PDA

View Full Version : Worlds Smallest Gun (banned in the US)


Taco John
03-05-2008, 09:36 AM
Introducing the world's smallest gun that fires deadly 300mph bullets - but is just TWO inches long

Last updated at 13:43pm on 5th March 2008


This is the world's smallest gun - and although it might look like a harmless toy to some it is anything but as it is capable at firing deadly bullets at a speed of 300mph.

The Swiss Minigun, being marketed as a collector's item, is two inches long, and fires 4.53mm bullets.


http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/03_01/MiniGunHandLL_468x348.jpg

Costing £3,000 in stainless steel, a gold-plated, diamond-studded version is also available.


It cannot be imported into the UK, and buyers in Switzerland and Europe must get a permit from police to own one.

The gun is banned in the US - because it is too small to qualify for sporting purposes.

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/03_01/MiniGunBulletsLL_468x350.jpg


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=526655&in_page_id=1770

Adept Havelock
03-05-2008, 09:44 AM
Awwww, Isn't that cute. Cool for the impressive machine work, IMO.

I prefer this style of minigun, though it has portability issues the Swiss one does not.

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Qc-ayCF3RF4"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Qc-ayCF3RF4" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

Radar Chief
03-05-2008, 10:22 AM
A 300 MPH bullet speed may sound fast but that’s only 440 feet per second. Pellet guns shoot faster than that.

JBucc
03-05-2008, 10:26 AM
A 300 MPH bullet speed may sound fast but that’s only 440 feet per second. Pellet guns shoot faster than that.The bullet is about the same size as a bb too. And this is banned why? No one in their right mind would actually use it in a gun fight. It's just a neat little collector's item.

Brock
03-05-2008, 10:31 AM
That's a silly little thing.

Logical
03-05-2008, 11:38 AM
So how do you pull the trigger, with a paper clip?

banyon
03-05-2008, 11:51 AM
http://www.cellular.co.za/phones/gunphone/gun-phone.jpg
Hitting the 5, 6, 7 and 8 buttons on the
gunphone fires four .22 caliber rounds
in quick succession.



At first sight it looks like a regular cell phone — same size, same shape, same overall appearance.


But beneath the digital face lies a .22-caliber pistol, a phone gun capable of firing four rounds in quick succession with a touch of the otherwise standard keypad.
The US Department of Homeland Security and the FBI are aware of the device and have instructed baggage screeners to be on the lookout for suspicious mobile phones. This is especially after 9/11.
European law enforcement officials — stunned by the discovery of these deadly decoys — say phone guns are changing the rules of engagement in Europe.


Airport authorities across Europe are implementing systems to X-ray all cell phones

“We find it very, very alarming,” says Wolfgang Dicke of the German Police union. “It means police will have to draw their weapons whenever a person being checked reaches for their mobile phone.”
The FBI, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, and the U.S. Customs Service say they’ve been briefed on the new weapons.

“This criminal invention represents a potentially serious threat to law enforcement and the public,” said U.S. Customs Service Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly.
“We received word about these guns last month. We have since alerted our field personnel to be on the lookout for ‘cell phone guns’ at U.S. ports of entry.”

Guns on the Move
These new covert guns were first discovered in October when Dutch police stumbled on a cache during a drug raid in Amsterdam.

In another recent incident a Croatian gun dealer was caught attempting to smuggle a shipment through Slovenia into Western Europe.

Police say both shipments are believed to have originated in Yugoslavia.
Interpol sent out a warning to law enforcement agencies around the world.
European border police and customs officers are at a heightened state of alert at all ports, airports and border crossings.Realistic Appearance

‘If you didn’t know they were guns, you wouldn’t suspect anything,” said Ari Zandbergen, spokesman for the Amsterdam police.

“Only when you have one in your hand do you realize that they are heavier,” says Birgit Heib of the German Federal Criminal Investigation Agency.

The guns are loaded by twisting the phone in half. The .22-caliber rounds fit into the top of the phone under the screen. The lower half, under the keyboard, holds the firing pins. The bullets fire through the antenna by pressing the keypad from numbers five to eight.

Amsterdam police says they are very sophisticated machines constructed inside gutted cell phones which do not light up or operate as real phones.
“These are very difficult to make. We believe experts are involved,” says Zandbergen.


