Sotomayer Doesn't Understand Guns

[rogue06]

Hand guns murders though, they are often disputes between people who know each other, or gang disputes, family disputes, and no one is suggesting banning hand guns, but regulating them, the same as all guns, in order that they be kept out of the wrong peoples hands is a good idea.

The current fad is to concentrate on "scary looking" guns (so-called "assault weapons" that can include single shot handguns like the Thompson Contender), but there was a time when the Democrats wanted to ban all firearms.

Here are but a few examples...

"I shortly will introduce legislation banning the sale, manufacture or possession of handguns (with exceptions for law enforcement and licensed target clubs). . . . It is time to act. We cannot go on like this. Ban them!"

--Sen. John H. Chafee (R-RI), Minneapolis Star Tribune, 6/15/92

"[The country] can’t be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans to legitimately own handguns and rifles."

-- President Bill Clinton, Washington Post, 3/2/93

"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them, Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in, I would have done it."

--Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), CBS 60 Minutes, 2/5/95

"Let’s take all the handguns we have in America, put them on a couple of old rusted ships, take them out in the middle of the ocean and sink them, that would be the best thing to do."

--Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA), Senate Democratic Policy Committee Hearing, 5/15/2000

“The Second Amendment does not extend an individual right to keep and bear arms.”

—Seth Waxman 41st U.S. Solicitor General, explaining position of the Clinton/Gore U.S. Department of Justice, 8/22/2000

During the 2016 election, a CNN "fact check" noted that

"Some Democrats have supported a mandatory gun confiscation buy-back. Joe Biden, the Democratic nominee, instead supports a voluntary buy-back program."

For instance, old Joe on Anderson Cooper's 360 on August, 5 2019:

ANDERSON COOPER: "To gun owners out there who say well a Biden administration means they're going to come for my guns."

JOE BIDEN: "Bingo. You're right if you have an assault weapon, the fact of the matter is that they should be illegal. Period."

That doesn't sound very "voluntary" to me.

And earlier, before the left finally realized that the American public wouldn't stand for the confiscation of all firearms and started focusing instead at going after them piecemeal, old Joe declared

"Banning guns is an idea whose time has come."

--old Joe, Associated Press, 11/18/93

Please note that he wasn't restricting it to just supposed "assault weapons" (a term the left concocted to describe scary-looking semi-automatic firearms), but "guns" in general.

[JimL]

Sitting Bull was killed by two Sioux Tribal Police Officers two weeks prior to Wounded Knee.

Ok.

[eider]

That doesn't make any sense at all.

And how do you propose "they" did that?

and
Not to you, it doesn't make any sense....of course.

Our Regimental Sergeant Major had been in special forces during the war. He respected the Bren machine gun for it's amazing accuracy and comparative light weight but criticised it because if held in a tripod it could send all its rounds through a very tight 'group' at with very little spread, even at long ranges. He thought that the flash cup designed for the barrel muzzle might have helped spread the rounds a little more widely.

He was the only soldier I ever knew who really liked the short range sten gun. It had the most massive spread of shot, he said, but it was necessary to know how to correct all the scores of ways in which it could jam..

The assault type rifle fitted for VFF has no such problems because it is comparatively light and will 'kick considerably' with every shot fired.

Many WW11 soldiers said similar things but today everybody seems to know better.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://ww2talk.com/index.php?thread...bren-gun.2645/

"From Wikipedia"
Some considered the Bren too accurate because its cone of fire was extremely concentrated. When used for suppressive fire this was not as useful, however for accurate shooting it was much better; rather than spraying as many bullets as possible for a hit, it relied on the accuracy of the gun and a experienced soldier.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One of the valuable lessons of the machine gun in war was that it ushered in an era of far less kills per bullet. In wartime, ammo is precious, and "spraying it at the enemy" is an incredible waste of treasure. Hence, the introduction of the M16A2 and A4 and their ability to fire a 3 round burst.

Who told you that?
During WW1 German machine guns were set up if possible to cross an attacking force from either flank and EVERY bullet would hit a soldier.....EVERY bullet.

If you need a diagram for your further education then please just ask and I will draw on for you.....just you.

[rogue06]

A sufficient prepared wealthy person could have done much worse. Your hyperbole requires someone able to plan an attack with sufficient skill. If he wanted to, he could have used a Tommy gun.

Another firearm with a reputation for "spraying" out bullets in the general direction of the target.

I think it was the only automatic weapon I was ever told to "walk" the line of fire up to the target. Basically, you fire at the ground directly in front of the target and direct the fire at the target as the barrel starts to rise up during while it is firing.

[Cow Poke]

and
Not to you, it doesn't make any sense....of course.

