On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 20:43:11 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 2/11/2022 8:35 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 2/11/2022 7:16 PM, John B. wrote:
>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:38:47 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2/10/2022 10:51 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 20:11:51 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2/10/2022 7:04 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 10:44:34 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2/10/2022 1:43 AM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It might be that the Air Gun was the most effective weapon that the
>>>>>>>>> expedition carried as while I can't find a specific statement
>>>>>>>>> that the
>>>>>>>>> Girandoni was rifled...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It was rifled.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> See https://youtu.be/2dZLeEUE940?t=189
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Interesting. Very innovative. The first rifled long guns in the U.S.
>>>>>>> army date to about 1800 and in the British Army about the same
>>>>>>> period.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I defer to you on official War Department procurement, since
>>>>>> I have no idea.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But I do know something about our Founding. Paul Revere and
>>>>>> William Dawes left Boston on horseback at night* because
>>>>>> some 700-odd of the British garrison had marched out at
>>>>>> midnight* for Lexington where the most accurate _long
>>>>>> rifles_ on the continent were manufactured.  They took a
>>>>>> circuitous route but did arrive at Lexington in time and the
>>>>>> results, including the forced withdrawal at Concord, were
>>>>>> our 'shot heard round the world'. A result in our favor was
>>>>>> critically due to the superior range and accuracy of long
>>>>>> rifles against smooth bore British issue muskets.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 18 April, 1775.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * 1775! No streetlights, no headlamps, no paved rural roads.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, I've read the stories and yes, British troops were marching to
>>>>> seize stores of gun powder and some arms at Lexington, and yes, I've
>>>>> read stories about the Minute Men snipping from behind fences but I
>>>>> doubt greatly whether many rifles were used, although admittedly this
>>>>> seems to be a constant theme in U.S. history.
>>>>>
>>>>> But, where did these "rifles" come from? The average farmer had no
>>>>> requirement for an expensive rifled gun, a smooth bore was far cheaper
>>>>> and far more versatile for use on the farm.
>>>>>
>>>>> Additionally there were no organized munitions makers in the U.S. and
>>>>> rifles were made one at a time, and were extremely expensive. Kenneth
>>>>> Roberts in the historical novel Arundel, based on actual diaries of
>>>>> the 1775 Quebec Campaign, mentions used rifles with accoutrements
>>>>> exchanged for 12-15 English pounds. A smooth bore at the time might be
>>>>> 2 pounds and 4 shillings. To get an idea of how much this was there is
>>>>> a record of a John Moll paying 45 pounds for a 60’ X 230’ building lot
>>>>> in Allentown in 1772.  And, William Carlin, a tailor in colonial
>>>>> Alexandria who made clothes for field hands as well as the planter
>>>>> elite, charged £3-5 for an ordinary wool suit.
>>>>>
>>>>> Some of the greatest support furnished by the French to the
>>>>> revolutionists was in the form of muskets and gun power. In the
>>>>> Battles of Saratoga on September 19 and October 7, 1777, it is
>>>>> estimated that as many as nine out of 10 American soldiers carried
>>>>> French arms, and were completely dependent on French gunpowder.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I was engaged in a discussion on currency debasement policy
>>>> (popularly called 'inflation') and remembered your post
>>>> above so I checked the NPV of 14 Sterling in 1775.
>>>>
>>>> Current value 2400 pounds or US$3200. For reference, your
>>>> average popular modern rifle runs somewhere around $2000.
>>>>
>>>> So you make a good point that premium equipment of the era
>>>> was pricey. No wonder Louis sent muskets!
>>>>
>>>> Typical selections:
>>>> https://blog.gunassociation.org/best-rifles/
>>>>
>>>> https://www.outdoorlife.com/photos/gallery/guns/rifles/centerfire/2011/11/20-best-semi-automatic-rifles-big-game-hunting/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> where $3000 rifles are at the far end of 'popular', most are
>>>> below $2000, and the range is $800 to $7000
>>>
>>> I was "into" gun smithing for a while and actually gave some thought
>>> to doing it as a business after I left the Military, and "back then",
>>> say the 1960's a good "deer rifle" with iron sights was in the $200
>>> range. And, disregarding my Military pay and allowances, I was making
>>> $10 a day part time in a gunsmith shop (:-)
>>>
>>> Disregarding "Home Defense" mentioned in your reference above, my
>>> grandfather used a Winchester lever action 38-55 as a "deer rifle" and
>>> killed his one deer a year under his license (and sometimes two  if
>>> the Game Warden was down at the other end of the state) and had one
>>> packet of, I think it was 20 rounds, that he'd been using for
>>> something like 10 years.
>>>
>>> Which might say something about AR-15's, and other shoot em up,
>>> bang,bang, guns as hunting rifles (:-)
>>>
>>
>> Wrong.
>> We've been over this here on RBT at least a dozen times over the years.
>> My AR-15 repeats at the exact same speed as my .38 Police Special
>> revolver. Both are faster than girlfriend's inherited .30 Winchester
>> vintage lever, but not by all that much.  None of those are magic
>> lead-spraying pew-pew-pew television weapons.
>
>38 Police Special: "pew pew pew pew pew pew" and slowly
>reload.
>
>Typical AR15: "pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew
>pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew."
>
>You know, for hunting.

Well... people who never race by racing bicycles (:-) and even worse,
I've got a friend lives on a 45 ft boat and bought "mountain bike"
(:-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 17:51:19 -0800 (PST), "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
<ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Friday, February 11, 2022 at 7:13:08 PM UTC-6, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 2/11/2022 6:49 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> > On Thursday, February 10, 2022 at 10:52:02 PM UTC-6, John B. wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 20:11:51 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On 2/10/2022 7:04 PM, John B. wrote:
>> >>>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 10:44:34 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>> >>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> On 2/10/2022 1:43 AM, John B. wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> It might be that the Air Gun was the most effective weapon that the
>> >>>>>> expedition carried as while I can't find a specific statement that the
>> >>>>>> Girandoni was rifled...
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> It was rifled.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> See https://youtu.be/2dZLeEUE940?t=189
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Interesting. Very innovative. The first rifled long guns in the U.S.
>> >>>> army date to about 1800 and in the British Army about the same period.
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> I defer to you on official War Department procurement, since
>> >>> I have no idea.
>> >>>
>> >>> But I do know something about our Founding. Paul Revere and
>> >>> William Dawes left Boston on horseback at night* because
>> >>> some 700-odd of the British garrison had marched out at
>> >>> midnight* for Lexington where the most accurate _long
>> >>> rifles_ on the continent were manufactured. They took a
>> >>> circuitous route but did arrive at Lexington in time and the
>> >>> results, including the forced withdrawal at Concord, were
>> >>> our 'shot heard round the world'. A result in our favor was
>> >>> critically due to the superior range and accuracy of long
>> >>> rifles against smooth bore British issue muskets.
>> >>>
>> >>> 18 April, 1775.
>> >>>
>> >>> * 1775! No streetlights, no headlamps, no paved rural roads.
>> >> Yes, I've read the stories and yes, British troops were marching to
>> >> seize stores of gun powder and some arms at Lexington, and yes, I've
>> >> read stories about the Minute Men snipping from behind fences but I
>> >> doubt greatly whether many rifles were used, although admittedly this
>> >> seems to be a constant theme in U.S. history.
>> >>
>> >> But, where did these "rifles" come from? The average farmer had no
>> >> requirement for an expensive rifled gun, a smooth bore was far cheaper
>> >> and far more versatile for use on the farm.
>> >
>> > Yes the myth of Americans fighting with Kentucky Long Rifles is very rampant. Well known. Frontiersmen with their own rifled rifles (?) would pick off the English soldiers like snipers. And win the war. But when the military regiments lined up to fight each other on the battlefields in rows upon rows, they used cheap, plentiful muskets issued by their employer, the government army. And they mowed each other down by the thousands. So losing 10 soldiers to sniper rifles, isn't too comparable to losing 1000 soldiers to musket volleys.
>> >
>> > A similar story persists for operation Barbarossa. Russian snipers. Generally women according to the stories I have seen. They were deadly, supposedly. But snipers killing a hundred or two hundred people does not compare much at all to the thousands, millions (?) of dead Russians and Germans on the eastern front. Who were killed by tanks, artillery, rifles, freezing cold, disease.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Additionally there were no organized munitions makers in the U.S. and
>> >> rifles were made one at a time, and were extremely expensive. Kenneth
>> >> Roberts in the historical novel Arundel, based on actual diaries of
>> >> the 1775 Quebec Campaign, mentions used rifles with accoutrements
>> >> exchanged for 12-15 English pounds. A smooth bore at the time might be
>> >> 2 pounds and 4 shillings. To get an idea of how much this was there is
>> >> a record of a John Moll paying 45 pounds for a 60’ X 230’ building lot
>> >> in Allentown in 1772. And, William Carlin, a tailor in colonial
>> >> Alexandria who made clothes for field hands as well as the planter
>> >> elite, charged £3-5 for an ordinary wool suit.
>> >>
>> >> Some of the greatest support furnished by the French to the
>> >> revolutionists was in the form of muskets and gun power. In the
>> >> Battles of Saratoga on September 19 and October 7, 1777, it is
>> >> estimated that as many as nine out of 10 American soldiers carried
>> >> French arms, and were completely dependent on French gunpowder.
>> >> --
>> >> Cheers,
>> >>
>> >> John B.
>> Well done, Mr Seaton.
>> All that's true and not in conflict.
>>
>> American long rifles were indeed superior but rifles and
>> riflemen were never voluminous enough to change the outcome
>> except in small-unit skirmishes such as Lexington.
>
>One of the other "problems" with rifles at the time in battle was the time and effort it took to reload them. A rifled rifle took more time and effort to push the slug down the bore. While a smooth bore musket could be reloaded and shot about 3 times per minute I believe. Volume of fire was important even back then.

Having owned and shot muzzle loading guns it gets a bit more
complicated. Yes rifles have to be loaded with a close fitting bullet,
usually by means of a cloth "patch" wrapped around the bullet but more
important from a battle view point the rifle can only be fired a
limited number of times before the fouling gets so bad that it is
nearly impossible to ram the bullet home. I believe that there are
reports of the British riflemen in the Peninsular War urinating in the
barrels of their Baker (I believe) rifles to clear the fouling and
also loading a bare ball, as a battle progressed.

--
Cheers,

John B.

On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 20:04:00 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>On 2/11/2022 7:19 PM, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Thursday, February 10, 2022 at 11:15:14 PM UTC-6, jeff.li...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Wed, 9 Feb 2022 11:53:37 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> And a comment on Human Factors: There was probably no technical need to
>>>> make the gun look so much like a flintlock, or to have a fake "cock" or
>>>> flint holder swinging forward and down. But if soldiers were used to
>>>> flintlocks, that feature of the air rifle probably aided training.
>>>
>>> Design is most commonly evolutionary and rarely revolutionary. In
>>> other words, a new design tends to build on the old design that it
>>> attempts to replace. In this case, the 1780 Girandoni prototype was
>>> probably built from components borrowed from the muskets of the day.
>>> While the internal pneumatic mechanisms were certainly different, the
>>> design and placement of the stock, barrel, sighting, breech, etc were
>>> "good enough" to be used in their original forms. For example, the
>>> 20/22 shot loader was borrowed directly from "harmonica" guns,
>>> invented in 1742:
>>> <https://www.google.com/search?q=harmonica+rifle&tbm=isch>
>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonica_gun>
>>>
>>> I don't think training was the most important consideration. What was
>>> important was to sell the air rifle. The military of the day was
>>> highly conservative and not particularly receptive to making major
>>> changes of any kind. It was much like the early machine guns, which
>>> were declared useless by the military because it wasted ammunition.
>>
>> I've read stories about the US Army back in the late 1860s, 1870s, 1880s, when looking for a new issue gun for the soldiers. They were not receptive to the new multi shot rifles such as the Winchester lever action rifle (Model 1866, 1873, 1876, etc.) of the late 1860s, 1870s. Because if a soldier had more than one bullet, he would shoot too often and waste bullets. The Civil War era rifled musket began in the 1850s. It was used up until 1872 when the single shot .45 caliber trap door rifle became the standard issue US Army rifle. Single Shot. Then in 1903 the bolt action Springfield became the standard issue. And was used in WW1. Until the M1 Garand semi auto came to be in 1936 and used in WW2.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Making the air rifle look like something familiar had the advantage of
>>> making it appear to be a minor improvement to the existing rifle
>>> rather than a radical redesign hidden inside. However, that would
>>> only get the air rifle to testing and trials, where the differences
>>> and limitations would soon be evident. Before soldiers can be trained
>>> to use any kind of weapon system, the military needs to decide how the
>>> weapon is to be used.
>>
>> This brings up kind of a humorous, ironic point. It wasn't until after WW2 I believe when the scholars and educated people studied things, that they realized the key ingredient to winning a battle was number of shots fired. More shots fired, more chance of winning. Germany in WW2 may have been the first ones to realize this concept. They developed many sophisticated machine guns that fired 1200 rounds a minute. Buzzsaw was their nickname. More bullets better. Everyone else caught on later. Just fire bullets in the air. In the Vietnam war we had helicopters flying over the jungle with machine gunners hanging out the sides firing bullets at the jungle. Not that it helped the US win the Vietnam war. But I suspect if you looked at the casualty totals for all involved in the Vietnam war, a lot more north Vietnamese soldiers were killed than US or south Vietnamese soldiers. But in that war the number of dead wasn't the deciding factor for determining a victor.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> This was a major problem with early machine
>>> guns, tanks, airplanes, and just about every revolutionary
>>> technological improvement. When first introduced, officers had no
>>> idea how these were to be used and had to do quite a bit of
>>> experimentation before a functional system was contrived. Once that
>>> was established, then the training can begin.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
>>> PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
>>> Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
>>> Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
>
>Your late 1800s issue list skipped the very successful 1892
>Krag.

