Ted Nugent proves a shotgun is deadlier than an AR-15

[Q-Tip]

So when is the U.S. Army and Marine Corps going to make shot guns the weapon of choice for infantry units?

Oh, that's right. Never.

Because, unlike you and Ted Nugent, they understand weapons, ballistics, rate of fire, et. al.


I like shotguns for taking out zombies, or in some close-quarter trench warfare situations. At least that what Call of Duty has taught me!

If you want to lay down a hailstorm of lead, and put a lot of lethal damage on an enemy you are going to need semi-automatic and automatic assault rifles.
Although my personal favorite is the Soviet PPSh-41 submachine gun. The rate and amount of lead that thing puts out defies reason! It is my weapon of choice in WW2 Call of Duty franchise games!

What gave you the idea that the military doesn't use shotguns?

http://www.gunsinternational.com/guns-for-sale-online/shotguns/military-shotguns-us.cfm?cat_id=639

 

[countryboy]

So when is the U.S. Army and Marine Corps going to make shot guns the weapon of choice for infantry units?

Oh, that's right. Never.

Because, unlike you and Ted Nugent, they understand weapons, ballistics, rate of fire, et. al.


I like shotguns for taking out zombies, or in some close-quarter trench warfare situations. At least that what Call of Duty has taught me!

If you want to lay down a hailstorm of lead, and put a lot of lethal damage on an enemy you are going to need semi-automatic and automatic assault rifles.
Although my personal favorite is the Soviet PPSh-41 submachine gun. The rate and amount of lead that thing puts out defies reason! It is my weapon of choice in WW2 Call of Duty franchise games!

If you look up fast, you just might catch the point sailing over your head. Oops, too late.

 

[sear]

"What gave you the idea that the military doesn't use shotguns?" the comprehensionally impaired QT #81

C #80 didn't assert the military doesn't use shotguns. We all know they do.

C #80's words were:

Quote Originally Posted by Q-Tip
Ted Nugent proves a shotgun is deadlier than an AR-15

"So when is the U.S. Army and Marine Corps going to make shot guns the weapon of choice for infantry units?
Oh, that's right. Never." C #80 is correct.

This thread's title is badly worded. And I haven't found a definition of the key word here: "deadlier".

It may be capable of imparting more foot pounds to target at some ranges (but not others).

But precisely as C #80 suggests, U.S. infantry units from multiple services tend to avoid scatter guns as infantry weapons.
As techniques of warfare improve over the millennia distances between enemy combatants continues to grow.

For cave dwellers, that distance was the length of a human arm, or less.
The distance has been growing ever since, yes, sometimes in spurts.

Want an example?
One source I consulted reported that one U.S. minuteman missile has more explosive / destructive power than all the munitions used in WWII by all sides combined. And that includes the nukes we dropped on Japan.

And I believe the range on the minuteman is intercontinental.

See the trend?

C #80 was satirical, perhaps sarcastic. But QT #81 is an obvious attempt to change the subject. For it applies to an assertion that has not been made here.

Please don't troll here.

spring forward

 

[Mason Michaels]

Nugent is Batshit crazy,he sadly has a long term
Case of Cat Scratch Fever:-( ~

 

[sear]

M #84

Even if you're right, that's not refutation, it's ad hom, with a little Nugent trivia added for fun.

Care to make a more persuasive point, by quoting Nugent or his think-alikes, and then refuting it?

 

[Cypress]

What gave you the idea that the military doesn't use shotguns?

http://www.gunsinternational.com/guns-for-sale-online/shotguns/military-shotguns-us.cfm?cat_id=639

Reading comprehension not your strong suit?

Why don't you respond to what I actually wrote, and not what you imagined I wrote?

Everybody knows the Army and special forces use shotguns in specific situations. A Trench gun is one of my favorites for house to house, close quarters combat in Call of Duty or Resident Evil.

What you and Ted Nugent apparently do not realize - but I guarantee you the US Army does - is that semi-automatic and fully automatic assault rifles are the weapon of choice for putting large amounts of rounds, at high rates of fire, on an enemy position.....which also makes it a favored weapons for people who want to mass murder dozens of school children.

 

[Nordberg]

My point is that if the school shooters had used shot guns with 00 buckshot, the death toll would have been much higher.

I've got a 20 gauge with a full choke and at around 20 feet, it will put a load of bird shot through 3/4 inch plywood and leave a really ugly hole.
This means that if was used on a group of people, anyone behind the initial victim would also be dead.

That is no point at all. Why do you think he bought an AR? Why a big clip and lots of ammo.? Because he was trying to kill as many people as possible. But you argument is he could have done worse damage if he was as smart about killing people as you are? If he used grenades the toll would have been higher yet. Not the point at all.