Our Regimental Sergeant Major had been in special forces during the war. He respected the Bren machine gun for it's amazing accuracy and comparative light weight but criticised it because if held in a tripod it could send all its rounds through a very tight 'group' at with very little spread, even at long ranges. He thought that the flash cup designed for the barrel muzzle might have helped spread the rounds a little more widely.

He was the only soldier I ever knew who really liked the short range sten gun. It had the most massive spread of shot, he said, but it was necessary to know how to correct all the scores of ways in which it could jam..

The assault type rifle fitted for VFF has no such problems because it is comparatively light and will 'kick considerably' with every shot fired.

Many WW11 soldiers said similar things but today everybody seems to know better.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://ww2talk.com/index.php?thread...bren-gun.2645/

"From Wikipedia"
Some considered the Bren too accurate because its cone of fire was extremely concentrated. When used for suppressive fire this was not as useful, however for accurate shooting it was much better; rather than spraying as many bullets as possible for a hit, it relied on the accuracy of the gun and a experienced soldier.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





Who told you that?
During WW1 German machine guns were set up if possible to cross an attacking force from either flank and EVERY bullet would hit a soldier.....EVERY bullet.

If you need a diagram for your further education then please just ask and I will draw on for you.....just you.

laughing

[Cow Poke]

Another firearm with a reputation for "spraying" out bullets in the general direction of the target.

I think it was the only automatic weapon I was ever told to "walk" the line of fire up to the target. Basically, you fire at the ground directly in front of the target and direct the fire at the target as the barrel starts to rise up during while it is firing.

Yeah, I was taught "walking it up" from the bottom left to the top right - a diagonal "spray".

[eider]

Dismiss? No. Pointing out that the shooter you, Jim, and the left are almost in rapture imagining doesn't really doesn't exist and then left doesn't understand anything about guns outside of they look scary and theoretical rpms.

Oh you chump! You actually think that 'the left' doesn't understand guns or this, or that........... you must be so thick to plump half your country's people in to 'scared and stupid'.

For instance, it's legal to own a Thompson submachine gun but there are reasons once never been used in "mass shooting". The reason "mass shooting" fatalities are less than 1,200 and injured less than 1,700 in 40 years is that is once you start shooting into a crowd is that it disperses. To legislate on the basis of statistical blimps is in the least just pandering. Even if all "mass shootings" were prevented, it would do practically nothing for gun murders or gun deaths.

More waffle from you. VFF guns are quite unnecessary for civilians to own.

When you're being attacked by multiple people, you need to be able to put out as much rounds as possible. Those 2 extra rps are actually meaningful then.

.........you think that 'the left' are scared, yet you imagine yourself being attacked by hordes of......... what, exactly?
And in your crazy imaginings who exactly are you killing............. Americans? Such madness.

[eider]

First of we're not comparing the different ways that people are killed, we're talking about, or comparing number of murders over time with numbers of murders at one time.
We're simply talking about mass shootings period.
And it seems that I have a difference of opinion with many here concerning the interpretation of the law, or I should say how a justice should interpret the law.

So, first off, an AR-15 equipped with a bump stock according to my research can fire between 400-800 rpm which means it can be comparable to a fully automatic machine gun. I would assume that the rpm is dependent on the experience/ability of the shooter, but nonetheless the rpm can be comparable to a machine gun.
As far as the legal mechanism involved which defined a machine gun, the single function of the trigger finger. I could be wrong, but it's the way it read to me and I noticed it's also the way that the ATF defined it i.e. that with the bump stock there is only a single function of the trigger finger, from that point on it is the recoil of the gun that bumps against the finger, not that the shooter is pulling the trigger each time.
So,, with that in mind, I don't agree with Thomas or some of you here that a Judge leaves his common sense at the door and simply interpret the exact wording of the law, I think you use your common sense, interpret the intent of the law, and all things being as above, if the weapons are comparable, then that was the intent of the original law. I agree with Sotomayor. If it walks like a duck........

Yes........ Judge Sotomayer clearly thinks that very fast firing guns in civilian hands is absolutely crazy.
Personally I could care less how VFFs can do that....they just can.

[rogue06]

and
Not to you, it doesn't make any sense....of course.

Our Regimental Sergeant Major had been in special forces during the war. He respected the Bren machine gun for it's amazing accuracy and comparative light weight but criticised it because if held in a tripod it could send all its rounds through a very tight 'group' at with very little spread, even at long ranges. He thought that the flash cup designed for the barrel muzzle might have helped spread the rounds a little more widely.

He was the only soldier I ever knew who really liked the short range sten gun. It had the most massive spread of shot, he said, but it was necessary to know how to correct all the scores of ways in which it could jam..

The assault type rifle fitted for VFF has no such problems because it is comparatively light and will 'kick considerably' with every shot fired.

