Gun two f-AR

Phill Ewinn

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/01/foghorn/gilboas-double-barreled-ar-15-makes-american-debut/


'Murica has made the rootenest tootenest gun any 10 year old boy could want. A double barrel, home defence toy.

AR-15s have a bad rap already don't they? Well. Here's a solution, weld two of them together!

A gun two fAR?

I think so

darkpagandeath

Yes because you need an AR-15 for home defence ...........

MadsL

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Yes because you need an AR-15 for home defence ...........

Even though that has been explained to you, oh like a hundred times now, you persist in playing that tune on your whistle.

darkpagandeath

MadsL wrote: »

Even though that has been explained to you, oh like a hundred times now, you persist in playing that tune on your whistle.

Err think I have only ever made 2/3 comments ever on here about guns, Why is a 9 mm or any gun not enough how many burglars use AR-15s to break into houses. Are they not a bit large and cumbersome easy to spot on the street ?

MadsL

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Err think I have only ever made 2/3 comments ever on here about guns, Why is a 9 mm or any gun not enough how many burglars use AR-15s to break into houses. Are they not a bit large and cumbersome easy to spot on the street ?

http://www.boards.ie/search/submit/?query=gun&forum=&user=62849&date_from=&date_to=
Sure about that 2/3 commets figure?

An AR-15 is simply a rifle. This may easily be the most appropriate home defence weapon for a slender woman with weakish wrists or weak hands - My nephew's girlfriend cannot manage the trigger pull on a large revolver for instance and the recoil on a shotgun would probably knock her over.

Who said anything about burglers carrying AR-15s??

Once again more silly nonsense from posters who know nothing about firearms. Oh, and OP this gun was made by Israelis not Americans.

darkpagandeath

MadsL wrote: »

An AR-15 is simply a rifle. This may easily be the most appropriate home defence weapon for a slender woman with weakish wrists or weak hands - My nephew's girlfriend cannot manage the trigger pull on a large revolver for instance and the recoil on a shotgun would probably knock her over.

Who said anything about burglers carrying AR-15s??

Once again more silly nonsense from posters who know nothing about firearms. Oh, and OP this gun was made by Israelis not Americans.

That has been used in a lot of high profile mass murders ? I made a point about the burglars as you don't need a weapon that big to defend a simple private home.. Unless you live in Precinct 13

Edit

In threads specifically about guns ? I'm not anti gun

MadsL

darkpagandeath wrote: »

That has been used in a lot of high profile mass murders ? I made a point about the burglars as you don't need a weapon that big to defend a simple private home.. Unless you live in Precinct 13

Edit

In threads specifically about guns ? I'm not anti gun

Big?

What do you object to...its caliber, physical size or the hole it puts in you?

If caliber: well it's usually 5.56mm compared to the 9mm you advocated earlier. Which is "bigger"

If physical size, you have lost me there...what is your objection to the size of a gun? A shotgun would be "bigger".

If the hole it puts in you, a shotgun slug would be far "bigger"


Or perhaps you actually just know nothing about firearms? And did you just miss my point about some women not being physically capable of handling a shotgun or large handgun.

Phill Ewinn

Gilboa is going into full production right here in the United States to

MadsL wrote: »

http://www.boards.ie/search/submit/?query=gun&forum=&user=62849&date_from=&date_to=
Sure about that 2/3 commets figure?

An AR-15 is simply a rifle. This may easily be the most appropriate home defence weapon for a slender woman with weakish wrists or weak hands - My nephew's girlfriend cannot manage the trigger pull on a large revolver for instance and the recoil on a shotgun would probably knock her over.

Who said anything about burglers carrying AR-15s??

Once again more silly nonsense from posters who know nothing about firearms. Oh, and OP this gun was made by Israelis not Americans.

"Gilboa is going into full production right here in the United States "

I expect the home defence market is bigger than the killing children market abroad like.

Seems OTT. It's like putting cartoon characters on cigarette boxes. I mean srsly! It's a gimmick to sell guns to the next generation. A poster boy for fire arms.


Is O'Bama gonna have Popeye smoke maryjoanna instead of eatin spinach next?

StinkyMunkey

I'm sure it's just a novelty item, sounds a little to impractical tbh.

MadsL

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

Gilboa is going into full production right here in the United States to

"Gilboa is going into full production right here in the United States "

I expect the home defence market is bigger than the killing children market abroad like.