U.S. authorities, including the FBI, ATF, Federal Aviation Administration and the U.S. Customs Service Authority have been supplied detailed information and pictures of these new weapons.

“They’ve been given a heads up,” said Jim Crandall, ATF spokesman.
To date no phone guns have been discovered either in the United States or in the process of being smuggled in, authorities say. But they know it’s only a matter of time.

FAA spokeswoman Rebecca Trexler said airport security officers had been trained to deal with this new threat.

“We don’t want to tell the bad guys exactly what we’re looking for,” she says, “We are trying to stay one step ahead.”Will Affect Travelers

Airport authorities across Europe are implementing systems to X-ray all cell phones, those procedures will likely be followed by airports around the world.
“This is just one more item that we need to pay special attention to because nowadays, of course just about every passenger carries a mobile phone,” says the spokesman for Frankfurt airport security.

Customs officials in the U.S. say their safety procedure has normally been to require travelers to turn their phones on, however that may no longer be enough. Cell phone users will have to be made aware that reaching for their phones in some circumstances could be misinterpreted as a threat by authorities.

Radar Chief
03-05-2008, 12:14 PM
The bullet is about the same size as a bb too. And this is banned why?

It could break the skin and give you a nasty infection.

;)

Iowanian
03-05-2008, 12:21 PM
So how do you pull the trigger, with a paper clip?

bronco fans fire it with an erection.

BucEyedPea
03-05-2008, 12:25 PM
Where's Q?

Adept Havelock
03-05-2008, 01:24 PM
Where's Q?

Dead, sometime between "The World is not Enough" and "Die Another Day". :deevee:

John Cleese as "R" replaced him in "Die Another Day". IIRC, there was no Q in the franchise reset film "Casino Royale" featuring Daniel Craig.

I hope Cleese shows up again, but he might be a bit silly for the new "tone" of the Craig films.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-05-2008, 05:29 PM
Awwww, Isn't that cute. Cool for the impressive machine work, IMO.

I prefer this style of minigun, though it has portability issues the Swiss one does not.

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Qc-ayCF3RF4"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Qc-ayCF3RF4" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

I've never wanted anything so bad in my entire life.

SBK
03-05-2008, 05:34 PM
So this gun is banned for being too small? Kind of strange too big is bad, too small is bad, but the right size is okay? Makes no sense.

MurphDog
03-05-2008, 05:41 PM
Thats liberal gun laws for you

Rain Man
03-05-2008, 06:16 PM
The bullet is about the same size as a bb too. And this is banned why? No one in their right mind would actually use it in a gun fight. It's just a neat little collector's item.

But crazy people are the ones you should most fear in a gun fight.

Cochise
03-05-2008, 06:18 PM
Actually, I think this might be very effective against midgets.

a1na2
03-05-2008, 06:22 PM
Actually, I think this might be very effective against midgets.

I don't think so, smaller targets.

banyon
03-05-2008, 06:42 PM
Thats liberal gun laws for you

That's stupid.

mikey23545
03-05-2008, 07:00 PM
The French have ordered 200,000 of them for their armed forces.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-05-2008, 10:06 PM
Thats liberal gun laws for you


That's a dumbf*ck for you.

MurphDog
03-06-2008, 06:36 AM
Any of you liberals care to actually have something of substance regarding gun laws and how liberals have eroded the 2nd amendment or is your tiny brain full from Obama's empty promises?

http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii31/LakeAnna/liberals14.jpg

Radar Chief
03-06-2008, 06:53 AM
Here’s the problem. Rats outnumber humans by something like 100:1 in North America. Why would we want to arm them?

Radar Chief
03-06-2008, 06:53 AM
Any of you liberals care to actually have something of substance regarding gun laws and how liberals have eroded the 2nd amendment or is your tiny brain full from Obama's empty promises?

http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii31/LakeAnna/liberals14.jpg


:LOL:

banyon
03-06-2008, 07:19 AM
Any of you liberals care to actually have something of substance regarding gun laws and how liberals have eroded the 2nd amendment or is your tiny brain full from Obama's empty promises?

http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii31/LakeAnna/liberals14.jpg


Good Lord.

