The psychology of the bully
in [Slackware]
|
Prev: where is zmodem?
Next: props to the slack developers
From: Floyd L. Davidson on 15 May 2007 22:34 rm(a)biteme.org wrote: >Two Ravens <two-ravens(a)operamail.com> wrote: >> rm(a)biteme.org wrote: >> >>> But all of these guns are much, much, more powerful than a .22. > >> That depends on what you are referring to as a '.22' as it >> includes not only the rimfire cartridges but all the centrefire >> so-called .22's as well the 220 swift is still a '.22' as are the >> 222's, if you mean .22 rimfire then say so, as there are several >> varieties of that alone. The fact > >No. A ".22" refers to a rimfire, not a centerfire. Centerfire >cartridges are huge compared to the .22. You are an idiot. A 22 caliber is a 22 caliber, whether it is rimfire or centerfire. Specifying ".22" or "22 caliber" does not indicate a rimfire any more than it indicates a centerfire. >> remains as Floyd has pointed out, that an awful lot of meat gets >> taken with former military calibres because there are a lot of >> rifles in those calibres about, .303 and 7 x 57mm being quite >> common and even those cartridges are known by a number of >> different nomenclatures .275 Rigby for example. > >Again, a .223 is _not_ a .22 and anyone who thinks so is being >disengenuous. A .223 *is* a .22, idiot. >> Bullet placement and deformation within the wound channel are the >> two most significant factors in choosing a suitable calibre for >> any given quarry. > >?!? What does that have to do with anything? If you took a shot at >a bear with a .22 you would have to be very lucky and shoot it in >the eye or the throat. Even then it would probably kill you. But a >.223 has 50% more power, enough to go through thick bone. You are spouting nonsense. Lots of bears have been killed with 22 caliber weapons. It happens often simply because often enough that is the only weapon available. Fools like you need a howitizer to be sure, but people who know how to shoot don't. -- Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson> Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd(a)apaflo.com
From: Dan C on 15 May 2007 22:44 On Tue, 15 May 2007 18:34:20 -0800, Floyd L. Davidson wrote: >>Again, a .223 is _not_ a .22 and anyone who thinks so is being >>disengenuous. > A .223 *is* a .22, idiot. No, it isn't. It's a .223. It may be a *.22 caliber*, but it's not a *.22*. For all intents and purposes, the term ".22" refers to the .22LR cartridge, and anyone with any knowledge of firearms knows it. You're both idiots, BTW. -- "Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".
From: Floyd L. Davidson on 16 May 2007 00:21 Dan C <youmustbejoking(a)lan.invalid> wrote: >On Tue, 15 May 2007 18:34:20 -0800, Floyd L. Davidson wrote: > >>>Again, a .223 is _not_ a .22 and anyone who thinks so is being >>>disengenuous. > >> A .223 *is* a .22, idiot. > >No, it isn't. It's a .223. It may be a *.22 caliber*, but it's not a >*.22*. For all intents and purposes, the term ".22" refers to the .22LR >cartridge, and anyone with any knowledge of firearms knows it. Let me reinsert a part that you trimmed, because it applies to you as well as the other idiot, "*You* *are* *an* *idiot*. A 22 caliber is a 22 caliber, whether it is rimfire or centerfire. Specifying ".22" or "22 caliber" does not indicate a rimfire any more than it indicates a centerfire." [New emphasis added.] There are at least a dozen or so centerfire .22 varieties that are referred to as a ".22" *most* of the time. .22 Hornet, 22 WRF, .22 Reed Express, .22 Remington Jet, and .22 Jet are all examples. All of the others previously mentioned (.22-250, .223, etc) are *commonly* referred to as ".22s". In addition, rimfire 22's come in Short, Long, and Longrifle, so even there claiming that ".22" refers only to the .22 Long Rifle is wrong. Oh, there are even airguns that a 22's. >You're both idiots, BTW. How would you know. -- Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson> Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd(a)apaflo.com
From: notbob on 16 May 2007 01:03 On 2007-05-15, rm(a)biteme.org <rm(a)biteme.org> wrote: > If you actually had a gun you would have blown your brains out a > long time ago. At least it would take a gun. All you put together couldn't scrape up enough brains to need more than a gnat fart to blow the slate clean. > Oh. You mean the .22 rimfire can be used in place of a .223 in the > same gun...... Yep. Same gun, different chamber. Done all the time. I don't know anyone making one that will shoot a .223 Remington centerfire and a ..22LR rimfire, but it's possible. In fact, there already are guns that will shoot at least 3 of the twenty-two cartridges that have been mentioned from the same chamber. This has been done with other size cartridges, also. If you actually knew anything at all about guns, you'd know this. But, you don't. nb
From: Beej Jorgensen on 16 May 2007 01:09
Floyd L. Davidson <floyd(a)apaflo.com> wrote: >Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd(a)apaflo.com Is this where you are? What do you do up there? -Beej, always wondered about that place |