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.

(The New Republic)   Series of photos show what different guns look like when they're pointed right at you   (newrepublic.com) divider line 100
    More: Scary, Point Blank project, close-up, harmonic series, sports commentary  
•       •       •

5713 clicks; posted to Geek » on 02 Apr 2014 at 2:02 AM (16 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



100 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-04-01 10:28:55 PM
Looking straight into the coward's meatus.
 
2014-04-01 10:37:52 PM

brap: Looking straight into the coward's meatus.


www.clydefitchreport.com

Since 1775, the Marine Corps has been winning battles and defending our nation with giant vagina extenders because obviously everyone who ever touched a gun in hung like Ken. .
 
2014-04-01 10:46:00 PM
I didn't say anything about size DEFENSEMO but thanks for that touching tribute.   The photo and boldface really made it hit home.
 
2014-04-01 10:50:48 PM
The captions on the guns are not correct.
 
2014-04-01 10:59:47 PM

violentsalvation: The captions on the guns are not correct.


-Journalistsguidetoguns.jpg-


/love the "Beretta 9MM" , Mr Ingram must be rolling in his grave...
 
2014-04-01 11:05:38 PM

doglover: giant vagina extenders


Well played, April 1st filter. Well played.
 
2014-04-01 11:05:57 PM
They all look like AK-47s to me.
 
2014-04-01 11:21:32 PM
Let's count the Farkers who are going to jerk off to that

so far I think I see two.....
 
2014-04-01 11:29:06 PM

cretinbob: Let's count the Farkers who are going to jerk off to that

so far I think I see two.....


Is it ok if I jerk off to the kitten photos in your profile instead?
 
2014-04-01 11:40:59 PM
How can those be photos of a gun pointed at me when there's no one holding it? Oh, right. A clever ruse by the anti-gun nuts blaming the tool instead of the user.
 
2014-04-01 11:45:48 PM

cretinbob: Let's count the Farkers who are going to jerk off to that

so far I think I see two.....


You, and?
 
2014-04-01 11:47:51 PM

cretinbob: Let's count the Farkers who are going to jerk off to that

so far I think I see two.....


No one will jerk off to that, they'll be too busy mocking the author for misidentifying the pics.
 
2014-04-01 11:51:11 PM
As if I've never looked down the barrel of a gun before? Come on.
 
2014-04-01 11:51:17 PM

Pribar: violentsalvation: The captions on the guns are not correct.

-Journalistsguidetoguns.jpg-


/love the "Beretta 9MM" , Mr Ingram must be rolling in his grave...


I wasn't even paying attention until I saw the blocky Glock they called a Sig.
 
2014-04-01 11:59:08 PM

I fnally completed my second AR. Now I have a 6.8spc wth an ACOG and a 5.56 wth an EOTech holosght and magnfer. Both have Gelesse SSA-E trggers.


i74.photobucket.com
 
2014-04-01 11:59:24 PM

John Buck 41: How can those be photos of a gun pointed at me when there's no one holding it? Oh, right. A clever ruse by the anti-gun nuts blaming the tool instead of the user.


Actually, it's just an artist doing a composite image study. It's one of the oldest artistic endeavors: to view the known at an unknown or impossible angle. In this case, you can't actually photograph guns like that. It's just not how optics work. So he took many images of each one and combined them into those hyper detailed ones. He even says it's not political.

Grain of salt, etc. but this is really just a textbook photography project so I'm inclined to believe him.
 
2014-04-02 12:12:40 AM

violentsalvation: Pribar: violentsalvation: The captions on the guns are not correct.

-Journalistsguidetoguns.jpg-

/love the "Beretta 9MM" , Mr Ingram must be rolling in his grave...

I wasn't even paying attention until I saw the blocky Glock they called a Sig.


I started wondering when they labeled what was clearly a 1911 as a Rhino. Then when the one labeled as a 1911 is obviously not. And I think the one labeled as a Beretta might actually be an Uzi Micro.

*edit*

Now I've gone though all the pictures. Damn are they ALL wrong??
 
2014-04-02 12:22:01 AM

fusillade762: violentsalvation: Pribar: violentsalvation: The captions on the guns are not correct.

-Journalistsguidetoguns.jpg-

/love the "Beretta 9MM" , Mr Ingram must be rolling in his grave...

I wasn't even paying attention until I saw the blocky Glock they called a Sig.

I started wondering when they labeled what was clearly a 1911 as a Rhino. Then when the one labeled as a 1911 is obviously not. And I think the one labeled as a Beretta might actually be an Uzi Micro.

*edit*

Now I've gone though all the pictures. Damn are they ALL wrong??


I think the first two are correct, the Desert Eagle and the S&W revolver, but a lot, if not all of the others are farked up. I haven't tried to properly identify all of them because BASEBALL IS ON and I'm fapping to photos of cretinbob's cats.
 
2014-04-02 12:23:03 AM

Pribar: cretinbob: Let's count the Farkers who are going to jerk off to that

so far I think I see two.....

Is it ok if I jerk off to the kitten photos in your profile instead?


2.bp.blogspot.com

What do you think it's there for?
 
2014-04-02 12:26:35 AM
They had the same photo spread in Vibe magazine last month.
Except all the guns were facing sideways.
 
2014-04-02 12:29:39 AM

John Buck 41: How can those be photos of a gun pointed at me when there's no one holding it? Oh, right. A clever ruse by the anti-gun nuts blaming the tool instead of the user.


Guns don't kill people.  People with guns kill people.
 
2014-04-02 12:34:40 AM

doyner: John Buck 41: How can those be photos of a gun pointed at me when there's no one holding it? Oh, right. A clever ruse by the anti-gun nuts blaming the tool instead of the user.

Guns don't kill people.  People with guns kill people.


Guns don't kill people. Bullets kill people.
 
2014-04-02 12:36:45 AM

doyner: John Buck 41: How can those be photos of a gun pointed at me when there's no one holding it? Oh, right. A clever ruse by the anti-gun nuts blaming the tool instead of the user.

Guns don't kill people.  People with guns kill people.


