You have still failed to provide any evidence to support your view, whereas we have provided ample testimony from experts which goes against your view. Re-stating your unsubstantiated opinion is not a suitable way to back up an argument (it is re-stating your basic premise), especially when the bulk of evidence is against you.
You are invited, again, to cite some experts to back up your claims re. M1 carbine. If you cannot do this you are at least foolish, at most a prat.
BTW, the claims were yours, not mine, that the M1 Carbine uses pistol ammunition, is a replacement for the .45, does not have the characteristics of an assault rifle circa WWII… etc.
More of that trying to prove the untrue… again. That’s about 5 posts so far.
More of the “let’s insult him if we can’t prove our false claims to be true”.
Remember the behavior pattern?
Aren’t you filling up the thread in your attmep to prove the untrue… again?
Remember the behavior pattern?
Since 17 February 2005, this is the way that it is done. This is to comply with the Hunting Act 2004, which came into effect at midnight on that date. You are invited to read the whole Act here:
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2004/20040037.htm
Here is also a copy of the Hunting Handbook 2005, which outlines how hunting has to continue (in summary, the dogs are used to flush the fox which is then shot):
http://www.countryside-alliance.org/images/stories/pdf/c_H_Hunting_Handbook.pdf
Now you want us to believe that the Brits hunt foxes by shooting them first instead of letting the dogs kill it for them?
“Just in time to see Ms. Fox shriek as at least ten hounds each chomp into a different part of her body and yank her until she rips. “Usually ten or more dogs do the job in 20 seconds,” said Gammon, who’s witnessed such killings. “with fewer dogs, it’s more drawn out.” Many foxes die from having their guts ripped out: “We’ve taken bodies to a vet and the autopsy showed that,” Gammon said.”
http://www.idausa.org/facts/foxhunting.html
Please. Don’t even try that.[/quote]
Excellent choice of sources. The League against Cruel Sports and the Hunt Saboteurs.
As fine a piece of anthropomorphism as I’ve seen in a while.
Did you ever watch Bambi before going stalking?
I quoted Hatcher, who is the Big Boss Authority on this kind of thing - did you quote someone of a similar stature?
[b]World.guns.ru where we found the 500metre quote was referring to the SA80 in its individual fire capacity.
The skill at arms pamphlet is the produce of the British military.[/b]
I have seen a Fox maimed by a rifle bullet, Bleeding out slowly trying to run and incapable or dragging itself into cover, I have yet to see a Fox maimed by a pack of beagle hounds! It is generally one or the other. It survives or very definetly dies!
You are a Huntsman and you hunt squirrels, well whoopdi fucking do,
HOLY FREAKIN GUANO BATBOY (that is great)
bet all the farmers round your way are greatful for the nuts you have saved! Foxes out by me kill lambs direct from the Birth Canal of sheep, kill household pets and tore the throat out of one of my friends Alsation puppies when it went for a wonder in the bushes. The Alsatian was a puppy lying on its back expecting to play, and hte Fox cub tore its trachea out.
You evidently have no idea about countryside life, and please stick to annyoing me about your lack of weapons knowledge (or rather plentiful yet wholly inaccurate) rather than your urban urbane bullshit about the countryside.
A friend of mine shot 36 foxes in a week in south Gloucestershire, they are not endangered or any other fucking bollocks like it they are a plague and the only time anyone will allow us to recommence hunting them is when thye finally carry diseases into the cities and become more prevalent in killing children on doorsteps, such as happened late last year
Its my countryside, fuck off, if your septic “hiney” thinks it has any place playing in domestic plitics that half of the UK shouldnt event be getting involved in
If im not very much mistaken a Black man was towed down a road behind a pickup a few years back following a 3 Mile chase across rough countryside! get your own hunting problems in order before commenting on ours!
anyway back to the question that you refuse to answer.
I dont ask what you mean I merely ask if they are contradictory.
http://www.ww2incolor.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=60&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=210
an
assult rifle is pretty worthless at 600m and soldiers are not going to shoot together at men 600m away with them.
