If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   Hey, look: a $369 modification that lets your AR-15 fire 900 rounds a minute. You know, for hunting   (slate.com) divider line 582
    More: Interesting, assault weapons ban, semi-automatic rifle, National Firearms Act, trigger fingers  
•       •       •

16480 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 Jan 2013 at 11:17 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



582 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-08 04:17:48 PM
i wonder if adam lanza had one on order...
 
2013-01-08 04:23:23 PM

FlashHarry: i wonder if adam lanza had one on order...


Nah, you can't hit the side of a school from the inside using one of those.
 
2013-01-08 04:24:32 PM
Wouldn't it be easier (& cheaper) to just learn how to aim guns? You'd have to stop waving them above your head while you pontificate to do it.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-01-08 04:28:47 PM

oldfarthenry: Wouldn't it be easier (& cheaper) to just learn how to aim guns? You'd have to stop waving them above your head while you pontificate to do it.


Nah.  Not macho enough for the little Rambos.

R.A.Danny: FlashHarry: i wonder if adam lanza had one on order...

Nah, you can't hit the side of a school from the inside using one of those.


It would be great for a flock of first graders though.
 
2013-01-08 04:35:43 PM

vpb: R.A.Danny: FlashHarry: i wonder if adam lanza had one on order...

Nah, you can't hit the side of a school from the inside using one of those.

It would be great for a flock of first graders though.


We're going to hell.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-01-08 04:38:03 PM

R.A.Danny: vpb: R.A.Danny: FlashHarry: i wonder if adam lanza had one on order...

Nah, you can't hit the side of a school from the inside using one of those.

It would be great for a flock of first graders though.

We're going to hell.


I am informed of that on a regular basis.
 
2013-01-08 04:39:25 PM
Well, how else should one be expected to hunt clouds of gnats?
 
2013-01-08 04:40:56 PM
I"m cool with it if you guys want to ban 900-round magazines.
 
2013-01-08 04:44:12 PM

violentsalvation: I"m cool with it if you guys want to ban 900-round magazines.


looks like it was belt-fed to me.
 
2013-01-08 04:46:12 PM
You can get Gatling-esque systems too where you mount multiple guns into them and use a crank to rotate them around and pull the triggers.  Since you're turning the crank it isn't a machine gun.

Put a drill on the crank, though, and now it's a machine gun.
 
2013-01-08 04:46:32 PM

duppy: Well, how else should one be expected to hunt clouds of gnats?


Ok i lol'd.

Hard.
 
2013-01-08 04:49:02 PM

duppy: Well, how else should one be expected to hunt clouds of gnats?


www.oxitec.com

approve
 
2013-01-08 04:50:52 PM

FlashHarry: violentsalvation: I"m cool with it if you guys want to ban 900-round magazines.

looks like it was belt-fed to me.


Oh, I didn't watch the videos.
 
2013-01-08 05:09:16 PM
Damn, if each of those kids took multiple rounds there would have been nothing but bloody giblets left of them
 
2013-01-08 05:17:39 PM

R.A.Danny: Nah, you can't hit the side of a school from the inside using one of those.


I've tried one out. It's fun but a serious waste of $ on ammo.
 
2013-01-08 05:25:54 PM
But don't you dare take those modifications away.  the founding fathers clearly intended for these devices to be available.

/snark
 
2013-01-08 05:29:44 PM
i42.tinypic.com
 
2013-01-08 05:42:44 PM
images55.fotki.com
 
2013-01-08 05:59:09 PM

Dinjiin: [images55.fotki.com image 450x720]


i50.tinypic.com

FTFY
 
2013-01-08 06:24:19 PM

FlashHarry: FTFY


You know, I'm curious about something here. There seem to be a few of you who have deemed themselves penis experts and I can only assume that you are one of them seeing as you have made such a post. Since you are such an aficionado of the penis and the sizes of them when it comes to the types of firearms that one might or might not own, how exactly do you determine what the firearm/penis size is? I mean does an average dick qualify for a .22 single shot rifle or maybe a Derringer handgun and a bigger wang get you a Red Rider BB gun while a smaller dangle score you a larger caliber weapon? Or does there some other criteria that you use not based on size vs caliber but size vs rate of fire? How many penises did you study to arrive at your determination? Did you consider them while flaccid or turgid? Was this done in person or were lots of pictures enough for you?  If in person did you hold them or was a good long look enough? One of the guys I work with is in the market for a new handgun. Perhaps he could send you a picture of his cock and you could tell him what would work best for him. Let me know eh?
 