I fixed that. For YOU. And for anyone else who misunderstands this issue.
 
2014-04-02 12:37:11 AM
img.fark.net
oh yeah?
 
2014-04-02 12:40:26 AM

violentsalvation: I think the first two are correct, the Desert Eagle and the S&W revolver


I think that's a "nope" on the revolver:

Smith & Wesson K-38:

milpas.cc

www.newrepublic.com

Unless that's some kind of custom handle.  Even then the rest of it looks wrong.  Looks more like a Colt Python.
 
2014-04-02 12:47:43 AM

fusillade762: violentsalvation: I think the first two are correct, the Desert Eagle and the S&W revolver

I think that's a "nope" on the revolver:

Smith & Wesson K-38:

[milpas.cc image 500x265]

[www.newrepublic.com image 416x624]

Unless that's some kind of custom handle.  Even then the rest of it looks wrong.  Looks more like a Colt Python.


Yeah. I think they are only showing us part of the photo set, and mixed up some captions with guns they didn't include. here's another link with some crossover
 
2014-04-02 12:52:52 AM

fusillade762: doyner: John Buck 41: How can those be photos of a gun pointed at me when there's no one holding it? Oh, right. A clever ruse by the anti-gun nuts blaming the tool instead of the user.

Guns don't kill people.  People with guns kill people.

Guns don't kill people. Bullets kill people.


www.imfdb.org

It might be decorated, but that large bulbous handle is not just for show.
 
2014-04-02 12:58:19 AM
"In doing so, the project creates large-scale, extremely detailed, and uncomfortably in-your-face frontal photographs. The images have a jarring beauty in the symmetry of design, the depth-of-field, and the level of detail-all the more powerful for their implicit violence. These subjects have, quite literally, the power to kill".

nothing 'uncomfortable' about any of those photos.

but congratulations for describing human beings.
 
2014-04-02 01:39:50 AM
Ah, so they fixed some of them. Though they still have the last two labeled as 1911s when they're not. And still apparently can't spell "Glock".
 
2014-04-02 01:48:05 AM
Not a single Ho-Point neither.
 
2014-04-02 02:11:15 AM

TommyymmoT: They had the same photo spread in Vibe magazine last month.
Except all the guns were facing sideways.



Hahahahaa!
 
2014-04-02 02:12:29 AM
It'd be far more effective with a hand on the gun.

As it is, it looks like a gun advertisement.
 
2014-04-02 02:13:25 AM

fusillade762: violentsalvation: I think the first two are correct, the Desert Eagle and the S&W revolver

I think that's a "nope" on the revolver:

Smith & Wesson K-38:

[milpas.cc image 500x265]

[www.newrepublic.com image 416x624]

Unless that's some kind of custom handle.  Even then the rest of it looks wrong.  Looks more like a Colt Python.



The revolver they used looks like a a S&W Model 686.
 
2014-04-02 03:00:42 AM
Gloc?
 
2014-04-02 03:27:22 AM

JustHereForThePics: Gloc?


That's the least of their mistakes.
 
2014-04-02 03:44:03 AM
Why did they need  7 pictures of a Glock?
 
2014-04-02 04:15:52 AM
When you take guns away. Terrorists will use poison gas.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarin_gas_attack_on_the_Tokyo_subway

/A college kid was caught manufacturing weapons grade ricin in his dorm the other week.
//The boston bombing used pressure cookers not guns.
///Poverty, drug abuse, racism? Nah, lets address symptoms, not causes.
 
2014-04-02 04:21:57 AM
Glock, glock, AK, RPG...
 
2014-04-02 04:37:19 AM
These people refer to themselves as "creatives".   That is all I need to know to hate them.
 
2014-04-02 05:29:04 AM
I just see a series of dark holes.
 
2014-04-02 05:30:46 AM

BadReligion: I fnally completed my second AR. Now I have a 6.8spc wth an ACOG and a 5.56 wth an EOTech holosght and magnfer. Both have Gelesse SSA-E trggers.
[i74.photobucket.com image 768x1024]


Either you have some very long arms or that grip is too far forward on that rail to be practically used. Unless of course you plain to aim from the hip, in which case why no laser?
 
2014-04-02 05:53:58 AM

fluffy2097: When you take guns away. Terrorists will use poison gas.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarin_gas_attack_on_the_Tokyo_subway

/A college kid was caught manufacturing weapons grade ricin in his dorm the other week.
//The boston bombing used pressure cookers not guns.
///Poverty, drug abuse, racism? Nah, lets address symptoms, not causes.


non sequiter/threadjack much? Oh, it's you fluffy, please do keep entertaining the troops....
 
2014-04-02 05:56:00 AM

Hacker_X: BadReligion: I fnally completed my second AR. Now I have a 6.8spc wth an ACOG and a 5.56 wth an EOTech holosght and magnfer. Both have Gelesse SSA-E trggers.
[i74.photobucket.com image 768x1024]

Either you have some very long arms or that grip is too far forward on that rail to be practically used. Unless of course you plain to aim from the hip, in which case why no laser?


img.fark.net



Some people do the thumb over bore thing, which is easier if you have a vertical grip to the front.

/not my cup of tea, but to each his own.
 
2014-04-02 06:08:08 AM

Farker Soze: Why did they need  7 pictures of a Glock?


Author doesn't understand what you mean.

i.imgur.com
 
2014-04-02 06:12:05 AM

violentsalvation: fusillade762: violentsalvation: Pribar: violentsalvation: The captions on the guns are not correct.

-Journalistsguidetoguns.jpg-

/love the "Beretta 9MM" , Mr Ingram must be rolling in his grave...

I wasn't even paying attention until I saw the blocky Glock they called a Sig.

I started wondering when they labeled what was clearly a 1911 as a Rhino. Then when the one labeled as a 1911 is obviously not. And I think the one labeled as a Beretta might actually be an Uzi Micro.

*edit*

Now I've gone though all the pictures. Damn are they ALL wrong??

I think the first two are correct, the Desert Eagle and the S&W revolver, but a lot, if not all of the others are farked up. I haven't tried to properly identify all of them because BASEBALL IS ON and I'm fapping to photos of cretinbob's cats.


