Most annoying Gun Myths

The Sten smg was designed for the Normandy landing and it's magazine was welded on, because it was cheaper to make that way. If you managed to empty yours, all you had to do was pick one up from a dead guy.

MINOR IRRITATIONS ....

I get irritated by people who waste time and band width on trivia such as being upaet by people who, with all good intentions, confuse "clip" and "magazine" or "bullet" and "cartridge" or even "shell."

If they get their meaning across, *** cares?

My advice is to "Get a life!"



GrayBear

I agree with Zedicus

People who think all newbies can only start out with .22's.

Click to expand...

This one always bothers me. I am supposed to take a 250lb man out and say "since you are knew you will only be able to learn properly if you use this little plink gun". I myself find .22 calibers super boring to shoot and I am sure alot of newbies do too and my goal is to make the experience as fun for them as possible. I have found I always get more "I wanna do this again" responses when I take out the big boys along with some smaller calibers like .32acp pistols.

Shotguns cannot be used/were meant for war.
Playing FPS video games or watching Tales of the Gun makes one a weapons expert.
500 S&W is the gangbangers choice of weapon or made just to kill people.
45-70 is not effective past 100 yards.
Handguns are not used for hunting.
Handguns are not effective on deer/wild pigs/etc.
LEO=gun expert.

People who think all newbies can only start out with .22's

Click to expand...

I have to say that all new shooters SHOULD start out with a .22

not to say that all new shooters MUST start out with a .22

If someone has never shot a gun in their life there is no way you can know how they will react. Size doesn't matter, this 350lb guy thing... he could still react like a 8 year old city girl if there is something in his life which happened to condition him to that. (no offense to 8 year old girls intended) Depending on the person graduate to other calibers at the person's own pace perhaps after only 1 magazine.

I would feel bad if the 450 lb tough guy never shot a gun again because I thought he was tough enough to shoot a .357 mag and he wanted to be tough in from of the other guys. In actuallity he needed a little more time.

Aside from re-actions there is the flinch factor. A .22 has less recoil and it is easier for the shooter to develop good habits.

I realize that I have gotten off topic here and posted a bit of a straw man, but my teaching style is to start with a .22, others choose differently. I am always open to being proven/shown wrong if it will make be better at what I like to do.

I have to say that all new shooters SHOULD start out with a .22

Click to expand...

See, it never fails.

I have been through alot of advance handgun training in my life. Military, police academy, marksmanship training for competition shooting, and even SASS training and none of them advocate starting with a .22...I am not sure where this really started.

I have been through alot of advance gun training in my life. Military, police academy, marksmanship training for competition shooting, and even SASS training and none of them advocate starting with a .22...I am not sure where this really started.

Click to expand...

Ok... what do they recommend starting with?

Also I am not talking about advanced firearms training, which it seems your examples are. I am talking about a person who has never fired a gun in their life EVER. If a person wants training for CCW purposes or whatever and says they have been shooting since 3 years old and wants to shoot their 9mm I am not going to force them to use a .22.

Most of the training I have received either started you with a 9mm or a .38 caliber.

Most of the people in every class I have ever been in where newbies too. Small .22 caliber guns are good for killing small pest, seeing how tight a group you can make, saving cost on ammo, etc but as far as being better to learn with I think that is bunk. People I know that learned on a .22 were like teaching newbies once they moved onto a gun that had real power and needed to be controlled.

Ok... what do they recommend starting with?

Also I am not talking about advanced firearms training, which it seems your examples are. I am talking about a person who has never fired a gun in their life EVER. If a person wants training for CCW purposes or whatever and says they have been shooting since 3 years old and wants to shoot their 9mm I am not going to force them to use a .22.

Click to expand...

The first time I touched a firearm was in basic training at age 18 courtesy of the United States Navy. First was the M1911A1 .45 pistol, then the M14 rifle, 7.62mm and finally shotguns. They certainly didn't start us off with a .22.

DJ

I started shooting handguns with a 6" model 19, loaded with 38s. light recoil, and easy to aim.

People I know that learned on a .22 were like teaching newbies once they moved onto a gun that had real power and needed to be controlled.

Click to expand...

I see that as valid.

However, I keep coming back to the concern that if you put too much gun in a person's hand you may scare them off. I know you can develop good habits starting off with a .38, but I think it is easier with a .22. hmm...

