Michael Moore is being sued!

[Target Practice]

This one is for you Army.

IPSC is the International Practical Shooting Confederation.

I observe IDPA, USPSA, and ICORE matches almost every weekend (unfortunately, I im ill-equipped to compete in them), but I have never heard of the IPSC. I was wondering if you could give me some more information.

[Konigballer]

"Yes you pointed out your unsubstantiated opinion, and it has been pointed out to you that there is historical precedence that the MORE vicious the repercussions, the less terrorism."

ugh.....Shooter JM, I'm actually going to have to...god forgive me.....agree with Collegeboy on in disagreeing with you on that point.

There is NO historical precedence that the MORE vicious the repercussions, the less terrorism.

Your statement is right out of german army's operating procedure for dealing with partisans and freedom fighters from occupied countries in World War 2. It was a methodology of basically killing "10 of them for every 1 of us". Of course this kind of ratio varied from country to country and from situation to situation. However, the use of overwhelming force and "viciousness" in reponse to any attack by unconventional forces was a german, and japanese procedure throughout the war. It doesnt work. It never has.

Of course I'm not trying to compare us to the germans or japanese. I'm just trying to illustrate how some nations have used ,notoriously ,your way of fighting unconventional forces. Bombing South Vietnam back to the stone age did not quell resistance and support for the Vietcong, it only reinforced it. You cant use an ax to do the job a knife is needed for, because inevitably there will be alot of collateral damage. That only fuels the fire.

Thankfully, we have learned from mistakes of the past and are not fighting our current conflict in such a heavy handed manner as in vietnam. However, everyone agrees that we are still too "top heavy" and lack the necessary understanding of the local culture and people to combat the terrorists effectively right now. Hopefully, that will change in the future, but I think operating with a strategy along the lines your suggesting Shooter jm, is a surefire way to get embroiled in a massive quagmire.

[ShooterJM]

Interesting, I was just referencing studies on Israili vs Palestinian terrorism. I'll see if I can find the actual study or the article about it on Slate.com. It illustrated how when Isreal adopted a pacifist stance, terrorism increased. But when extreme measures were taken, terrorism actually decreased. Removal of hope or what have you. Like I said, I'll try to find it.

[Konigballer]

If the Palestinians had a viable market economy then israels nearby presense and much greater prosperity wouldnt be such a "thorn in the side". If someone has a good job, happy family, and a cold beer to kick back and relax with:) then they have no real reason to go blow themselves up for any kind of cause, religious or otherwise, that cant provide that kind of stability to begin with.

Israel sure aint getting anywere sending missles into crowded urban areas and villages, their only fuelling the fire. You cant "one up" the fundementalist religious movements that spawn the suicide bombers by killing more civilians in the process. Thats what they want, that anger and lust for revenge is what gives them their suicide bomber volunteers. To quote Fat Bastard, "its a vicious cycle".

[spazzed]

[billybob_81067]

Originally posted by Collegeboy
I never said a plane will be taking down by Ak welding fellows. That was in the debate with another person about a terrorist shooting a 50 caliber, I said more then likly it would be a shot from an Ak 47 or 74. TO believe that I said the terrorist would shoot the AK 47 or 74, you have to believe the other guy thinks they could get a 50 caliber on. Since that is ludicrous, your belief of my statement has to be ludicrous also. My statement was made in the context of the Ak47 and 74 being the most widely used weapons of terrorist, so they would have more of a chance to get one, then a 50 caliber. Never did I say they will use this to take over a plane.

Are you so dense and thick-headed that you cannot understand what I wrote about the 50 caliber?

It states clearly in the vert first post I even mentioned it that it was in response to one of your mentally retarded thought processes. Guess what! I was being sarcastic!!!! I even used the rolleyes smiley to show that!!! Are you capable of understanding that? I have even gone on to post a second time and correct you, yet you still manage to twist the facts around to try and "favor" your pointless argument.

And here it is again for everyone to see how utterly ignorant you are being...

originally posted by Collegeboy

Now the whole article is one sided in a way, like I said, will one bullet bring down a plane, probably not, but when will there ever only be one bullet. This is something that it fails to acknowledge. The believers in this purposely look to the best case scenario and do don't plan for the worst.