Otherwise known as he Springfield Model 1892–99 (:-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 20:46:19 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>On 2/11/2022 8:37 PM, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Friday, February 11, 2022 at 7:35:23 PM UTC-6, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 2/11/2022 7:16 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:38:47 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2/10/2022 10:51 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 20:11:51 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2/10/2022 7:04 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 10:44:34 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2/10/2022 1:43 AM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It might be that the Air Gun was the most effective weapon that the
>>>>>>>>>> expedition carried as while I can't find a specific statement that the
>>>>>>>>>> Girandoni was rifled...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It was rifled.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> See https://youtu.be/2dZLeEUE940?t=189
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Interesting. Very innovative. The first rifled long guns in the U.S.
>>>>>>>> army date to about 1800 and in the British Army about the same period.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I defer to you on official War Department procurement, since
>>>>>>> I have no idea.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But I do know something about our Founding. Paul Revere and
>>>>>>> William Dawes left Boston on horseback at night* because
>>>>>>> some 700-odd of the British garrison had marched out at
>>>>>>> midnight* for Lexington where the most accurate _long
>>>>>>> rifles_ on the continent were manufactured. They took a
>>>>>>> circuitous route but did arrive at Lexington in time and the
>>>>>>> results, including the forced withdrawal at Concord, were
>>>>>>> our 'shot heard round the world'. A result in our favor was
>>>>>>> critically due to the superior range and accuracy of long
>>>>>>> rifles against smooth bore British issue muskets.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 18 April, 1775.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> * 1775! No streetlights, no headlamps, no paved rural roads.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, I've read the stories and yes, British troops were marching to
>>>>>> seize stores of gun powder and some arms at Lexington, and yes, I've
>>>>>> read stories about the Minute Men snipping from behind fences but I
>>>>>> doubt greatly whether many rifles were used, although admittedly this
>>>>>> seems to be a constant theme in U.S. history.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But, where did these "rifles" come from? The average farmer had no
>>>>>> requirement for an expensive rifled gun, a smooth bore was far cheaper
>>>>>> and far more versatile for use on the farm.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Additionally there were no organized munitions makers in the U.S. and
>>>>>> rifles were made one at a time, and were extremely expensive. Kenneth
>>>>>> Roberts in the historical novel Arundel, based on actual diaries of
>>>>>> the 1775 Quebec Campaign, mentions used rifles with accoutrements
>>>>>> exchanged for 12-15 English pounds. A smooth bore at the time might be
>>>>>> 2 pounds and 4 shillings. To get an idea of how much this was there is
>>>>>> a record of a John Moll paying 45 pounds for a 60’ X 230’ building lot
>>>>>> in Allentown in 1772. And, William Carlin, a tailor in colonial
>>>>>> Alexandria who made clothes for field hands as well as the planter
>>>>>> elite, charged £3-5 for an ordinary wool suit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Some of the greatest support furnished by the French to the
>>>>>> revolutionists was in the form of muskets and gun power. In the
>>>>>> Battles of Saratoga on September 19 and October 7, 1777, it is
>>>>>> estimated that as many as nine out of 10 American soldiers carried
>>>>>> French arms, and were completely dependent on French gunpowder.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I was engaged in a discussion on currency debasement policy
>>>>> (popularly called 'inflation') and remembered your post
>>>>> above so I checked the NPV of 14 Sterling in 1775.
>>>>>
>>>>> Current value 2400 pounds or US$3200. For reference, your
>>>>> average popular modern rifle runs somewhere around $2000.
>>>>>
>>>>> So you make a good point that premium equipment of the era
>>>>> was pricey. No wonder Louis sent muskets!
>>>>>
>>>>> Typical selections:
>>>>> https://blog.gunassociation.org/best-rifles/
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.outdoorlife.com/photos/gallery/guns/rifles/centerfire/2011/11/20-best-semi-automatic-rifles-big-game-hunting/
>>>>>
>>>>> where $3000 rifles are at the far end of 'popular', most are
>>>>> below $2000, and the range is $800 to $7000
>>>>
>>>> I was "into" gun smithing for a while and actually gave some thought
>>>> to doing it as a business after I left the Military, and "back then",
>>>> say the 1960's a good "deer rifle" with iron sights was in the $200
>>>> range. And, disregarding my Military pay and allowances, I was making
>>>> $10 a day part time in a gunsmith shop (:-)
>>>>
>>>> Disregarding "Home Defense" mentioned in your reference above, my
>>>> grandfather used a Winchester lever action 38-55 as a "deer rifle" and
>>>> killed his one deer a year under his license (and sometimes two if
>>>> the Game Warden was down at the other end of the state) and had one
>>>> packet of, I think it was 20 rounds, that he'd been using for
>>>> something like 10 years.
>>>>
>>>> Which might say something about AR-15's, and other shoot em up,
>>>> bang,bang, guns as hunting rifles (:-)
>>>>
>>> Wrong.
>>> We've been over this here on RBT at least a dozen times over
>>> the years. My AR-15 repeats at the exact same speed as my
>>> .38 Police Special revolver. Both are faster than
>>> girlfriend's inherited .30 Winchester vintage lever, but not
>>> by all that much. None of those are magic lead-spraying
>>> pew-pew-pew television weapons.
>>> --
>>> Andrew Muzi
>>> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
>>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>>
>> Your AR-15 has a 20 or 30 shot magazine. Most likely .223 Remington or NATO ammunition. Your Police Special has 6 shots. The 5 shot S&W only became common fairly recently. The lever action likely has a 7 or 8 or 9 round tube fed ammo holding system. So roughly the AR-15 has 5 times the revolver capacity and 4 times the rifle capacity. You can easily fire two shots per second. Bang-bang. Thats one second. Maybe you can even fire three rounds per second.
>>
>> At the June 12, 2016 Orlando Florida mass shooting at a GAY nightclub, a SIG Sauer MCX semi-automatic rifle (it is an AR-15) and a Glock 17 semi auto pistol were used. 49 people killed, 53 wounded.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_nightclub_shooting#Weapons
>> "In less than five minutes, Mateen had fired approximately 200 rounds, pausing only to reload." That works out to a little more than 40 rounds per minute. One and a half seconds per shot. Not too fast I guess.
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIG_MCX
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glock#Glock_17
>>
>> It wasn't until October 2017, a whole year and 3 months later, that Orlando lost its crown as the biggest mass shooting in US history. That is when the Las Vegas concert killer used the bump stock device on his AR-15 rifles to kill 60 and wound 411.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Las_Vegas_shooting#Weaponry
>> "Paddock was found to have fired a total of 1,058 rounds from fifteen of the firearms: 1,049 from twelve AR-15-style rifles, eight from two AR-10-style rifles, and the round used to kill himself from the Smith & Wesson revolver."
>>
>
>meh.
>
>And every day (more than usual this week) there are multiple
>stabbings and sword/machete murders.
>
>https://www.wate.com/news/sword-attack-in-indiana-leaves-2-dead-1-wounded/
>
>https://www.expressnews.com/news/local/article/Sword-wielding-man-shot-by-New-Braunfels-police-16836088.php
>
>https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/police-find-man-decapitating-girlfriend-with-machete-in-philadelphia/ar-AATJCVg
>
>https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/man-accused-of-attacking-lakewood-store-employee-with-machete-police-say/ar-AATJXiV
>
>https://www.thedailybeast.com/karla-jackelin-morales-allegedly-lured-jose-villanueva-to-ms-13-machete-death-and-skipped-bail
>
>I skip the stabbings/slashings with knives/razors which are
>frequent.
>
>Turns out that by not prosecuting/detaining criminals,
>mayhem results. Weapon of choice may vary but the results
>are fungibly similar.

On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 20:48:52 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot
<i_am_cycle_pathic@yahoo.ca> wrote:

>On Friday, February 11, 2022 at 8:51:22 p.m. UTC-5, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Friday, February 11, 2022 at 7:13:08 PM UTC-6, AMuzi wrote:
>> > On 2/11/2022 6:49 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> > > On Thursday, February 10, 2022 at 10:52:02 PM UTC-6, John B. wrote:
>> > >> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 20:11:51 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>> On 2/10/2022 7:04 PM, John B. wrote:
>> > >>>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 10:44:34 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>> > >>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>> On 2/10/2022 1:43 AM, John B. wrote:
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> It might be that the Air Gun was the most effective weapon that the
>> > >>>>>> expedition carried as while I can't find a specific statement that the
>> > >>>>>> Girandoni was rifled...
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> It was rifled.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> See https://youtu.be/2dZLeEUE940?t=189
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Interesting. Very innovative. The first rifled long guns in the U.S.
>> > >>>> army date to about 1800 and in the British Army about the same period.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> I defer to you on official War Department procurement, since
>> > >>> I have no idea.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> But I do know something about our Founding. Paul Revere and
>> > >>> William Dawes left Boston on horseback at night* because
>> > >>> some 700-odd of the British garrison had marched out at
>> > >>> midnight* for Lexington where the most accurate _long
>> > >>> rifles_ on the continent were manufactured. They took a
>> > >>> circuitous route but did arrive at Lexington in time and the
>> > >>> results, including the forced withdrawal at Concord, were
>> > >>> our 'shot heard round the world'. A result in our favor was
>> > >>> critically due to the superior range and accuracy of long
>> > >>> rifles against smooth bore British issue muskets.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> 18 April, 1775.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> * 1775! No streetlights, no headlamps, no paved rural roads.
>> > >> Yes, I've read the stories and yes, British troops were marching to
>> > >> seize stores of gun powder and some arms at Lexington, and yes, I've
>> > >> read stories about the Minute Men snipping from behind fences but I
>> > >> doubt greatly whether many rifles were used, although admittedly this
>> > >> seems to be a constant theme in U.S. history.
>> > >>
>> > >> But, where did these "rifles" come from? The average farmer had no
>> > >> requirement for an expensive rifled gun, a smooth bore was far cheaper
>> > >> and far more versatile for use on the farm.
>> > >
>> > > Yes the myth of Americans fighting with Kentucky Long Rifles is very rampant. Well known. Frontiersmen with their own rifled rifles (?) would pick off the English soldiers like snipers. And win the war. But when the military regiments lined up to fight each other on the battlefields in rows upon rows, they used cheap, plentiful muskets issued by their employer, the government army. And they mowed each other down by the thousands. So losing 10 soldiers to sniper rifles, isn't too comparable to losing 1000 soldiers to musket volleys.
>> > >
>> > > A similar story persists for operation Barbarossa. Russian snipers. Generally women according to the stories I have seen. They were deadly, supposedly. But snipers killing a hundred or two hundred people does not compare much at all to the thousands, millions (?) of dead Russians and Germans on the eastern front. Who were killed by tanks, artillery, rifles, freezing cold, disease.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >>
>> > >> Additionally there were no organized munitions makers in the U.S. and
>> > >> rifles were made one at a time, and were extremely expensive. Kenneth
>> > >> Roberts in the historical novel Arundel, based on actual diaries of
>> > >> the 1775 Quebec Campaign, mentions used rifles with accoutrements
>> > >> exchanged for 12-15 English pounds. A smooth bore at the time might be
>> > >> 2 pounds and 4 shillings. To get an idea of how much this was there is
>> > >> a record of a John Moll paying 45 pounds for a 60’ X 230’ building lot
>> > >> in Allentown in 1772. And, William Carlin, a tailor in colonial
>> > >> Alexandria who made clothes for field hands as well as the planter
>> > >> elite, charged £3-5 for an ordinary wool suit.
>> > >>
>> > >> Some of the greatest support furnished by the French to the
>> > >> revolutionists was in the form of muskets and gun power. In the
>> > >> Battles of Saratoga on September 19 and October 7, 1777, it is
>> > >> estimated that as many as nine out of 10 American soldiers carried
>> > >> French arms, and were completely dependent on French gunpowder.
>> > >> --
>> > >> Cheers,
>> > >>
>> > >> John B.
>> > Well done, Mr Seaton.
>> > All that's true and not in conflict.
>> >
>> > American long rifles were indeed superior but rifles and
>> > riflemen were never voluminous enough to change the outcome
>> > except in small-unit skirmishes such as Lexington.
>> One of the other "problems" with rifles at the time in battle was the time and effort it took to reload them. A rifled rifle took more time and effort to push the slug down the bore. While a smooth bore musket could be reloaded and shot about 3 times per minute I believe. Volume of fire was important even back then.
>> >
>> > The Red Army did indeed produce very skilled and effective
>> > women snipers in large numbers. But as you note Stalingrad,
>> > where the war turned, was a battle of logistics and
>> > attrition, decided by starvation and cold as much as armor
>> > and tactics.
>> > --
>> > Andrew Muzi
>> > <www.yellowjersey.org/>
>> > Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>
>Then the hollow base rifle bullet was invented. The bullet slid as easily if not easier down the barrel than a round ball did and upon firing the rifle the hollow base expanded to form a tight seal on the rifling. I use such slugs in my .50 caliber percussion cap Hawken rifle. It made quite the difference in speeding up reloading time.
>
>Cheers

Certainly true and largely the reason that the U.S. Civil war, the
first fought with the "Minie Ball", I believe, resulted in more deaths
then any other war that the U.S. has been engaged in.

