Well, that there is the problem. If we go with math, yep, 5.45 MM is sub .22. If we go with the fevered mind of some illiterate bureaucrat that believes all boolets are bad, who knows. But if they use math with +/- range within a "family" of rounds given the proliferation over centuries, then you are screwed to the wall regardless.
Maybe if they would just forget about caliber and consider only velocity/mass at 100 yards for everything, it would level the playing field so to speak. Then I could dig out my 0 gauge goose gun for home defense (and that of my 3 adjacent neighbors)
You are a guest here when you comment. This is my soapbox, not yours. Be polite. Inappropriate comments will be deleted without mention. Amnesty period is expired.
Do not go off on a tangent, stay with the topic of the post. If I can't tell what your point is in the first couple of sentences I'm flushing it.
If you're trying to comment anonymously: You can't. Log into your Google account.
If you can't comprehend this, don't comment; because I'm going to moderate and mock you for wasting your time.
Well, that there is the problem. If we go with math, yep, 5.45 MM is sub .22. If we go with the fevered mind of some illiterate bureaucrat that believes all boolets are bad, who knows. But if they use math with +/- range within a "family" of rounds given the proliferation over centuries, then you are screwed to the wall regardless.
ReplyDeleteMaybe if they would just forget about caliber and consider only velocity/mass at 100 yards for everything, it would level the playing field so to speak. Then I could dig out my 0 gauge goose gun for home defense (and that of my 3 adjacent neighbors)