Shoot The Breeze 3.0

[CF]

Wait you dry fire your guns???? That’s just practicing for murder!!!! Don’t let the courts hear about that…. You don’t live in a red flag state do you? ?

What he does with his gun in private is none of your business!

 

[Peter Gibbons]

Wait you dry fire your guns???? That’s just practicing for murder!!!! Don’t let the courts hear about that…. You don’t live in a red flag state do you? ?

Bruh whats a red flag? Is that a carry permit? I don't need one of those here!

Ammo be expensive these days gotta practice that draw and trigger press somehow.

 

[Mr.Tickles]

I’d put money on that blanks and live rounds were sitting in one consolidated ammo point location. Probably right next to each other.

 

[Mike Kilo]

Bruh whats a red flag? Is that a carry permit? I don't need one of those here!

Ammo be expensive these days gotta practice that draw and trigger press somehow.

Nah it’s for red flag laws where someone says they are scurred and all your firearms are confiscated and you get to spend thousands of dollars and all your free time trying to get you property and rights back!

 

[Tuco_Benidito]

She’s not gonna fuck you bro relax

At least I have one thing going for me.....

 

[Peter Gibbons]

I’d put money on that blanks and live rounds were sitting in one consolidated ammo point location. Probably right next to each other.

I mean whomst among us doesn't have a random shoebox of odds and ends ammo we reach into and load at random?

At least I have one thing going for me.....

My dude it's okay if you wanna clap those geriatric cheeks this is 2021 and you are in a no judgement zone.

Just put that lady gaga on, throw on your finest assless chaps and be your own true self.

 

[Tuco_Benidito]

My dude it's okay if you wanna clap those geriatric cheeks this is 2021 and you are in a no judgement zone.

Just put that lady gaga on, throw on your finest assless chaps and be your own true self.

I bet you look just like Peter Gibbons!

 

[Termine]

guns aren't the death machines they think they are

Um.

What?

Is not the entire point of a gun to cause the death of some creature at a farther distance (and/or with more ease) than you would be capable of if you didn't have it?

You can say "Guns can be used for non-killing purposes, like skeet shooting or range practice" but that doesn't change the fact that the point of a gun is literally "to be a death machine." Contrast this with cars, for example, which can also be deadly—but the point of a car is "to transport things" and not "to kill things."

 

[pedaNTIc]

That concept of never having to qualify again, much less going to the field or doing any kind of training exercises is mind blowing haha.

You're supposed to do it every 3 years I think.

I shot 4 times in 8 years in the AF. M-16 at Basic, Combat Arms lost my records so I had to go do it again once I finished tech school. Then I cross-trained to an aircrew AFSC (MOS) and had to do the M-9, then again in cycle 3 years later. But it's not a meaningful/useful amount, it was 60 rounds every 3 years.

The AFSCs that need to be more proficient are, and get more range time/ammo. SecFo, PJ, CCT, and Civil Engineering has a security augmentee mission so they might too. But that's it.

 

[Peter Gibbons]

Um.

What?

Is not the entire point of a gun to cause the death of some creature at a farther distance (and/or with more ease) than you would be capable of if you didn't have it?

You can say "Guns can be used for non-killing purposes, like skeet shooting or range practice" but that doesn't change the fact that the point of a gun is literally "to be a death machine." Contrast this with cars, for example, which can also be deadly—but the point of a car is "to transport things" and not "to kill things."

I'm gonna call semantics on this one because sure, you are correct, but that's not the point I was making. The point I was making is firearms can be owned and used responsibly without it just.....ya know killing someone by itself, because that doesn't happen, as much as some seem to think is the case.

Takes an irresponsible or intentionally malicious act for a gun to become a killing machine, and at that point is it so much different than a knife? I mean a KABAR is quite literally a fighting knife. It's express purpose is for killing people. It doesn't do so without someone using it for that instead of opening Amazon boxes. If I cut myself because I was cutting towards myself, or I don't keep a form grip and it flies out of my hand and cuts someone, is it the knifes fault for being a fighting knife or mine for handling it irresponsibly?