2013-01-08 06:27:34 PM
There was another video on YouTube of the slide fire modification, and it appeared that the shooter was having a lot of issues with his rifle jamming.  Hard to tell if the spent cartridge wasn't ejecting properly or if his magazine wasn't feeding smoothly.

I wonder how well some of the cheaper AR-15 clones out there [not manufactured by Colt] hold up.
 
2013-01-08 07:19:35 PM
I'll accept a ban on slidefire stocks if we repeal the Hughes Amendment.

/how many crimes have slidefire-style stocks been used in again?
 
2013-01-08 07:24:06 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: FlashHarry: FTFY

You know, I'm curious about something here. There seem to be a few of you who have deemed themselves penis experts and I can only assume that you are one of them seeing as you have made such a post. Since you are such an aficionado of the penis and the sizes of them when it comes to the types of firearms that one might or might not own, how exactly do you determine what the firearm/penis size is? I mean does an average dick qualify for a .22 single shot rifle or maybe a Derringer handgun and a bigger wang get you a Red Rider BB gun while a smaller dangle score you a larger caliber weapon? Or does there some other criteria that you use not based on size vs caliber but size vs rate of fire? How many penises did you study to arrive at your determination? Did you consider them while flaccid or turgid? Was this done in person or were lots of pictures enough for you?  If in person did you hold them or was a good long look enough? One of the guys I work with is in the market for a new handgun. Perhaps he could send you a picture of his cock and you could tell him what would work best for him. Let me know eh?


cdn-ugc.cafemom.com

Bushmaster seems to think a gun substitutes for a cock.
 
2013-01-08 07:39:54 PM
cdn.motinetwork.net
 
2013-01-08 07:51:25 PM
i236.photobucket.com

You libs think it's really that easy to take a bunch of these down?
 
2013-01-08 07:54:41 PM
i.imgur.com
I believe I've seen those on farkingmachines.com.  They're recoil-powered assvibrators.
 
2013-01-08 07:55:01 PM

Three Crooked Squirrels: Dancin_In_Anson: FlashHarry: FTFY

You know, I'm curious about something here. There seem to be a few of you who have deemed themselves penis experts and I can only assume that you are one of them seeing as you have made such a post. Since you are such an aficionado of the penis and the sizes of them when it comes to the types of firearms that one might or might not own, how exactly do you determine what the firearm/penis size is? I mean does an average dick qualify for a .22 single shot rifle or maybe a Derringer handgun and a bigger wang get you a Red Rider BB gun while a smaller dangle score you a larger caliber weapon? Or does there some other criteria that you use not based on size vs caliber but size vs rate of fire? How many penises did you study to arrive at your determination? Did you consider them while flaccid or turgid? Was this done in person or were lots of pictures enough for you?  If in person did you hold them or was a good long look enough? One of the guys I work with is in the market for a new handgun. Perhaps he could send you a picture of his cock and you could tell him what would work best for him. Let me know eh?

[cdn-ugc.cafemom.com image 364x500]

Bushmaster seems to think a gun substitutes for a cock.


To be fair, I DO refer to my penis as "Bushmaster."

Although my penis has never killed anyone that I'm aware of.
 
2013-01-08 08:22:15 PM
I don't understand the reasoning that something must be useful in order to be ownable. I own a few firearms. I would never turn them on another human being or animal, not even in self defense (okay, maybe an animal in self defense).

