I hate MSNBC

[predator20]

What a dumb "c u next tuesday".

Even if you could make a gun completely out of plastic. (Plastic barrel yeah I really doubt it) What about the ammunition?

The 30 rd mag may or may not have made a difference out all. Had he only been working with 10 or 15 rounders. He could have worked on faster reloading, or counted the number of rounds he had, left one in the chamber when needing to reload then used it when someone tried to stop him.

The assault weapon and magazine ban is dead because they tried it for 10 years and it didn't make a bit of difference.

[Evil Tim]

Originally Posted by predator20

Even if you could make a gun completely out of plastic. (Plastic barrel yeah I really doubt it) What about the ammunition?

With modern materials (ceramics, carbon fibre, polymers, etc; they usually mean "non-metal" when they say "plastic") you could make a gun that contained no major metal components, though I doubt it would be very hard-wearing. I've heard of ceramic bullet casings, and you can certainly make the bullet itself from them. The big problem would be the springs; AFAIK the only non-metal that's suitable is carbon fullerines at $35,000 per pound, and I really don't think that's within the price range of the average terrorist.

Nevermind that terrorists tend more towards blowing up places with metal detectors than shooting them up anyway, or that sneaking past a metal detector isn't really something you'd care about if you just want to kill lots of people. I assume Cheney just didn't feel like explaining that he voted against it because it banned no weapons that actually existed at the time.

Originally Posted by predator20

The 30 rd mag may or may not have made a difference out all.

I believe a panel concluded it didn't. Apart from anything else, he could have just carried another loaded gun and had 30 rounds on tap before he reloaded without needing a 30-round magazine.

One of the ones that really got me was the idea that 7.62mm (NATO, I guess) is an antiaircraft gun round. What are we shooting at here, the Hindenberg?

[predator20]

Originally Posted by Evil Tim

I believe a panel concluded it didn't. Apart from anything else, he could have just carried another loaded gun and had 30 rounds on tap before he reloaded without needing a 30-round magazine.

One of the ones that really got me was the idea that 7.62mm (NATO, I guess) is an antiaircraft gun round. What are we shooting at here, the Hindenberg?

New York reload I forgot all about that.

7.62 I didn't get that either, I think they were just throwing shit out there and non-gun owners wouldn't know the difference.

[Gunmaster45]

Originally Posted by Evil Tim

With modern materials (ceramics, carbon fibre, polymers, etc; they usually mean "non-metal" when they say "plastic") you could make a gun that contained no major metal components, though I doubt it would be very hard-wearing. I've heard of ceramic bullet casings, and you can certainly make the bullet itself from them. The big problem would be the springs; AFAIK the only non-metal that's suitable is carbon fullerines at $35,000 per pound, and I really don't think that's within the price range of the average terrorist.

Nevermind that terrorists tend more towards blowing up places with metal detectors than shooting them up anyway, or that sneaking past a metal detector isn't really something you'd care about if you just want to kill lots of people. I assume Cheney just didn't feel like explaining that he voted against it because it banned no weapons that actually existed at the time.



I believe a panel concluded it didn't. Apart from anything else, he could have just carried another loaded gun and had 30 rounds on tap before he reloaded without needing a 30-round magazine.

One of the ones that really got me was the idea that 7.62mm (NATO, I guess) is an antiaircraft gun round. What are we shooting at here, the Hindenberg?

Even if you did manage to make a pistol completely out of non-metal parts, the iconic gun shape would still be visible through an X-ray monitor, unless you kept it in a lead box or something, which they would check into if you did.

The only weapon I've seen that seems quite dangerous to getting past security are the ceramic or hard plastic daggers that can be hidden inside a comb or brush. Companies like Cold Steel make them, and for less than $20, I wouldn't be surprised if someone tried slipping one by. Does anyone know if securities have a method that works better to prevent that?

[k9870]

x rays show outline of objects, even ceramics. The only thing they fool is metal detectors, not scanners.

[MoviePropMaster2008]

Dammit AdAstra! With this forum post alone, you've DOUBLE MSNBC's viewership!!!! Stop that!!!! They might start thinking they're relevant!

[funkychinaman]

Seeing this makes me sad. I mean, I still can't believe Tim Russert is gone.

So she's angry that there's not enough knee-jerk liberal outrage in the country? So typically MSNBC.

[AdAstra2009]

Originally Posted by predator20

The 30 rd mag may or may not have made a difference out all. Had he only been working with 10 or 15 rounders. He could have worked on faster reloading, or counted the number of rounds he had, left one in the chamber when needing to reload then used it when someone tried to stop him.

If they want to play the "high capacity magazine killing machine" card then I can easily come up with a laundry list of killings that were not.

[Jcordell]

MSNBC has been a liberal mouthpiece since it first started broadcasting. Business as usual.

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

Right, our Second amendment rights don't allow us to own Anti Aircraft guns....