 

[Q-Tip]

Reading comprehension not your strong suit?

Why don't you respond to what I actually wrote, and not what you imagined I wrote?

Everybody knows the Army and special forces use shotguns in specific situations. A Trench gun is one of my favorites for house to house, close quarters combat in Call of Duty or Resident Evil.

What you and Ted Nugent apparently do not realize - but I guarantee you the US Army does - is that semi-automatic and fully automatic assault rifles are the weapon of choice for putting large amounts of rounds, at high rates of fire, on an enemy position.....which also makes it a favored weapons for people who want to mass murder dozens of school children.

Make up your damn mined.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

That is no point at all. Why do you think he bought an AR? Why a big clip and lots of ammo.? Because he was trying to kill as many people as possible. But you argument is he could have done worse damage if he was as smart about killing people as you are? If he used grenades the toll would have been higher yet. Not the point at all.

Maybe, JUST MAYBE, he's like some many of others and didn't bother to really research anything and instead just went with what the MSM has designated as eeeeeeeeeeeeeevil.

 

[Rusty Bell 65]

So when is the U.S. Army and Marine Corps going to make shot guns the weapon of choice for infantry units?

Oh, that's right. Never.

Because, unlike you and Ted Nugent, they understand weapons, ballistics, rate of fire, et. al.


I like shotguns for taking out zombies, or in some close-quarter trench warfare situations. At least that what Call of Duty has taught me!

If you want to lay down a hailstorm of lead, and put a lot of lethal damage on an enemy you are going to need semi-automatic and automatic assault rifles.
Although my personal favorite is the Soviet PPSh-41 submachine gun. The rate and amount of lead that thing puts out defies reason! It is my weapon of choice in WW2 Call of Duty franchise games!

Interesting fact is the police carry shotguns, don't they?

 

[Rusty Bell 65]

Reading comprehension not your strong suit?

Why don't you respond to what I actually wrote, and not what you imagined I wrote?

Everybody knows the Army and special forces use shotguns in specific situations. A Trench gun is one of my favorites for house to house, close quarters combat in Call of Duty or Resident Evil.

What you and Ted Nugent apparently do not realize - but I guarantee you the US Army does - is that semi-automatic and fully automatic assault rifles are the weapon of choice for putting large amounts of rounds, at high rates of fire, on an enemy position.....which also makes it a favored weapons for people who want to mass murder dozens of school children.

I don't base my use of a particular firearm on video games, that would be absurd.
Of course, the select fire rifle and the center fire cartridge is the choice of nearly every military firing on enemy positions, but those distances are far greater than the length of a school classroom, no?
Face the facts, the use of the semi auto sporting rifle has become the weapon of choice in these incidents simply because of publicity, not because these assholes have any advanced knowledge of firearms.

 

[sear]

" police carry shotguns, don't they? " R6 #90

Some may, in some circumstance.

"A gun is a tool." Shane

The right tool for the right job.

But as you should know, paramilitary though police organizations may tend to be, with uniforms, rank insignia and formal command structures, as well as martial means, the missions of police and military differ.
Rush Limbaugh articulated that.
- The purpose of the U.S. military is to kill people and break things. - RL

In oversimplified terms, the military kills, the police capture.

One other thing.
The U.S. military is bound by international treaties to which it is signatory.
In the U.S., police are not.
Thus purely as a matter of law, in the U.S. police can carry and use equipment, ordnance that would be illegal for the U.S. military to use. Hollow-point ammunition is the text book example.

"Face the facts, the use of the semi auto sporting rifle has become the weapon of choice in these incidents simply because of publicity, not because these assholes have any advanced knowledge of firearms." R6 #91

That may be a factor in some cases.
It's widely reported that the Sandy Hook shooter did not own the gun he used, but stole it from the family armory.

But there may have been other external influences; like the Columbine precedent of school massacres in the first place.

 

[Rusty Bell 65]

Some may, in some circumstance.

The right tool for the right job.

But as you should know, paramilitary though police organizations may tend to be, with uniforms, rank insignia and formal command structures, as well as martial means, the missions of police and military differ.
Rush Limbaugh articulated that.
- The purpose of the U.S. military is to kill people and break things. - RL

In oversimplified terms, the military kills, the police capture.

One other thing.
The U.S. military is bound by international treaties to which it is signatory.
In the U.S., police are not.
Thus purely as a matter of law, in the U.S. police can carry and use equipment, ordnance that would be illegal for the U.S. military to use. Hollow-point ammunition is the text book example.

That may be a factor in some cases.
It's widely reported that the Sandy Hook shooter did not own the gun he used, but stole it from the family armory.

But there may have been other external influences; like the Columbine precedent of school massacres in the first place.

Every police cruiser in my area has a shotgun in it.