Well for starters, being able to have a tiny gun does nothing to further anything contained in the 2nd amendment. I wouldn't think any "well-regulated militia" would want to arm their members with tiny guns.

Second, it's an unjustifiable risk to law enforcement. Such weapons would be difficult to find in a standard pat-down check and might be used against them later.

Last, post-9-11 I don't think we want terrorists carrying these things around and taking a couple of pot shots at a jet engine or a fuel tank while aboard.

Or, I guess I could adopt your argument tact: Are you a pro-terrorist homo? Are ya, hrrrrrrrrrrrrr?

Ultra Peanut
03-06-2008, 07:21 AM
It's so cuuuuuuuuuute.

Any of you liberals care to actually have something of substance regarding gun laws and how liberals have eroded the 2nd amendment or is your tiny brain full from Obama's empty promises?

http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii31/LakeAnna/liberals14.jpgPoor, pitiful MurphDog. So objective, but people are always picking on him. :deevee:

a1na2
03-06-2008, 07:25 AM
Last, post-9-11 I don't think we want terrorists carrying these things around and taking a couple of pot shots at a jet engine or a fuel tank while aboard.


I would like for you to tell us all how a terrorist might be able to shoot that little weapon through the side of an aircraft and hit the jet engine, or even have a remote possibility of getting the projectile into the intake, or to go through the same side of the aircraft and puncture the fuel tank.

I"m sure that you probably don't fly because of the fears you have of this happening, but I would like to know how a projectile traveling at 440 fps has the velocity and penetrating power to accomplish what you fear.

banyon
03-06-2008, 07:28 AM
I would like for you to tell us all how a terrorist might be able to shoot that little weapon through the side of an aircraft and hit the jet engine, or even have a remote possibility of getting the projectile into the intake, or to go through the same side of the aircraft and puncture the fuel tank.

I"m sure that you probably don't fly because of the fears you have of this happening, but I would like to know how a projectile traveling at 440 fps has the velocity and penetrating power to accomplish what you fear.

I'm just speculating. I'm not a ballistics expert, and scanning a ham radio all night doesn't make you one either.

a1na2
03-06-2008, 07:31 AM
The Taylor Index - A Measure of Stopping Power
We sometimes get a question such as "How do I compare the effectiveness, of one cartridge, say a .450 Marlin over a 30-06? I want to purchase a deer/bear rifle for woods and need some guidance."
Hunters and shooters have been searching a long time for the magic formula that will predict what is needed to drop an animal in his tracks, every time. No such formula has been developed, but this doesn't keep people from trying. Many thought that the kinetic energy of the bullet was a reasonable measure of the stopping power of the bullet and most bullet and ammunition manufacturers catalogs provide charts that show the velocity and kinetic energy of a given bullet anywhere along its trajectory.
The equation for this energy calculation is:
KE = m*v2/2 = bw*v2/450436 (1)
Where:
KE = Kinetic Energy, ft-lbs
m = bullet mass, slugs
v = bullet velocity, f.p.s.
bw = Bullet weight, grs.
Noted big game hunter and writer John Taylor thought that the kinetic energy equation gave too much credit to the new high velocity cartridges. Taylor, who spent a good many years in Mozambique, did a great deal of shooting and some commercial ivory hunting. He wrote a book entitled African rifles and Cartridges in which he pushed the British big-bore viewpoint. He thought these new cartridges, which fired a lightweight bullet at high velocity, gave too much importance to bullet velocity. Looking at the kinetic energy equation it can be seen that a small increase in velocity means a large increase in the kinetic energy because this energy increases as the square of the velocity. He thought that this would lead the hunter to believe that a small bullet, at high velocity, would be more effective on big game than a slower, heavier bullet. He stated that based on his hunting experience this was not so.
In an article in the November, 1947 issue of the American Rifleman magazine, Taylor gave several examples of how the heavier bullet knocked big game animals cold while the lighter faster bullet, in many cases, only dazed the animal for a few seconds. Taylor's energy equation is listed below:
TI = bw/7000*v*DI (2)
Where:
TI = Taylor Index
bw = Bullet weight, grs
v = bullet velocity, f.p.s.
DI = Bullet diameter, inches
Taylor's equation includes the bullet diameter, velocity and bullet weight. Since the velocity term is not squared it has less impact on TI energy as compared to the kinetic energy equation.
Table 1.0 shown below lists several popular cartridges and the generated kinetic energy (K.E.) and Taylor Index (TI).
Table 1.0
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="90%" align=center border=1><TBODY><TR bgColor=#ffffcc><TD>Cartridge