 

[Homsar]

At the end of the day, don’t point and pull the trigger of any firearm, real or fake, at someone if you aren’t meaning to harm them

I’m of this opinion too. Despite armorers on a set, the onus should be on anyone holding a gun, actor or not, to be familiar with gun handling and gun safety before they’re pointing one at someone and pulling a trigger. The fact that Baldwin is an anti-gun fuckhead who probably never bothered to learn anything about gun safety, and fights against groups trying to promote gun safety, makes this 10x worse. He shares the blame, because he chose to not have a safety check with a machine that can cause death. “I’m just doing my job” isn’t an excuse most of the time, and it isn’t here.

Um.

What?

Is not the entire point of a gun to cause the death of some creature at a farther distance (and/or with more ease) than you would be capable of if you didn't have it?

You can say "Guns can be used for non-killing purposes, like skeet shooting or range practice" but that doesn't change the fact that the point of a gun is literally "to be a death machine." Contrast this with cars, for example, which can also be deadly—but the point of a car is "to transport things" and not "to kill things."

If that’s the “point” of a gun, then millions of them are being used wrong constantly. That’s like saying the “point” of a knife is to stab or cut meat/a living being, despite knives used for tons of other uses on the daily that don’t involve flesh.

The “point” of a gun is to expel a projectile at high velocity. Where that projectile goes is up to the shooter.

 

[Peter Gibbons]

I’m of this opinion too. Despite armorers on a set, the onus should be on anyone holding a gun, actor or not, to be familiar with gun handling and gun safety before they’re pointing one at someone and pulling a trigger. The fact that Baldwin is an anti-gun fuckhead who probably never bothered to learn anything about gun safety, and fights against groups trying to promote gun safety, makes this 10x worse. He shares the blame, because he chose to not have a safety check with a machine that can cause death. “I’m just doing my job” isn’t an excuse most of the time, and it isn’t here.



If that’s the “point” of a gun, then millions of them are being used wrong constantly. That’s like saying the “point” of a knife is to stab or cut meat/a living being, despite knives used for tons of other uses on the daily that don’t involve flesh.

The “point” of a gun is to expel a projectile at high velocity. Where that projectile goes is up to the shooter.

While in general I agree with your sentiments.....let's be real here. Guns we're invented to shoot a projectile at high velocity.....to kill things. Sure there's plenty of uses outside of that but that's what they were made to do from the get go.

That's like saying ugg the caveman invented the bow and arrow to throw pointy sticks very far for no real reason. Nah dude he did it to kill sabretooth cats and mammoths and shit, and engaging in obfuscation of that by playing semantics games is silly.

 

[CF]

How much of human progress has resulted from our desire to kill each other more efficiently? Lol

 

[Peter Gibbons]

How much of human progress has resulted from our desire to kill each other more efficiently? Lol

Honestly probably a good 30 to 50 percent I'd say hahaha.

 

[Homsar]

While in general I agree with your sentiments.....let's be real here. Guns we're invented to shoot a projectile at high velocity.....to kill things. Sure there's plenty of uses outside of that but that's what they were made to do from the get go.

That's like saying ugg the caveman invented the bow and arrow to throw pointy sticks very far for no real reason. Nah dude he did it to kill sabretooth cats and mammoths and shit, and engaging in obfuscation of that by playing semantics games is silly.

“Invented for” and the “point of” (in the modern context that Termine was using it in) are two different things. Like I said in the last post, knives weren’t invented to cut vegetables, but you can buy knives made in modern times of which the “point” of them is to cut vegetables, that are not very good at all for cutting meat.

Many guns are made nowadays of designs that don’t take “killing” into consideration at all, such as Olympic target rifles/pistols.

Therefore, it’s wrong to say that “the point” of guns is to kill things.

 

[Peter Gibbons]

“Invented for” and the “point of” (in the modern context that Termine was using it in) are two different things. Like I said in the last post, knives weren’t invented to cut vegetables, but you can buy knives made in modern times of which the “point” of them is to cut vegetables, that are not very good at all for cutting meat.

Many guns are made nowadays of designs that don’t take “killing” into consideration at all, such as Olympic target rifles/pistols.

Therefore, it’s wrong to say that “the point” of guns is to kill things.

The market share you are describing as "many" is a miniscule amount of the market though. You know that as well as I do. Hit me up when volquartsen is selling more custom Olympic target style 22s than Springfield sells ar15s m1as 1911s and xds etc etc.