And my original response... ONCE AGAIN!

originally posted by billybob_81067

When will there only be one bullet? When the terrorist on the plane gets taken out with one well placed shot, that's when.

You act as if there was a terrorist on a plane there would be a huge conflict with hundreds of thousands of bullets from a 50 cal machine gun located at the back of the plane trying to hit the terrorist at the front of the plane.

Do you understand this time?

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by ShooterJM



My point exactly. Kill them, kill anyone that knew about them, etc. It'll be deterrent.

It worked for Keyser Solzay!



As for CB. Please explain to me how the terrorists are at a tactical (not Tactful as they are probably not polite ) advantage. Once the first few bodies fall clogging the aisle, the terrorists will have to slow down to climb over their fallen comrades. Slowing down makes them an even easier target for the Air Marshall. You do understand the AM would be firing down a 24 to 27 inch corridor. Not much "Matrix" dodging room for the terrorist, eh?

[tony emerson]

Originally posted by tony emerson
Ok CB I have a Beretta 92g Brigader it is about 21 cm long and the barrel is about 12 cm so lets do some math

21-12=9
9/2.54=3.54

wow If I take off the barrel it will be only 3.5 inches by CB math! some times the barrel is not the only thing that goes out in front of the reciver.

The debate was can an AK be made to be 10 inches. The answer is it can be made to be 10.5 inches or so. Your idea on the barrel being longer then the receiver is funny, if you go check out the web site I provided you, you will see why.

Or if you are too lazy here is it again, but actually the original source for the info.

http://kalashnikov.guns.ru/models/ka114.html

Somehow you prooved that you can make a Ak 10 inches long by a flawed idea of subtracting the leingth of the barrel from the overall length. On the same baretta thet can "mathmatically" get to 3.5 inches long the smallest it gets is about 7.5 with the barrel removed. I figured that you would notice how silly that 3.5 inches was but you did not.

Can you see the clip on your AK? That is where the barrel would start do you see the metal that goes past the clip that would make the receiver LONGER than the total length-barrel= overall. I took my gun apart to prove it and you still say YOU ARE RIGHT. So I started looking just to back up my point and found this on your AKlook!!

[davidb]

I have been in millions of different debates on this forum, of course I can make one post and it not be intended for the overall discussion, but be on something similar. Hence the AK situation. It was a two part discussion, one was me saying that the AK was the most widely used gun, hence if the terrorist would get any gun, they would have an AK, not saying they would actually get it into a plane.

I said that the best case scenario is the one bullet fired from an air marshal that hits one terrorist, and the terrorist is killed with out anything else happening. The fact of the matter is that is a very unlikely thing to happen. There will hardly ever be one terrorist, and if one passenger gets up and starts to make a move the terrorist will open fire onto the guy. It will not be a 50 caliber shot, more then likely a 7.2 mm or a 5.62 mm (depending on if it is a 47 of 76)

In technical terms, you're what's called "full of it".

[FactsOfLife]

I find it unbelievably humorous that it took 15 pages for people to figure out the The Boy is certifiable.

The really sad thing is, he's a shining example of the general college mentality that's run rampant on the campii lately.

It's about the last place of unabashed liberalism left in this country.

Liberals are a disease Mr. Anderson, we must wipe them out...

[Collegeboy]

Thank you DavidB for proving my point.

That was in responce to the above reposted opinion of rebel in which I thought he said the terrorist would have 50 calibers (hence rebel I have replied the last two times like I would have when I thought you said the terrorist had the 50 calibers, I know I mistook your words, and have said it know like 6 times. But when trying to show people what I meant, I have to post like I thought when I typed it) It was stated to the idea that the terrorist was able to get a gun on board. I took that to be the pretense for that part of the discussion, that the terrorist automatically could get a gun on board and it was a 50 caliber. From that I said that the weapon would be an ak for their cheapness, abundance, mass firepower, etc........ Of course if you pull out one quote, you can make it sound like anything you want it to, but if you take the time to read what it was in responce to, it is easy to see what it means.

