[Combat-wombat]

Oh, man I just looked at VPC's web site. I found two things that really piss me off (Everything on their site pisses me off, but these are just two things).
Bullet Hoses "study" (http://www.vpc.org/studies/hosecont.htm)
The "Flood" of Foreign Imports (http://www.vpc.org/studies/targcont.htm)
On the latter one they list the PSG-1. As quoted from an article on Oleg's site, "When was the last time you heard of someone sticking up a 7-11 with a $10,000 sniper rifle?"
And this REALLY makes me mad!
"Spray-firing" from the hip, a widely recognized technique for the use of assault weapons in certain combat situations, has no place in civil society. Although assault weapon advocates claim that "spray-firing" and shooting from the hip with such weapons is never done, numerous sources (including photographs and diagrams) show how the functional design features of assault weapons are used specifically for this purpose.
Wow, all the militaries of the world have been using such an ineffective technique, firing from the shoulder for the last 500 years! Thank's VPC, you've helped our military fight better!
All the "Bullet Hoses" stuff is pure 100% USDA certified Bull$%(#.
Stupid leftist extremists.:cuss:

[James Castilla]

http://www.vpc.org/graphics/hosep10-3.jpg

even as an anti, ive still seen how large a heckler and koch p7 is. from the size comparison, it looks like the tec-9 is not much bigger than what police carry, and police dont exactly carry for intimidation.

-best wishes, james

[StLGlocker]

"Spray-firing" from the hip, a widely recognized technique for the use of assault weapons in certain combat situations, usually those situations that occur during the filming of "Rambo IV".

It looks cool on the screen, but don't expect to, oh, actually hit anything in real life firing a rifle from your hip.

They mention photographs. Could it be that these guys see soldiers carrying them at low ready and assume that's a firing position?

Can they really be that stupid?

I guess I don't really have to ask, they speak for themselves...

[Norm357]

James don't let the looks fool ya. The Tec 9 is a POS in the first degree.
Norm

[bogie]

Frankly, the Tec-9 is the functional gun-culture equivalent of all those ray guns that we had when we were little kids. Looks cool, but that's about it.

And James, if you're following this, I've got a friend in Kentucky who has one (among some other firearms) - a semi-auto version. She lives, alone, in a rural area, and wants enough firepower available in the event that she has problems with someone who wants what she has. She's had problems with that sort of thing in the past, which is why she got into guns. The first time they hurt her, and they hurt her dogs. It won't happen again. If you pull up her driveway in the dark, you better have called first, or you get met (not shot - just met) by a very paranoid armed person. The "shot" part is then up to you.

[RANash]

"Spray and pray" is how people think that fully-auto weapons are/should be used. This is mainly due to Hollywood.

I took a class in the use of the submachine gun (we used Uzi 9mm) and the very first thing that was done was a demonstration as to why "spray-firing" was ineffective.

The instructor stood before four targets with a full magazine (25 rounds) and "spray-fired from the hip" at the four targets at a distance of 5 yards. Only two targets actually were hit, and only one with a hit that would have had a chance of being an instant stop.

Then, the instructor reloaded and put four new targets up. Then he fired controlled bursts from the shoulder. In about the same amount of time as it took to spray the 25 rounds, he put two rounds into the center of the thoractic cavity of all four targets and then one into the head of each of the targets.

Spraying put out 25 rounds, while controlled shooting put out 12 rounds, in about the same amount of time. But the controlled shooting put all rounds where they counted.

By the end of the class, I could do that too (but not as quickly).

[El Tejon]

How can people who know absolutely nothing about firearms even comment on them?:rolleyes:

VPC does not know an automatic rifle from an automatic first down.

[Standing Wolf]

"When was the last time you heard of someone sticking up a 7-11 with a $10,000 sniper rifle?"

Still hasn't happened in my neighborhood.

[Tamara]

4. However, this is a distinction without a difference in terms of killing power. Civilian semiautomatic assault weapons incorporate all of the functional design features that make assault weapons so deadly. They are arguably more deadly than military versions, because most experts agree that semiautomatic fire is more accurate—and thus more lethal—than automatic fire.