I can assure you the desert eagle is correct.  looks just like I remember.

never play quarters against a redneck ex-SEAL with a handle of Jim Beam and kill it in under an hour.

/csb
 
2014-04-02 06:17:32 AM

way south: Hacker_X: BadReligion: I fnally completed my second AR. Now I have a 6.8spc wth an ACOG and a 5.56 wth an EOTech holosght and magnfer. Both have Gelesse SSA-E trggers.
[i74.photobucket.com image 768x1024]

Either you have some very long arms or that grip is too far forward on that rail to be practically used. Unless of course you plain to aim from the hip, in which case why no laser?

[img.fark.net image 768x510]

Some people do the thumb over bore thing, which is easier if you have a vertical grip to the front.

/not my cup of tea, but to each his own.


Some people really farking hate their own fingers.
 
2014-04-02 06:38:16 AM
Man, the Geek Tab has gone to shiat. First, the "Popular Science" crap, and now clickbait like this.
 
2014-04-02 06:43:18 AM
well that was dumb
 
2014-04-02 06:58:23 AM

fusillade762: doyner: John Buck 41: How can those be photos of a gun pointed at me when there's no one holding it? Oh, right. A clever ruse by the anti-gun nuts blaming the tool instead of the user.

Guns don't kill people.  People with guns kill people.

Guns don't kill people. Bullets kill people.


Bullets don't kill people.  Loss of blood due to excessive kinetic energy transfer kills people.
 
2014-04-02 07:15:39 AM

UNC_Samurai: fusillade762: doyner: John Buck 41: How can those be photos of a gun pointed at me when there's no one holding it? Oh, right. A clever ruse by the anti-gun nuts blaming the tool instead of the user.

Guns don't kill people.  People with guns kill people.

Guns don't kill people. Bullets kill people.

Bullets don't kill people.  Loss of blood due to excessive kinetic energy transfer kills people.


Loss of blood due to excessive kinetic energy transfer kills people. Shock due to loss of blood caused by excessive kinetic energy transfer kills people.
 
2014-04-02 07:16:30 AM
Loss of blood due to excessive kinetic energy transfer doesn't kill people. Shock due to loss of blood caused by excessive kinetic energy transfer kills people.

FTFM.
 
2014-04-02 07:20:24 AM

MmmmBacon: Loss of blood due to excessive kinetic energy transfer doesn't kill people. Shock due to loss of blood caused by excessive kinetic energy transfer kills people.

FTFM.


Brain death due to hypoxia kills people. Not shock.
 
2014-04-02 07:47:37 AM

demaL-demaL-yeH: way south: Hacker_X: BadReligion: I fnally completed my second AR. Now I have a 6.8spc wth an ACOG and a 5.56 wth an EOTech holosght and magnfer. Both have Gelesse SSA-E trggers.
[i74.photobucket.com image 768x1024]

Either you have some very long arms or that grip is too far forward on that rail to be practically used. Unless of course you plain to aim from the hip, in which case why no laser?

[img.fark.net image 768x510]

Some people do the thumb over bore thing, which is easier if you have a vertical grip to the front.

/not my cup of tea, but to each his own.

Some people really farking hate their own fingers.




Its a controversial grip.
To be fair, it takes a while for an ar to heat up in semi automatic. Competition shooters often wear gloves too. Long as you keep your fingers off the gas tube or A-frame its not a real issue to the extent of civilian use.

The thing with firearms is you need consistency. You want to hold the gun exactly the same way every time so that its not only secure but your results are repeatable.
I think that by locking your elbow forward you make a secure triangle with your upper torso. Its easy to repeat.

For me tho, it just feels awkward (granted I have a 20" inch barrel on my bushmaster, so awkward is the rule of the day). Plus I don't like planting my hand so far from the controls.

/My bad habit is gripping it by the magazine well.
/Comfortable, but not entirely stable.
/chicken wing that shiat, ar don't care.
 
2014-04-02 08:17:26 AM

brap: Looking straight into the coward's meatus.


Auditory meatus?

Superior Nasal meatus?

Vulvular  urinary meatus?

Or was that a Markley's Law violation?  Because the whole "gun as penis" thing is more worn-out than Ron Jeremy's dong.
 
2014-04-02 08:19:00 AM

demaL-demaL-yeH: way south: Hacker_X: BadReligion: I fnally completed my second AR. Now I have a 6.8spc wth an ACOG and a 5.56 wth an EOTech holosght and magnfer. Both have Gelesse SSA-E trggers.
[i74.photobucket.com image 768x1024]

Either you have some very long arms or that grip is too far forward on that rail to be practically used. Unless of course you plain to aim from the hip, in which case why no laser?

[img.fark.net image 768x510]

Some people do the thumb over bore thing, which is easier if you have a vertical grip to the front.

/not my cup of tea, but to each his own.

Some people really farking hate their own fingers.


I particularly hate my thumb, which is why I loved my old M-1 Garand.
 
2014-04-02 08:26:35 AM
I got 100%.
 
2014-04-02 08:32:34 AM

TommyymmoT: They had the same photo spread in Vibe magazine last month.
Except all the guns were facing sideways.


Dammit! You almost made me spill my coffee.
 
2014-04-02 08:35:45 AM

Farker Soze: Why did they need  7 pictures of a Glock?


To... ♪ Rock around the Glock tonight... ♪

/sorry, I have nothing to add but bad puns;b
 
2014-04-02 08:50:01 AM

John Buck 41: doyner: John Buck 41: How can those be photos of a gun pointed at me when there's no one holding it? Oh, right. A clever ruse by the anti-gun nuts blaming the tool instead of the user.

Guns don't kill people.  People with guns kill people.

I fixed that. For YOU. And for anyone else who misunderstands this issue.


i.imgflip.com
 
2014-04-02 08:56:19 AM

MmmmBacon: Loss of blood due to excessive kinetic energy transfer doesn't kill people. Shock due to loss of blood caused by excessive kinetic energy transfer kills people.

FTFM.