</TD><TD>Bullet Wt.
(grains)
</TD><TD>Muzzle Vel.
(f.p.s.)
</TD><TD>100 yd. Vel.
(f.p.s.)
</TD><TD>100 yd. K.E.
(ft.-lb.)
</TD><TD>100 yd.
Taylor Index
</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#cccc00><TD width=109>22 Long Rifle</TD><TD width=69>40
</TD><TD width=104>1150
</TD><TD width=90>976
</TD><TD width=81>85
</TD><TD width=81>1.2
</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#ffffcc><TD width=109>223 Rem.</TD><TD width=69>53
</TD><TD width=104>3330
</TD><TD width=90>2865
</TD><TD width=81>966
</TD><TD width=81>4.9
</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#cccc00><TD width=109>7mm Rem. Mag.</TD><TD width=69>154
</TD><TD width=104>3200
</TD><TD width=90>2966
</TD><TD width=81>3008
</TD><TD width=81>18.5
</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#ffffcc><TD width=109>308 Win.</TD><TD width=69>150
</TD><TD width=104>2820
</TD><TD width=90>2593
</TD><TD width=81>2239
</TD><TD width=81>17.1
</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#cccc00><TD width=109>30-06</TD><TD width=69>180
</TD><TD width=104>2700
</TD><TD width=90>2484
</TD><TD width=81>2466
</TD><TD width=81>19.7
</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#ffffcc><TD width=109>416 Rigby</TD><TD width=69>400
</TD><TD width=104>2400
</TD><TD width=90>2184
</TD><TD width=81>4236
</TD><TD width=81>51.9
</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#cccc00><TD width=109>450 Marlin</TD><TD width=69>350
</TD><TD width=104>2100
</TD><TD width=90>1710
</TD><TD width=81>2272
</TD><TD width=81>39.2
</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#ffffcc><TD width=109>470 N.E.</TD><TD width=69>500
</TD><TD width=104>2150
</TD><TD width=90>1907
</TD><TD width=81>4037
</TD><TD width=81>64.6
</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#cccc00><TD width=109>50 BMG </TD><TD width=69>750
</TD><TD width=104>2769
</TD><TD width=90>2681
</TD><TD width=81>11965
</TD><TD width=81>146.5
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Note: All velocities and energies shown were calculated using the LFDW program.
From Table 1.0 it can be seen that the 450 Marlin develops only about 92% of the 30-06's kinetic energy at 100 yd, but the Taylor Index for the 450 Marlin is almost double that of the 30-06. Based on this information and the fact that heavier bullets usually work better in brush, the 450 Marlin looks like a winner. The last cartridge listed, the 50 BMG, is not considered a sporting cartridge, but was included to show how much energy this military cartridge can develop in comparison to other cartridges.
The Taylor Index is a relative value, which means the value has no units of measurement like ft.-lbs. or feet per second. It is more of an indicator of how one cartridge stacks up against another. This assumes, in all cases, that a well placed shot will be delivered to the vital area using a properly constructed bullet that will transfer all its energy to the game animal.
So, you might ask, "How do I use this information?" What we need is a chart of the Taylor Index figures rated against different type/size game. Listed below is my evaluation of such a table. Your ideas may differ and that's fine, but it is a starting place.
Table 2.0
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="75%" align=center border=1><TBODY><TR bgColor=#ffffcc><TD width="22%">Taylor Index
</TD><TD width="78%">Game Animal</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#cccc00><TD width="22%">1-3</TD><TD width="78%">Crows, Squirrels, rabbits and skunks</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#ffffcc><TD width="22%">3-5</TD><TD width="78%">Prairie dogs, ground hogs and coyotes</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#cccc00><TD width="22%">6-17</TD><TD width="78%">Antelope, mule deer and sheep - Open country</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#ffffcc><TD width="22%">17-20</TD><TD width="78%">White tail deer, black bear - Brush/Woods</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#cccc00><TD width="22%">20-40</TD><TD width="78%">Elk, moose, Grizzly bear</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#ffffcc><TD width="22%">40-50</TD><TD width="78%">Lion and other thin skinned dangerous game</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#cccc00><TD width="22%">50-125</TD><TD width="78%">Rhino, elephant or other thick skinned dangerous game</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#ffffcc><TD width="22%">125-200</TD><TD width="78%">Any animal that roams the earth</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Of course we all know that a 22 Long Rifle can kill a deer just as dead as the 416 Rigby, but how close did you have to get to fire a clean shot and how long did you have to track the deer before it dropped? By using the TI values from Table 2.0, as a guide, the hunting experience should be more pleasant for the hunter and more humane for the game animal.

