And you just believe them? You just blindly trust that they are telling you the truth while they demand ever more power to violate your rights? Don't be a damn fool! They are lying, just like they always do when they want more power.
Bullshit, the entire point of diversity programs is to impose a preference for one gender or race over another. That explicitly requires hiring someone of the favored gender or race over another even if they are less qualified. In the current situation in technology that means hiring women and other minorities, but primarily women, no matter how low there qualifications because there are so few of them in the pool to hire from.
What the fuck are you rambling about?
Nobody in the STEM fields is excluding any minority group, they are tripping over themselves to hire them.
Housewives, now you have this one all sorts of wrong. There were many reasons why women chose to be housewives, not forced like many people are certain of.
* Birth control was unheard of, so if you wanted to fuck then you were going to be popping out kids. This was not conducive to keeping and advancing in any job, still isn't today, and shouldn't be.
* Child care is fucking expensive. Then and today, child care would cost nearly as much as one parent can make, and often more.
* It was a better deal. Being a housewife involved far less manual labor than most jobs, as well as a vastly lower injury and death rate. After the first couple of kids started nearing ten years old the housewife's amount of work started to plummet because the kids were helping with most things, including caring for the other children.
There is not one single way in which women are "denigrated" in which there is not a male equivalent. The only difference is that the male equivalents are deemed acceptable and in fact expected.
You are still ignoring the damage caused by impact.
Your ricochet theory depends on the bullet being bounced off a bone into a more vital area, of which the likelihood is very small. I am talking about bouncing off a skull instead of penetrating through it. If you hit it dead on, it will likely penetrate, but if you do not, there is a high likelihood that it will simply bounce off leaving a mostly superficial wound, see impact in my previous post.
To answer your question, yes I have seen.22LR bounce off of skulls, animal, not human, but there is not that much difference in thickness. Now you tell me which anus you pulled your bullshit from.
You really need to learn a lot more about guns.
The diameter of the bullet does play a part in the amount of damage the round can do, but it is far from the only factor. The.223/5.56 which are very similar rounds, but not quite the same, have a much heavier bullet and many times the amount of powder. The damage done is a factor of the impact and wound size. The impact deals with the weight of the bullet and the speed of the bullet at impact. Both of these are many times larger with the.223/5.56 than with the.22LR. Also, if you are using hollow point ammunition, which you should be, the.223/5.56 will have a significantly larger mushroom affect than a.22LR making the size of the wound vastly larger.
As for your claim that a.22LR will ricochet, this is very rare. It does happen, but you would be a complete fool to rely on it.
For your headshot claim, a.22LR is far more likely to ricochet off of your skull in the first place and never enter, much less bounce around inside your head.
Seriously, do a little damn research before you make grandiose claims about ammunition you know next to nothing about.
I'm sorry you live in such an intellectually dishonest shithole. Maybe you should move to Texas where they are at least honest about their irrational fears. It's still a shithole, but at least they are more honest with themselves.
There had to be a law passed to prevent gun hating judges from allowing bullshit lawsuits from happening. Any manufacturer can be sued for death related to defects in their product, but for some reason gun manufacturers were being sued for deaths related to the misuse of their products, which is completely asinine. The law had to be implemented in order to stop judges who were using their position of power to push an agenda.
When the makers of the Louisville slugger start getting sued successfully when someone gets killed with one of their products then you might have a valid point. This does not happen though, because it is well established in law that the producer is not responsible for the acts committed by an owner. Sadly, due to systemic corruption in the court systems of places like Chicago this had to be stated explicitly for gun manufacturers where as it is a given for any other product on the market.
In summary, you are still completely full of shit.
You're not going to fix a sociopathic, violent, gun-loving culture with any one simple solution.
I agree, the government and police should not own guns. The rest of us, on the other hand, should have guns in order to keep said violent sociopaths in check.
That is a very important point. If you are in real danger the police are not going to help you. They are far more concerned with their own safety than they are with yours.
The claim that the police are there to protect you is utter nonsense. The only protection you can rely on is yourself, and if you want to protect yourself from armed attackers you had better be armed yourself, preferably better armed.