A case where "the way we did it before" didn't work well with new
technology.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Saturday, February 12, 2022 at 1:04:02 AM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 20:43:11 -0500, Frank Krygowski
> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> >On 2/11/2022 8:35 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >> On 2/11/2022 7:16 PM, John B. wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:38:47 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 2/10/2022 10:51 PM, John B. wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 20:11:51 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 2/10/2022 7:04 PM, John B. wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 10:44:34 -0500, Frank Krygowski
> >>>>>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 2/10/2022 1:43 AM, John B. wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> It might be that the Air Gun was the most effective weapon that the
> >>>>>>>>> expedition carried as while I can't find a specific statement
> >>>>>>>>> that the
> >>>>>>>>> Girandoni was rifled...
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> It was rifled.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> See https://youtu.be/2dZLeEUE940?t=189
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Interesting. Very innovative. The first rifled long guns in the U..S.
> >>>>>>> army date to about 1800 and in the British Army about the same
> >>>>>>> period.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I defer to you on official War Department procurement, since
> >>>>>> I have no idea.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> But I do know something about our Founding. Paul Revere and
> >>>>>> William Dawes left Boston on horseback at night* because
> >>>>>> some 700-odd of the British garrison had marched out at
> >>>>>> midnight* for Lexington where the most accurate _long
> >>>>>> rifles_ on the continent were manufactured. They took a
> >>>>>> circuitous route but did arrive at Lexington in time and the
> >>>>>> results, including the forced withdrawal at Concord, were
> >>>>>> our 'shot heard round the world'. A result in our favor was
> >>>>>> critically due to the superior range and accuracy of long
> >>>>>> rifles against smooth bore British issue muskets.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 18 April, 1775.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> * 1775! No streetlights, no headlamps, no paved rural roads.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yes, I've read the stories and yes, British troops were marching to
> >>>>> seize stores of gun powder and some arms at Lexington, and yes, I've
> >>>>> read stories about the Minute Men snipping from behind fences but I
> >>>>> doubt greatly whether many rifles were used, although admittedly this
> >>>>> seems to be a constant theme in U.S. history.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> But, where did these "rifles" come from? The average farmer had no
> >>>>> requirement for an expensive rifled gun, a smooth bore was far cheaper
> >>>>> and far more versatile for use on the farm.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Additionally there were no organized munitions makers in the U.S. and
> >>>>> rifles were made one at a time, and were extremely expensive. Kenneth
> >>>>> Roberts in the historical novel Arundel, based on actual diaries of
> >>>>> the 1775 Quebec Campaign, mentions used rifles with accoutrements
> >>>>> exchanged for 12-15 English pounds. A smooth bore at the time might be
> >>>>> 2 pounds and 4 shillings. To get an idea of how much this was there is
> >>>>> a record of a John Moll paying 45 pounds for a 60’ X 230’ building lot
> >>>>> in Allentown in 1772. And, William Carlin, a tailor in colonial
> >>>>> Alexandria who made clothes for field hands as well as the planter
> >>>>> elite, charged £3-5 for an ordinary wool suit.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Some of the greatest support furnished by the French to the
> >>>>> revolutionists was in the form of muskets and gun power. In the
> >>>>> Battles of Saratoga on September 19 and October 7, 1777, it is
> >>>>> estimated that as many as nine out of 10 American soldiers carried
> >>>>> French arms, and were completely dependent on French gunpowder.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I was engaged in a discussion on currency debasement policy
> >>>> (popularly called 'inflation') and remembered your post
> >>>> above so I checked the NPV of 14 Sterling in 1775.
> >>>>
> >>>> Current value 2400 pounds or US$3200. For reference, your
> >>>> average popular modern rifle runs somewhere around $2000.
> >>>>
> >>>> So you make a good point that premium equipment of the era
> >>>> was pricey. No wonder Louis sent muskets!
> >>>>
> >>>> Typical selections:
> >>>> https://blog.gunassociation.org/best-rifles/
> >>>>
> >>>> https://www.outdoorlife.com/photos/gallery/guns/rifles/centerfire/2011/11/20-best-semi-automatic-rifles-big-game-hunting/
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> where $3000 rifles are at the far end of 'popular', most are
> >>>> below $2000, and the range is $800 to $7000
> >>>
> >>> I was "into" gun smithing for a while and actually gave some thought
> >>> to doing it as a business after I left the Military, and "back then",
> >>> say the 1960's a good "deer rifle" with iron sights was in the $200
> >>> range. And, disregarding my Military pay and allowances, I was making
> >>> $10 a day part time in a gunsmith shop (:-)
> >>>
> >>> Disregarding "Home Defense" mentioned in your reference above, my
> >>> grandfather used a Winchester lever action 38-55 as a "deer rifle" and
> >>> killed his one deer a year under his license (and sometimes two if
> >>> the Game Warden was down at the other end of the state) and had one
> >>> packet of, I think it was 20 rounds, that he'd been using for
> >>> something like 10 years.
> >>>
> >>> Which might say something about AR-15's, and other shoot em up,
> >>> bang,bang, guns as hunting rifles (:-)
> >>>
> >>
> >> Wrong.
> >> We've been over this here on RBT at least a dozen times over the years..
> >> My AR-15 repeats at the exact same speed as my .38 Police Special
> >> revolver. Both are faster than girlfriend's inherited .30 Winchester
> >> vintage lever, but not by all that much. None of those are magic
> >> lead-spraying pew-pew-pew television weapons.
> >
> >38 Police Special: "pew pew pew pew pew pew" and slowly
> >reload.
> >
> >Typical AR15: "pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew
> >pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew."
> >
> >You know, for hunting.
> Well... people who never race by racing bicycles (:-) and even worse,
> I've got a friend lives on a 45 ft boat and bought "mountain bike"

The next time you hear of a racing bicycle being used to murder 26 children at an elementary school, let us know.

At the risk of straying off bicycle tire valves and onto gun control,

A friend of mine bought a cap and ball revolver.
It's ingenious. Looks just like what the lone ranger had, but a little harder to load. We had to put powder, wad, and shot into each cylinder and pack it down with that lever under the barrel. First time it took about 20 minutes to load, about 4 seconds to unload.

AR-15. I think they are the most popular gun sold now, lots of them out there. Few of them apparently misused, so technically probably the safest gun we have. (The US has more gun deaths than other countries. But we also have many times more guns than other countries. A smaller percentage of our guns are misused, therefore the conclusion is gun ownership is safer in the US than elsewhere.)

In the US there are roughly 14,000 gun homicides and 22,000 gun suicides every year, doesn't vary by much. Of those, less than .25% of homicides are with rifles, less than .10% of suicides are with rifles. Yes, the two combined don't add up to half a percent, yet it is the only gun being considered for a ban. I think this is inherently racist. I think these guns are more scary to white people. People of color are probably much more at risk from 9mm pistols. But at any rate, completely eliminating the AR type weapon by a total confiscation would have zero detectable effect on gun deaths in the US.

On 2/11/2022 11:56 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
> On Friday, February 11, 2022 at 9:37:50 p.m. UTC-5, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Friday, February 11, 2022 at 7:35:23 PM UTC-6, AMuzi wrote:
> Snipped
>> Your AR-15 has a 20 or 30 shot magazine. Most likely .223 Remington or NATO ammunition. Your Police Special has 6 shots. The 5 shot S&W only became common fairly recently. The lever action likely has a 7 or 8 or 9 round tube fed ammo holding system. So roughly the AR-15 has 5 times the revolver capacity and 4 times the rifle capacity. You can easily fire two shots per second. Bang-bang. Thats one second. Maybe you can even fire three rounds per second.
> Snipped
>
> You cab tape two 30 rounds AR15 magazines together with the openings opposite each other. With that setup you can easily change the magazine in a second or two at the most.
>

Which must be very handy if the first 30 rounds don't finish off that
deer...

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Friday, February 11, 2022 at 3:19:51 PM UTC-8, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, February 11, 2022 at 6:05:38 PM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > Magazines available up to 30 rounds for visiting people like Flunky and all of his close friends at the gay bath houses.
> Or, episode 2112020 of 'Tommy's Table Talk'*, in which he condones mass shootings of unarmed civilians, much like these guys:
> https://www.theholocaustexplained.org/life-in-nazi-occupied-europe/oppression/homosexuals/ (but those evil liberals like Frank are the real nazi oppressors).
>
> Nice company you're keeping there Sparky...BTW , They're coming for you next, apparently Mr. Rhodes has your number in his contact list:
>
> https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/leader-oath-keepers-and-10-other-individuals-indicted-federal-court-seditious-conspiracy-and
>
> *https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler%27s_Table_Talk

If you aren't queer why are you so informed about the acts of the Germans against homosexuals who would otherwise be safe had they not become a public nuisance?

On Friday, February 11, 2022 at 5:07:24 PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
> On 2/11/2022 6:46 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > On 2/11/2022 4:38 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>
> >> I was engaged in a discussion on currency debasement
> >> policy (popularly called 'inflation') and remembered your
> >> post above so I checked the NPV of 14 Sterling in 1775.
> >>
> >> Current value 2400 pounds or US$3200. For reference, your
> >> average popular modern rifle runs somewhere around $2000.
> >>
> >> So you make a good point that premium equipment of the era
> >> was pricey. No wonder Louis sent muskets!
> >
> > Circling back to (ahem) bicycles - and inflation. This may
> > be a repeat post, but:
> >
> > Back around 1990 I was reading a historical novel set in San
> > Francisco about the time of their big earthquake. One
> > character in the novel was throwing a huge, lavish party to
> > impress the upper crust folks. He was spending $20 per plate!
> >
> > Apparently that was a lot, so I got curious what that
> > equated to in current dollars. Now in 2022, one can easily
> > find online inflation apps to convert dollar values between
> > years, but in those days they didn't exist.
> >
> > So I wrote one. It involved a fair amount of library
> > research to find the rates of inflation for each individual
> > year. The program just compounded those between the chosen
> > years.
> >
> > Eventually I used that program as a programming example in
> > class. In the class discussion that followed, it was
> > interesting to investigate what items had become cheaper in
> > constant dollars and which had become more expensive.
> >
> > Well, one guy in our department was a multi-bike member of
> > the Wheelmen, those guys who restore and do parades, etc. on
> > historic bikes. He asked me to put in the original price of
> > his 1880-something high wheeler, for which he had paid
> > dearly then restored.
> >
> > While I don't remember the numbers, I remember he was a bit
> > disappointed. The original sticker price, when adjusted for
> > inflation, exactly matched the current appraised value of
> > his rare antique bike. IOW, its current rarity added nothing
> > to its monetary value.
> >
> Factor in 100 years of bicycle use (or rental fees) and he
> still has the equity! Not a bad deal at all!
>
>
> in re debasement of the currency- Inflation calculators
> supply 'average' rates but in so many things, particulars
> vary a great deal. Note the ingenious William Norhaus'
> economic study of the declining cost to light a room
>
> https://lucept.com/2014/11/04/william-nordhaus-the-historic-cost-of-light/
>
> And I assume some components have steps or reversals such as
> restaurants, which have lower raw product cost (with higher
> quality and greater selection) but higher all-in labor cost
> and serious structural regulatory inefficiencies which must
> be priced into your meal as well.
>
> I do use the various online simple calculators but for any
> given product they can be way off, none more than comparing
> a $15 in 1962 Princess WE telephone to a $1000 modern
> walk-around telephone.

Pacific Gas and Electricity just got a 10% increase in their charges and just this morning it was announced that 1. They were getting yet another 9.9% increase and they have put in for another 30% increase by 2030. PG&E lost several law suits to town losing their homes to wild fires including those in which PG&E had actual video's of the fires starting in the power stations belonging to small towns.

They are now going to bury ALL of their power lines which will cost a mega-fortune and after they are buried who believes that they will reduce their rates?