MurphDog
03-06-2008, 07:32 AM
Apparently the liberals want to trivialize the second amendment and fail to understand the meaning of the second amendment but at the same time bitch about how Bush & Co are eroding their constitutional rights - you guys are pathetic...

banyon
03-06-2008, 07:33 AM
great, you cut and pasted some crap. That, of course, tells us nothing about the inner workings of how it would impact a jet engine or fuel tank (i.e., the requisite force to affect a key system or subsystem of the plane).

a1na2
03-06-2008, 07:35 AM
I'm just speculating. I'm not a ballistics expert, and scanning a ham radio all night doesn't make you one either.

I'm sure that you intended that as an insult, once again you have no credible answer.

Read my next post and you might see how ridiculous your speculation is.

(just for your edification, I've never even seen a Ham Radio other than in pictures)

I tend to use a little more modern equipment for communication.

banyon
03-06-2008, 07:35 AM
Apparently the liberals want to trivialize the second amendment and fail to understand the meaning of the second amendment but at the same time bitch about how Bush & Co are eroding their constitutional rights - you guys are pathetic...

I answered your question substantively. Reply to that instead of a bunch of blustery BS. Please don't follow Tom's lead here. You really couldn't pick anyone worse to have on your side of an argument (maybe Denise).

a1na2
03-06-2008, 07:36 AM
great, you cut and pasted some crap. That, of course, tells us nothing about the inner workings of how it would impact a jet engine or fuel tank (i.e., the requisite force to affect a key system or subsystem of the plane).

You are supposed to be educated, read the damn article. I'm sure you didn't read the information, it is more credible as your bible, wikipedia.

You don't want information, you just want to argue with me. I think you are probably getting close to being obsessed with my style of posting.

It's a shame, you almost had a lucritive career started.

Better get back to the can, you are falling behind on your 3 hour pre-requisite for the day.

MurphDog
03-06-2008, 07:36 AM
The 2nd amendment goes beyond a well regulated militia and chances are you fail to understand the meaning of militia.

Terrorists dont have rights afforded to them under the constitution anyways

RedDread
03-06-2008, 07:36 AM
Apparently the liberals want to trivialize the second amendment and fail to understand the meaning of the second amendment but at the same time bitch about how Bush & Co are eroding their constitutional rights - you guys are pathetic...

Go back to your sandbox and play with your bang-bangs and leave the politics to the big boys, okay sweetie?

MurphDog
03-06-2008, 07:37 AM
LOL - you guys are the weakest bag of liberals I have ever seen

Ultra Peanut
03-06-2008, 07:39 AM
Apparently the liberals want to trivialize the second amendment and fail to understand the meaning of the second amendment but at the same time bitch about how Bush & Co are eroding their constitutional rights - you guys are pathetic...It's really amazing. Who could have seen it coming that MurphDog was a complete wanker who wished to do nothing but shout Rush's talking points at people who disagreed with him?

Oh, right. I saw it coming (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=4600897&postcount=34). Go me.

MurphDog
03-06-2008, 07:42 AM
OK so none of you can actually point to anything when it comes to liberal anti gun legislation and the 2nd amendment? I was right about the tiny brain piece...

You guys have absolutely nothing to offer up in the way of discussions what so ever - you cant address gun laws or the 2nd amendment - instead you flounder around attempting to beat your chest - again the weakest group of liberals I have come across yet

banyon
03-06-2008, 07:42 AM
The 2nd amendment goes beyond a well regulated militia and chances are you fail to understand the meaning of militia.