5. The distinctive "look" of assault weapons is not cosmetic. It is the visual result of specific functional design decisions. Military assault weapons were designed and developed for a specific military purpose—laying down a high volume of fire over a wide killing zone, also known as "hosing down" an area.

How dense does one have to be to not notice that Point #5 directly contradicts Point #4? :scrutiny:

[Combat-wombat]

I found some more crap on their site. They have a problem with youth firearms and teaching kids gun safety. "A .22 For Christmas" (http://www.vpc.org/studies/22cont.htm)
:cuss:

[UnknownSailor]

Unless my memory is failing me, there is no such film as Rambo IV.

[bfason]

How dense does one have to be to not notice that Point #5 directly contradicts Point #4?

"One can't believe impossible things," said Alice

"I daresay you haven't had much practice," said the Queen. "When I was your age, I always did it for half-an-hour a day. Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast."

Lewis Carroll, Alice and the White Queen, in _Through the Looking Glass_ (1872).

----

Who would actually "need" an "assault weapon"?

Probably no one, but if you did need one, you'd *really* need it. Just ask this guy. (Anyone know how to say "Molon Labe" in Korean?)

[Nightfall]

Oh how similar we are, Combat-wombat. :D

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=11815

[Combat-wombat]

Yep:)
I just get sick when the nation is exposed to horrible misinformation, and they believe it.

[Mark Tyson]

Spray fire? Give me a break. The only time firing from the hip is feasible is at extreme close quarters with an unwieldly long gun which is difficult to shoulder. So I was told, anyway.

My blood runs cold when I read swill like this by these totalitarian do-gooders.

These guns are dangerous. They're SUPPOSED to be dangerous. What matters is whose hands they're in.

That cat from the VPC is a bull(fill in the blank) hose.

[shooten]

I found some more crap on their site. They have a problem with youth firearms and teaching kids gun safety. "A .22 For Christmas"


Man, that thing reads like the cigarette campaign from years ago. Just insert cigarette for gun or rifle. I don't need the gun industry to teach my child about firearms, I'll do it myself.

Scott



edited for spelling :uhoh:

[Hkmp5sd]

I own about a dozen of the so-called "semi-automatic assault weapons" and I can't remember a single instance where I have fired any of them from the hip.

Holding a pistol gripped weapon at the hip requires bending the wrist in a very uncomfortable angle. I regular stock is easier to fire from the hip and generally ends with the same results as using an AW, hitting absolutely nothing.


And as every normal American citizen knows, if you need legal advice, you go to a lawyer. If you need medical advice, you go to a physician. If you need your car repaired, you go to a mechanic. And if you need to know anything about guns, you go to Sarah Brady.

[Spot77]

Combat-Wounded:

Thanks a lot. I've been trying to puke all day and the link to that vpc site did the trick.

I read way too many assumptions, too many instances of improper handling, and above all, JUST WAY TOO MUCH B.S.

[spacemanspiff]

ooo ooo ooo! hkmp5sd! but i bet you've fired those evil pistol gripped rifles with one hand, right?? dont lie to us now! we all know that a pistol grip weapon is EASY to fire with one hand.
:barf: :fire: :confused:

[Jim March]

James Castilla: unless you really pay attention to these guys, you won't understand what they're really doing.

It's what we call "Goldilocks Gun Control". It goes like this:

"This gun is too big. It's eeeeevil and we'll ban it for the children."

"This gun is too SMALL. It's eeeeevil and we'll ban it for the children, after we label it a "pocket rocket"" (yes, that's actually a term invented by the grabbers for smaller-sized handguns).

"This gun looks too much like a military rifle. It's eeeeevil and we'll ban it for the children after we call it an "assault rifle" when it's actually a semi-auto, since full-autos have been either banned or strictly controlled since 1934."

"This gun is too cheap. It's eeeeevil and we'll ban it for the children once we label it a "Saturday Night Special" even though the concept of banning low-cost guns was designed to disarm blacks, and the term itself originated with racist police slang for a series of violent occurances circa 1890: "******town Saturday Night"."