VS
That is true Mr. Schätzer, it is a light rifle, and as such, it did not shoot pistol ammunition. Albiet a weak rifle, but effective at it’s maximum effective range, as are all weapons. It may not be effective at 600m, like a standard or sniper rifle, but it was a dandy little weapon
does this quote mean that a standard rifle is effective at 600 metres unlike the M1 carbine, IRONMAN?
Does this mean a Carbine is different to a standard rifle?
is the refusal to admit this is a contradiction evidence enough to block IRONMAN, MODS. IRONMAN is terribly concerned we may be misinforming the public, it seems that IRONMAN is informing the public giving the most balanced view I ahve ever seen, in fact he speaks on both sides of the same argument! what a hero.
CAN I SET A PACK OF BEAGLES ON HIM, IF HE DOESNT LIKE THE IDEA OF US STANDING 501 METRES FROM HIM WITH AN SA80
PLEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSEEEEEEEEEEE
Ironman,
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you? You constantly refuse to back up any of your opinions with facts. The overwhelming evidence put forward by people posting on this site is against you. You have ignored the friendly invitation to discuss this elsewhere so that we don’t clog up this website.
You also think that, by changing the subject and editing your posts, we will be fooled into thinking that you are right in what you say. How thick do you think everyone is?
To address just one of the spurious points you brought up earlier:
No-one said this. People did say that it is legal, in some circumstances, for a British soldier in the UK to carry a concealed weapon.
While we are at it, I have to admit you are right in one thing you have said. I do swear a lot. You have pissed me off mightily and I am afraid that when someone does this, I do tend to swear. I apologise to anyone offended by this. This doesn’t mean however that I will stop doing it.
Don’t bring my upbringing into this or I will start bringing your parenting into question.
Cunt.
Edited for clarity to add “British soldier in the UK”
Its ok to Swear Tubby most of us have had things worse than nasty words hurled at us before, on my first hunt I was caught acrtoss the side of the head by what I understand was an aborted fox foetus!
:lol: :lol:
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You [quote]You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?[/quote]
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
You really are an obnoxious little twat aren’t you?
sorry I was trying to quote tubbyboy and my computer appears to have a virus will correct it when I can be bothered.
(edit - well later on anyway)
No-one said this. People did say that it is legal, in some circumstances, for a British soldier in the UK to carry a concealed weapon.
[/i][/quote]
It is noted however that there are states in which any non-felon can carry a concealed wpn without any permit. Vermont and Alaska at least, off the top of my head. So that’s 2 states where your statement (which was words put in our mouths) is manifestly true.
Also, it is you, tinwalt, who has been arguing against the accepted authodoxy, and against accepted experts such as Hatcher.
:roll:
And since you’ve not responded to this post in the other thread, I’ll repeat it here:
http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/Assault.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_Carbine
http://www.totse.com/en/politics/right_to_keep_and_bear_arms/arifle2.html
… U.S. Carbine M1 and M2 come very close [to being assault rifles], but in fact fall into their own very special category. In every case, the “pure” assault rifles replaced or supplemented much more powerful rifles…in U.S., M16 replaced M14, in the USSR, AK an SKS replaced the Nagant and Tokarev in 7.62x54R M91, and so on.
http://www.angelfire.com/art/enchanter/MIKE223.html
An interesting piece of advice I’ve come across was that if you thought of the M1 carbine as a rifle you would always be disappointed, -better to think of it as a “two handed pistol”
Jane’s:
…totally useless at ranges over 200 yards, since it fired a pistol bullet. It was intended simply to replace the pistol … but found itself being used as a light rifle more often than not.
I can’t find a document anywhere that says that the M1 carbine in fact is an assault rifle. Sorry, ironman, but you’re on your own on this one, and you’re arguing against the whole of Internet- and Gunowner-land.