On Friday, February 11, 2022 at 5:27:07 PM UTC-8, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Friday, February 11, 2022 at 10:00:38 AM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Thursday, February 10, 2022 at 5:44:07 PM UTC-8, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > On Thursday, February 10, 2022 at 6:33:14 PM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, February 10, 2022 at 4:04:06 PM UTC-8, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, February 10, 2022 at 5:37:58 PM UTC-6, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > > > > > On 2/9/2022 6:30 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> > > > > > > On 2/9/2022 4:11 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > > > > > >> On Wednesday, February 9, 2022 at 2:03:36 PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
> > > > > > >>> On 2/9/2022 3:02 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > > > > > >>>> On Wednesday, February 9, 2022 at 12:09:40 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski
> > > > > > >>>> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>> On 2/9/2022 2:20 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>> On Wednesday, February 9, 2022 at 9:49:00 AM UTC-8, Frank
> > > > > > >>>>>> Krygowski wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>>> On 2/9/2022 12:32 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, February 9, 2022 at 9:24:08 AM UTC-8, Frank
> > > > > > >>>>>>>> Krygowski wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> On 2/9/2022 12:06 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, February 8, 2022 at 6:31:18 PM UTC-8, Frank
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Krygowski wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2022 6:09 PM, John B. wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 8 Feb 2022 15:52:35 -0500, Frank Krygowski
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2022 2:16 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, February 7, 2022 at 6:10:25 PM UTC-6, John B.
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 12:03:48 -0500, Frank Krygowski
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/7/2022 9:22 AM, Tim R wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, February 6, 2022 at 3:24:24 PM UTC-5,
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jeff.li...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 06 Feb 2022 13:52:24 -0600, AMuzi
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > snippity snip snip snip
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> You do realize that Frank considers Lewis and Clark stupid bumbling idiots because they didn't have college educations.
> > > > > > >> Simply being able to do it is not a sign of intelligence to Frank. He needs a piece of paper saying that he is intelligent
> > > > > > >> to qualify as competent.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > That reminds me of a great bicycle story.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I was great friends with Angel Rodriguez for many years. A Certain
> > > > > > > Person, a minor Midwest framebuilder of no great success, walked in,
> > > > > > > touting his 'Framebuilder Certification' program with certificate - at a
> > > > > > > fee. Angel, who was the 3d largest tandem builder then, with a long
> > > > > > > waiting list for his beautiful (& expensive) tandems, bit his lip,
> > > > > > > opened the cash register, threw several over-$1000 checks on the photo
> > > > > > > copier, handed the copy to that gentleman and said "Here's my
> > > > > > > certificate. You can leave now."
> > > > > > Certainly, not every "piece of paper" is equally valuable. And as John
> > > > > > has noted, Meriwether Lewis had a college degree. Beyond that, he had
> > > > > > what might be the equivalent of a Master's Degree, based on further
> > > > > > independent study arranged by Thomas Jefferson.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But Tom keeps implying degrees or even high school diplomas are of
> > > > > > little value - a classic case of "sour grapes."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Do you know someone who wants to fly the tilt rotor Osprey aircraft for
> > > > > > the Marines? They need to start by getting their degree. Pay attention
> > > > > > to 0:50 to 1:05 at
> > > > > > https://www.yahoo.com/news/marine-pilots-fly-84-million-163600565.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Related: One of my favorite students had a lifetime ambition of flying
> > > > > > for the Air Force - specifically, the huge transport planes at our local
> > > > > > base. And indeed, within a few years of graduating, that's exactly what
> > > > > > he was doing. (He was kind enough to give me a tour of our area in a
> > > > > > much smaller plane to thank me.)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > - Frank Krygowski
> > > > > To become an officer in the USA military, the person must have a bachelor's degree from a college. You cannot be a member of rank in the USA military without a college degree. Enlisted people are required to have a high school degree or a GED. I am not sure Tommy qualifies to be in the military.
> > > > Tell us when you were in the Military Russell. If you haven't why are you speaking about it as if you knew something? Most military officers attend the appropriate military academy such as West Point, Annapolis or United States Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs. If you think that an officer is going to get anywhere with some Podunk college degree you couldn't be more wrong.
> > > John F Kennedy, Harvard graduate, Lieutenant Navy, President of USA
> > Tell me Russy, do you think that the President is a commissioned officer? Do you know the difference between a Lieutenant and a Captain in the Navy?
> No Tommy, the President of the USA is not a commissioned officer of any military. I am pretty sure when Andrew Jackson, and Ulysses Grant, and Dwight Eisenhower became President, they were not serving in the military as generals. You cannot be both. Which is why we have laws, rules, that restrict the secretary of war to being not a military person. Although Congress can pass exemptions. As they did for the current one. In the USA, we do not want a military person running the military. We want to keep control of the military separate from the military itself. The person running the military must be a civilian.
>
> I merely pointed out JFK was a Harvard university graduate, with a college degree, before he became a Navy Lieutenant. And then President a few years later. A simple, easy contradiction of your LIE that read "If you think that an officer is going to get anywhere with some Podunk college degree you couldn't be more wrong." Look above and you can see your LIE in print. You wrote that LIE.

No Russy, you were merely attempting to make it appear that some podunck university like that in which Frank taught could turn out real officers when the facts are plain that they couldn't. ALL Army Generals including Robert E. Lee were educated in West Point. When you act like a pin-head, you get treated as a pin-head. Your attempt to make it appears that Kennedy knew the slightest thing about military science or tactic is shown by his loss of PT-109 and him being given PT59 modified without torpedo tubes and his role reduced to firing on Japanese cargo barges.

On 2/12/2022 1:35 AM, John B. wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 20:46:19 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>
>> On 2/11/2022 8:37 PM, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
>>> On Friday, February 11, 2022 at 7:35:23 PM UTC-6, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 2/11/2022 7:16 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:38:47 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2/10/2022 10:51 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 20:11:51 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2/10/2022 7:04 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 10:44:34 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 2/10/2022 1:43 AM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It might be that the Air Gun was the most effective weapon that the
>>>>>>>>>>> expedition carried as while I can't find a specific statement that the
>>>>>>>>>>> Girandoni was rifled...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It was rifled.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> See https://youtu.be/2dZLeEUE940?t=189
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Interesting. Very innovative. The first rifled long guns in the U.S.
>>>>>>>>> army date to about 1800 and in the British Army about the same period.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I defer to you on official War Department procurement, since
>>>>>>>> I have no idea.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But I do know something about our Founding. Paul Revere and
>>>>>>>> William Dawes left Boston on horseback at night* because
>>>>>>>> some 700-odd of the British garrison had marched out at
>>>>>>>> midnight* for Lexington where the most accurate _long
>>>>>>>> rifles_ on the continent were manufactured. They took a
>>>>>>>> circuitous route but did arrive at Lexington in time and the
>>>>>>>> results, including the forced withdrawal at Concord, were
>>>>>>>> our 'shot heard round the world'. A result in our favor was
>>>>>>>> critically due to the superior range and accuracy of long
>>>>>>>> rifles against smooth bore British issue muskets.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 18 April, 1775.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> * 1775! No streetlights, no headlamps, no paved rural roads.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, I've read the stories and yes, British troops were marching to
>>>>>>> seize stores of gun powder and some arms at Lexington, and yes, I've
>>>>>>> read stories about the Minute Men snipping from behind fences but I
>>>>>>> doubt greatly whether many rifles were used, although admittedly this
>>>>>>> seems to be a constant theme in U.S. history.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But, where did these "rifles" come from? The average farmer had no
>>>>>>> requirement for an expensive rifled gun, a smooth bore was far cheaper
>>>>>>> and far more versatile for use on the farm.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Additionally there were no organized munitions makers in the U.S. and
>>>>>>> rifles were made one at a time, and were extremely expensive. Kenneth
>>>>>>> Roberts in the historical novel Arundel, based on actual diaries of
>>>>>>> the 1775 Quebec Campaign, mentions used rifles with accoutrements
>>>>>>> exchanged for 12-15 English pounds. A smooth bore at the time might be
>>>>>>> 2 pounds and 4 shillings. To get an idea of how much this was there is
>>>>>>> a record of a John Moll paying 45 pounds for a 60’ X 230’ building lot
>>>>>>> in Allentown in 1772. And, William Carlin, a tailor in colonial
>>>>>>> Alexandria who made clothes for field hands as well as the planter
>>>>>>> elite, charged £3-5 for an ordinary wool suit.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Some of the greatest support furnished by the French to the
>>>>>>> revolutionists was in the form of muskets and gun power. In the
>>>>>>> Battles of Saratoga on September 19 and October 7, 1777, it is
>>>>>>> estimated that as many as nine out of 10 American soldiers carried
>>>>>>> French arms, and were completely dependent on French gunpowder.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was engaged in a discussion on currency debasement policy
>>>>>> (popularly called 'inflation') and remembered your post
>>>>>> above so I checked the NPV of 14 Sterling in 1775.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Current value 2400 pounds or US$3200. For reference, your
>>>>>> average popular modern rifle runs somewhere around $2000.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So you make a good point that premium equipment of the era
>>>>>> was pricey. No wonder Louis sent muskets!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Typical selections:
>>>>>> https://blog.gunassociation.org/best-rifles/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.outdoorlife.com/photos/gallery/guns/rifles/centerfire/2011/11/20-best-semi-automatic-rifles-big-game-hunting/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> where $3000 rifles are at the far end of 'popular', most are
>>>>>> below $2000, and the range is $800 to $7000
>>>>>
>>>>> I was "into" gun smithing for a while and actually gave some thought
>>>>> to doing it as a business after I left the Military, and "back then",
>>>>> say the 1960's a good "deer rifle" with iron sights was in the $200
>>>>> range. And, disregarding my Military pay and allowances, I was making
>>>>> $10 a day part time in a gunsmith shop (:-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Disregarding "Home Defense" mentioned in your reference above, my
>>>>> grandfather used a Winchester lever action 38-55 as a "deer rifle" and
>>>>> killed his one deer a year under his license (and sometimes two if
>>>>> the Game Warden was down at the other end of the state) and had one
>>>>> packet of, I think it was 20 rounds, that he'd been using for
>>>>> something like 10 years.
>>>>>
>>>>> Which might say something about AR-15's, and other shoot em up,
>>>>> bang,bang, guns as hunting rifles (:-)
>>>>>
>>>> Wrong.
>>>> We've been over this here on RBT at least a dozen times over
>>>> the years. My AR-15 repeats at the exact same speed as my
>>>> .38 Police Special revolver. Both are faster than
>>>> girlfriend's inherited .30 Winchester vintage lever, but not
>>>> by all that much. None of those are magic lead-spraying
>>>> pew-pew-pew television weapons.
>>>> --
>>>> Andrew Muzi
>>>> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
>>>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>>>
>>> Your AR-15 has a 20 or 30 shot magazine. Most likely .223 Remington or NATO ammunition. Your Police Special has 6 shots. The 5 shot S&W only became common fairly recently. The lever action likely has a 7 or 8 or 9 round tube fed ammo holding system. So roughly the AR-15 has 5 times the revolver capacity and 4 times the rifle capacity. You can easily fire two shots per second. Bang-bang. Thats one second. Maybe you can even fire three rounds per second.
>>>
>>> At the June 12, 2016 Orlando Florida mass shooting at a GAY nightclub, a SIG Sauer MCX semi-automatic rifle (it is an AR-15) and a Glock 17 semi auto pistol were used. 49 people killed, 53 wounded.
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_nightclub_shooting#Weapons
>>> "In less than five minutes, Mateen had fired approximately 200 rounds, pausing only to reload." That works out to a little more than 40 rounds per minute. One and a half seconds per shot. Not too fast I guess.
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIG_MCX
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glock#Glock_17
>>>
>>> It wasn't until October 2017, a whole year and 3 months later, that Orlando lost its crown as the biggest mass shooting in US history. That is when the Las Vegas concert killer used the bump stock device on his AR-15 rifles to kill 60 and wound 411.
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Las_Vegas_shooting#Weaponry
>>> "Paddock was found to have fired a total of 1,058 rounds from fifteen of the firearms: 1,049 from twelve AR-15-style rifles, eight from two AR-10-style rifles, and the round used to kill himself from the Smith & Wesson revolver."
>>>
>>
>> meh.
>>
>> And every day (more than usual this week) there are multiple
>> stabbings and sword/machete murders.
>>
>> https://www.wate.com/news/sword-attack-in-indiana-leaves-2-dead-1-wounded/
>>
>> https://www.expressnews.com/news/local/article/Sword-wielding-man-shot-by-New-Braunfels-police-16836088.php
>>
>> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/police-find-man-decapitating-girlfriend-with-machete-in-philadelphia/ar-AATJCVg
>>
>> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/man-accused-of-attacking-lakewood-store-employee-with-machete-police-say/ar-AATJXiV
>>
>> https://www.thedailybeast.com/karla-jackelin-morales-allegedly-lured-jose-villanueva-to-ms-13-machete-death-and-skipped-bail
>>
>> I skip the stabbings/slashings with knives/razors which are
>> frequent.
>>
>> Turns out that by not prosecuting/detaining criminals,
>> mayhem results. Weapon of choice may vary but the results
>> are fungibly similar.
>
> But when you say "GUN" Ohoooo it is so scary.
>
> As has been discussed before, the FBI records show that in 2015 "long
> guns" killed 463 victims and hands and feet killed 651.
>
> But a news article announcing "Oh Yes, he was kicked to death" is sort
> of, well sort of every day, and far less thrilling that "He was shot,
> 17 times!"

On 2/12/2022 8:43 AM, Tim R wrote:
> At the risk of straying off bicycle tire valves and onto gun control,
> ...
>
> AR-15. I think they are the most popular gun sold now, lots of them out there. Few of them apparently misused, so technically probably the safest gun we have. (The US has more gun deaths than other countries. But we also have many times more guns than other countries. A smaller percentage of our guns are misused, therefore the conclusion is gun ownership is safer in the US than elsewhere.)

That's specious logic. By that standard, the way to make guns "safer"
would be to legally require the ownership of ten loaded guns by every
American - including every violent felon, every paranoid nut case,
little kid. Sure, the death count would soar, but since only one gun
could be shot at a time (usually) the percentage of guns not used in
homicide would be very low.

Nobody but gun companies should give positive credit to the number of
guns in circulation. The metric for gun safety should be the number of
gun deaths per capita. And the U.S. is the worst among its peers by that
metric, something like tenth out of ~200 nations, with only places
similar to Venezuela or Honduras being worse.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/gun-deaths-by-country
Hell, our rate is six times that of Canada, a hunting paradise.

> In the US there are roughly 14,000 gun homicides and 22,000 gun suicides every year, doesn't vary by much. Of those, less than .25% of homicides are with rifles, less than .10% of suicides are with rifles.

You're ignoring the large number of deaths by unspecified firearm, many
of which are probably AR or other long guns.

> Yes, the two combined don't add up to half a percent, yet it is the only gun being considered for a ban.