Is there anything inherently wrong with chucking 900 rounds of lead downrange in a controlled environment if that's what you want to do? I think it's incredibly silly, but it's a kind of neat engineering challenge.

The problem with firearms is one of externalities. Firearms create an attractive nuisance- we are all measurably less safe because firearms exist and are common in the US. Between accidents, outlier incidents like mass shootings (which, by population, are exceedingly rare), and crime (which usually doesn't involve legally owned firearms, which makes new laws on the subject difficult).

So let's apply economics to the problem: each firearm carries with it a risk that it is used in a negative fashion. Each negative application carries with it a social cost- deaths, medical bills, public fear, and so on. This gives us a strategy for attacking the problem in a fashion far more nuanced than "2nd Amendment, biatches!" and "Ban (some/most/all) guns!"

A gun tax, for example, would be perfectly reasonable- an assessment at the point of purchase for the total social costs of allowing firearms to be owned. It could be adjusted based on its ability to enact costs- high fire rates and large magazines would be taxed more steeply. Similarly, requiring firearm owners to carry insurance would create a social net system.

This allows us to restrict access to firearms without taking active steps to ban anything, it allows us to evaluate our measures based on measurable economic values, it creates a new class of charge to be brought against those who use firearms illegally. It addresses things in terms of externalities.
 
2013-01-08 08:23:13 PM

dahmers love zombie: I believe I've seen those on farkingmachines.com. They're recoil-powered assvibrators.


Modified wooden toilet roll holder? Wow. Just wow.
 
2013-01-08 08:26:08 PM

dahmers love zombie: [i.imgur.com image 450x720]
I believe I've seen those on farkingmachines.com.  They're recoil-powered assvibrators.


Ordered a pair, didn't you?
 
2013-01-08 08:49:35 PM
Why don't I need to fire 900 rounds a minute?
 
2013-01-08 08:52:05 PM

Nabb1: dahmers love zombie: [i.imgur.com image 450x720]
I believe I've seen those on farkingmachines.com.  They're recoil-powered assvibrators.

Ordered a pair, didn't you?


I dunno. I don't think dahmers is a Republican politician. It's the internet, though. Crazier things happen.
 
2013-01-08 09:00:36 PM

t3knomanser: A gun tax, for example, would be perfectly reasonable-


Not to me....I already have a 9.2% sales tax where I live.
 
2013-01-08 09:03:16 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: FlashHarry: FTFY

You know, I'm curious about something here. There seem to be a few of you who have deemed themselves penis experts and I can only assume that you are one of them seeing as you have made such a post. Since you are such an aficionado of the penis and the sizes of them when it comes to the types of firearms that one might or might not own, how exactly do you determine what the firearm/penis size is? I mean does an average dick qualify for a .22 single shot rifle or maybe a Derringer handgun and a bigger wang get you a Red Rider BB gun while a smaller dangle score you a larger caliber weapon? Or does there some other criteria that you use not based on size vs caliber but size vs rate of fire? How many penises did you study to arrive at your determination? Did you consider them while flaccid or turgid? Was this done in person or were lots of pictures enough for you?  If in person did you hold them or was a good long look enough? One of the guys I work with is in the market for a new handgun. Perhaps he could send you a picture of his cock and you could tell him what would work best for him. Let me know eh?


It's easy to figure out. We use the Lenny Scale.

If you are exactly like me -- that is, if you are me -- you have precisely the perfectly sized penis. It is so large that it satisfies all women without appearing to be the result of plastic surgery or Satanic pacts. Therefore, everything I own represents that perfect penis.

If you own something slightly more macho than what I have, it is because your penis is too small.

If you own something slightly less macho than what I have, it is because you are gay.

These are not mutually exclusive. You can be both gay and have a small penis, depending on your consumer choices. For example, you own both a 4x4 3/4-ton pick-up AND a Mazda Miata.
 
2013-01-08 09:09:20 PM
I have two of them.  They work great.  (one on an AR15, one on an AK74)  And they've been out for about a year now.  But unless Uncle Sam is providing the ammo--they're too expensive to use all day at the range.  Fortunately, there's a little lever you can turn and easily put it back into single shot mode.
 