.45 ACP = 835 J
9mm = 678 J


A punch can be between 600 J and 1200 J depending on who is throwing it.

The 'excessive' KE is not the problem.

And honestly neither is the loss of blood, a well placed punch to the back of the neck, a solid strike to the sides of the neck, or even front of the face will kill you just as dead,
 
rpl
2014-04-02 09:06:26 AM
If a person who wishes to own guns is a coward, then what's a person who finds an abstract picture of a gun to be [scary]?
 
2014-04-02 09:16:24 AM
Guns don't kill people, people kill guns.

Lack of maintenance, abuse, improper storage, allowing fascists to confiscate and destroy them...

/no such thing as "gun collectors", they are "gun protectors" if they are doing it right.
 
2014-04-02 09:19:22 AM

siphra: The 'excessive' KE is not the problem.


Well, it kind of is.  The reason that the slug flying forward is potentially deadly but the gun recoiling against your hand/shoulder isn't is mostly because momentum scales linearly with velocity but kinetic energy scales with its square.  So even though momentum is conserved in the separation of bullet and gun, the bullet's equal momentum carries much more KE than the gun's.

Though it's better to think in terms of how that energy is expressed as  pressure if you really want to comprehend it, since it's colliding with a mostly-incompressible fluid at the other end and the characteristics of the resulting shockwave are what does the damage.  This is why bullets that collapse on impact can do more damage, even though they typically lose some energy due to aerodynamics and more self-destructing at the end: it's all about having all that energy go into a small area very rapidly.

// I like this art project as a gun owner, by the way: it does what art is supposed to do, give you a different perspective on things-- more literally than usual in this case, since you almost never look head-on at the front of an assembled gun (because that would be a bad habit to get into).  If they're trying to imply something or provoke an emotional reaction between "hey, nifty", though, then they've failed in my case.
 
2014-04-02 09:46:34 AM

John Buck 41: How can those be photos of a gun pointed at me when there's no one holding it? Oh, right. A clever ruse by the anti-gun nuts blaming the tool instead of the user.


img4.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2014-04-02 09:47:16 AM

Jim_Callahan: So even though momentum is conserved in the separation of bullet and gun, the bullet's equal momentum carries much more KE than the gun's.


No, they carry the exact same amount of KE.  But the KE of a gun recoiling is absorbed over a much wider area, and the velocity is less because the gun weighs more than the bullet, but they have the exact same KE.

I doubt anyone would want to shoot a .30'06 Springfield with a sharpened spike for a buttstock.
 
2014-04-02 09:57:01 AM

dittybopper: I particularly hate my thumb, which is why I loved my old M-1 Garand.


I love my M14, the granddaughter to the M-1 Garand. The last, great battle rifle designed and produced by the US.

Those en bloc clips on the M-1 can go straight to Hell, I agree.
 
2014-04-02 09:57:03 AM
That is one of the best Rorschach tests for your stance on guns I've ever seen.
 
2014-04-02 09:57:11 AM

doyner: Guns don't kill people. People with guns kill people.


People with guns don't kill people.  Widespread availability of guns kills people.
 
2014-04-02 09:57:23 AM

Flaumig: John Buck 41: doyner: John Buck 41: How can those be photos of a gun pointed at me when there's no one holding it? Oh, right. A clever ruse by the anti-gun nuts blaming the tool instead of the user.

Guns don't kill people.  People with guns kill people.

I fixed that. For YOU. And for anyone else who misunderstands this issue.

[i.imgflip.com image 300x300]


Okay, THAT'S funny. Havn't seen that meme in awhile.
 
2014-04-02 10:01:56 AM

dittybopper: brap: Looking straight into the coward's meatus.

Auditory meatus?

Superior Nasal meatus?

Vulvular  urinary meatus?

Or was that a Markley's Law violation?  Because the whole "gun as penis" thing is more worn-out than Ron Jeremy's dong.


For having such a worn-out penis, you sure blew a huge load of semantics.
 
2014-04-02 10:14:06 AM

tillerman35: doyner: Guns don't kill people. People with guns kill people.

People with guns don't kill people.  Widespread availability of guns kills people.


Look, we both know that you are trolling, but some people are liable to believe the bullshiat that you spew...  Why do you hate the world?
 
2014-04-02 10:26:35 AM

dittybopper: Jim_Callahan: So even though momentum is conserved in the separation of bullet and gun, the bullet's equal momentum carries much more KE than the gun's.

No, they carry the exact same amount of KE.  But the KE of a gun recoiling is absorbed over a much wider area, and the velocity is less because the gun weighs more than the bullet, but they have the exact same KE.

I doubt anyone would want to shoot a .30'06 Springfield with a sharpened spike for a buttstock.


... you may need to go review your high-school physics, man.  I can run over it real fast before I head out to work for you though.

For a classical system, momentum is conserved and you can simplify to p = m*v

Energy is also conserved, but we're adding energy from chemical conversion and gas-work which is more complicated and not really relevant to the problem, so ignore that for a while, and just remember that for kinetic energy E = m*v2/2

Initially, a gun firing is a one-dimensional problem-- gun goes backward, bullet goes forward, so we can neglect the difference between overall speed and velocity and just use a scalar number for v.

A heavy slug-style bullet of the kind you'd shoot at a person masses 20g or so and fires at about 400 m/s.  These numbers vary a lot, but they're in the ballpark and it makes the mass easier so meh.  A rifle weighs around 4 kg and a handgun weighs about half a kg.  Going to stick with the rifle because easier math and it illustrates the point better.

OK, so you shoot your bullet, and momentum is conserved: mbullet * vbullet = mgun * vgun.  Plug in your numbers and you have a backwards velocity of 20*400/4000 = 2 m/s.

Now you have all the factors to solve for kinetic energy, roughly.  For the bullet, you get basically what was mentioned earlier: .02(kg) *4002/2 = 1600 J.  But for the gun, it's 4*22/2 = 8 J.

The kinetic energy going back into your shoulder is thus significantly lower than that imparted by the bullet.

// Obviously the starting quantities vary and that changes the final numbers, but you get the point.
 