Terrorists dont have rights afforded to them under the constitution anyways

I'm sorry I don't have time for this today.

Maybe later.

Ultra Peanut
03-06-2008, 07:43 AM
Maybe you should go hang out at FreeRepublic then, big guy.

MurphDog
03-06-2008, 07:44 AM
LOL no I would rather hang out here and point out the inadequacies and hypocrites...

Funny when someone gets called out for not understanding the facts they say - I dont have time for this today - which really means I cant contribute in any way

RedDread
03-06-2008, 07:46 AM
OK so none of you can actually point to anything when it comes to liberal anti gun legislation and the 2nd amendment? I was right about the tiny brain piece...

You guys have absolutely nothing to offer up in the way of discussions what so ever - you cant address gun laws or the 2nd amendment - instead you flounder around attempting to beat your chest - again the weakest group of liberals I have come across yet

If you're wanting to argue a point that bad, why don't YOU put forth some facts or something to debate about. It won't be me, I could give a shit less what the gun laws are.

MurphDog
03-06-2008, 07:48 AM
Why would you even be in this conversation then if you didnt give a shit about gun laws?

Just goes to show that liberals want to pick and choose what amendments are important and which ones dont need protection...

RedDread
03-06-2008, 07:59 AM
Why would you even be in this conversation then if you didnt give a shit about gun laws?

Amazingly, I'm just here to berate you

http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/4149/arnoldjj0.jpg

Ultra Peanut
03-06-2008, 08:28 AM
Why would you even be in this conversation then if you didnt give a shit about gun laws?

Just goes to show that liberals want to pick and choose what amendments are important and which ones dont need protection...You're a liberal!!!!!

a1na2
03-06-2008, 09:47 AM
I'm sorry I don't have time for this today.

Maybe later.

BATHROOM BREAK!

MurphDog
03-06-2008, 11:08 AM
Maybe you should go hang out at FreeRepublic then, big guy.

Sorry I didnt realize this forum was for liberal whiners

Ultra Peanut
03-06-2008, 12:42 PM
Sorry I didnt realize this forum was for liberal whinersGO AWAY YOU LIEBRUL

Radar Chief
03-06-2008, 12:54 PM
Good Lord.

Well for starters, being able to have a tiny gun does nothing to further anything contained in the 2nd amendment. I wouldn't think any "well-regulated militia" would want to arm their members with tiny guns.

Second, it's an unjustifiable risk to law enforcement. Such weapons would be difficult to find in a standard pat-down check and might be used against them later.

Last, post-9-11 I don't think we want terrorists carrying these things around and taking a couple of pot shots at a jet engine or a fuel tank while aboard.

Or, I guess I could adopt your argument tact: Are you a pro-terrorist homo? Are ya, hrrrrrrrrrrrrr?


That’s not a real gun, is it Clark?
Are you kidding? This is a Magnum P.I.

ROFL

banyon
03-06-2008, 01:07 PM
OK so none of you can actually point to anything when it comes to liberal anti gun legislation and the 2nd amendment? I was right about the tiny brain piece...

You guys have absolutely nothing to offer up in the way of discussions what so ever - you cant address gun laws or the 2nd amendment - instead you flounder around attempting to beat your chest - again the weakest group of liberals I have come across yet

Back on topic. Please bear in mind that I am in the process of applying for my CCH permit, so I may not fit whatever caricature/sterotype that you were trying to fit me into.

but i guess the question comes down to: should there be ANY limitations on the ability of individuals to own weapons? Should I be able to go down to the pawn shop and by a rocket launcher?

My reasons are the same for opposing this weapon as they would be for an RPG or Rocket Launcher. It's a legitimate public safety/law enforcement concern, and the guns don't really serve any legitimate purpose necessary for defending yourself or your home that a rifle, shotgun, or handgun wouldn't accomplish.

banyon
03-06-2008, 01:08 PM
LOL no I would rather hang out here and point out the inadequacies and hypocrites...

Funny when someone gets called out for not understanding the facts they say - I dont have time for this today - which really means I cant contribute in any way

I'm employed, sorry about not replying to you instantly.

Taco John
03-06-2008, 01:22 PM
Should I be able to go down to the pawn shop and by a rocket launcher?