Hell up until I think the 60/70s countries used thier standard service rifle (or some variation of it) for Olympic competition as target shooting is.....you guessed it a simulation of the martial act of shooting a firearm.

I mean shit just call a spade a spade. Guns were invented for, and most all of them are fully capable of killing, and be it a "sporting" gun for hunting, or simulation of hunting like shooting trap, or an IDPA or two gun match simulating doing cool guy action hero shit, or one of the many millions owned for defense, and practice to be competent if that ever happens the reason for throwing the projectile is mostly the same- to kill, to practice killing, or to simulate killing for competition.

 

[32andBelow]

am I supposed to not be cutting my veggies with my gun?

I still don’t understand this take about not point a Gun at people on a movie set. It’s a movie. They have to simulate a gun fight. Or in some cases have a direct view of the gun by the camera

 

[Homsar]

The market share you are describing as "many" is a miniscule amount of the market though. You know that as well as I do. Hit me up when volquartsen is selling more custom Olympic target style 22s than Springfield sells ar15s m1as 1911s and xds etc etc.

It’s not a minuscule market. .22lr isn’t a round suitable for self defense by any measure, and the only hunting application is something like prairie dogs, but even that isn’t a good caliber for them, which is why rounds like the .17HMR were invented. .22lr is marketed as a target/plinking caliber, and there are countless scaled-down models of larger firearms in that caliber designed for target shooting or plinking. It’s a gigantic facet of firearms designed solely for reasons separate than killing. Anyone who says these guns are designed to kill things is ignorant at best.

Hell up until I think the 60/70s countries used thier standard service rifle (or some variation of it) for Olympic competition as target shooting is.....you guessed it a simulation of the martial act of shooting a firearm.

I mean shit just call a spade a spade. Guns were invented for, and most all of them are fully capable of killing, and be it a "sporting" gun for hunting, or simulation of hunting like shooting trap, or an IDPA or two gun match simulating doing cool guy action hero shit, or one of the many millions owned for defense, and practice to be competent if that ever happens the reason for throwing the projectile is mostly the same- to kill, to practice killing, or to simulate killing for competition.

I love how you keep dancing around my point by using different words, ignoring what Termine and I said. Yes, guns were invented to kill. Yes, they’re fully capable of killing. Go return your straw, because i never claimed otherwise on these points. But no, in the modern context, “the point” of them, wholly, is not to kill, and saying so is just as ignorant as calling all Muslims terrorists.

Calling someone who chooses a career shooting IDPA or Olympic target shooting “simulating killing for competition” is one of the most laughably bad things you’ve said in these wonderful STB threads. That’s a talking point out of the Brady Campaign seeking to demonize a shotgun shooting clay pigeons as “murder simulations.” Good lord. Imagine claiming NASCAR is nothing other than a speeding simulation.

 

[Tuco_Benidito]

It’s not a minuscule market. .22lr isn’t a round suitable for self defense by any measure, and the only hunting application is something like prairie dogs, but even that isn’t a good caliber for them, which is why rounds like the .17HMR were invented. .22lr is marketed as a target/plinking caliber, and there are countless scaled-down models of larger firearms in that caliber designed for target shooting or plinking. It’s a gigantic facet of firearms designed solely for reasons separate than killing. Anyone who says these guns are designed to kill things is ignorant at best.




I love how you keep dancing around my point by using different words, ignoring what Termine and I said. Yes, guns were invented to kill. Yes, they’re fully capable of killing. Go return your straw, because i never claimed otherwise on these points. But no, in the modern context, “the point” of them, wholly, is not to kill, and saying so is just as ignorant as calling all Muslims terrorists.

Calling someone who chooses a career shooting IDPA or Olympic target shooting “simulating killing for competition” is one of the most laughably bad things you’ve said in these wonderful STB threads. That’s a talking point out of the Brady Campaign seeking to demonize a shotgun shooting clay pigeons as “murder simulations.” Good lord. Imagine claiming NASCAR is nothing other than a speeding simulation.

You are doing it again........you cannot use logic with these people. They cannot follow logic.

 

[CF]

You are doing it again........you cannot use logic with these people. They cannot follow logic.

Homsar knows no other way. Logic is his lifeblood.