2014-04-02 11:06:55 AM

demaL-demaL-yeH: Some people really farking hate their own fingers.


And yet again, you prove that you have no clue about firearms techniques developed after 1945.

The C Clamp grip is of course nothing new.  But then again, you still think that carrying an unloaded pistol is the way to go... so, yeah.

Anything coming out of your mouth relating to firearms should be taken with a salt mine.

C Clamp isn't the way to go for me, but then again my work AR has an 11" barrel... so, that would be bad.  But plenty of honest to god high speed low drag guys run their guns that way, so I'm not going to argue with them.
 
2014-04-02 11:06:56 AM

doglover: It might be decorated, but that large bulbous handle is not just for show.


So...blunt object?
 
2014-04-02 11:07:12 AM

Jim_Callahan: dittybopper: Jim_Callahan: So even though momentum is conserved in the separation of bullet and gun, the bullet's equal momentum carries much more KE than the gun's.

No, they carry the exact same amount of KE.  But the KE of a gun recoiling is absorbed over a much wider area, and the velocity is less because the gun weighs more than the bullet, but they have the exact same KE.

I doubt anyone would want to shoot a .30'06 Springfield with a sharpened spike for a buttstock.

... you may need to go review your high-school physics, man.  I can run over it real fast before I head out to work for you though.

For a classical system, momentum is conserved and you can simplify to p = m*v

Energy is also conserved, but we're adding energy from chemical conversion and gas-work which is more complicated and not really relevant to the problem, so ignore that for a while, and just remember that for kinetic energy E = m*v2/2

Initially, a gun firing is a one-dimensional problem-- gun goes backward, bullet goes forward, so we can neglect the difference between overall speed and velocity and just use a scalar number for v.

A heavy slug-style bullet of the kind you'd shoot at a person masses 20g or so and fires at about 400 m/s.  These numbers vary a lot, but they're in the ballpark and it makes the mass easier so meh.  A rifle weighs around 4 kg and a handgun weighs about half a kg.  Going to stick with the rifle because easier math and it illustrates the point better.

OK, so you shoot your bullet, and momentum is conserved: mbullet * vbullet = mgun * vgun.  Plug in your numbers and you have a backwards velocity of 20*400/4000 = 2 m/s.

Now you have all the factors to solve for kinetic energy, roughly.  For the bullet, you get basically what was mentioned earlier: .02(kg) *4002/2 = 1600 J.  But for the gun, it's 4*22/2 = 8 J.

The kinetic energy going back into your shoulder is thus significantly lower than that imparted by the bullet.

// Obviously the starting quantities vary ...

Doh!


I guess these books are going back into the reading rotation:

ecx.images-amazon.com

www.larrygonick.com


I've already pulled them off the shelves and placed them at the top of the "to be read" stack.
 
2014-04-02 11:11:22 AM
Point still stands about the .30'06 with a point-ed stick for a stock, though:  Even though the velocity of the gun would be  a mere (2900 fps * 150 gr) / 70,000 gr = 6.2 fps, I still wouldn't want a 2 m/s spear point piercing my shoulder.
 
2014-04-02 11:19:48 AM
img.fark.net
 
2014-04-02 11:20:06 AM

fusillade762: violentsalvation: I think the first two are correct, the Desert Eagle and the S&W revolver

I think that's a "nope" on the revolver:

Smith & Wesson K-38:

[milpas.cc image 500x265]

[www.newrepublic.com image 416x624]

Unless that's some kind of custom handle.  Even then the rest of it looks wrong.  Looks more like a Colt Python.


I'm going with a S&W .357:

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2014-04-02 12:00:03 PM

dittybopper: demaL-demaL-yeH: way south: Hacker_X: BadReligion: I fnally completed my second AR. Now I have a 6.8spc wth an ACOG and a 5.56 wth an EOTech holosght and magnfer. Both have Gelesse SSA-E trggers.
[i74.photobucket.com image 768x1024]

Either you have some very long arms or that grip is too far forward on that rail to be practically used. Unless of course you plain to aim from the hip, in which case why no laser?
[img.fark.net image 768x510]
Some people do the thumb over bore thing, which is easier if you have a vertical grip to the front.
/not my cup of tea, but to each his own.

Some people really farking hate their own fingers.

I particularly hate my thumb, which is why I loved my old M-1 Garand.


I was taught to never load single rounds (and to hold the bolt back with the pinkie side of my palm if I really, really had to).
/Saw my brother do a number on his thumb because he failed to properly lock the bolt back.
//He only did that once.
 
2014-04-02 12:40:04 PM

Click Click D'oh: demaL-demaL-yeH: Some people really farking hate their own fingers.

And yet again, you prove that you have no clue about firearms techniques developed after 1945.

The C Clamp grip is of course nothing new.  But then again, you still think that carrying an unloaded pistol is the way to go... so, yeah.

Anything coming out of your mouth relating to firearms should be taken with a salt mine.

C Clamp isn't the way to go for me, but then again my work AR has an 11" barrel... so, that would be bad.  But plenty of honest to god high speed low drag guys run their guns that way, so I'm not going to argue with them.


Refer back to that picture. Look closely. Now read the article you linked:  The stance in that picture is exactly what Nick warns against. He even says it's a new fad.

Back to you: You believe that obscuring the front sight and/or sticking body parts next to/wrapping said parts around the business end of a rife while firing it is a Good Idea(TM)?  OK, then, stumpy.

Click Click D'oh: But then again, you still think that carrying an unloaded pistol is the way to go... so, yeah.


And just to make this perfectly clear. Again.
From my perspective, there are very few valid reasons to walk around armed in public: You are in a combat zone. Your job requires it. You have a valid, direct, personal threat to your life. It's hunting season.
A quick review of Condition 3 carry for semiautomatic pistols: Loaded, but no round in the chamber.
A quick review of my perspective on the inevitable result of large numbers of people carrying firearms with no external safety with a round in the chamber: Glock leg/foot/butt/kawk. (Google your own damned results.)
 
2014-04-02 01:04:15 PM

rpl: If a person who wishes to own guns is a coward, then what's a person who finds an abstract picture of a gun to be [scary]?