Seems OTT. It's like putting cartoon characters on cigarette boxes. I mean srsly! It's a gimmick to sell guns to the next generation. A poster boy for fire arms.


Is O'Bama gonna have Popeye smoke maryjoanna instead of eatin spinach next?

You are so 'edgy'. Wow.

Bit of duct tape - same result. They are making this gun for the same reason VW come up with loony concept cars.

darkpagandeath

MadsL wrote: »

Big?

What do you object to...its caliber, physical size or the hole it puts in you?

If caliber: well it's usually 5.56mm compared to the 9mm you advocated earlier. Which is "bigger"

If physical size, you have lost me there...what is your objection to the size of a gun? A shotgun would be "bigger".

If the hole it puts in you, a shotgun slug would be far "bigger"


Or perhaps you actually just know nothing about firearms? Or did you just mis my point about some women not being physically capable of handling a shotgun or large handgun.

That seems like rational thinking with your family in the house.. Don't most people think on the lines of how much penetration the bullet has unless you live in a bunker and can guarantee you wont hit anyone upstairs for example. As i doubt having a shootout in your living room is the same as firing on the Range

MadsL

darkpagandeath wrote: »

That seems like rational thinking with your family in the house.. Don't most people think on the lines of how much penetration the bullet has unless you live in a bunker and can guarantee you wont hit anyone upstairs for example. As i doubt having a shootout in your living room is the same as firing on the Range

Oh now you are mentioning penetration, having failed to really understand "bigger" in terms of guns. Too funny.

Next you will be talking about how "bad" "dum-dums" are.

I don't have an AR-15 for home defence purposes, so I'm not sure what that is about, however if a women alone in a detached house was asking for a recommendation...

you however seem to fall into the "evil AR-15 bad black gun" category, despite claiming to be not "anti-gun" - instead I guess you feel only men and strong women should have the option to defend their home.

aaronjumper

The logical next step.

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Film/Pix/pictures/2008/11/04/spirit460.jpg

stevenmu

A lot of people just hate assault rifles, and I can understand that, I mean no one likes being assaulted, especially by a rifle.

They should make defense rifles instead, everyone likes being well defended.

darkpagandeath

MadsL wrote: »

Oh now you are mentioning penetration, having failed to really understand "bigger" in terms of guns. Too funny.

Next you will be talking about how "bad" "dum-dums" are.

I don't have an AR-15 for home defence purposes, so I'm not sure what that is about, however if a women alone in a detached house was asking for a recommendation...

you however seem to fall into the "evil AR-15 bad black gun" category, despite claiming to be not "anti-gun" - instead I guess you feel only men and strong women should have the option to defend their home.

How many people would be using correct ammunition for firing inside a home ? How many would be assuming the guy breaking in was wearing body armour ? As I said a simple hand gun should suffice. Your making it out that women are trying to fire Colt 45 or desert eagle inside... I just think its a bit pointless and dangerous using an AR-15 inside a family home.

Phill Ewinn

MadsL wrote: »

You are so 'edgy'. Wow.

Bit of duct tape - same result. They are making this gun for the same reason VW come up with loony concept cars.

People are going to buy them. Unlike "concept" cars. And cars don't shoot you in the facel

MadsL

darkpagandeath wrote: »

How many people would be using correct ammunition for firing inside a home ? How many would be assuming the guy breaking in was wearing body armour ? As I said a simple hand gun should suffice. Your making it out that women are trying to fire Colt 45 or desert eagle inside... I just think its a bit pointless and dangerous using an AR-15 inside a family home.

What is correct ammunition according to you?

What gun would recommend for a women who could not accurately fire a heavy pistol or manage the recoil from a shotgun?

Why do you feel a light, mobile and importantly accurate rifle is a "pointless and dangerous" item?

I'll await your wealth of firearms expertise to justify denying women (or anyone else) this self-defence tool.

MadsL

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

People are going to buy them. And cars don't shoot you in the face

Yes, guns spontaneously become self aware and shoot you in the face when equipped with more than one barrel. Countless farmers and birders will attest to this. :rolleyes:

darkpagandeath

MadsL wrote: »

What is correct ammunition according to you?

What gun would recommend for a women who could not accurately fire a heavy pistol or manage the recoil from a shotgun?