From the New Orleans Times-Picayune

The SKS...

one of the most dangerous weapons on the streets

Click to expand...

can blast through engine blocks as easily as it can bones

Click to expand...

Faust said the steel core bullets used in an SKS strike the body then follow bone, so a bullet can "enter your shoulder and come out of your toe."

Click to expand...

I don't think people NEED to start with a .22 but I encourage everyone to get one sooner rather than later since it's the cheapest way to have fun doing a lot of shooting. If you already have a larger caliber then getting one with a similiar grip angle / configuration or a conversion kit is ideal. The one drawback to shooting a .22 without something larger thrown into the mix is the lack of recoil with the .22 will allow bad habits to form. If you mix it up that shouldn't be an issue and it's a lot more fun.

However, I keep coming back to the concern that if you put too much gun in a person's hand you may scare them off. I know you can develop good habits starting off with a .38, but I think it is easier with a .22. hmm...

Click to expand...

I doubt that will be an issue with most men or with most women who seriously want to learn. It might be a concern with the wife who doesn't really want to shoot but wants to learn for SD carry just in case or with small kids. Otherwise I say start with a 9mm or at least a .38...easier to teach them how to shoot when they are actually shooting something they can feel.

I have no problem with people who want to learn with a .22 instead of something larger. I just have a problem with the guys who want to jump on people like they broke an unwriiten law by teaching someone on something other than a .22...like they are the gun gods or something.

I know I could go to the range and shoot my Ruger Mark II (the only .22 I own) all day and not spend much on ammo but I would also not have any fun or really develope any skill.

It is mechanically correct to refer to a semi-automatic "assault weapon" as an assault rifle or machinepistol.

F.A.s offer a damn load more firepower than semi-autos, why do you think f.a.s, and not semis, are in the NFA?

I don't know if this has been mentioned already, but the idea amongst non-shooters, particularly antis, that using a handgun is a simple draw, point, and click affair, regardless of distance. Point, click, and the target drops. One-handed, at that. Under stress. In a snowstorm. Shooting uphill.

Click to expand...

Good one!

A non-shooter friend (a preacher) and I were having a discussion last New Years Eve. He knows I carry and he asked me if I would shoot to kill if my life depended on it. I told him that if my life, or the life of a family member depended on it, I would do so without hesitation. He asked me why I wouldn't just shoot for the bad guy's gun hand. I told him that if he'd go to the range with me sometime, I'd show him.

In June, we went to the range. After some instruction and practice, I had him shooting my Ruger Mk III. I traced my rather large paw onto a paper plate and stapled it to the target stand. From 15 yards, I asked him to shoot it. No luck. At 7 yards, taking his time and aiming carefully, he hit it with two out of ten shots. I asked him if he remembered our previous conversation. He did.

Razorburn:

You've confused the Conservation of Energy with Newton's Third Law of Motion.

The Conservation of Energy just says you can't destroy energy, only change it's form. Guns follow this law by turning chemical energy into kinetic energy + heat energy + light energy + sonic energy + etc. This says nothing about the kinetic energy imparted to the bullet or rifle. (Not completely true. By using the Conservation of Energy and the Conservation of Momentum laws together, we can find the momemtum and kinetic energy of the bullet and the gun. But, do the math and we'll find that the kinetic energy of the gun and bullet will not be equal.)

The Newton's Third Law of Motion is the "For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction." This refers to force not energy as Newton's Three Laws of Motion are only concerned with motion. Using Newton's Third Law along with the Second Law (F=m*a), the force applied to the bullet is equal (and opposite) to the force applied to the gun. Integrate that quantity over time and we find that the momentum of the gun + brass is equal to the momentum of the bullet + gasses.

Click to expand...

Then if we use that force equation of mass x acceleration as being what's equal between the gun and bullet, it means that assuming equal momentum is wrong if that momentum is defined as = m x v, since acceleration is the 1st derivative of velocity.

There's a TV Commercial out here in CA that I just love. There is a Uniformed LEO holding a .50 BMG round, saying some other guy voted to allow this dangerous military assult rifle to be legal. Then to top it all off they show a little clip of a bullet going through 2 cartoon police cars and out the other side, while the Uniformed LEO says "this bullet can travel through 2 police cars and come out the other side and still kill you".

