Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: zen cycle <funkmasterxx@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: cyclists attack auto driver
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2024 05:19:04 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 222
Message-ID: <va4be9$3qdaj$1@dont-email.me>
References: <nns5cjhvfa23vbjhongnv94u0bs1ags6tl@4ax.com>
 <gj06cj1kimofmc8u9kt250diqmchn1pf2d@4ax.com> <v9voo7$2tip9$4@dont-email.me>
 <omp6cj9hm1c9bh8l5a9dee0ps37siiqoa0@4ax.com>
 <bhn7cjldbqvv58f67m3pbo1fcvjdbphser@4ax.com> <va0tks$3793q$4@dont-email.me>
 <s3o8cjdesesc2mgr60t2t9rdjqrv12m2l8@4ax.com>
 <tnq8cjd26q686281q3kmkmbok4gkj9u2j7@4ax.com> <va23o0$3chus$3@dont-email.me>
 <nndacjl6o7eljdqirb8qa8i281pjq66ipu@4ax.com> <va3dte$3ita9$1@dont-email.me>
 <va3h6p$3j0kg$5@dont-email.me> <ugbbcj5olk5b939d5020ah5ld3m6hsb4tv@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2024 11:19:06 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="0d9afeac48d41b5c5edcd85fcbac11de";
	logging-data="4011347"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1831OlZf5F1f4FJgdqK6eE6Vv3v8boYw94="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:mKsthk4Y+bcx5wagwxS4lTDxgxk=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <ugbbcj5olk5b939d5020ah5ld3m6hsb4tv@4ax.com>
Bytes: 11027

On 8/21/2024 5:07 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Aug 2024 21:51:21 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> 
>> On 8/20/2024 8:55 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 8/20/2024 7:41 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 20 Aug 2024 07:55:28 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 8/20/2024 6:09 AM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 20 Aug 2024 05:23:32 -0400, Catrike Ryder
>>>>>> <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 22:05:15 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 8/19/2024 8:50 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 11:46:24 -0400, Catrike Ryder
>>>>>>>>> <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 11:35:34 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/19/2024 6:27 AM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 03:42:14 -0400, Catrike Ryder
>>>>>>>>>>>> <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Aug 2024 20:41:35 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/18/2024 4:19 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Aug 2024 14:38:26 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/17/2024 11:37 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But as I've mentioned  a number of times my family has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had guns for at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> least 4 generations, as close as I can calculate 300
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> years or so, and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> never shot anyone. Why does Frankie want to penalize us?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My bet is that your family had guns for hunting and pest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> control. My bet
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is also that your family never owned a gun that could fire
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more than,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> say, six rounds in a minute. After all, that capability is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> essentially
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> useless for almost all hunting. But it is "useful" if you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> intend to kill
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a roomful of kids, or church attendees. That is the gun
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> style's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> significant detriment.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As you _should_ be able to remember, I'm firmly in favor
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of hunting.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That's nonsense. My dad's old Winchester model 69 (1930s)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had an eight
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> round mag. My Colt Woodsman had a ten round mag. That
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't count the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one in the pipe. Counting that, put all the Wichester model
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 94s at 7
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rds.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I know those guns exist.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> No you don't. You never heard of them until I mentioned them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm betting John's family didn't have them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> You obviously have no idea how many hunters have had a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Winchester 94.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I had one years ago. The one I had was a carbine and only had
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a 6 rd
>>>>>>>>>>>>> mag. The model 94 rifle produced today has an 8 rd mag.  The
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 94 stands
>>>>>>>>>>>>> for 1894, by the way.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> while I may be wrong, it's certain that the earliest family
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> members he
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bragged about did not have them, but probably still hunted
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A competent hunter doesn't need even six quick shots.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <LOL>  As if you'd know anything about competent hunting.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I really can't figure where Frankie is gets his ideas and I
>>>>>>>>>>>> can only
>>>>>>>>>>>> assume that like Tom, just makes then up.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>       Above he writes, "also that your family never owned a gun
>>>>>>>>>>>> that could
>>>>>>>>>>>> fire more than,  say, six rounds in a minute."
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> As I've said a number of times my father had a hunting rifle
>>>>>>>>>>>> built on
>>>>>>>>>>>> a Springfield army rifle base. 5 round magazine and one up the
>>>>>>>>>>>> spout
>>>>>>>>>>>> is 6 and I could, with no problems at all fire 6 rounds in a
>>>>>>>>>>>> minute
>>>>>>>>>>>> and if you want to talk about pistols I'm sure that you can
>>>>>>>>>>>> fire your
>>>>>>>>>>>> Colt Woodman even faster.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I could probably get all 11 rds off in a couple of seconds, but I
>>>>>>>>>> don't think I ever tried. Walking through the gardens, pastures and
>>>>>>>>>> cornfields shooting gophers, it was handy not having to stop and
>>>>>>>>>> reload.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ah, John! First, please note that I said "MORE than 6 rounds in a
>>>>>>>>>>> minute." You gave _one_ example of _one_ gun your father had,
>>>>>>>>>>> but it did
>>>>>>>>>>> not shoot _more_ than 6 in a minute. So, thanks for confirming
>>>>>>>>>>> my guess!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> And as I said, that capability is essentially useless for
>>>>>>>>>>> hunting. I'm
>>>>>>>>>>> betting you (or your father) never blasted six quick shots at
>>>>>>>>>>> an animal
>>>>>>>>>>> while hunting with that rifle.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Krygowski dishonest strawman alert.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> You could, of course, tell us some of your hunting tales, and
>>>>>>>>>>> let us
>>>>>>>>>>> know details of how you actually _used_ those guns. But I
>>>>>>>>>>> suspect you
>>>>>>>>>>> won't, because they'll describe one or two careful shots, not a
>>>>>>>>>>> rapid
>>>>>>>>>>> blast of shooting.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Another Krygowski dishonest strawman alert.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Note that Frankie says "You gave _one_ example of _one_ gun your
>>>>>>>>> father had, but it did not shoot _more_ than 6 in a minute."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> While I actually wrote, "I could, with no problems at all fire 6
>>>>>>>>> rounds in a minute".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Good grief. Do you not understand the meaning of "more than"? That
>>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>>> the phrase I used.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And then he goes on to ignore the British army reference...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Because I was talking about the guns _your family_ owned. How can
>>>>>>>> you be
>>>>>>>> so confused about the matter under discussion? And again, firing that
>>>>>>>> many rounds that fast is useless in any normal hunting situation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Since you're talking about your family's hunting gun use, why not
>>>>>>>> tell
>>>>>>>> us how many times you shot six rounds within a minute to kill game?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Another Krygowski strawman....
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does the term adroit come to mind here, as in Frankie is adroit at
>>>>>> changing the terms to justify his ignorance?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The original of this 6 rounds in 1 minute  discussion was Frankie
>>>>>> seeming assertion that 6 rounds a minute was probably all that was
>>>>>> possible with common fire arms
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I replied pointing out that an old army rifle converted to a hunting
>>>>>> rice was certainly capable of that rate of fire and adding a British
>>>>>> rifleman's test for rounds on the 300 yard target fired in one minute
>>>>>> with a bolt action rifle
>>>>>>
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========