2013-01-08 09:09:22 PM
We need something like Godwin's law for when someone brings up their penis envy in a gun thread. FlashHarry peniswinned the thread.
 
2013-01-08 09:11:45 PM

violentsalvation: We need something like Godwin's law for when someone brings up their penis envy in a gun thread. FlashHarry peniswinned the thread.


He "Flashed Henry."
 
2013-01-08 09:19:51 PM

t3knomanser: Similarly, requiring firearm owners to carry insurance would create a social net system.


I'm fond of this idea. You have to have insurance to drive a car, why not for owning a gun?
 
2013-01-08 09:22:17 PM

Three Crooked Squirrels: Bushmaster seems to think a gun substitutes for a cock.


I would not be displeased if a lot of people aimed their cocks at Madison Avenue.
 
2013-01-08 09:22:32 PM

Shostie: violentsalvation: We need something like Godwin's law for when someone brings up their penis envy in a gun thread. FlashHarry peniswinned the thread.

He "Flashed Henry."


Oooo that has my vote.

Anybody else have a suggestion for what we should call this gun thread debate curiosity?? Use the funny button to vote.
 
2013-01-08 09:25:44 PM

fusillade762: t3knomanser: Similarly, requiring firearm owners to carry insurance would create a social net system.

I'm fond of this idea. You have to have insurance to drive a car, why not for owning a gun?


Because they are very different in their uses, the computed risk of simply owning a gun and incurring liability without criminal action is absurdly low (and no carrier will ever insure liability from illegal activity), and you don't have a constitutional right to own an automobile.
 
2013-01-08 09:31:47 PM

violentsalvation: Shostie: violentsalvation: We need something like Godwin's law for when someone brings up their penis envy in a gun thread. FlashHarry peniswinned the thread.

He "Flashed Henry."

Oooo that has my vote.

Anybody else have a suggestion for what we should call this gun thread debate curiosity?? Use the funny button to vote.


Actually, that should be "Flashed Harry," I guess.

Stupid typos.
 
2013-01-08 09:33:19 PM

violentsalvation: We need something like Godwin's law for when someone brings up their penis envy in a gun thread.


Just say, "I'm sensitive about that."
 
2013-01-08 09:42:14 PM

Lenny_da_Hog: fusillade762: t3knomanser: Similarly, requiring firearm owners to carry insurance would create a social net system.

I'm fond of this idea. You have to have insurance to drive a car, why not for owning a gun?

Because they are very different in their uses, the computed risk of simply owning a gun and incurring liability without criminal action is absurdly low (and no carrier will ever insure liability from illegal activity), and you don't have a constitutional right to own an automobile.


15,000 or so accidental shootings (with about 600 fatalities) per year is "absurdly low"?
 
2013-01-08 09:43:11 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: violentsalvation: We need something like Godwin's law for when someone brings up their penis envy in a gun thread.

Just say, "I'm sensitive about that."


"My penis makes Nina_Hartley's_Ass sensitive" ... o_O Okaaay. Not bad, but I think we can do better. I'm still liking Shostie's "Flashed Harry" .
 
2013-01-08 09:46:58 PM

fusillade762: Lenny_da_Hog: fusillade762: t3knomanser: Similarly, requiring firearm owners to carry insurance would create a social net system.

I'm fond of this idea. You have to have insurance to drive a car, why not for owning a gun?

Because they are very different in their uses, the computed risk of simply owning a gun and incurring liability without criminal action is absurdly low (and no carrier will ever insure liability from illegal activity), and you don't have a constitutional right to own an automobile.

15,000 or so accidental shootings (with about 600 fatalities) per year is "absurdly low"?


Compared to 300 million guns in private hands--yeah, I'd agree with that.
 