1. What's the Cheapest .50 BMG Rifle? Say around $2500?

2. How much does a .50 BMG round cost, like $2 each

3. When was the last time some Criminial killed someone with a .50 BMG?

4. I forgot everyone that owns a .50 BMG is trying to shoot down Planes at the LA and San Diego Air Ports ... cause a .50 BMG will make anything that's shot with it explode.

But hey, I'm in California, were I legally have permited AR's and extended capacity mags, but have to wait 10 days to buy a double barrel trap gun that has huge chokes on it that won't allow it to shoot slugs or balled shot numerically smaller than 6.

razorburn:

mass x acceleration as being what's equal between the gun and bullet

Click to expand...

does not lead to

equal momentum is wrong if that momentum is defined as = m x v.

Click to expand...

Given constant acceleration and over t time, integrating acceleration over time gives (a*t) which is equal to (v) as velocity is equal to the time integral of acceleration.

So, momentum is = m*v = m*a*t.

Rearranging gives, m*a = (m*v)/t.

Setting F1 = m1*a1 as the force acting on the bullet and F2 = m2*a2 as the force acting on the gun. (Newton's Second Law)

Toss all that into Newton's Third Law F1 = m1*a1 = F2 = m2*a2.

Substitute m*a for (m*v)/t.

Result is (m1*v1)/t = (m2*v2)/t. Simplify by multiplying both sides by t gives (m1*v1) = (m2*v2).

End result, the momentum of the bullet is equal and opposite to the momentum of the gun.

If acceleration varies as the bullet travels down the barrel, which it does, then the integral becomes messier, but as long as F=m*a holds, which it does, then the momentum of the bullet and the firearm will be equal.

Automatic = Machine Gun

Will someone explain to people that 'automatic' does not mean 'machine gun'.

And for that matter, set them straight on "I don't know why you need an AK-47 to hunt?" & "Why do you need a gun like that?"

I was at the range when two more shooters came to the line. One was trying to sell his rifle. Listening to his "gab" about how great his rifle was,( it was a Lazzeroni of some sort ), I heard this..." this bullet is so fast it actually rises..." Um.m.m.m , its not a wing, so if you fire at "dead level", doesn't gravity affect every bullet the same? Does the bullet start to drop as soon as it leaves the barrel? Maybe I'm wrong but that statement just sounded all wrong to me.
Mark.

Maybe his bullet was fin stablizied...

annoying gun myth is that (atleast where I live and in cali) everyone who owns a gun must be a god fearing, republican,anti-abortion yadda yadda yada and well you know what it just aint true.

"Maybe I'm wrong but that statement just sounded all wrong to me."

Yes and no.

If there bore were parallel to the gound, yes, the bullet would immediatly start to drop. In fact, if you drop a bullet for the same height as the bore at the same time a bullet is fired, and the ground were perfectly flat, they would hit the groud at the same time.

Now, there is a BUT in all of this. sights/scope are above the bore axis. At some point you want the bullet to meet the line of sight. To do this, the bore has to be at a slight up angle, so in most insaces with most rifles, the bullet does climb before it goes back down.

WRT starting noobies out with a .22...I always do so. The .22 is CHEAP to shoot. We're talking 1/10 the price of practicing with centerfire rounds. More practice is better and, as long as I am footing the bill, practice will be with the less expensive rounds. Once the basics of marksmanship are thoroughly learned, then we move on to heavier rounds. Remember, if you are a lousy shot with a .22, picking up a heavier caliber won't magically make you a marksman. On the other hand, if you are a good shot with a .22 you are much more likely to be a good shot with something bigger.

At some point you want the bullet to meet the line of sight. To do this, the bore has to be at a slight up angle, so in most insaces with most rifles, the bullet does climb before it goes back down.

Click to expand...

This is true for all guns... coming out of the barrel, the bullet rises (relative to the line-of-sight), intersects the line-of-sight, goes above the line-of-sight, reaches its apex, comes back down, and intersects the line-of-sight again at the target. (This assumes the rifle is zeroed for the target distance.) The bullet never rises above the barrel axis, even when shooting uphill or downhill.

When you adjust the elevation of the sights, don't think of it as adjusting the sights. Assume the sights are fixed, and you're adjusting the elevation angle of the barrel.