Well, there are lots of guns effectively banned, not to mention other
weapons. But again, advantages vs. disadvantages: AR guns make a guy
feel tough and macho. AR guns can kill a couple dozen schoolkids in a
few minutes.

> I think this is inherently racist. I think these guns are more scary to white people. People of color are probably much more at risk from 9mm pistols.

Hmm. "More scary?" I think rapid fire, combat optimized, large magazine
guns are scary to "people of [non-white] color" as well as white people.
When gang bangers and drug dealers are frequently arrested in possession
of such weaponry, it has an effect; and more of those arrests seem to
happen in neighborhoods that are less white.

> But at any rate, completely eliminating the AR type weapon by a total confiscation would have zero detectable effect on gun deaths in the US.

It seems to have pretty much eliminated mass shootings in Australia,
which is something worth achieving. And certainly, among developed
nations, the U.S. attitude toward guns is a gross outlier. So is the
U.S. gun fatality rate.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 2/12/2022 10:51 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>
> No Russy, you were merely attempting to make it appear that some podunck university like that in which Frank taught could turn out real officers when the facts are plain that they couldn't.

Anecdote time: I had a fair number of ROTC members in my classes over
the years. I used to joke with one of them in particular, about her
habit of coming to class in camo fatigues.

(She was the one who introduced me to the phrase "A target rich
environment.")

She was an excellent student, graduated and of course enlisted. Last I
heard (which admittedly is decades ago) she'd achieved the rank of Major
and was teaching at West Point.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Saturday, February 12, 2022 at 10:30:29 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, February 11, 2022 at 3:19:51 PM UTC-8, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On Friday, February 11, 2022 at 6:05:38 PM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >
> > > Magazines available up to 30 rounds for visiting people like Flunky and all of his close friends at the gay bath houses.
> > Or, episode 2112020 of 'Tommy's Table Talk'*, in which he condones mass shootings of unarmed civilians, much like these guys:
> > https://www.theholocaustexplained.org/life-in-nazi-occupied-europe/oppression/homosexuals/ (but those evil liberals like Frank are the real nazi oppressors).
> >
> > Nice company you're keeping there Sparky...BTW , They're coming for you next, apparently Mr. Rhodes has your number in his contact list:
> >
> > https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/leader-oath-keepers-and-10-other-individuals-indicted-federal-court-seditious-conspiracy-and
> >
> > *https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler%27s_Table_Talk
>
> If you aren't queer why are you so informed about the acts of the Germans against homosexuals
So one has to be gay in order to have any knowledge of persecution of gays. Got it.

> who would otherwise be safe had they not become a public nuisance?

but wait, If you aren't queer why are you so informed about the acts of the Germans against homosexuals ?

Besides that - now your admitting its ok to commit genocide against those considered a "nuisance" - but Frank and I are the "nazis".

On 2/12/2022 10:29 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 2/12/2022 1:35 AM, John B. wrote:
>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 20:46:19 -0600, AMuzi
>> <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2/11/2022 8:37 PM, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>> On Friday, February 11, 2022 at 7:35:23 PM UTC-6, AMuzi
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On 2/11/2022 7:16 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:38:47 -0600, AMuzi
>>>>>> <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2/10/2022 10:51 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 20:11:51 -0600, AMuzi
>>>>>>>> <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2/10/2022 7:04 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 10:44:34 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>>>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/10/2022 1:43 AM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It might be that the Air Gun was the most
>>>>>>>>>>>> effective weapon that the
>>>>>>>>>>>> expedition carried as while I can't find a
>>>>>>>>>>>> specific statement that the
>>>>>>>>>>>> Girandoni was rifled...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It was rifled.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> See https://youtu.be/2dZLeEUE940?t=189
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Interesting. Very innovative. The first rifled
>>>>>>>>>> long guns in the U.S.
>>>>>>>>>> army date to about 1800 and in the British Army
>>>>>>>>>> about the same period.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I defer to you on official War Department
>>>>>>>>> procurement, since
>>>>>>>>> I have no idea.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But I do know something about our Founding. Paul
>>>>>>>>> Revere and
>>>>>>>>> William Dawes left Boston on horseback at night*
>>>>>>>>> because
>>>>>>>>> some 700-odd of the British garrison had marched
>>>>>>>>> out at
>>>>>>>>> midnight* for Lexington where the most accurate _long
>>>>>>>>> rifles_ on the continent were manufactured. They
>>>>>>>>> took a
>>>>>>>>> circuitous route but did arrive at Lexington in
>>>>>>>>> time and the
>>>>>>>>> results, including the forced withdrawal at
>>>>>>>>> Concord, were
>>>>>>>>> our 'shot heard round the world'. A result in our
>>>>>>>>> favor was
>>>>>>>>> critically due to the superior range and accuracy
>>>>>>>>> of long
>>>>>>>>> rifles against smooth bore British issue muskets.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 18 April, 1775.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> * 1775! No streetlights, no headlamps, no paved
>>>>>>>>> rural roads.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes, I've read the stories and yes, British troops
>>>>>>>> were marching to
>>>>>>>> seize stores of gun powder and some arms at
>>>>>>>> Lexington, and yes, I've
>>>>>>>> read stories about the Minute Men snipping from
>>>>>>>> behind fences but I
>>>>>>>> doubt greatly whether many rifles were used,
>>>>>>>> although admittedly this
>>>>>>>> seems to be a constant theme in U.S. history.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But, where did these "rifles" come from? The average
>>>>>>>> farmer had no
>>>>>>>> requirement for an expensive rifled gun, a smooth
>>>>>>>> bore was far cheaper
>>>>>>>> and far more versatile for use on the farm.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Additionally there were no organized munitions
>>>>>>>> makers in the U.S. and
>>>>>>>> rifles were made one at a time, and were extremely
>>>>>>>> expensive. Kenneth
>>>>>>>> Roberts in the historical novel Arundel, based on
>>>>>>>> actual diaries of
>>>>>>>> the 1775 Quebec Campaign, mentions used rifles with
>>>>>>>> accoutrements
>>>>>>>> exchanged for 12-15 English pounds. A smooth bore at
>>>>>>>> the time might be
>>>>>>>> 2 pounds and 4 shillings. To get an idea of how much
>>>>>>>> this was there is
>>>>>>>> a record of a John Moll paying 45 pounds for a
>>>>>>>> 60’ X 230’ building lot
>>>>>>>> in Allentown in 1772. And, William Carlin, a tailor
>>>>>>>> in colonial
>>>>>>>> Alexandria who made clothes for field hands as well
>>>>>>>> as the planter
>>>>>>>> elite, charged £3-5 for an ordinary wool suit.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Some of the greatest support furnished by the French
>>>>>>>> to the
>>>>>>>> revolutionists was in the form of muskets and gun
>>>>>>>> power. In the
>>>>>>>> Battles of Saratoga on September 19 and October 7,
>>>>>>>> 1777, it is
>>>>>>>> estimated that as many as nine out of 10 American
>>>>>>>> soldiers carried
>>>>>>>> French arms, and were completely dependent on French
>>>>>>>> gunpowder.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I was engaged in a discussion on currency debasement
>>>>>>> policy
>>>>>>> (popularly called 'inflation') and remembered your post
>>>>>>> above so I checked the NPV of 14 Sterling in 1775.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Current value 2400 pounds or US$3200. For reference,
>>>>>>> your
>>>>>>> average popular modern rifle runs somewhere around
>>>>>>> $2000.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So you make a good point that premium equipment of
>>>>>>> the era
>>>>>>> was pricey. No wonder Louis sent muskets!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Typical selections:
>>>>>>> https://blog.gunassociation.org/best-rifles/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.outdoorlife.com/photos/gallery/guns/rifles/centerfire/2011/11/20-best-semi-automatic-rifles-big-game-hunting/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> where $3000 rifles are at the far end of 'popular',
>>>>>>> most are
>>>>>>> below $2000, and the range is $800 to $7000
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was "into" gun smithing for a while and actually
>>>>>> gave some thought
>>>>>> to doing it as a business after I left the Military,
>>>>>> and "back then",
>>>>>> say the 1960's a good "deer rifle" with iron sights
>>>>>> was in the $200
>>>>>> range. And, disregarding my Military pay and
>>>>>> allowances, I was making
>>>>>> $10 a day part time in a gunsmith shop (:-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Disregarding "Home Defense" mentioned in your
>>>>>> reference above, my
>>>>>> grandfather used a Winchester lever action 38-55 as a
>>>>>> "deer rifle" and
>>>>>> killed his one deer a year under his license (and
>>>>>> sometimes two if
>>>>>> the Game Warden was down at the other end of the
>>>>>> state) and had one
>>>>>> packet of, I think it was 20 rounds, that he'd been
>>>>>> using for
>>>>>> something like 10 years.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which might say something about AR-15's, and other
>>>>>> shoot em up,
>>>>>> bang,bang, guns as hunting rifles (:-)
>>>>>>
>>>>> Wrong.
>>>>> We've been over this here on RBT at least a dozen times
>>>>> over
>>>>> the years. My AR-15 repeats at the exact same speed as my
>>>>> .38 Police Special revolver. Both are faster than
>>>>> girlfriend's inherited .30 Winchester vintage lever,
>>>>> but not
>>>>> by all that much. None of those are magic lead-spraying
>>>>> pew-pew-pew television weapons.
>>>>> --
>>>>> Andrew Muzi
>>>>> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
>>>>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>>>>
>>>> Your AR-15 has a 20 or 30 shot magazine. Most likely
>>>> .223 Remington or NATO ammunition. Your Police Special
>>>> has 6 shots. The 5 shot S&W only became common fairly
>>>> recently. The lever action likely has a 7 or 8 or 9
>>>> round tube fed ammo holding system. So roughly the
>>>> AR-15 has 5 times the revolver capacity and 4 times the
>>>> rifle capacity. You can easily fire two shots per
>>>> second. Bang-bang. Thats one second. Maybe you can
>>>> even fire three rounds per second.
>>>>
>>>> At the June 12, 2016 Orlando Florida mass shooting at a
>>>> GAY nightclub, a SIG Sauer MCX semi-automatic rifle (it
>>>> is an AR-15) and a Glock 17 semi auto pistol were used.
>>>> 49 people killed, 53 wounded.
>>>>
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_nightclub_shooting#Weapons
>>>>
>>>> "In less than five minutes, Mateen had fired
>>>> approximately 200 rounds, pausing only to reload." That
>>>> works out to a little more than 40 rounds per minute.
>>>> One and a half seconds per shot. Not too fast I guess.
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIG_MCX
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glock#Glock_17
>>>>
>>>> It wasn't until October 2017, a whole year and 3 months
>>>> later, that Orlando lost its crown as the biggest mass
>>>> shooting in US history. That is when the Las Vegas
>>>> concert killer used the bump stock device on his AR-15
>>>> rifles to kill 60 and wound 411.
>>>>
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Las_Vegas_shooting#Weaponry
>>>>
>>>> "Paddock was found to have fired a total of 1,058 rounds
>>>> from fifteen of the firearms: 1,049 from twelve
>>>> AR-15-style rifles, eight from two AR-10-style rifles,
>>>> and the round used to kill himself from the Smith &
>>>> Wesson revolver."
>>>>
>>>
>>> meh.
>>>
>>> And every day (more than usual this week) there are multiple
>>> stabbings and sword/machete murders.
>>>
>>> https://www.wate.com/news/sword-attack-in-indiana-leaves-2-dead-1-wounded/
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.expressnews.com/news/local/article/Sword-wielding-man-shot-by-New-Braunfels-police-16836088.php
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/police-find-man-decapitating-girlfriend-with-machete-in-philadelphia/ar-AATJCVg
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/man-accused-of-attacking-lakewood-store-employee-with-machete-police-say/ar-AATJXiV
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.thedailybeast.com/karla-jackelin-morales-allegedly-lured-jose-villanueva-to-ms-13-machete-death-and-skipped-bail
>>>
>>>
>>> I skip the stabbings/slashings with knives/razors which are
>>> frequent.
>>>
>>> Turns out that by not prosecuting/detaining criminals,
>>> mayhem results. Weapon of choice may vary but the results
>>> are fungibly similar.
>>
>> But when you say "GUN" Ohoooo it is so scary.
>>
>> As has been discussed before, the FBI records show that in
>> 2015 "long
>> guns" killed 463 victims and hands and feet killed 651.
>>
>> But a news article announcing "Oh Yes, he was kicked to
>> death" is sort
>> of, well sort of every day, and far less thrilling that
>> "He was shot,
>> 17 times!"
>
> As we've mentioned before: Data on U.S. gun crime generally
> shows a small number of homicides by "long gun" or "rifle."
> But it shows a large number by unspecified "firearm," a
> separate category from "handgun." I assume that means that
> the type of gun was undetermined. And I think it's
> reasonable to say a large portion of those undetermined
> cases are in fact ARs.
>
> And regarding hands and feet vs. semi-automatic, easily
> customized, large magazine assault-style rifles: Can we
> again consider advantages and disadvantages? I shouldn't
> have to point out that hands and feet have countless
> practical uses, and that life without them would be
> difficult. (The same is true of knives, BTW.)
>
> What are the advantages and disadvantages of AR-style
> weaponry? Well, a disadvantage is that those guns are the
> weapon of choice for crackpots choosing to blow away bunches
> of kids in a schoolroom, a bunch of people in a night club,
> a bunch of people at a music concert, etc. Also, their
> widespread presence makes the job of a cop much more
> difficult, since it's easy for them to be out-gunned.
> (That's something almost no other developed countries have
> to worry about).
>
> The AR advantages are so slight that most truly civilized
> countries do perfectly well with roughly zero of them in
> circulation. In fact, those other countries do far better.
>
> What _are_ the advantages of AR-style guns? "Dude, they're
> cool! And when I play with mine or shoot at those silhouette
> targets, I can pretend I'm a really tough commando defending
> my home against ... um, them other people. Even though I'm
> really a feeble 77 year old pot bellied guy with memory
> problems."
>
> "Really cool" doesn't outweigh "27 schoolkids murdered" in
> my book.
>