The debate about the Ak being able to be made to 10 inchs or so came from someone who said the AK is too big to be sneaked on board, I said that it can be made down to 10 inchs or so. So the size is not the size people think, that doesn't mean that it will be able to be brought on a plane for it is still one huge chunk of metal.

If you have a problem with the mesurements tony, take it up with the man himself. Would you like for me to translate, for he doesn't speak English well enough.

The terrorist are going to be trained in the exact ways to carry out their mission. The marhsal will be trained to handle the situation to the best of his abilities. In the end, the limits of the air marshal will show.

No, a shot to the head will kill a person. I never said it would not. But when you have 6 guys running at you , you can get the first two for sure, maybe the third. You will not have a target on the others. Even if the terrorist do not use that tactic, there are other ways in which they can act.

Spazzed, next time post responces not insults. I haven't insulted you one bit, so please do the same

I have never insulted the intelligence of Shartly, Army, or anyone else anymore then they insulted mine.

I agree with all the points but the last one, Kongiballer. We haven't learned our lesson. A quick look into Iraq will show this. We have tried to be different then in Vietnam, but we still do not understand the devotion and the understanding of anyone who does not think as we think they should, that does not think like a westerner does. This in the end will lead to an escalation of the civil war going on now, a pulling out of the US, and the return to Iraq of a worse government actually lead by a terrorist. Or in other words, everything I said before the war started.

[Collegeboy]

Originally posted by FactsOfLife
I find it unbelievably humorous that it took 15 pages for people to figure out the The Boy is certifiable.

The really sad thing is, he's a shining example of the general college mentality that's run rampant on the campii lately.

It's about the last place of unabashed liberalism left in this country.

Liberals are a disease Mr. Anderson, we must wipe them out...

Must come from someone that never been to my college.

Did you get that MBA in the mail or was it an online degree.

For only someone that is either brainwashed or never been on a college campus in their life can say that with a straight face.

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by Collegeboy


The terrorist are going to be trained in the exact ways to carry out their mission. The marhsal will be trained to handle the situation to the best of his abilities. In the end, the limits of the air marshal will show.

Our Air Marshalls are being trained right here in NJ at Pamona AFB. They are being trained by the best in the world. The terrorists are being trained in caves by a bunch of looney tunes camel jockeys!

Hmmm, who to bet on?

No, a shot to the head will kill a person. I never said it would not. But when you have 6 guys running at you , you can get the first two for sure, maybe the third. You will not have a target on the others. Even if the terrorist do not use that tactic, there are other ways in which they can act.

How will numbers 3 through 6 get by the bodies of the one in front of them piling up in a 2 foot wide aisle?

You are not making any sense.

Also, please name the last hijacked plane that had an air marshall on it? Waiting........

[Collegeboy]

The first and second body will not be on the ground, simple as that.

Being trained in a cave, being trained in New Jersey, same thing.

The terrorist are being trained with the best people that they have in the area that they are doing.

The air marshal is being trained by the best people they have in that area.

In the end it is the limits of one man against many that will lead to the terrorist grabbing control of the plane.

Name the last time an attempt to take over a plane was stopped on an airline that opens its flights to all passengers.

[FactsOfLife]

Originally posted by Collegeboy


Must come from someone that never been to my college.

Did you get that MBA in the mail or was it an online degree.

For only someone that is either brainwashed or never been on a college campus in their life can say that with a straight face.

Oh you are indeed a piece of work.

Let's see, my MBA was from RIT, it's the third degree I've earned from that school. The other two being my Masters in Mechanical Engineering and my BS in English.

So, exactly what 4 year degrees do you hold? Sociology?

No Boy, I certainly don't need to go to YOUR school to know for a FACT that colleges all across thic country are rampantly liberal. I have experience on at LEAST a half dozen campii in the pursuit of my degrees and every one of them to a fault was liberal.

The fact that you still refuse to admit your bias is your problem. It is hardly material to the fact that you are liberal.

Frankly I've never understood why liberals refuse to admit to being liberal. Something to be ashamed of perhaps?


in the famous words of Sam...