Many WW11 soldiers said similar things but today everybody seems to know better.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://ww2talk.com/index.php?thread...bren-gun.2645/

"From Wikipedia"
Some considered the Bren too accurate because its cone of fire was extremely concentrated. When used for suppressive fire this was not as useful, however for accurate shooting it was much better; rather than spraying as many bullets as possible for a hit, it relied on the accuracy of the gun and a experienced soldier..

The bolded part was why most folk with experience with Stens loathed them. Practically speaking, there is nothing worse than going into a firefight with an unreliable weapon.

Still most isn't all and they had their fans, like your buddy.

Similarly the Czech .32 Skorpion machine pistol was adored by some people but most hated them because they apparently had too fast a ROF and you could empty the entire magazine with a simple pull of the trigger if you weren't careful. That meant you found yourself constantly changing, or worse reloading, magazines.

The only firearm that I liked that kind of needed special training to fire were my mini-Uzis. They have a tendency to spray if not handled properly, and a former member of Britain's SAS coached me how to control them. Got where I could accurately fire them both simultaneously.

[rogue06]

Yes........ Judge Sotomayer clearly thinks that very fast firing guns in civilian hands is absolutely crazy.
Personally I could care less how VFFs can do that....they just can.

The problem, as has been shown, virtually all firearms can be your "VFFs." I even posted a video of someone using an old-fashioned single-action revolver meaning not just one bullet per pull of the trigger but you have to manually pull back the hammer between each shot.

[rogue06]

Yeah, I was taught "walking it up" from the bottom left to the top right - a diagonal "spray".

Someone once claimed that for left handers it tended to go from right to left but never was able to check that out.

[rogue06]

Sitting Bull was killed by two Sioux Tribal Police Officers two weeks prior to Wounded Knee.

I always wondered if they had orders to kill him if hey couldn't arrest him. I say that because it seems that as soon as trouble started up with the gathering crowd opposing the arrest, they shot him in the head and chest. I never read anything saying that he was doing anything when they shot him.

Hmm... According to Wikipedia:

Around 5:30 a.m. on December 15, 39 police officers and four volunteers approached Sitting Bull's house. They surrounded the house, knocked, and entered. Bull Head told Sitting Bull that he was under arrest and led him outside.^[63] Sitting Bull and his wife noisily stalled for time as the camp awakened and men converged at the house. As Bull Head ordered Sitting Bull to mount a horse, he said that the Indian Affairs agent wanted to see the chief, and that Sitting Bull could then return to his house. When Sitting Bull refused to comply, the police used force on him. The Sioux in the village were enraged. Catch-the-Bear, a Lakota, shouldered his rifle and shot Bull Head, who, in response, fired his revolver into the chest of Sitting Bull.^[64] Another police officer, Red Tomahawk, shot Sitting Bull in the head, and Sitting Bull dropped to the ground. Sitting Bull died between 12 and 1 p.m.^[64]

A close quarters fight erupted, and within minutes, several men were dead. The Lakota killed six policemen immediately, and two more died shortly after the fight, including Bull Head. The police killed Sitting Bull and seven of his supporters at the site, along with two horses.^[65]

[Cow Poke]

I always wondered if they had orders to kill him if hey couldn't arrest him. I say that because it seems that as soon as trouble started up with the gathering crowd opposing the arrest, they shot him in the head and chest. I never read anything saying that he was doing anything when they shot him.

Hmm... According to Wikipedia:

Around 5:30 a.m. on December 15, 39 police officers and four volunteers approached Sitting Bull's house. They surrounded the house, knocked, and entered. Bull Head told Sitting Bull that he was under arrest and led him outside.^[63] Sitting Bull and his wife noisily stalled for time as the camp awakened and men converged at the house. As Bull Head ordered Sitting Bull to mount a horse, he said that the Indian Affairs agent wanted to see the chief, and that Sitting Bull could then return to his house. When Sitting Bull refused to comply, the police used force on him. The Sioux in the village were enraged. Catch-the-Bear, a Lakota, shouldered his rifle and shot Bull Head, who, in response, fired his revolver into the chest of Sitting Bull.^[64] Another police officer, Red Tomahawk, shot Sitting Bull in the head, and Sitting Bull dropped to the ground. Sitting Bull died between 12 and 1 p.m.^[64]

A close quarters fight erupted, and within minutes, several men were dead. The Lakota killed six policemen immediately, and two more died shortly after the fight, including Bull Head. The police killed Sitting Bull and seven of his supporters at the site, along with two horses.^[65]

I remember something about the Ghost Dance which was prohibited on the Res, and which Sitting Bull promoted.

[Cow Poke]

Someone once claimed that for left handers it tended to go from right to left but never was able to check that out.

I just remember (whether it actually happened or not) the gangster movies where they would fire their Tommy gun, starting lower left and allowing the bullet pattern to climb right.

[rogue06]

That doesn't make any sense at all.

Yeah, I just skipped that part figuring it was a typical eiderism.