Find me some nice quotes from reputable sources (not re-enacting or gaming walt sites) to back yourself up, or admit defeat, if you’d be so frightfully kind. 8)[/quote]
It should be noted yet again that if someone wishes to dissent from established wisdom, they should provide some effing evidence for it, not just repeat their basic premise.
Just in case IRONINGMAN has missed the question, clearly he is too upstanding to ignore a question, I will ask again…
http://www.ww2incolor.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=60&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=210
assult rifle is pretty worthless at 600m and soldiers are not going to shoot together at men 600m away with them.
VS
That is true Mr. Schätzer, it is a light rifle, and as such, it did not shoot pistol ammunition. Albiet a weak rifle, but effective at it’s maximum effective range, as are all weapons. It may not be effective at 600m, like a standard or sniper rifle, but it was a dandy little weapon
does this quote mean that a standard rifle is effective at 600 metres unlike the M1 carbine, IRONMAN?
Does this mean a Carbine is different to a standard rifle?
how many times is he allowed to avoid a question before we can download trojans onto his computer?
I think some guys from the Intelligence corps might be bored.
:roll: Possibly the most obnoxious emoticon there is!
And Man of Stoat if he doesnt believe those are suitable places to reference, there is always this quote;
That is true Mr. Schätzer, it is a light rifle, and as such, it did not shoot pistol ammunition. Albiet a weak rifle, but effective at it’s maximum effective range, as are all weapons. It may not be effective at 600m, like a standard or sniper rifle, but it was a dandy little weapon
Seem to remember that one from a very intelligent man, and is actually a direct attempt to educate those lacking knowledge, consequently it must be true, the teacher was very keen that the younger generation must not be misinformed!
:roll:[/quote]
Do you want to elaborate on that?
Halfwit (see no swearing)
CUNT!
Its ok I frequently equate halfwit. for fuckwit
IRONMAN you are a fuckwit.
http://www.ww2incolor.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=60&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=210
an assult rifle is pretty worthless at 600m and soldiers are not going to shoot together at men 600m away with them.
VS
That is true Mr. Schätzer, it is a light rifle, and as such, it did not shoot pistol ammunition. Albiet a weak rifle, but effective at it’s maximum effective range, as are all weapons. It may not be effective at 600m, like a standard or sniper rifle, but it was a dandy little weapon
does this quote mean that a standard rifle is effective at 600 metres unlike the M1 carbine, IRONMAN?
Does this mean a Carbine is different to a standard rifle?
You blundered. All of those sources compare the M1 Carbine to the modern standards for assault rifles. The M1 Carbine is a WWII era weapon. It is not a modern weapon. It was designed prior to WWII.
Do you see your blunder? Let’s hope so.
Ironman,
might I politely and respectfully request the evidence I previously asked you for to justify your comments vis-a-vis the British Army sending Gurkha troops into battle “ahead of white troops”?
You blundered. All of those sources compare the M1 Carbine to the modern standards for an assult rifle. The M1 Carbine is a WWII era weapon. It is not a modern weapon. It was designed and manufactured prioor to WWII.
Do you see your blunder? let’s hope so.[/quote]
The least you could do is learn how to spell. I am sick of hearing about alleged [i]assult /i rifles.
Do you see your blunder? If you do, please find an assault rifle, load a full magazine, select full automatic, take the safety catch off, place the muzzle in your mouth, big toe on the trigger and put yourself out of our misery.
Edited to say: What a surprise, he has edited his post.
Nevertheless those sites are more likely to be comparing the M1 carbine to the definition of an assault rifle!
assault rifles are termed assault rifles in relation to their characteristics, ones that the M1 carbine does not have! If the moniker is merely handed to weapons used in assaults then surely the M1/M2 (Im not sure which was first I ws confused by your post)could not have been the first assault rifle, as assaults actually happened prior to WWII
and purely because I have a bet on the fact that Ill reach 40 posts before you reply to this question, here it is again…
Still unanswered. …