Why do you feel a light, mobile and importantly accurate rifle is a "pointless and dangerous" item?

I'll await your wealth of firearms expertise to justify denying women (or anyone else) this self-defence tool.

Then why is the 16 version used in the US Army ? Penetration over range and stopping power are considerations there ? Why does it have to be a heavy pistol ? What about a glock or similar

Nodin

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/01/foghorn/gilboas-double-barreled-ar-15-makes-american-debut/


'Murica has made the rootenest tootenest gun any 10 year old boy could want. A double barrel, home defence toy.

AR-15s have a bad rap already don't they? Well. Here's a solution, weld two of them together!

A gun two fAR?

I think so

Absolutely. They are of surly disposition, given to criminality and imbibing all manner of narcotics to excess.

MadsL

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Then why is the 16 version used in the US Army ? Penetration over range and stopping power are considerations there ? Why does it have to be a heavy pistol ? What about a glock or similar

How about you let the people who have to fire the thing worry about it, and you stop fretting your head about the "big" scary black gun.

A women alone five miles from her nearest neighbour has no fears about holes in her drywall after all.

Nodin

MadsL wrote: »

How about you let the people who have to fire the thing worry about it, and you stop fretting your head about the "big" scary black gun.

A women alone five miles from her nearest neighbour has no fears about holes in her drywall after all.

....its not black is it......I mean I've nothing against them, but I wouldn't want one living next to me....you know what they get like with a few rounds in them....

MadsL

Nodin wrote: »

....its not black is it.......

Relax, they also come in pink.

Let the innuendo commence....

darkpagandeath

MadsL wrote: »

How about you let the people who have to fire the thing worry about it, and you stop fretting your head about the "big" scary black gun.

A women alone five miles from her nearest neighbour has no fears about holes in her drywall after all.

Fair enough

But if that was the case that only women in the sticks were buying them not a lot would be being sold. Seems more than this specific group of people are purchasing them. So if i did live in the USA i would be rightly concerned that my next door neighbour had access to one.

Nodin

MadsL wrote: »

Relax, they also come in pink.

Let the innuendo commence....

...two pink ones, side by side.....it makes a mockery of traditional double barrelry!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

biko

Pew pew you're dead!

Pew, no you're dead!

No, you!

No, you!

...ad infinitum...

Witcher

A lot of soldiers complain about the lack of penetration offered by the 5.56 and that's even loaded hotter than the .223 ammo most people would be using. Cases from Afghanistan where it wouldn't penetrate the internal structures of a house during a firefight, it even lacks knockdown power. Read a case online where an insurgent was shot several times with a 5.56 in the torso and walked into a US base several hours later saying 'You shot me'.

People think a round of ammuntion is like a nuclear bomb or something. A knot in a tree with deflect a bullet. Another one you hear is that a shotgun will take out a massive part of a wall when fired..when you hear that you know the person has never fired one.

MadsL

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Fair enough

But if that was the case that only women in the sticks were buying them not a lot would be being sold. Seems more than this specific group of people are purchasing them. So if i did live in the USA i would be rightly concerned that my next door neighbour had access to one.

I'd be more than reassured if I had call to scream for help if my neighbour was as equipped as this...

Since you legally have to answer for your actions with any firearm, as I said why not let those who own them decide on what they do with them. No need to be fretting, especially when you know so little about firearms.

Vincent Vega

I have never really understood how releasing a wider range of guns into the hands of a wider range of people could ever be seen as a progressive step to solving anything.

MadsL

Vincent Vega wrote: »

I have never really understood how releasing a wider range of guns into the hands of a wider range of people could ever be seen as a progressive step to solving anything.

Restricting access to guns is really working in Ireland isn't it? There are no burglaries or shootings at all.

Gatling

Blay wrote: »

A lot of soldiers complain about the lack of penetration offered by the 5.56 and that's even loaded hotter than the .223 ammo most people would be using. Cases from Afghanistan where it wouldn't penetrate the internal structures of a house during a firefight, it even lacks knockdown power. Read a case online where an insurgent was shot several times with a 5.56 in the torso and walked into a US base several hours later saying 'You shot me'.

People think a round of ammuntion is like a nuclear bomb or something. A knot in a tree with deflect a bullet.