Are you part of a "well regulated militia?"

If so, why not?

banyon
03-06-2008, 01:23 PM
Are you part of a "well regulated militia?"

If so, why not?

According to the Dodge City code, yes I am.

Cochise
03-06-2008, 01:34 PM
Back on topic. Please bear in mind that I am in the process of applying for my CCH permit, so I may not fit whatever caricature/sterotype that you were trying to fit me into.

but i guess the question comes down to: should there be ANY limitations on the ability of individuals to own weapons? Should I be able to go down to the pawn shop and by a rocket launcher?

My reasons are the same for opposing this weapon as they would be for an RPG or Rocket Launcher. It's a legitimate public safety/law enforcement concern, and the guns don't really serve any legitimate purpose necessary for defending yourself or your home that a rifle, shotgun, or handgun wouldn't accomplish.

Why do we always need to use this canard of average people being able to buy rocket launchers or tanks or whatever?

It's just about as dumb as the 'you don't need an uzi to hunt deer' one.

banyon
03-06-2008, 01:39 PM
Why do we always need to use this canard of average people being able to buy rocket launchers or tanks or whatever?

It's just about as dumb as the 'you don't need an uzi to hunt deer' one.

Well, there are weapons in between like assault weapons, fully auto's etc., but can you idenitfy a legitimately needed use of the tiny gun other than to evade law enforcement?

MurphDog
03-06-2008, 01:41 PM
Back on topic. Please bear in mind that I am in the process of applying for my CCH permit, so I may not fit whatever caricature/sterotype that you were trying to fit me into.

but i guess the question comes down to: should there be ANY limitations on the ability of individuals to own weapons? Should I be able to go down to the pawn shop and by a rocket launcher?

My reasons are the same for opposing this weapon as they would be for an RPG or Rocket Launcher. It's a legitimate public safety/law enforcement concern, and the guns don't really serve any legitimate purpose necessary for defending yourself or your home that a rifle, shotgun, or handgun wouldn't accomplish.

Hell buy an AH1 Abrams while your at it - if you want to try and draw ridiculous comparisons then it proves no point whats so ever. I doubt you seriously are applying for a conceal permit as these must people are ardent gun supporters and dont draw ludicrous comparisons such as yours.

Radar Chief
03-06-2008, 01:42 PM
It’s a BB gun!
Don’t tempt me. I could poke your eye out with this thing.
You couldn’t break the skin with that thing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkqaSd0O8Pc&feature=related

If the hint isn’t sinking in, I don’t see this thing as a threat to anyone other than gadget geeks with too much available credit in their high rate card.

Cochise
03-06-2008, 01:45 PM
Well, there are weapons in between like assault weapons, fully auto's etc., but can you idenitfy a legitimately needed use of the tiny gun other than to evade law enforcement?

No. They should all have hubcaps attached to them, like the key to a gas station bathroom.

Radar Chief
03-06-2008, 01:46 PM
Well, there are weapons in between like assault weapons, fully auto's etc., but can you idenitfy a legitimately needed use of the tiny gun other than to evade law enforcement?

Dude, this little thing is a toy.
It is not any more of a danger to police than a bb gun.
Seriously.

Radar Chief
03-06-2008, 01:47 PM
Hell buy an AH1 Abrams while your at it - if you want to try and draw ridiculous comparisons then it proves no point whats so ever. I doubt you seriously are applying for a conceal permit as these must people are ardent gun supporters and dont draw ludicrous comparisons such as yours.

Yes he has applied for a CCL.
You may disagree with banyon’s opinions, but he is NOT a liar.

MurphDog
03-06-2008, 01:52 PM
http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii31/LakeAnna/huntingforliberals.gif

a1na2
03-06-2008, 02:03 PM
Dude, this little thing is a toy.
It is not any more of a danger to police than a bb gun.
Seriously.

But banyon wants to know what a terrorist would do with one on an airliner! Fire it into the jet engine or into the fuel tanks.

With the limited velocity it is highly unlikely that it would be able to penetrate the "tube" that is the passenger compartment, let alone get through the engine cowling, even a pellet that small wouldn't even be too much of a risk for the impeller/compressor. But banyon has that fear.