On Saturday, February 12, 2022 at 11:10:39 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
> On 2/12/2022 10:29 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > On 2/12/2022 1:35 AM, John B. wrote:
> >> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 20:46:19 -0600, AMuzi
> >> <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 2/11/2022 8:37 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >>>> On Friday, February 11, 2022 at 7:35:23 PM UTC-6, AMuzi
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>> On 2/11/2022 7:16 PM, John B. wrote:
> >>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:38:47 -0600, AMuzi
> >>>>>> <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 2/10/2022 10:51 PM, John B. wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 20:11:51 -0600, AMuzi
> >>>>>>>> <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On 2/10/2022 7:04 PM, John B. wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 10:44:34 -0500, Frank Krygowski
> >>>>>>>>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On 2/10/2022 1:43 AM, John B. wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> It might be that the Air Gun was the most
> >>>>>>>>>>>> effective weapon that the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> expedition carried as while I can't find a
> >>>>>>>>>>>> specific statement that the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Girandoni was rifled...
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> It was rifled.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> See https://youtu.be/2dZLeEUE940?t=189
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Interesting. Very innovative. The first rifled
> >>>>>>>>>> long guns in the U.S.
> >>>>>>>>>> army date to about 1800 and in the British Army
> >>>>>>>>>> about the same period.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I defer to you on official War Department
> >>>>>>>>> procurement, since
> >>>>>>>>> I have no idea.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> But I do know something about our Founding. Paul
> >>>>>>>>> Revere and
> >>>>>>>>> William Dawes left Boston on horseback at night*
> >>>>>>>>> because
> >>>>>>>>> some 700-odd of the British garrison had marched
> >>>>>>>>> out at
> >>>>>>>>> midnight* for Lexington where the most accurate _long
> >>>>>>>>> rifles_ on the continent were manufactured. They
> >>>>>>>>> took a
> >>>>>>>>> circuitous route but did arrive at Lexington in
> >>>>>>>>> time and the
> >>>>>>>>> results, including the forced withdrawal at
> >>>>>>>>> Concord, were
> >>>>>>>>> our 'shot heard round the world'. A result in our
> >>>>>>>>> favor was
> >>>>>>>>> critically due to the superior range and accuracy
> >>>>>>>>> of long
> >>>>>>>>> rifles against smooth bore British issue muskets.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> 18 April, 1775.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> * 1775! No streetlights, no headlamps, no paved
> >>>>>>>>> rural roads.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Yes, I've read the stories and yes, British troops
> >>>>>>>> were marching to
> >>>>>>>> seize stores of gun powder and some arms at
> >>>>>>>> Lexington, and yes, I've
> >>>>>>>> read stories about the Minute Men snipping from
> >>>>>>>> behind fences but I
> >>>>>>>> doubt greatly whether many rifles were used,
> >>>>>>>> although admittedly this
> >>>>>>>> seems to be a constant theme in U.S. history.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> But, where did these "rifles" come from? The average
> >>>>>>>> farmer had no
> >>>>>>>> requirement for an expensive rifled gun, a smooth
> >>>>>>>> bore was far cheaper
> >>>>>>>> and far more versatile for use on the farm.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Additionally there were no organized munitions
> >>>>>>>> makers in the U.S. and
> >>>>>>>> rifles were made one at a time, and were extremely
> >>>>>>>> expensive. Kenneth
> >>>>>>>> Roberts in the historical novel Arundel, based on
> >>>>>>>> actual diaries of
> >>>>>>>> the 1775 Quebec Campaign, mentions used rifles with
> >>>>>>>> accoutrements
> >>>>>>>> exchanged for 12-15 English pounds. A smooth bore at
> >>>>>>>> the time might be
> >>>>>>>> 2 pounds and 4 shillings. To get an idea of how much
> >>>>>>>> this was there is
> >>>>>>>> a record of a John Moll paying 45 pounds for a
> >>>>>>>> 60’ X 230’ building lot
> >>>>>>>> in Allentown in 1772. And, William Carlin, a tailor
> >>>>>>>> in colonial
> >>>>>>>> Alexandria who made clothes for field hands as well
> >>>>>>>> as the planter
> >>>>>>>> elite, charged £3-5 for an ordinary wool suit.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Some of the greatest support furnished by the French
> >>>>>>>> to the
> >>>>>>>> revolutionists was in the form of muskets and gun
> >>>>>>>> power. In the
> >>>>>>>> Battles of Saratoga on September 19 and October 7,
> >>>>>>>> 1777, it is
> >>>>>>>> estimated that as many as nine out of 10 American
> >>>>>>>> soldiers carried
> >>>>>>>> French arms, and were completely dependent on French
> >>>>>>>> gunpowder.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I was engaged in a discussion on currency debasement
> >>>>>>> policy
> >>>>>>> (popularly called 'inflation') and remembered your post
> >>>>>>> above so I checked the NPV of 14 Sterling in 1775.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Current value 2400 pounds or US$3200. For reference,
> >>>>>>> your
> >>>>>>> average popular modern rifle runs somewhere around
> >>>>>>> $2000.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> So you make a good point that premium equipment of
> >>>>>>> the era
> >>>>>>> was pricey. No wonder Louis sent muskets!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Typical selections:
> >>>>>>> https://blog.gunassociation.org/best-rifles/
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> https://www.outdoorlife.com/photos/gallery/guns/rifles/centerfire/2011/11/20-best-semi-automatic-rifles-big-game-hunting/
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> where $3000 rifles are at the far end of 'popular',
> >>>>>>> most are
> >>>>>>> below $2000, and the range is $800 to $7000
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I was "into" gun smithing for a while and actually
> >>>>>> gave some thought
> >>>>>> to doing it as a business after I left the Military,
> >>>>>> and "back then",
> >>>>>> say the 1960's a good "deer rifle" with iron sights
> >>>>>> was in the $200
> >>>>>> range. And, disregarding my Military pay and
> >>>>>> allowances, I was making
> >>>>>> $10 a day part time in a gunsmith shop (:-)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Disregarding "Home Defense" mentioned in your
> >>>>>> reference above, my
> >>>>>> grandfather used a Winchester lever action 38-55 as a
> >>>>>> "deer rifle" and
> >>>>>> killed his one deer a year under his license (and
> >>>>>> sometimes two if
> >>>>>> the Game Warden was down at the other end of the
> >>>>>> state) and had one
> >>>>>> packet of, I think it was 20 rounds, that he'd been
> >>>>>> using for
> >>>>>> something like 10 years.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Which might say something about AR-15's, and other
> >>>>>> shoot em up,
> >>>>>> bang,bang, guns as hunting rifles (:-)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> Wrong.
> >>>>> We've been over this here on RBT at least a dozen times
> >>>>> over
> >>>>> the years. My AR-15 repeats at the exact same speed as my
> >>>>> .38 Police Special revolver. Both are faster than
> >>>>> girlfriend's inherited .30 Winchester vintage lever,
> >>>>> but not
> >>>>> by all that much. None of those are magic lead-spraying
> >>>>> pew-pew-pew television weapons.
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Andrew Muzi
> >>>>> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> >>>>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
> >>>>
> >>>> Your AR-15 has a 20 or 30 shot magazine. Most likely
> >>>> .223 Remington or NATO ammunition. Your Police Special
> >>>> has 6 shots. The 5 shot S&W only became common fairly
> >>>> recently. The lever action likely has a 7 or 8 or 9
> >>>> round tube fed ammo holding system. So roughly the
> >>>> AR-15 has 5 times the revolver capacity and 4 times the
> >>>> rifle capacity. You can easily fire two shots per
> >>>> second. Bang-bang. Thats one second. Maybe you can
> >>>> even fire three rounds per second.
> >>>>
> >>>> At the June 12, 2016 Orlando Florida mass shooting at a
> >>>> GAY nightclub, a SIG Sauer MCX semi-automatic rifle (it
> >>>> is an AR-15) and a Glock 17 semi auto pistol were used.
> >>>> 49 people killed, 53 wounded.
> >>>>
> >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_nightclub_shooting#Weapons
> >>>>
> >>>> "In less than five minutes, Mateen had fired
> >>>> approximately 200 rounds, pausing only to reload." That
> >>>> works out to a little more than 40 rounds per minute.
> >>>> One and a half seconds per shot. Not too fast I guess.
> >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIG_MCX
> >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glock#Glock_17
> >>>>
> >>>> It wasn't until October 2017, a whole year and 3 months
> >>>> later, that Orlando lost its crown as the biggest mass
> >>>> shooting in US history. That is when the Las Vegas
> >>>> concert killer used the bump stock device on his AR-15
> >>>> rifles to kill 60 and wound 411.
> >>>>
> >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Las_Vegas_shooting#Weaponry
> >>>>
> >>>> "Paddock was found to have fired a total of 1,058 rounds
> >>>> from fifteen of the firearms: 1,049 from twelve
> >>>> AR-15-style rifles, eight from two AR-10-style rifles,
> >>>> and the round used to kill himself from the Smith &
> >>>> Wesson revolver."
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> meh.
> >>>
> >>> And every day (more than usual this week) there are multiple
> >>> stabbings and sword/machete murders.
> >>>
> >>> https://www.wate.com/news/sword-attack-in-indiana-leaves-2-dead-1-wounded/
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> https://www.expressnews.com/news/local/article/Sword-wielding-man-shot-by-New-Braunfels-police-16836088.php
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/police-find-man-decapitating-girlfriend-with-machete-in-philadelphia/ar-AATJCVg
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/man-accused-of-attacking-lakewood-store-employee-with-machete-police-say/ar-AATJXiV
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> https://www.thedailybeast.com/karla-jackelin-morales-allegedly-lured-jose-villanueva-to-ms-13-machete-death-and-skipped-bail
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I skip the stabbings/slashings with knives/razors which are
> >>> frequent.
> >>>
> >>> Turns out that by not prosecuting/detaining criminals,
> >>> mayhem results. Weapon of choice may vary but the results
> >>> are fungibly similar.
> >>
> >> But when you say "GUN" Ohoooo it is so scary.
> >>
> >> As has been discussed before, the FBI records show that in
> >> 2015 "long
> >> guns" killed 463 victims and hands and feet killed 651.
> >>
> >> But a news article announcing "Oh Yes, he was kicked to
> >> death" is sort
> >> of, well sort of every day, and far less thrilling that
> >> "He was shot,
> >> 17 times!"
> >
> > As we've mentioned before: Data on U.S. gun crime generally
> > shows a small number of homicides by "long gun" or "rifle."
> > But it shows a large number by unspecified "firearm," a
> > separate category from "handgun." I assume that means that
> > the type of gun was undetermined. And I think it's
> > reasonable to say a large portion of those undetermined
> > cases are in fact ARs.
> >
> > And regarding hands and feet vs. semi-automatic, easily
> > customized, large magazine assault-style rifles: Can we
> > again consider advantages and disadvantages? I shouldn't
> > have to point out that hands and feet have countless
> > practical uses, and that life without them would be
> > difficult. (The same is true of knives, BTW.)
> >
> > What are the advantages and disadvantages of AR-style
> > weaponry? Well, a disadvantage is that those guns are the
> > weapon of choice for crackpots choosing to blow away bunches
> > of kids in a schoolroom, a bunch of people in a night club,
> > a bunch of people at a music concert, etc. Also, their
> > widespread presence makes the job of a cop much more
> > difficult, since it's easy for them to be out-gunned.
> > (That's something almost no other developed countries have
> > to worry about).
> >
> > The AR advantages are so slight that most truly civilized
> > countries do perfectly well with roughly zero of them in
> > circulation. In fact, those other countries do far better.
> >
> > What _are_ the advantages of AR-style guns? "Dude, they're
> > cool! And when I play with mine or shoot at those silhouette
> > targets, I can pretend I'm a really tough commando defending
> > my home against ... um, them other people. Even though I'm
> > really a feeble 77 year old pot bellied guy with memory
> > problems."
> >
> > "Really cool" doesn't outweigh "27 schoolkids murdered" in
> > my book.
> >
> As was noted by Mr Bach above, every problem is not a
> crisis. You're not innumerate. There are more than 20
> million AR-15 in the US of A, the greater bulk of which just
> passed another uneventful day, oiled and cased.