Actually, I find a picture of looking down a gun barrel scary because in my mind that perspective violates two of the rules.  I'm happy to say that reaction is intrinsic.
 
2014-04-02 01:07:27 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: Refer back to that picture. Look closely. Now read the article you linked: The stance in that picture is exactly what Nick warns against. He even says it's a new fad.


Look, if you want to hold fast to the thought that the C Clamp is either new, or a fad, that's fine.  Just keep reinforcing how much of an idiot you are in terms of firearms training and techniques.

Did you even read the article?  Let me help you:

"This particular style of shooting comes from the competition side of the field and started some time ago.  Shooters such as Pat McNamara (Former 1SFOD), Kyle Defoor (Former SEAL),  Jerry Miculek (competitive shooter), and Mike Pannone (Former 1SFOD) use this shooting style, but only to some degree."

Uh... oops  I don't suppose you realize how deeply you stepped in it because you probably don't recognize some of the most prominent names in the shooting sports right now..  The, um... "fad" you discount so readily is being used by most of the top shooters.  Just to review those shooters qualifications: 2 Delta, 1 Seal and the best civilian shooter in the world.

Lol, loosers. They don't know what they are doing.

But wait

"If you are going to use this style of shooting grip and stance, there is nothing wrong with that.  Just know the way that the style/"C" clamp grip was intended to be used. "

Uh... so wait... His "warn[ing] against" is in fact him saying there's nothing wrong with it.

But wait... hang on.  It gets better.  Who does he show a picture of using the C Clamp technique?  "Picture below is of Former Delta Operator Dale Comstock."

Another Delta operator.  Yeah, because if there's guys who don't know anything at all about firearms techniques, it's Delta Force operators..  So, three Delta operators, a Seal, and the best civilian shooter in the world... Vs, your dubious opinion.

Yeah, going with the pros on this one.


As to how new the technique is:

warriortalknews.typepad.com

demaL-demaL-yeH: And just to make this perfectly clear. Again.


Yeah, we get it.  You know nothing about modern firearms techniques as you so bravely and perfectly demonstrated again with the C Clamp issue.
 
2014-04-02 02:05:09 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: dittybopper: demaL-demaL-yeH: way south: Hacker_X: BadReligion: I fnally completed my second AR. Now I have a 6.8spc wth an ACOG and a 5.56 wth an EOTech holosght and magnfer. Both have Gelesse SSA-E trggers.
[i74.photobucket.com image 768x1024]

Either you have some very long arms or that grip is too far forward on that rail to be practically used. Unless of course you plain to aim from the hip, in which case why no laser?
[img.fark.net image 768x510]
Some people do the thumb over bore thing, which is easier if you have a vertical grip to the front.
/not my cup of tea, but to each his own.

Some people really farking hate their own fingers.

I particularly hate my thumb, which is why I loved my old M-1 Garand.

I was taught to never load single rounds (and to hold the bolt back with the pinkie side of my palm if I really, really had to).
/Saw my brother do a number on his thumb because he failed to properly lock the bolt back.
//He only did that once.


I never actually got M-1 thumb, mainly because my father showed me the right way to load.

It was a joke.

It is the one gun I most regret selling, though.
 
2014-04-02 02:06:56 PM

Click Click D'oh: You know nothing about modern firearms techniques as you so bravely and perfectly demonstrated again with the C Clamp issue.


He has pre-C Clampsia?
 
2014-04-02 02:34:27 PM

dittybopper: Point still stands about the .30'06 with a point-ed stick for a stock, though:  Even though the velocity of the gun would be  a mere (2900 fps * 150 gr) / 70,000 gr = 6.2 fps, I still wouldn't want a 2 m/s spear point piercing my shoulder.


OK, now I'm going to have to calculate just how much delta-V I'd get from pissing a full bladder.

So I've got to figure out how much mass that is, and how fast it comes out.
 
2014-04-02 04:26:15 PM

Maul555: tillerman35: doyner: Guns don't kill people. People with guns kill people.

People with guns don't kill people.  Widespread availability of guns kills people.

Look, we both know that you are trolling, but some people are liable to believe the bullshiat that you spew...  Why do you hate the world?


Well everybody else was moving from one statement to increasingly more specific statements.  I figured I'd go the other direction and hope someone would keep going with it.  What, you've never been on Fark before?
 
2014-04-02 04:46:19 PM

Click Click D'oh: Look, if you want to hold fast to the thought that the C Clamp is either new, or a fad, that's fine.  Just keep reinforcing how much of an idiot you are in terms of firearms training and techniques.


First damned sentence of YourFA: "Over the past 6 years or so, combative and realistic shooting techniques have adopted a new, exaggerated shooting stance/style.  I first saw this way of shooting while serving overseas and a couple of guys were using it during shooting drills before an op."

Again, from your article, a picture of Dale doing it the right way:
loadoutroom.com
Your picture upthread also shows the correct way.

Now look upthread to the original picture. See the man holding the farking muzzle of his short-barreled AR? See his farking thumb on top of the muzzle where it would obscure the front sight? See how his left arm and shoulder are blocking his vision to his left?

Click Click D'oh: Uh... oops  I don't suppose you realize how deeply you stepped in it because you probably don't recognize some of the most prominent names in the shooting sports right now..  The, um... "fad" you discount so readily is being used by most of the top shooters.  Just to review those shooters qualifications: 2 Delta, 1 Seal and the best civilian shooter in the world.


Since we're quoting from your article.
"It isn't unusual for us "shooters", to quickly adapt a  new technique, especially if we see it being used by "spec ops veterans", top competitive shooters, etc.  As humans, we often feel the need to do something simply because the masses are doing it, it is called the Bandwagon Effect.  The Bandwagon Effect is a well documented form of group-think in behavioral science and has many applications."

So you told all of fark that you are a sheep and linked the article that explicitly says you are. Mazal tov.

Click Click D'oh: Lol, loosers. They don't know what they are doing.


I prefer tighter. But then, again, not only can I spell the word, loser, but I also know how to use a farking sling properly. (The M16's sling sucks sweaty donkey balls, by the way.)