Seen mud walls in Afghanistan withstand 30mm rounds from an apache ,left nothing more than splash marks

The Gilboa isn't even American it was designed and developed in Isreal ,

Vincent Vega

MadsL wrote: »

Restricting access to guns is really working in Ireland isn't it? There are no burglaries or shootings at all.

So, obviously the best way for us to reduce both of these things would be to add more fuel to the fire?

I think people are simply too irrational to handle firearms responsibly and needn't have them for the most part.

I suppose an argument could be made for a person who had one for a specific reason eg: hunting

But someone with a firearm just lying around unused for the most part is in my mind less likely to think things through logically before they went reaching for it.

MadsL

Vincent Vega wrote: »

So, obviously the best way for us to reduce both of these things would be to add more fuel to the fire?

I think people are simply too irrational to handle firearms responsibly and needn't have them for the most part.

I suppose an argument could be made for a person who had one for a specific reason eg: hunting

But someone with a firearm just lying around unused for the most part is in my mind less likely to think things through logically before they went reaching for it.

They are fortunate I suppose in living in places that determine that by entering someone else's house uninvited you can pretty much expect to have to take what the homeowner is prepared to dish out to protect themselves and their family.

Do you wish me to have sympathy for those who place themselves in that position?

Vincent Vega

MadsL wrote: »

Do you wish me to have sympathy for those who place themselves in that position?

Certainly not, I just think more should be spent on preventative measures to crime, by government and citizen, as opposed to preparing {them} to fight to the death with potential criminals.

It just creates a more aggravated overall situation and feeds into a person's paranoia, on-guardness and apprehension of having to potentially kill someone should it come down to it. Do you think it helps people feel more secure?

Also, I was in no way suggesting that it would be only in times of self defence that a person may see shooting at someone(s) as the solution to a problem.

MadsL

Vincent Vega wrote: »

Certainly not, I just think more should be spent on preventative measures to crime, by government and citizen, as opposed to preparing {them} to fight to the death with potential criminals.

It just creates a more aggravated overall situation and feeds into a person's paranoia, on-guardness and apprehension of having to potentially kill someone should it come down to it. Do you think it helps people feel more secure?

Also, I was in no way suggesting that it would be only in times of self defence that a person may see shooting at someone(s) as the solution to a problem.

You have lost me... How does a private citizen spending money on a firearm prevent Govt spending on preventative measures?

Paranoia? Do you lock your doors? Does that make you paranoid?

We have laws to prevent people seeing shooting someone unjustly as a solution to a problem. You seem to think someone having a gun turns them into a rabid "shoot first ask questions later" redneck. Over half of US homes have guns.

Also - since when does standing uninvited in your living room make someone a 'potential' criminal?

MonaPizza

darkpagandeath wrote: »

How many people would be using correct ammunition for firing inside a home ? How many would be assuming the guy breaking in was wearing body armour ? As I said a simple hand gun should suffice. Your making it out that women are trying to fire Colt 45 or desert eagle inside... I just think its a bit pointless and dangerous using an AR-15 inside a family home.

I'd be interested to know what the statistics are for home robberies and how many people actually get injured or killed by burglars. I'm guessing it's fairly low. Don't most breakins occur when the home occupier is actually out?
But regardless of the low chances of a violent intruder killing you Americans are the most scared people on earth so having a cannon in the home to defend against a practically non-existent threat goes someway to ease their insecurities.

Skylinehead

MadsL wrote: »

Restricting access to guns is really working in Ireland isn't it?

I would say yes. Are you suggesting that deregulating guns in Ireland would solve, rather than cause, problems? Ireland and the USA are completely different countries in this regard, I can see why the States "needs" guns because there's so many of them about as it is, but Ireland's not like that at all.

Gatling

Skylinehead wrote: »

I would say yes. Are you suggesting that deregulating guns in Ireland would solve, rather than cause, problems? Ireland and the USA are completely different countries in this regard, I can see why the States "needs" guns because there's so many of them about as it is, but Ireland's not like that at all.

There's rougly 200,000 + legally held firearms here ,
Not bad for a population of 4.2 million people

MadsL

MonaPizza wrote: »

I'd be interested to know what the statistics are for home robberies and how many people actually get injured or killed by burglars. I'm guessing it's fairly low. Don't most breakins occur when the home occupier is actually out?
But regardless of the low chances of a violent intruder killing you Americans are the most scared people on earth so having a cannon in the home to defend against a practically non-existent threat goes someway to ease their insecurities.