On 2/12/2022 1:53 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Saturday, February 12, 2022 at 11:10:39 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 2/12/2022 10:29 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>> On 2/12/2022 1:35 AM, John B. wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 20:46:19 -0600, AMuzi
>>>> <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2/11/2022 8:37 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Friday, February 11, 2022 at 7:35:23 PM UTC-6, AMuzi
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2/11/2022 7:16 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:38:47 -0600, AMuzi
>>>>>>>> <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2/10/2022 10:51 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 20:11:51 -0600, AMuzi
>>>>>>>>>> <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/10/2022 7:04 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 10:44:34 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>>>>>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/10/2022 1:43 AM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It might be that the Air Gun was the most
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> effective weapon that the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expedition carried as while I can't find a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specific statement that the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Girandoni was rifled...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was rifled.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> See https://youtu.be/2dZLeEUE940?t=189
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Interesting. Very innovative. The first rifled
>>>>>>>>>>>> long guns in the U.S.
>>>>>>>>>>>> army date to about 1800 and in the British Army
>>>>>>>>>>>> about the same period.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I defer to you on official War Department
>>>>>>>>>>> procurement, since
>>>>>>>>>>> I have no idea.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But I do know something about our Founding. Paul
>>>>>>>>>>> Revere and
>>>>>>>>>>> William Dawes left Boston on horseback at night*
>>>>>>>>>>> because
>>>>>>>>>>> some 700-odd of the British garrison had marched
>>>>>>>>>>> out at
>>>>>>>>>>> midnight* for Lexington where the most accurate _long
>>>>>>>>>>> rifles_ on the continent were manufactured. They
>>>>>>>>>>> took a
>>>>>>>>>>> circuitous route but did arrive at Lexington in
>>>>>>>>>>> time and the
>>>>>>>>>>> results, including the forced withdrawal at
>>>>>>>>>>> Concord, were
>>>>>>>>>>> our 'shot heard round the world'. A result in our
>>>>>>>>>>> favor was
>>>>>>>>>>> critically due to the superior range and accuracy
>>>>>>>>>>> of long
>>>>>>>>>>> rifles against smooth bore British issue muskets.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 18 April, 1775.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> * 1775! No streetlights, no headlamps, no paved
>>>>>>>>>>> rural roads.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yes, I've read the stories and yes, British troops
>>>>>>>>>> were marching to
>>>>>>>>>> seize stores of gun powder and some arms at
>>>>>>>>>> Lexington, and yes, I've
>>>>>>>>>> read stories about the Minute Men snipping from
>>>>>>>>>> behind fences but I
>>>>>>>>>> doubt greatly whether many rifles were used,
>>>>>>>>>> although admittedly this
>>>>>>>>>> seems to be a constant theme in U.S. history.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But, where did these "rifles" come from? The average
>>>>>>>>>> farmer had no
>>>>>>>>>> requirement for an expensive rifled gun, a smooth
>>>>>>>>>> bore was far cheaper
>>>>>>>>>> and far more versatile for use on the farm.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Additionally there were no organized munitions
>>>>>>>>>> makers in the U.S. and
>>>>>>>>>> rifles were made one at a time, and were extremely
>>>>>>>>>> expensive. Kenneth
>>>>>>>>>> Roberts in the historical novel Arundel, based on
>>>>>>>>>> actual diaries of
>>>>>>>>>> the 1775 Quebec Campaign, mentions used rifles with
>>>>>>>>>> accoutrements
>>>>>>>>>> exchanged for 12-15 English pounds. A smooth bore at
>>>>>>>>>> the time might be
>>>>>>>>>> 2 pounds and 4 shillings. To get an idea of how much
>>>>>>>>>> this was there is
>>>>>>>>>> a record of a John Moll paying 45 pounds for a
>>>>>>>>>> 60’ X 230’ building lot
>>>>>>>>>> in Allentown in 1772. And, William Carlin, a tailor
>>>>>>>>>> in colonial
>>>>>>>>>> Alexandria who made clothes for field hands as well
>>>>>>>>>> as the planter
>>>>>>>>>> elite, charged £3-5 for an ordinary wool suit.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Some of the greatest support furnished by the French
>>>>>>>>>> to the
>>>>>>>>>> revolutionists was in the form of muskets and gun
>>>>>>>>>> power. In the
>>>>>>>>>> Battles of Saratoga on September 19 and October 7,
>>>>>>>>>> 1777, it is
>>>>>>>>>> estimated that as many as nine out of 10 American
>>>>>>>>>> soldiers carried
>>>>>>>>>> French arms, and were completely dependent on French
>>>>>>>>>> gunpowder.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I was engaged in a discussion on currency debasement
>>>>>>>>> policy
>>>>>>>>> (popularly called 'inflation') and remembered your post
>>>>>>>>> above so I checked the NPV of 14 Sterling in 1775.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Current value 2400 pounds or US$3200. For reference,
>>>>>>>>> your
>>>>>>>>> average popular modern rifle runs somewhere around
>>>>>>>>> $2000.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So you make a good point that premium equipment of
>>>>>>>>> the era
>>>>>>>>> was pricey. No wonder Louis sent muskets!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Typical selections:
>>>>>>>>> https://blog.gunassociation.org/best-rifles/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://www.outdoorlife.com/photos/gallery/guns/rifles/centerfire/2011/11/20-best-semi-automatic-rifles-big-game-hunting/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> where $3000 rifles are at the far end of 'popular',
>>>>>>>>> most are
>>>>>>>>> below $2000, and the range is $800 to $7000
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I was "into" gun smithing for a while and actually
>>>>>>>> gave some thought
>>>>>>>> to doing it as a business after I left the Military,
>>>>>>>> and "back then",
>>>>>>>> say the 1960's a good "deer rifle" with iron sights
>>>>>>>> was in the $200
>>>>>>>> range. And, disregarding my Military pay and
>>>>>>>> allowances, I was making
>>>>>>>> $10 a day part time in a gunsmith shop (:-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Disregarding "Home Defense" mentioned in your
>>>>>>>> reference above, my
>>>>>>>> grandfather used a Winchester lever action 38-55 as a
>>>>>>>> "deer rifle" and
>>>>>>>> killed his one deer a year under his license (and
>>>>>>>> sometimes two if
>>>>>>>> the Game Warden was down at the other end of the
>>>>>>>> state) and had one
>>>>>>>> packet of, I think it was 20 rounds, that he'd been
>>>>>>>> using for
>>>>>>>> something like 10 years.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Which might say something about AR-15's, and other
>>>>>>>> shoot em up,
>>>>>>>> bang,bang, guns as hunting rifles (:-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Wrong.
>>>>>>> We've been over this here on RBT at least a dozen times
>>>>>>> over
>>>>>>> the years. My AR-15 repeats at the exact same speed as my
>>>>>>> .38 Police Special revolver. Both are faster than
>>>>>>> girlfriend's inherited .30 Winchester vintage lever,
>>>>>>> but not
>>>>>>> by all that much. None of those are magic lead-spraying
>>>>>>> pew-pew-pew television weapons.
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Andrew Muzi
>>>>>>> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
>>>>>>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your AR-15 has a 20 or 30 shot magazine. Most likely
>>>>>> .223 Remington or NATO ammunition. Your Police Special
>>>>>> has 6 shots. The 5 shot S&W only became common fairly
>>>>>> recently. The lever action likely has a 7 or 8 or 9
>>>>>> round tube fed ammo holding system. So roughly the
>>>>>> AR-15 has 5 times the revolver capacity and 4 times the
>>>>>> rifle capacity. You can easily fire two shots per
>>>>>> second. Bang-bang. Thats one second. Maybe you can
>>>>>> even fire three rounds per second.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At the June 12, 2016 Orlando Florida mass shooting at a
>>>>>> GAY nightclub, a SIG Sauer MCX semi-automatic rifle (it
>>>>>> is an AR-15) and a Glock 17 semi auto pistol were used.
>>>>>> 49 people killed, 53 wounded.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_nightclub_shooting#Weapons
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "In less than five minutes, Mateen had fired
>>>>>> approximately 200 rounds, pausing only to reload." That
>>>>>> works out to a little more than 40 rounds per minute.
>>>>>> One and a half seconds per shot. Not too fast I guess.
>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIG_MCX
>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glock#Glock_17
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It wasn't until October 2017, a whole year and 3 months
>>>>>> later, that Orlando lost its crown as the biggest mass
>>>>>> shooting in US history. That is when the Las Vegas
>>>>>> concert killer used the bump stock device on his AR-15
>>>>>> rifles to kill 60 and wound 411.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Las_Vegas_shooting#Weaponry
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Paddock was found to have fired a total of 1,058 rounds
>>>>>> from fifteen of the firearms: 1,049 from twelve
>>>>>> AR-15-style rifles, eight from two AR-10-style rifles,
>>>>>> and the round used to kill himself from the Smith &
>>>>>> Wesson revolver."
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> meh.
>>>>>
>>>>> And every day (more than usual this week) there are multiple
>>>>> stabbings and sword/machete murders.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.wate.com/news/sword-attack-in-indiana-leaves-2-dead-1-wounded/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.expressnews.com/news/local/article/Sword-wielding-man-shot-by-New-Braunfels-police-16836088.php
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/police-find-man-decapitating-girlfriend-with-machete-in-philadelphia/ar-AATJCVg
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/man-accused-of-attacking-lakewood-store-employee-with-machete-police-say/ar-AATJXiV
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.thedailybeast.com/karla-jackelin-morales-allegedly-lured-jose-villanueva-to-ms-13-machete-death-and-skipped-bail
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I skip the stabbings/slashings with knives/razors which are
>>>>> frequent.
>>>>>
>>>>> Turns out that by not prosecuting/detaining criminals,
>>>>> mayhem results. Weapon of choice may vary but the results
>>>>> are fungibly similar.
>>>>
>>>> But when you say "GUN" Ohoooo it is so scary.
>>>>
>>>> As has been discussed before, the FBI records show that in
>>>> 2015 "long
>>>> guns" killed 463 victims and hands and feet killed 651.
>>>>
>>>> But a news article announcing "Oh Yes, he was kicked to
>>>> death" is sort
>>>> of, well sort of every day, and far less thrilling that
>>>> "He was shot,
>>>> 17 times!"
>>>
>>> As we've mentioned before: Data on U.S. gun crime generally
>>> shows a small number of homicides by "long gun" or "rifle."
>>> But it shows a large number by unspecified "firearm," a
>>> separate category from "handgun." I assume that means that
>>> the type of gun was undetermined. And I think it's
>>> reasonable to say a large portion of those undetermined
>>> cases are in fact ARs.
>>>
>>> And regarding hands and feet vs. semi-automatic, easily
>>> customized, large magazine assault-style rifles: Can we
>>> again consider advantages and disadvantages? I shouldn't
>>> have to point out that hands and feet have countless
>>> practical uses, and that life without them would be
>>> difficult. (The same is true of knives, BTW.)
>>>
>>> What are the advantages and disadvantages of AR-style
>>> weaponry? Well, a disadvantage is that those guns are the
>>> weapon of choice for crackpots choosing to blow away bunches
>>> of kids in a schoolroom, a bunch of people in a night club,
>>> a bunch of people at a music concert, etc. Also, their
>>> widespread presence makes the job of a cop much more
>>> difficult, since it's easy for them to be out-gunned.
>>> (That's something almost no other developed countries have
>>> to worry about).
>>>
>>> The AR advantages are so slight that most truly civilized
>>> countries do perfectly well with roughly zero of them in
>>> circulation. In fact, those other countries do far better.
>>>
>>> What _are_ the advantages of AR-style guns? "Dude, they're
>>> cool! And when I play with mine or shoot at those silhouette
>>> targets, I can pretend I'm a really tough commando defending
>>> my home against ... um, them other people. Even though I'm
>>> really a feeble 77 year old pot bellied guy with memory
>>> problems."
>>>
>>> "Really cool" doesn't outweigh "27 schoolkids murdered" in
>>> my book.
>>>
>> As was noted by Mr Bach above, every problem is not a
>> crisis. You're not innumerate. There are more than 20
>> million AR-15 in the US of A, the greater bulk of which just
>> passed another uneventful day, oiled and cased.
>
> Exactly how would a gun homicide have a type of gun "indeterminate"? While there are rifles that shoot some handgun calibers the velocity of the bullet is enough different to determine whether it was a rifle or a handgun. IE Henry lever action rifles are made that shoot .357 but the velocity and rifling are substantially different. If you can recover a bullet you can almost always identify the brand of gun it was fired from. Sometimes even the year of manufacture.
>

On Saturday, February 12, 2022 at 10:52:00 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> ALL Army Generals including Robert E. Lee were educated in West Point.

And as usual, Tommy bloviates bullshit. Since WWII there have been 25 Chiefs of Staff of the United States Army. Of those, the following 6 (24%) did _not_ go to west point:

George Catlett Marshall Jr. in 1939 Marshall became acting Chief of Staff, and then the 15th Chief of Staff, a position he held until the war's end in 1945. Marshall graduated from the Virginia Military Institute (VMI) in 1901.

George Henry Decker served as Chief of Staff of the United States Army from 1960 to 1962. Decker attended Lafayette College in Easton, Pennsylvania, receiving an economics degree in 1924.

Frederick Carlton Weyand served as the 28th Chief of Staff of the United States Army from 1974 to 1976. Weyand was commissioned a second lieutenant in the United States Army through the Reserve Officers Training Corps program at the University of California, Berkeley, where he graduated in May 1938..

Gordon Russell Sullivan served as the 32nd Chief of Staff of the Army and as a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Sullivan also served as acting Secretary of the Army. He was commissioned a second lieutenant of Armor and awarded a Bachelor of Arts degree in history from Norwich University in 1959.

Peter Jan Schoomaker served as the 35th Chief of Staff of the United States Army from August 1, 2003 to April 10, 2007. Schoomaker graduated from the University of Wyoming in 1969 with a Bachelor of Science degree in education administration.

Mark Alexander Milley serves as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He previously served as the 39th chief of staff of the Army from August 14, 2015 to August 9, 2019. Milley Princeton University on a hockey scholarship.[5][11] There, he joined the Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC)[12] and in 1980 graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree in politics.