"This gun is too big and/or accurate. It's eeeeevil and we'll ban 50caliber rifles for the children even though absolutely none of 'em have been used in crimes as prices start around $2,500 and ammo runs $3 a pop, and if we can ban the "big sniper rifles" we'll start in on the ordinary scoped deer rifle which is identical to a police sniper rifle 'cept for maybe the color."

-------------

OK, humor aside, this is REALLY what's going on here. Never try and pin 'em down on what guns they'll tolerate us having, esp. for self defense. The answer to THAT is "zero", as banning self defense is the real goal.

[rebbryan]

ive still seen how large a heckler and koch p7 is

large? i don't think the p7 qualifies as a large pistol, not even close

[Combat-wombat]

After looking at that Tec-9/P7 comparison picture for a long time, I realized that the Tec-9 is not much bigger than the P7, but the VPC placed the P7 so it would look much smaller compared to the Tec. I mean the Tec is definitely bigger, but the grip is about the same, just the barrel length and the shroud make the Tec bigger

[Betty]

http://www.a-human-right.com/RKBA/s_lies.jpg

http://www.a-human-right.com/RKBA/blackrifle_s.jpg

http://www.a-human-right.com/RKBA/S_SNIPER.JPG

[Tharg]

Heh -

I fired my Mini 14 "from the hip" once (or was it twice?) had my 30 rounders in it and it was great fun. Would prolly scare the bejesus out of someone if they were in front of me.... but highly inaccurate.

I've also done the movie scene... you know .. .the one where they have a gun in each hand blazing and hit every shot... well considering i'm a fairly decent shot - 16 rounds later i'd landed 2 on target... rofl... i wouldn't suggest either to whoever wrote that article :p (at least if landing lead on target is what yer supposed to be doing when yer "hosing" :neener: )

J/Tharg!

[Hkmp5sd]

The Intratec Tec-9M with it's 3" barrel is even smaller than the P7.

http://www.rebdomine.com/images/tec9.jpg

As a side note, this is the one from Columbine. I don't understand the author's emphasis on it having a threaded barrel.

This is the gun Dylan used. I found an absolutely huge picture and resized it. The threaded barrel is clearly visible. This gun can accept attachments. It is definitely a TEC-9M and not an AB-10. An empty box for a TEC-DC9M was found on the passenger side seat of Dylan's car.

[Geech]

I don't understand the author's emphasis on it having a threaded barrel.

Logically, since a gun with a threaded barrel has been used to commit an evil act, threaded barrels are evil. After all, no honest citizen needs a threaded barrel.

[faustulus]

Did anyone notice how the logic of each statement seemed to contradict what the last statement said.

2. Military assault weapons are "machine guns." That is, they are capable of fully automatic fire. A machine gun will continue to fire as long as the trigger is held down until the ammunition magazine is empty.
So it fires fast.

3. Civilian assault weapons are not machine guns. natch

4. However, this is a distinction without a difference in terms of killing power. Civilian semiautomatic assault weapons incorporate all of the functional design features that make assault weapons so deadly. They are arguably more deadly than military versions, because most experts agree that semiautomatic fire is more accurate—and thus more lethal—than automatic fire. Presumably because it is aimed and slower so recoil is more undercontroled.

5. The distinctive "look" of assault weapons is not cosmetic. It is the visual result of specific functional design decisions. Military assault weapons were designed and developed for a specific military purpose—laying down a high volume of fire over a wide killing zone, also known as "hosing down" an area.
yet statement three said they were not 'machineguns' and four said they were more controlled.

7. The most significant assault weapon functional design features are: (1) ability to accept a high-capacity ammunition magazine, (2) a rear pistol or thumb-hole grip, and, (3) a forward grip or barrel shroud. Taken together, these are the design features that make possible the deadly and indiscriminate "spray-firing" for which assault weapons are designed. None of them are features of true hunting or sporting guns.

Yet point 4 said they were more accurate.
It would be funny if it weren't so sad. Don't they teach critical thinking in government schools?

[Spot77]

The really sad thing is that all of those contradictions will never be realized by the closed minded people support that website and all of its kind.

It's so much easier for people who can't think for themselves to jump on the "Guns are dangerous and must be destroyed" bandwagon than to truly research the pro's and (alleged) cons of responsible gun ownership. It's a feel good thing for people with insecurity issues.