Go live in Detroit and report back...

I guess that the 250,000+ injuries a year are "practically nonexistant".

A household member was present in roughly 1 million burglaries
and became victims of violent crimes in 266,560 burglaries.

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/vdhb.pdf

I guess such statistics mean nothing to you.

MonaPizza

MadsL wrote: »

I'd be more than reassured if I had call to scream for help if my neighbour was as equipped as this...

Since you legally have to answer for your actions with any firearm, as I said why not let those who own them decide on what they do with them. No need to be fretting, especially when you know so little about firearms.

How many times are you going to sneeringly mock someone over their perceived lack of knowledge and experience regarding guns? Does it make you feel superior? Do you think people are supposed to be impressed that you yourself own a few pop guns? Because it's getting tedious.

MadsL

Skylinehead wrote: »

I would say yes. Are you suggesting that deregulating guns in Ireland would solve, rather than cause, problems? Ireland and the USA are completely different countries in this regard, I can see why the States "needs" guns because there's so many of them about as it is, but Ireland's not like that at all.

Would allowing rural dwellers firearms for home defence protection encourage or discourage burglaries would you say?

Skylinehead

Gatling wrote: »

There's rougly 200,000 + legally held firearms here ,
Not bad for a population of 4.2 million people

Yes, but not on the scale of the States. And I don't see a real need for more guns here.

MadsL wrote: »

Would allowing rural dwellers firearms for home defence protection encourage or discourage burglaries would you say?

It could possibly discourage them, but it would also create more problems.

I'd appreciate it if you'd answer my question with an answer next time instead of a question.

MadsL

MonaPizza wrote: »

How many times are you going to sneeringly mock someone over their perceived lack of knowledge and experience regarding guns? Does it make you feel superior? Do you think people are supposed to be impressed that you yourself own a few pop guns? Because it's getting tedious.

Not nearly as tedious as the same old ill-informed nonsense that always makes an appearance in gun threads, laced with a little casual racism, from people such as yourself determined to paint the US as some form of lesser intelligence.

Your silly caricatures are very tedious indeed.

darkpagandeath

MadsL wrote: »

Would allowing rural dwellers firearms for home defence protection encourage or discourage burglaries would you say?

Don't most farmers here already have a gun of some kind already ? for hunting or dealing with vermin.

MadsL

Skylinehead wrote: »

It could possibly discourage them, but it would also create more problems.

What problems?

I'd appreciate it if you'd answer my question with an answer next time instead of a question.

I think my answer was clear, even in the form of a question.

Rural ownership would discourage rural burglaries.

Witcher

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Don't most farmers here already have a gun of some kind already ? for hunting or dealing with vermin.

Not all rural dwellers are farmers.

MadsL

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Don't most farmers here already have a gun of some kind already ? for hunting or dealing with vermin.

Many do. They have to pretend it is not for defence.

MonaPizza

MadsL wrote: »

Go live in Detroit and report back...

I guess that the 250,000+ injuries a year are "practically nonexistant".



http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/vdhb.pdf

I guess such statistics mean nothing to you.

Lighten the fcuk up with the sneers. I'm aware that ghettos like Detroit, Camden, Trenton etc are ravaged with crime. I am also aware that idiots who live in gated communities in Boca Raton or Palm Springs are also armed to the teeth yet the only threat of crime they'll ever face is the rich kid across the street peeling out in his corvette in front of their driveway.

MadsL

MonaPizza wrote: »

Lighten the fcuk up with the sneers. I'm aware that ghettos like Detroit, Camden, Trenton etc are ravaged with crime. I am also aware that idiots who live in gated communities in Boca Raton or Palm Springs are also armed to the teeth yet the only threat of crime they'll ever face is the rich kid across the street peeling out in his corvette in front of their driveway.

Please take your anti-American stereotypes back to US Politics or CT, I'm quite aware of your views. There is no need to be calling Americans idiots to make yourself feel intellectually superior.

Menas

MadsL wrote: »

Please take your anti-American stereotypes back to US Politics or CT, I'm quite aware of your views. There is no need to be calling Americans idiots to make yourself feel intellectually superior.

But you are the one who is doing the sneering in here?

Riddle101

It does seem impractical to me. A regular AR-15 is good enough of a weapon to have. Why a Double Barreled one?