GUNS GUNS GERNS

[regexcellent]

Yes I'm 100% certain of it. Putting a small hole in an airplane, literally 1/2" in diameter, is not going to cause structural integrity problems. It could, if you are an AMAZING shot, disable one engine or wound one pilot. And it's not uniquely capable of doing any of these things.

edit: and most likely if you shot the cockpit of a plane taking off, the bullet would get probably caught up in the weather radar or avionics in the nose and the pilots would be fine.

[Felch]

I love this part of his link:

If a bullet were to puncture a tank, it would at least cause a leak and would have some potential to cause an explosion.

Because shooting a gas tank totally makes a car explode! IN MOVIES!

[Sava]

I love this part of his link:

If a bullet were to puncture a tank, it would at least cause a leak and would have some potential to cause an explosion.

Because shooting a gas tank totally makes a car explode! IN MOVIES!

Oh. So leaking fuel has absolutely ZERO potential to cause an explosion.




You are so retarded. I love it.

[regexcellent]

Do you have any idea how hard it is to ignite jet fuel?

Like, that **** needs a LOT of heat to catch fire. It is super ****ing stable. A bullet will not light it on fire. If you shoot an ordinary gas tank it won't catch fire unless something else ignites it. Let alone jet fuel. You need a lot of pressure and a lot of heat.

[Felch]

Firing bullets at anything is potentially dangerous. Our point is that it is a hopelessly ineffective way of trying to bring down an airplane. The .50 BMG is not an effective round against a modern airliner.

[Felch]

Name one instance of jet fuel being ignited by a sniper bullet.

[regexcellent]

Also even if the plane did catch fire somewhere, at takeoff it would probably have time to safely ditch or land. But it wouldn't catch fire because jet fuel is really hard to burn. It's used as ****ing coolant in a lot of things.

[Sava]

There is a Senate report that looked at the threat of .50 caliber rifles being used against airlines.

Even the owner of Barrett, who makes such guns, admits there is a threat.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/big-rifle-a-terrorist-tool/

So let's see. Airplane safety experts think it's a threat. The US government does. Ray Kelly, NYPD chief (former? I can't recall). The guy who owns the company who makes a lot of these guns thinks there's a threat. The list goes on.

But reg, Felch and DD think it's okay.

Gee, I know who I'm trusting.

Hey reg... can you even buy a beer yet?

[Sava]

Name one instance of jet fuel being ignited by a sniper bullet.

Also, this is assuming the shooter isn't using HE incendiary rounds.

[Sava]

I get that you guys like your guns. But to let the love of your hobby cause you to deny facts. That's just sad. I don't understand it.

[regexcellent]

Let's assume the shooter doesn't have a ****ing federal explosives license and nobody was actually willing to sell him mk. 211 ammo. It is straight up NOT POSSIBLE to get those unless you stole it from a military depot.

There are at least three different permits you'd need to get APEI ammo AND the manufacturer, in Norway, would have to sell it to you.

[Felch]

Considering how hard it is to get HE incendiary ammo for a Barrett, I think the jillion odd Strelas floating around the world are a more realistic threat.

[regexcellent]

Democratic politicians are willing to say you can shoot down planes with it for political purposes. The manufacturer was answering loaded questions.

Mk. 211 is the only conceivable way a semi-automatic rifle could possibly hope to bring down something as big as an airliner when half the time a man-portable SAM won't. Even then, I'm highly doubtful.

[Sava]

The NYPD has a crew equipped with .50 sniper rifles. They think they can take down a jet.

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/09/can-the-nypd-shoot-down-a-plane-kinda-sorta-not-exactly/

[The Mad Monk]

This happened in midair. The plane landed safely with one fatality. It wasn't caused by an itty bitty bullet.