Click Click D'oh: As to how new the technique is:


You show a picture of somebody doing it correctly - and none of the people doing it correctly have their farking thumbs on top of the farking barrel, nor are they grabbing the muzzle. Now look upthread again at the picture of Mr. Chokesthe-Barrel. (I like how YourFA starts with a picture of this stupid fad with the guy's face censored out to protect the guilty.)
 
2014-04-02 04:51:46 PM

dittybopper: I never actually got M-1 thumb, mainly because my father showed me the right way to load.
It was a joke.
It is the one gun I most regret selling, though.


O.o

f0.thejournal.ie
 
2014-04-02 05:00:22 PM

dittybopper: It is the one gun I most regret selling, though.


Everyone does.
It should come with a warning label.
 
2014-04-02 05:04:59 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: See his farking thumb on top of the muzzle

...

Let's take a look:

img.fark.net

No, I don't see his thumb on top of the muzzle.The muzzle is several inches in front of his thumb.

Do you even know what a muzzle is?

Christ, get out of firearms threads.

demaL-demaL-yeH: ...where it would obscure the front sight?


The front sight is folded down you nitwit.


demaL-demaL-yeH: So you told all of fark that you are a sheep and linked the article that explicitly says you are


Actually, I told all of Fark that I don't use this technique because my equipment doesn't allow for it to be employed properly.  See:

Click Click D'oh: C Clamp isn't the way to go for me, but then again my work AR has an 11" barrel... so, that would be bad.



Could you possibly fail harder?  Would you like to try again?

demaL-demaL-yeH: and none of the people doing it correctly have their farking thumbs on top of the farking barrel

..

Lol, why do you think it's called the C Clamp method you buffoon?  What would a C look like if you CLAMPED it to the side of a rifle?  Would part of it cover the top of the rail?


demaL-demaL-yeH: ..nor are they grabbing the muzzle.

Again, do you even know what the muzzle is?  There are no pictures of anyone anywhere grabbing the muzzle.

So let's go through some of the expert shooter mentioned above and examine their technique:

Kyle Defoor:

i557.photobucket.com

Notice his thumb and arm position

Pat McNamara

i557.photobucket.com

Mike Pannone ... same thing
i557.photobucket.com

Kyle Lamb, another Delta guy

i557.photobucket.com

Jason Falla,. Australian SAS

i557.photobucket.com

And of course Jerry Miculek

i557.photobucket.com

So, go ahead.  Tell us that all these world renowned expert shooters are just doing it wrong.

Go on.
 
2014-04-02 07:44:59 PM

Click Click D'oh: No, I don't see his thumb on top of the muzzle.The muzzle is several inches in front of his thumb.
Do you even know what a muzzle is?
Christ, get out of firearms threads.


With that short barrel, it will be. (see chambered round and no manual safety ->Glock leg) We won't have long to wait.
NB: I'm not your messiah, although you that claim one of my relatives was.

Click Click D'oh: The front sight is folded down you nitwit.

Click Click D'oh: method you buffoon?


1. The front sight is not folded down: Look at the rear sight.
2. Based on the name-calling, you really can't muster a logical argument, although I do appreciate the effort you took to look up the spelling of buffoon.

*looks at other pictures*
Ah. I hear your response loud and clear.
I still won't change how I shoot due to argumentum ad vericundiam/populum.
Now if I didn't consistently hit targets in the first place, I might consider choking the barrel, blocking close to half my field of vision with my arm and shoulder, and holding my rifle in an uncomfortable stance.
Maybe.
After I'd exhausted almost every other alternative (like, say, using a proper sling on a non-tinkertoy rifle).
That said, follow whatever fads float your boat, as long as you and the rest of the flock stay away from me and mine.

/Two states should be sufficient, but four would be much better.
 
2014-04-03 09:58:36 AM

demaL-demaL-yeH: With that short barrel, it will be.


No, his hand is not on the muzzle, covering the muzzle, over the muzzle or anything at all in regards to the muzzle.  His hand is on the rail.  You can clearly see several segments of the rail in front of his hand.  The Front sight is attached to the rail between his hand and the muzzle and so is a Streamlight TLR-1


demaL-demaL-yeH: 1. The front sight is not folded down: Look at the rear sight.


The rear sight is folded down too you nitwit.  Do you know anything at all about modern firearms?  These type of sight fold flat when not in use:

www.harristacticalonline.com

The primary sighting system on that rifle, and the sight he's using in the picture, is the Vortex Sparc.  That would be the black thing stick up about halfway down the upper receiver.  It's a reflex sight.  It doesn't need a front or rear sight.  The folded down sights are called Back Up Iron Sights.  They stay stowed unless the reflex sight goes bad, then they are deployed.

Why the hell are you commenting on modern rifle fighting techniques when you don't even know how the sights operate or what state they are in?

demaL-demaL-yeH: I still won't change how I shoot due to argumentum ad vericundiam/populum.


I'm not trying to change how you shoot.  I don't care how you shoot.  I'm pointing out that you know nothing about modern shooting techniques.  Heck, this thread has made it pretty clear that you couldn't recognize a very popular and successful modern rifle fighting technique, and you can't even identify the sights on a rifle.

demaL-demaL-yeH: Now if I didn't consistently hit targets in the first place, I might consider choking the barrel, blocking close to half my field of vision with my arm and shoulder, and holding my rifle in an uncomfortable stance.


Who cares if you don't like the technique?  You didn't even know it was a technique when this thread started, so I doubt you have much grounds to actually debate it's merits.  It's not like you've ever tried it.  We know you haven't, so don't try to pretend you have any experience with it.

demaL-demaL-yeH: After I'd exhausted almost every other alternative (like, say, using a proper sling on a non-tinkertoy rifle).


That's great for precision engagements at range, which isn't what this technique is for.  Again, you demonstrate how absolutely abysmal your knowledge about modern rifle fighting techniques is.  This technique is for close quarters, moving, rapid target transition engagements.  That's why this technique is most often practiced and employed from 5 to 50 yards.