2013-01-08 10:00:59 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: FlashHarry: FTFY

You know, I'm curious about something here. There seem to be a few of you who have deemed themselves penis experts and I can only assume that you are one of them seeing as you have made such a post. Since you are such an aficionado of the penis and the sizes of them when it comes to the types of firearms that one might or might not own, how exactly do you determine what the firearm/penis size is? I mean does an average dick qualify for a .22 single shot rifle or maybe a Derringer handgun and a bigger wang get you a Red Rider BB gun while a smaller dangle score you a larger caliber weapon? Or does there some other criteria that you use not based on size vs caliber but size vs rate of fire? How many penises did you study to arrive at your determination? Did you consider them while flaccid or turgid? Was this done in person or were lots of pictures enough for you?  If in person did you hold them or was a good long look enough? One of the guys I work with is in the market for a new handgun. Perhaps he could send you a picture of his cock and you could tell him what would work best for him. Let me know eh?


timenewsfeed.files.wordpress.com
Because FlashHarry is supposed to be recoiling in horror at the suggestion that he might be a homosexual.
 
2013-01-08 10:13:34 PM

t3knomanser: I don't understand the reasoning that something must be useful in order to be ownable. I own a few firearms. I would never turn them on another human being or animal, not even in self defense (okay, maybe an animal in self defense).

Is there anything inherently wrong with chucking 900 rounds of lead downrange in a controlled environment if that's what you want to do? I think it's incredibly silly, but it's a kind of neat engineering challenge.

The problem with firearms is one of externalities. Firearms create an attractive nuisance- we are all measurably less safe because firearms exist and are common in the US. Between accidents, outlier incidents like mass shootings (which, by population, are exceedingly rare), and crime (which usually doesn't involve legally owned firearms, which makes new laws on the subject difficult).

So let's apply economics to the problem: each firearm carries with it a risk that it is used in a negative fashion. Each negative application carries with it a social cost- deaths, medical bills, public fear, and so on. This gives us a strategy for attacking the problem in a fashion far more nuanced than "2nd Amendment, biatches!" and "Ban (some/most/all) guns!"

A gun tax, for example, would be perfectly reasonable- an assessment at the point of purchase for the total social costs of allowing firearms to be owned. It could be adjusted based on its ability to enact costs- high fire rates and large magazines would be taxed more steeply. Similarly, requiring firearm owners to carry insurance would create a social net system.

This allows us to restrict access to firearms without taking active steps to ban anything, it allows us to evaluate our measures based on measurable economic values, it creates a new class of charge to be brought against those who use firearms illegally. It addresses things in terms of externalities.


The problem with a tax is that you would be forcing the costs of guns illegally used and, for the most part, illegally acquired onto those who would acquire them legally. And how would the insurance work? Again, most guns used in crimes are illegally acquired. If they will not or can not acquire them legally, what is the likelihood that they will insure them?
 
2013-01-08 10:23:34 PM

fusillade762: t3knomanser: Similarly, requiring firearm owners to carry insurance would create a social net system.

I'm fond of this idea. You have to have insurance to drive a car, why not for owning a gun?


Depending on the state, this is already covered by homeowners/renters insurance.  Rates vary by locality and company.
 
2013-01-08 10:24:44 PM

ArkAngel: The problem with a tax is that you would be forcing the costs of guns illegally used and, for the most part, illegally acquired onto those who would acquire them legally.


Again, we're addressing an externality. I would imagine such a tax would actually be absurdly low, on a per fire-arm basis. The purpose isn't to punish gun owners, it's to address the negative externality created by having weapons commonly available. The tax serves two purposes- it depresses demand for firearms (thus shrinking the negative externality) and creates a fund that can be used to fund law enforcement and first responders, as well as firearm safety programs (reducing the risks).

ArkAngel: Again, most guns used in crimes are illegally acquired


Most used in accidents, suicides, and domestic violence are legally acquired. Again, on an actuarial basis, I imagine the costs to the user would be very low. This has the added purpose of creating a financial incentive to reduce the risks associated with firearms.
 
Displayed 50 of 582 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report