In Norway when someone commits a crime they go to jail and actually get rehabilitated. In the US you go to jail and get taught just how much your country values you when you find out you are now a slave. Oh, but slavery was abolished in the US wasn't it? No, it wasn't. Slavery is still very much legal in the US. It is perfectly legal as part of a criminal sentence. Not only that, but the inmates are not rehabilitated. Instead they are abused in order to increase the chances of of becoming a returning slave.
Have you ever thought about what would happen if we actually tried to rehabilitate our prisoners instead of abuse them as slaves? If we did, we might get one of the lowest violent crime rates in the world like Norway does, but no, we have to make sure they suffer for their crimes. Especially if those crimes didn't harm anyone else, like smoking weed.
Funny how gun violence in the US is highest in the areas with the most restrictions on gun ownership. It's almost like criminals are quicker to use their guns when they know their victims are very unlikely to have their own gun on them.
Swords and knives are not less lethal than guns. The difference is that you have the advantage of range with them. A sword or knife is just as effective, if not more so, than a gun on an unarmed victim. Your argument is is bullshit.
Yea, because it couldn't possibly have anything to do with the mental health industry pushing drugs with primary side effects of hallucinations, suicidal tendencies, and increased violence, now could it?
Gun manufacturers do not have liability protections. You can't sue a gun manufacturer because someone shot you with a gun made by them the same damn way you can't sue a car manufacturer because someone used a car they produce to run you over.
There is only one type of manufacturer in the US that has any liability protections at all. Vaccine manufactures have complete immunity from lawsuits for damages caused by their products. No other industry has this protection, only them.
The more you attempt to spread your drivel the more I'm going to show others how full of shit you are.
Slashdot Mirror
And you just believe them? You just blindly trust that they are telling you the truth while they demand ever more power to violate your rights? Don't be a damn fool! They are lying, just like they always do when they want more power.
Bullshit, the entire point of diversity programs is to impose a preference for one gender or race over another. That explicitly requires hiring someone of the favored gender or race over another even if they are less qualified. In the current situation in technology that means hiring women and other minorities, but primarily women, no matter how low there qualifications because there are so few of them in the pool to hire from.
What the fuck are you rambling about?
Nobody in the STEM fields is excluding any minority group, they are tripping over themselves to hire them.
Housewives, now you have this one all sorts of wrong. There were many reasons why women chose to be housewives, not forced like many people are certain of.
* Birth control was unheard of, so if you wanted to fuck then you were going to be popping out kids. This was not conducive to keeping and advancing in any job, still isn't today, and shouldn't be.
* Child care is fucking expensive. Then and today, child care would cost nearly as much as one parent can make, and often more.
* It was a better deal. Being a housewife involved far less manual labor than most jobs, as well as a vastly lower injury and death rate. After the first couple of kids started nearing ten years old the housewife's amount of work started to plummet because the kids were helping with most things, including caring for the other children.
Your sig is very relevant to this comment.
Very few women were forced to be housewives in history, they had the option and chose to be housewives.
That's because all the men were at war.
There is not one single way in which women are "denigrated" in which there is not a male equivalent. The only difference is that the male equivalents are deemed acceptable and in fact expected.
You've never worked with more than four women at the same place have you?
That is nearly the most retarded post I have ever seen. Keep working hard and someday you will hold the title.
Fuck off bootlicker.
You are still ignoring the damage caused by impact.
.22LR bounce off of skulls, animal, not human, but there is not that much difference in thickness. Now you tell me which anus you pulled your bullshit from.
Your ricochet theory depends on the bullet being bounced off a bone into a more vital area, of which the likelihood is very small. I am talking about bouncing off a skull instead of penetrating through it. If you hit it dead on, it will likely penetrate, but if you do not, there is a high likelihood that it will simply bounce off leaving a mostly superficial wound, see impact in my previous post.
To answer your question, yes I have seen
And you're still spouting bullshit.
