Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
33. Glad to see you understand that allowing more gunz loose on base is a LOWER standard.
Sat Jan 9, 2016, 03:09 PM
Jan 2016

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

he is right Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #1
McCrhystal was talking about the bullets themselves -- not the automatic firing capabilities. Akamai Jan 2016 #10
a 5.56 round is not big Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #14
What are these larger military rounds? JustABozoOnThisBus Jan 2016 #16
You really have no knowledge of military weapons do you? GGJohn Jan 2016 #18
The 5.56mm round the M4 and M16 fire is so SMALL, troops complained in Afghanistan about it NickB79 Jan 2016 #23
Very few military assault rifles are in civilian hands, GGJohn Jan 2016 #2
I see gunners are here correcting nomenclature - - auto vs semiautomatic - as if a semi-auto can't Hoyt Jan 2016 #3
You find it wrong to correct nomenclature? dumbcat Jan 2016 #4
He also claims it's easy to convert a semi to a full auto, GGJohn Jan 2016 #7
the San Bernardino shooters attempted to convert their AR's to full auto Angel Martin Jan 2016 #41
I find deflecting with minor corrections to nomenclature a common tactic. Thor_MN Jan 2016 #11
Of course. It's much better to continue the lies and half truths dumbcat Jan 2016 #13
that is not a minor correction Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #15
Exactly. As numerous mass shootings demonstrate, semi-autos are plenty lethal Hoyt Jan 2016 #29
Of course, as usual Hoyt, you're wrong. GGJohn Jan 2016 #5
Hoyt TeddyR Jan 2016 #8
Semi-auto are deadly enough. I bet you've checked out what is involved. Here's a trick. Hoyt Jan 2016 #30
That didn't answer my question TeddyR Jan 2016 #34
Yahoos don't need fully automatic weapons to kill a lot of folks, intimidate folks, play Hoyt Jan 2016 #37
Semi-auto vs full auto is not a small quibble NickB79 Jan 2016 #24
Our mass shooters have been effective with semi-auto and yahoos love them. Hoyt Jan 2016 #31
LOL. eom. GGJohn Jan 2016 #32
The policy is in place because guns and ammo ended up at gun shows in the early 90's. X_Digger Jan 2016 #6
McChrystal was focusing on the bullet itself -- see below Akamai Jan 2016 #9
If the argument is meant as an idea towards warding off rampage shooters Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2016 #12
My suggestion -- Leave it up to the commanders on base or to the relevant laws. Akamai Jan 2016 #17
Commanders can add to restrictions but seldom lift restrictions. Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2016 #19
I would let them make the changes they feel they need to make and can lawfully make. Akamai Jan 2016 #21
While what you say is true I don't see it as germane to discussion about regulations Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2016 #25
A real problem is generalizing from single instances -- military leaders are much more likely to be Akamai Jan 2016 #26
While military leaders can and do offer advice on the writing of military regulations Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2016 #27
Memory doesn't serve you accurately in this instance. The regs were written during the preceding Akamai Jan 2016 #36
Another bad Bush policy. Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2016 #39
commanders can not loosen Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #20
Policies vary from base to base madville Jan 2016 #22
however Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #28
Glad to see you understand that allowing more gunz loose on base is a LOWER standard. Hoyt Jan 2016 #33
Let's be clear TeddyR Jan 2016 #35
And hardly any guns. You seem to think society here is a war zone. Leave em at home. Hoyt Jan 2016 #38
Did you actually read my post? TeddyR Jan 2016 #40
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Guns are tightly restrict...»Reply #33