That's just Chiefs of Staff of the United States Army. Further down the chain of command the ratio of non-West Point graduates to West Point graduates becomes much higher.

Feel free to post any links disputing the information above - or shut the fuck up - and no, the fact that I was never in the army doesn't exclude me from posting the facts above - hint: you weren't in the army either.

> When you act like a pin-head, you get treated as a pin-head.
Which explains the treatment of you in this forum quite succinctly.

"Magazines available up to 30 rounds for visiting people like Flunky and all of his close friends at the gay bath houses. " - Tom Kunich

On Saturday, February 12, 2022 at 12:56:20 PM UTC-8, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, February 12, 2022 at 10:52:00 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > ALL Army Generals including Robert E. Lee were educated in West Point.
> And as usual, Tommy bloviates bullshit. Since WWII there have been 25 Chiefs of Staff of the United States Army. Of those, the following 6 (24%) did _not_ go to west point:
>
> George Catlett Marshall Jr. in 1939 Marshall became acting Chief of Staff, and then the 15th Chief of Staff, a position he held until the war's end in 1945. Marshall graduated from the Virginia Military Institute (VMI) in 1901.
>
> George Henry Decker served as Chief of Staff of the United States Army from 1960 to 1962. Decker attended Lafayette College in Easton, Pennsylvania, receiving an economics degree in 1924.
>
> Frederick Carlton Weyand served as the 28th Chief of Staff of the United States Army from 1974 to 1976. Weyand was commissioned a second lieutenant in the United States Army through the Reserve Officers Training Corps program at the University of California, Berkeley, where he graduated in May 1938.
>
> Gordon Russell Sullivan served as the 32nd Chief of Staff of the Army and as a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Sullivan also served as acting Secretary of the Army. He was commissioned a second lieutenant of Armor and awarded a Bachelor of Arts degree in history from Norwich University in 1959.
>
> Peter Jan Schoomaker served as the 35th Chief of Staff of the United States Army from August 1, 2003 to April 10, 2007. Schoomaker graduated from the University of Wyoming in 1969 with a Bachelor of Science degree in education administration.
>
> Mark Alexander Milley serves as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.. He previously served as the 39th chief of staff of the Army from August 14, 2015 to August 9, 2019. Milley Princeton University on a hockey scholarship.[5][11] There, he joined the Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC)[12] and in 1980 graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree in politics.
>
> That's just Chiefs of Staff of the United States Army. Further down the chain of command the ratio of non-West Point graduates to West Point graduates becomes much higher.
>
> Feel free to post any links disputing the information above - or shut the fuck up - and no, the fact that I was never in the army doesn't exclude me from posting the facts above - hint: you weren't in the army either.
> > When you act like a pin-head, you get treated as a pin-head.
> Which explains the treatment of you in this forum quite succinctly.
>
> "Magazines available up to 30 rounds for visiting people like Flunky and all of his close friends at the gay bath houses. " - Tom Kunich

I have some information for you turd breath, Chief of Staff is NOT a military appointment - it is political. Or that stupid bastard that is the there presently couldn't even get in the door. One of the thousands of things wrong with you is that you have never been anywhere, done anything or have any knowledge of anything. Don't worry though, you don't have to worry about being drafted after your boy Biden starts a war with Russia,. To get in the military you have to have a minimum IQ of 83 and on the best day of your life you couldn't even dream that large.

On Saturday, February 12, 2022 at 12:07:23 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:

> > But at any rate, completely eliminating the AR type weapon by a total confiscation would have zero detectable effect on gun deaths in the US.
> It seems to have pretty much eliminated mass shootings in Australia,
> which is something worth achieving. And certainly, among developed
> nations, the U.S. attitude toward guns is a gross outlier. So is the
> U.S. gun fatality rate.
>
> --
> - Frank Krygowski

I'm not sure you can draw that conclusion. Mass shootings in Australia were vanishingly rare before and after the 1996 Port Arthur shooting (Martin Bryant killed 35 people with an AR15 among other weapons).

Suicide rates by gun did decline after the weapons ban, but overall rates did not, which is interesting because rifles are never the most common suicide choice due to the awkwardness of holding and firing.

On Saturday, February 12, 2022 at 3:14:50 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
>
> Add in through wounds, fragments unrecovered, and you have
> an 'indeterminate' area.
> --
> Andrew Muzi
> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971

I think there is a risk of interpreting indeterminant to mean they couldn't tell, rather than that they didn't say.

Certainly for a suicide, if you don't have the gun available, there's a problem!

For a homicide it would be very rare to mistake a rifle wound for a pistol wound - true there are some carbines that fire pistol rounds, are these really likely to be common murder weapons? They are not concealable or commonly carried by criminals.

On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 03:43:00 -0800 (PST), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, February 12, 2022 at 1:04:02 AM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 20:43:11 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>> >On 2/11/2022 8:35 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> >> On 2/11/2022 7:16 PM, John B. wrote:
>> >>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:38:47 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> On 2/10/2022 10:51 PM, John B. wrote:
>> >>>>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 20:11:51 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> On 2/10/2022 7:04 PM, John B. wrote:
>> >>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 10:44:34 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>> >>>>>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On 2/10/2022 1:43 AM, John B. wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> It might be that the Air Gun was the most effective weapon that the
>> >>>>>>>>> expedition carried as while I can't find a specific statement
>> >>>>>>>>> that the
>> >>>>>>>>> Girandoni was rifled...
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> It was rifled.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> See https://youtu.be/2dZLeEUE940?t=189
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Interesting. Very innovative. The first rifled long guns in the U.S.
>> >>>>>>> army date to about 1800 and in the British Army about the same
>> >>>>>>> period.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> I defer to you on official War Department procurement, since
>> >>>>>> I have no idea.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> But I do know something about our Founding. Paul Revere and
>> >>>>>> William Dawes left Boston on horseback at night* because
>> >>>>>> some 700-odd of the British garrison had marched out at
>> >>>>>> midnight* for Lexington where the most accurate _long
>> >>>>>> rifles_ on the continent were manufactured. They took a
>> >>>>>> circuitous route but did arrive at Lexington in time and the
>> >>>>>> results, including the forced withdrawal at Concord, were
>> >>>>>> our 'shot heard round the world'. A result in our favor was
>> >>>>>> critically due to the superior range and accuracy of long
>> >>>>>> rifles against smooth bore British issue muskets.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> 18 April, 1775.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> * 1775! No streetlights, no headlamps, no paved rural roads.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Yes, I've read the stories and yes, British troops were marching to
>> >>>>> seize stores of gun powder and some arms at Lexington, and yes, I've
>> >>>>> read stories about the Minute Men snipping from behind fences but I
>> >>>>> doubt greatly whether many rifles were used, although admittedly this
>> >>>>> seems to be a constant theme in U.S. history.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> But, where did these "rifles" come from? The average farmer had no
>> >>>>> requirement for an expensive rifled gun, a smooth bore was far cheaper
>> >>>>> and far more versatile for use on the farm.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Additionally there were no organized munitions makers in the U.S. and
>> >>>>> rifles were made one at a time, and were extremely expensive. Kenneth
>> >>>>> Roberts in the historical novel Arundel, based on actual diaries of
>> >>>>> the 1775 Quebec Campaign, mentions used rifles with accoutrements
>> >>>>> exchanged for 12-15 English pounds. A smooth bore at the time might be
>> >>>>> 2 pounds and 4 shillings. To get an idea of how much this was there is
>> >>>>> a record of a John Moll paying 45 pounds for a 60’ X 230’ building lot
>> >>>>> in Allentown in 1772. And, William Carlin, a tailor in colonial
>> >>>>> Alexandria who made clothes for field hands as well as the planter
>> >>>>> elite, charged £3-5 for an ordinary wool suit.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Some of the greatest support furnished by the French to the
>> >>>>> revolutionists was in the form of muskets and gun power. In the
>> >>>>> Battles of Saratoga on September 19 and October 7, 1777, it is
>> >>>>> estimated that as many as nine out of 10 American soldiers carried
>> >>>>> French arms, and were completely dependent on French gunpowder.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I was engaged in a discussion on currency debasement policy
>> >>>> (popularly called 'inflation') and remembered your post
>> >>>> above so I checked the NPV of 14 Sterling in 1775.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Current value 2400 pounds or US$3200. For reference, your
>> >>>> average popular modern rifle runs somewhere around $2000.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> So you make a good point that premium equipment of the era
>> >>>> was pricey. No wonder Louis sent muskets!
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Typical selections:
>> >>>> https://blog.gunassociation.org/best-rifles/
>> >>>>
>> >>>> https://www.outdoorlife.com/photos/gallery/guns/rifles/centerfire/2011/11/20-best-semi-automatic-rifles-big-game-hunting/
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> where $3000 rifles are at the far end of 'popular', most are
>> >>>> below $2000, and the range is $800 to $7000
>> >>>
>> >>> I was "into" gun smithing for a while and actually gave some thought
>> >>> to doing it as a business after I left the Military, and "back then",
>> >>> say the 1960's a good "deer rifle" with iron sights was in the $200
>> >>> range. And, disregarding my Military pay and allowances, I was making
>> >>> $10 a day part time in a gunsmith shop (:-)
>> >>>
>> >>> Disregarding "Home Defense" mentioned in your reference above, my
>> >>> grandfather used a Winchester lever action 38-55 as a "deer rifle" and
>> >>> killed his one deer a year under his license (and sometimes two if
>> >>> the Game Warden was down at the other end of the state) and had one
>> >>> packet of, I think it was 20 rounds, that he'd been using for
>> >>> something like 10 years.
>> >>>
>> >>> Which might say something about AR-15's, and other shoot em up,
>> >>> bang,bang, guns as hunting rifles (:-)
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> Wrong.
>> >> We've been over this here on RBT at least a dozen times over the years.
>> >> My AR-15 repeats at the exact same speed as my .38 Police Special
>> >> revolver. Both are faster than girlfriend's inherited .30 Winchester
>> >> vintage lever, but not by all that much. None of those are magic
>> >> lead-spraying pew-pew-pew television weapons.
>> >
>> >38 Police Special: "pew pew pew pew pew pew" and slowly
>> >reload.
>> >
>> >Typical AR15: "pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew
>> >pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew pew."
>> >
>> >You know, for hunting.
>> Well... people who never race by racing bicycles (:-) and even worse,
>> I've got a friend lives on a 45 ft boat and bought "mountain bike"
>
>The next time you hear of a racing bicycle being used to murder 26 children at an elementary school, let us know.

On Saturday, February 12, 2022 at 3:57:28 PM UTC-8, jeff.li...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 14:45:48 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >To get in the military you have to have a minimum IQ of 83 ...
>
> Nope.
> <https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/after-service/201801/are-military-members-the-lowest-our-low>
> US military does not use an IQ score, but instead uses the similar
> ASVAB (Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery) test where the
> score is the applicants percentile score when compared to other
> applicants.
>
> "To qualify, recruits must score higher than roughly one-third of all
> who take the ASVAB. The lowest acceptable percentile score to join is
> 36 for the Air Force, 35 for the Navy, 32 for the Marine Corps, and 31
> for the Army."
>
> "By definition, the worst test taker who makes it into the military
> still scores higher than one-third of his or her peers. The military
> intentionally slices off the bottom third of test-takers, not allowing
> them to join."
>
> Tom. Bad news:
> "Pew reports that 98 percent of the enlisted force has at least a high
> school diploma."
> That puts you in the lowest 2% of the military.
> <https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2011/10/05/chapter-6-a-profile-of-the-modern-military/>
> See the section under "Education Levels" for more details. Maybe 2%
> is a bit optimistic:
> "About eight-in-ten active-duty military personnel are high school
> graduates or have completed at least a year of college or other
> postsecondary training. Nearly two-in-ten (17.9%) are college
> graduates or have an advanced degree, while only 0.6% never finished
> high school."
>
> Drivel:
> "Replacing a gunner who scores around the 20th percentile with one who
> scores around the 55th percentile improves the likelihood of hitting a
> target by 34 percent."

So once again Jeffy proves that he has never heard the old saying, "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet" or in the his case, "a horse's ass by any other name is still a horses ass." He wants everyone to believe that an intelligence test isn't an intelligence test.

On Saturday, February 12, 2022 at 7:24:12 PM UTC-5, Tim R wrote:

Some discussion earlier about the military mindset and tradition.

I read a fascinating book about the evolution of the military long arm over time, and there was violent disagreement from the earliest days over the choice of calibre which continues to this day. The title escapes me.

The original musket was in .69 caliber. By the Civil War this had shrunk to .58, over the bitter resistance of what they called gravel bellies. Soldiers could carry more ammo, so they British sshot more ammo, so somebody had to pay for, procure, and deliver more ammo.

..45 caliber owned the late 1800s, with the .30 appearing near the end. The Phillippine conflict still had mostly trapdoor springfields in .45 but I the .30 Krag was used. Every reduction was fought ferociously by the oldtimers.

There were extensive tests of lethality (sheep I think), range, and accuracy at Aberdeen Proving ground, and out to about 1000 yards the .276 did as well as the larger calibers.

In Vietnam we went to .223, which I think is the sweet spot - smaller loses range and penetration, larger loses ability to carry enough ammo and recoil hurts accuracy for most soldiers. (I recently rewatched Zulu. Those rifles were Martini-Henrys in .577/.450, meaning they were a .577 cartridge case necked down to fire a .450 caliber 480 grain bullet. Recoil had to be extreme with that loading, and the average soldier probably weighed about 140.)