And again, no one gives a crap what technique YOU would employee.  The actual EXPERTS, seen to prefer this technique, and we all know they know a hell of a lot more about it than you do.  Your opinion in this matter has exactly zero weight, because the people who use this technique to kill other people for a living don't seem to have a problem with it.

demaL-demaL-yeH: That said, follow whatever fads float your boat, as long as you and the rest of the flock stay away from me and mine.


You really are a special sort of stupid aren't you?  Shall I state it again?

Click Click D'oh: Click Click D'oh: C Clamp isn't the way to go for me, but then again my work AR has an 11" barrel... so, that would be bad.


Do you have a reading problem?  How much more clear do I have to be in saying I don't use this technique?

So, to sum up the gist of your involvement in this thread:  A bunch of world renowned expert shooters employee a technique that you don't know anything at all about, or even that it existed before yesterday... but they're all wrong and you're right... oh, and how do sights work?

Do you even comprehend how stupid you look in this thread?
 
2014-04-03 10:26:37 AM
Wow... this thread sure went arf.com...
 
2014-04-03 12:48:27 PM

Click Click D'oh: The primary sighting system on that rifle, and the sight he's using in the picture, is the Vortex Sparc.


Is that polymer? It's awfully unattractive.
 
2014-04-03 12:53:15 PM

violentsalvation: Is that polymer? It's awfully unattractive.


Yes, the Magpul sights are polymer.  Other companies make them out of aluminum or steel.
 
2014-04-03 01:06:18 PM

Click Click D'oh: The Front sight is attached to the rail

Click Click D'oh: These type of sight fold flat when not in use


Mounting critical components on the handguard and making them foldable does wonders for accuracy.

Click Click D'oh: Do you know anything at all about modern firearms?

Click Click D'oh: Why the hell are you commenting on modern rifle fighting techniques

Click Click D'oh: Who cares if you don't like the technique?

Click Click D'oh: This technique is for close quarters, moving, rapid target transition engagements.  That's why this technique is most often practiced and employed from 5 to 50 yards.


O.o
AR-10: 1955. AR-15: 1957.  And I've been using (and detesting) one version or another of Stoner's Plastic Folly since James Earl Carter was CinC. Now use another  ad hominem and tell me I know nothing about guns. Please.
Considering the absolutely asinine choice of 5.56 as the primary round for personal weapons, the M-4 is a slight improvement over the M-16 in urban settings. Shotgun and .45 - in that order - are much better choices for clearing. (From your comments here, I certainly didn't see you sweating on Parks Range or McKenna.)
The technique you are defending makes the user far more vulnerable: The reflector sights encourage tunnel vision, and, as an especially wonderful bonus, the arm position renders the non-shooting side of the user far more vulnerable to bullets while simultaneously blocking almost half the field of view.

Click Click D'oh: You really are a special sort of stupid aren't you?

Click Click D'oh: Do you even comprehend how stupid you look in this thread?

Click Click D'oh: you nitwit.


I am not your mirror: Save your Stuart Smiley routine for the privacy of your own masturbatorium. Remember: Fark is not your personal erotica site.
 
2014-04-03 01:35:55 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: O.o
AR-10: 1955. AR-15: 1957. And I've been using (and detesting) one version or another of Stoner's Plastic Folly since James Earl Carter was CinC. Now use another ad hominem and tell me I know nothing about guns. Please.


Yes modern rifle fighting techniques.  If you think the current M-16/AR-15 and the tactics and techniques used to employee it are the same that were created 57 years ago... You've just reinforced exactly what I've been saying... You don't know anything about modern rifle fighting techniques.

demaL-demaL-yeH: Considering the absolutely asinine choice of 5.56 as the primary round for personal weapons, the M-4 is a slight improvement over the M-16 in urban settings. Shotgun and .45 - in that order - are much better choices for clearing


Yeah, go ahead... do rooming clearing with your 1911 and leave the carbine slung... which is why all the major swat teams in the nation have transitioned off their carbines to side arms..  Oh wait, no they haven't.  Everyone and their dog uses 5.56 carbines now.  It's almost impossible to find a major team not using 5.56 carbines.

Are you really that big of a fool?

Perhaps while you are telling all the worlds best shooters they are using the wrong rifle technique, you should go tell all the SWAT teams they are using the wrong guns.

Either you are the most brilliant firearms guy in the world and all the professionals are simply doing it wrong, or you are just that much of an egotistical idiot to think such.

demaL-demaL-yeH: The technique you are defending makes the user far more vulnerable:


Again, not my technique.  Not a technique I use.  Merely pointing out how stupid you are for not knowing it's a well used and respected technique employed by some of the worlds best shooters. before you attacked it for being silly.


demaL-demaL-yeH: The reflector sights encourage tunnel vision...



WTF?  The primary advantage of a reflex sight is that it can be operated properly with both eyes open, increasing peripheral awareness not decreasing it.

Can you get anything right?

demaL-demaL-yeH: and, as an especially wonderful bonus, the arm position renders the non-shooting side of the user far more vulnerable to bullets while simultaneously blocking almost half the field of view.


Have you ever actually tried this technique?  No? Okay then.  Keep proving you don't know anything.
 
2014-04-03 01:36:53 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: Mounting critical components on the handguard and making them foldable does wonders for accuracy.


You know so much better than the experts who design and use this stuff right?

STFU unqualified tard.
 
2014-04-03 01:54:13 PM
You two still going at it? Tell us what, there is a 25 acre wooded lot behind my cornfield that you can use hunger games style to prove who has the best combat technique, loser goes into my mulch pit so ya can at least be useful as fertilizer....


/there's plenty of room in the pit so a draw is no problem.
 
2014-04-03 02:11:00 PM

Pribar: You two still going at it? Tell us what, there is a 25 acre wooded lot behind my cornfield that you can use hunger games style to prove who has the best combat technique, loser goes into my mulch pit so ya can at least be useful as fertilizer....


/there's plenty of room in the pit so a draw is no problem.


Meh, I'll let him argue it with the guys who use the technique.  I'm sure the Delta guys aren't to worried about his Mad Skillz.
 
Displayed 100 of 100 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report