Pistol grips on long guns, and rifle crime in general.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

102. Do you even do the slightest bit of fact checking?

I'm referring to this specific exchange:

"Grandpap's 30-06 is more deadly than any of these so-called 'assault weapons'."

Complete bullshit.

Ellisonz, that statement is 100% accurate on any level.

The ballistic energy of a .30-06 at 200 yards is around 2000 ft/lbs . 500 yards is between 1000 and 1400 ft/lbs depending upon the loading. At 1000 yards, you're still dealing with 700 ft/lbs or so.

The ballistic energy of a .223 (that's what an M16 shoots) at 200 yards is barely 800 ft/lbs and at 500 yards has dropped to under 300 ft/lbs. Forget 1000 yards. It may still be flying but not fast enough to even raise a bruise.

Put another way, one round from a .30-06 fired into a crowd from the hip at short range (your apparent preferred method) is going to go through between 3 and 7 people with lethal force. The first 3 or 4 will die near instantly if its a center torso shot.

That .223 MIGHT make it through to a second person but isn't going to kill either of them with one shot unless its a lucky hit.

This information is not a secret. Its all over the place online. Most bullet manufacturers are even kind enough to provide ballistics tables for you.

Nobody with even a cursory understanding of firearms would ever claim an "assault weapon" is a high-power or extremely deadly rifle. Beyond 300 yards, most of them aren't your best choice - which is exactly what they were designed for. Militaries did not start using them because they were more deadly, but because they were actually less so. They also switched to them because the need for long range power really was no longer there. Battles were taking places at ranges under 300 yards, so why have a soldier carry 100 rounds of ammo good out to 1000 yards or more, when you could have him carry 250 rounds of stuff good out to 250 yards or so for the same weight?