You really need to learn a lot more about guns. .223/5.56 which are very similar rounds, but not quite the same, have a much heavier bullet and many times the amount of powder. The damage done is a factor of the impact and wound size. The impact deals with the weight of the bullet and the speed of the bullet at impact. Both of these are many times larger with the .223/5.56 than with the .22LR. Also, if you are using hollow point ammunition, which you should be, the .223/5.56 will have a significantly larger mushroom affect than a .22LR making the size of the wound vastly larger. .22LR will ricochet, this is very rare. It does happen, but you would be a complete fool to rely on it. .22LR is far more likely to ricochet off of your skull in the first place and never enter, much less bounce around inside your head.
The diameter of the bullet does play a part in the amount of damage the round can do, but it is far from the only factor. The
As for your claim that a
For your headshot claim, a
Seriously, do a little damn research before you make grandiose claims about ammunition you know next to nothing about.
That is not an if, that is a guarantee.
The answer is generally that they think you are stupid. History also agrees with them on most subjects too.
What fucking alternate reality do you live in? Oh, I forgot, you believe the fantasy in your head is real.
Dude, .22LR is not as deadly as the .223 or 5.56 which is used in an AR-15.
Stop spreading bullshit.
I'm sorry you live in such an intellectually dishonest shithole. Maybe you should move to Texas where they are at least honest about their irrational fears. It's still a shithole, but at least they are more honest with themselves.
There had to be a law passed to prevent gun hating judges from allowing bullshit lawsuits from happening. Any manufacturer can be sued for death related to defects in their product, but for some reason gun manufacturers were being sued for deaths related to the misuse of their products, which is completely asinine. The law had to be implemented in order to stop judges who were using their position of power to push an agenda.
When the makers of the Louisville slugger start getting sued successfully when someone gets killed with one of their products then you might have a valid point. This does not happen though, because it is well established in law that the producer is not responsible for the acts committed by an owner. Sadly, due to systemic corruption in the court systems of places like Chicago this had to be stated explicitly for gun manufacturers where as it is a given for any other product on the market.
In summary, you are still completely full of shit.
I agree, the government and police should not own guns. The rest of us, on the other hand, should have guns in order to keep said violent sociopaths in check.
That is a very important point. If you are in real danger the police are not going to help you. They are far more concerned with their own safety than they are with yours.
The claim that the police are there to protect you is utter nonsense. The only protection you can rely on is yourself, and if you want to protect yourself from armed attackers you had better be armed yourself, preferably better armed.
In Norway when someone commits a crime they go to jail and actually get rehabilitated. In the US you go to jail and get taught just how much your country values you when you find out you are now a slave. Oh, but slavery was abolished in the US wasn't it? No, it wasn't. Slavery is still very much legal in the US. It is perfectly legal as part of a criminal sentence. Not only that, but the inmates are not rehabilitated. Instead they are abused in order to increase the chances of of becoming a returning slave.
Have you ever thought about what would happen if we actually tried to rehabilitate our prisoners instead of abuse them as slaves? If we did, we might get one of the lowest violent crime rates in the world like Norway does, but no, we have to make sure they suffer for their crimes. Especially if those crimes didn't harm anyone else, like smoking weed.
Funny how gun violence in the US is highest in the areas with the most restrictions on gun ownership. It's almost like criminals are quicker to use their guns when they know their victims are very unlikely to have their own gun on them.
Swords and knives are not less lethal than guns. The difference is that you have the advantage of range with them. A sword or knife is just as effective, if not more so, than a gun on an unarmed victim. Your argument is is bullshit.
Yea, because it couldn't possibly have anything to do with the mental health industry pushing drugs with primary side effects of hallucinations, suicidal tendencies, and increased violence, now could it?
Gun manufacturers do not have liability protections. You can't sue a gun manufacturer because someone shot you with a gun made by them the same damn way you can't sue a car manufacturer because someone used a car they produce to run you over.
There is only one type of manufacturer in the US that has any liability protections at all. Vaccine manufactures have complete immunity from lawsuits for damages caused by their products. No other industry has this protection, only them.
The more you attempt to spread your drivel the more I'm going to show others how full of shit you are.