SKS Rifle in Dallas Shootings

texas_ex2000

2,500+ Posts
http://www.ammoland.com/2016/07/rif...t-assault-rifle-assault-weapon/#axzz4E1CXYgWB

Not an AR, but an antique 70+ year old rifle with a fixed 10 round magazine.

If you're wondering why that's important, this rifle with a fixed 10 round magazine is completely legal in California which prohibits "assault style" rifles with detachable magazines and capacity greater than 10 rounds and other cosmetic features. It's still compliant and completely legal to own in California even after their massive gun control legislation recently approved in May that outlaws all (they couldn't figure out what exactly constitute an "assault rifle") semi-auto rifles with detachable magazines.
 
Last edited:
I have an old SKS 56 Chinese model like the one in the link, complete with attached bayonet. Bought it from a guy in Crockett near our old family farm about 25 years ago. I took it to a shooting range and fired it a few times after I got it, been sitting in a case in my closet ever since. I’ve thought about selling it but I don’t know where. I guess gun shops may buy them?
 
Surprisingly accurate, reliable, and not too much kick.

You should keep it in case it's needed one day.
 
Imagine how many he would have killed if he had been armed with an "assault style" rifle.
 
Imagine how many he would have killed if he had been armed with an "assault style" rifle.
How many and why? And what makes this not an "assault style" rife while others are?

And I know you're going to make some sarcastic comment to deflect the questions. So I'm going to preemptively point out that the stool from that .45 brandishing chimp you use in your pic has more brain cells than you have in your skull.
 
Last edited:
Maybe Chango was asking a valid question. I honestly wonder if an AR-15 would have been more or less effective than the weapon used since I've never shot either.
 
Maybe Chango was asking a valid question. I honestly wonder if an AR-15 would have been more or less effective than the weapon used since I've never shot either.
The question is valid. Chango, however is not.

I know the answer to the question. If a person does not know the answer or at least can not verbalize an educated hypothesis, then it calls into question that person's opinion/credibility on the topic of "assault weapons" bans.

The SKS is a 7.62mm semi-auto rifle with a 20" barrel. The vast majority of AR-15s, and the ones used in mass shootings, are 5.56mm with 16" carbine barrels (of course semi-auto also). The 7.62mm out of a 20" barrel is much deadlier in the ambush staging in Dallas. All the AR plastic accessories, collapsable stocks, pistol grips, and black paint are worthless.

Depending on the proficiency of the operator, the SKS with its bigger round and longer barrel will likely have more effective firepower in general and certainly in this specific situation as the difference in rate of fire with reloading is minimal.

What is the 5.56mm carbine, specifically AR15s, better at than the SKS? I'd say it's a vastly superior home defense weapon, especially for older or disabled people who have difficulty reloading a magazine confronted with intruders. It also has lower recoil which is better for them. Due to its modular design and ease of customization and accessories, the AR15 is a much better sporting/competition rifle. Yes, there are shooting competitions with ARs. ARs are the preferred tool for varmint control for pests of certain sizes, e.g. javelinas/wild pigs, ground hogs, coyotes, etc. I'd say for a general beater ranch rifle that you keep in the truck, they're about equal.

And just because the military has adopted the 5.56mm over the 7.62mm doesn't mean it's a more lethal round in civilian use. The army has to deal with huge supply chains and deploys hundreds of thousands of soldiers on long campaigns in set piece battlefields around the world. A 5.56mm also wears out an enemy, not because the round is more ballistically lethal (it is a lethal round, but it doesn't have the energy of a 7.62mm which can be used as a hunting round), but because an enemy must use more manpower to care for the greater number of battlefield wounded. And soldiers fire those 5.56mm rounds in ACTUAL automatic assault rifles because they have to put down suppressive fire against enemy positions. The benefits of smaller faster 5.56mm rounds are materialized with automatic weapons in the scale of armed conflict between states.
 
Last edited:
2000
Thank you. I learned a lot. Too bad you can not educate the media like this.
After reading your explanation I realize 99% of what the media and many pols have been saying and printing about "assault weapons is pure bs.
It is not surprising chango could get things confused. The media reporting is muddled and never gets correct.
 
And I know you're going to make some sarcastic comment to deflect the questions. So I'm going to preemptively point out that the stool from that .45 brandishing chimp you use in your pic has more brain cells than you have in your skull.
See, now you've hurt my feelings.
 
Surprising New Evidence Shows Bias in Police Use of Force but Not in Shootings

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/u...e-use-of-force-but-not-in-shootings.html?_r=0

"And in the arena of “shoot” or “don’t shoot,” Mr. Fryer found that, in tense situations, officers in Houston were about 20 percent less likely to shoot a suspect if the suspect was black. This estimate was not very precise, and firmer conclusions would require more data. But, in a variety of models that controlled for different factors and used different definitions of tense situations, Mr. Fryer found that blacks were either less likely to be shot or there was no difference between blacks and whites."
 
It would appear the murderer wanted to surgically pick out white police officers. That may have influenced his choice of weapon.

Oswald didn't need an automatic weapon to do considerable damage to this country.
 

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Back
Top