@jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social cover
@jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social avatar

jeremy_sylvis

@[email protected]

aka @jsylvis

Just another person seeking connection, community, and diversity of thought in an increasingly polarized and team-based society.

Other contacts:

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. View on remote instance

jeremy_sylvis ,
@jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social avatar

You shouldn’t go “pew-pew” when every shot you miss can hit an innocent bystander.

Heck, even a shot that you don’t miss, can go all the way through and hit someone totally innocent on the other side.

You seem like someone who has absolutely no understanding of firearms and ballistics.

Assuming one follows the rules of firearm safety, including know your target and what is beyond your target, there’s no risk to bystanders. This person was clearly not firing wildly. This was a 9mm from a short barrel - there’s no real danger of over penetration.

Your fearmongering is ridiculous.

jeremy_sylvis ,
@jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social avatar

9mm can penetrate well into human flesh and beyond

So can .22lr - that didn’t mean it’s probable or likely. Even FMJ aren’t likely to over-penetration a center mass hit, and once more, so long as one is observing the rules of firearm safety, even over-penetration is meaningless.

Given the restraint shown, I have no reason to doubt the person took this into consideration.

jeremy_sylvis ,
@jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social avatar

That guilty verdict has been set aside until a hearing to discuss it on October 19.

We shall see.

jeremy_sylvis ,
@jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social avatar

Imagine jumping straight to obvious hyperbole as a means of supporting one’s rather absurd position.

Imagine defending such.

jeremy_sylvis ,
@jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social avatar

Ah, the as an [x] / how do you do, fellow kids trope.

As a lifelong gun owner, you clearly have no understanding of how firearms work and should probably seek out a firearm safety course if you own guns. Please stop spreading dangerous misinformation about firearms. The shit that just came out of your mouth would never be said by a responsible gun owner.

Given my direct reference to one of the rules of firearm safety - one which agrees with your point of err on the side of caution - I’m interested in how you jump from erring on the side of caution to criticizing a victim for erring on the side of caution in defending themselves.

Feel free to highlight how anything here - in this individual’s situation or otherwise - is dangerous misinformation. Take all the time you need to support such a position.

A responsible gun owner always errs on the side of caution. They know that discharging their weapon is an absolute last resort.

And, as shown by both the video, the arguments in court, and the jury’s ruling, this person acted perfectly in-line with such. And, as highlighted, the individual gave due consideration to the shot taken.

They also know how loud a 9mm is when fired in an enclosed space, and that even if miraculously in a shopping mall there was no one down range of his shot, it very likely damaged the hearing of nearby bystanders.

Not likely. Here’s a breakdown on how decibel reduction applies over distance - start from the ~160db of 9mm out of a handgun and work down, then compare to the video.

You seem to be talking entirely to baseless hypotheticals, to the complete neglect of the situation at hand. This, entirely aside from quibbling about loud noises when one justifiably defends oneself complete with respect to duty to retreat.

jeremy_sylvis ,
@jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social avatar

Correction: may over-penetrate, given the actual center-mass shot, and even then, given this individual seems to have ensured a safe shot e.g. knowing what is beyond your target, there’s absolutely no reason to assume such risk.

This, even side from jumping to alarmism regarding projectile without a reference to the actual projectile used. It seems you’re just fearmongering.

jeremy_sylvis ,
@jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social avatar

The person was attempting to walk away and was repeatedly headed off by the friend of the assualter, per the trial.

Imagine assuming the worst of a victim and blaming them.

jeremy_sylvis ,
@jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social avatar

The video which demonstrated a single rounded placed into the assailant low-center (backwards? barely any aiming? Way to take the mask off), completely clear of those stands and “unknown clients”?

Did you watch it? The extent to which you’re misrepresenting what happened makes a person wonder. I sincerely hope it’s just you were just too preoccupied with confirmation bias to see the objective truth of the situation in the video.

jeremy_sylvis ,
@jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social avatar

So you didn’t watch it.

Seeing how you’re arguing in bad faith, this is where we shall part ways.

Discussions must be easier when you can simply accuse another of your own failings, with no support for such an accusation, and just peace out when called out on it.

I believe that’s considered trolling.

jeremy_sylvis ,
@jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social avatar

If guns are permitted so that they can fight a tyrannical government

There is no “only” in play here; “fight a tyrannical government” is just an extension of self defense.

why are people allowed to carry them to shoot other citizens?

Self-defense.

jeremy_sylvis ,
@jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social avatar

I’m well aware of the ballistics; that over-penetration depends on incredible assumptions. Try the ballistic dummy tests for a better representation as the factor in the bone. The human body is more than gelatin.

And no, this is not true for hollow points.

jeremy_sylvis ,
@jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social avatar

I wasn’t aware drywall is exactly identical to the human body. Could you highlight that reasoning?

You are saying absurd things.

And you are clearly projecting your ignorance of firearms and ballistics.

jeremy_sylvis ,
@jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social avatar

Yikes, dude.

At this point you’re just repeating yourself with additional hyperbole and insult; it looks like we’re done here.

jeremy_sylvis ,
@jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social avatar

Im pointing out how absurd of a claim it is that small rounds run no risk of over penetration.

Oh, so you’re addressing something other than was actually stated?

You might want to revisit what I had actually said. Run no risk? Hardly.

It’s funny how much of a thrashing you’re getting for spreading this misinformation. Hopefully you consider it before the next, or first, time you pick up a gun.

I’m not sure I’d consider a handful of randos making absurd, baseless claims to be a thrashing - one could call it dogpiling, sure. Thrashing implies some sort of beatdown, though… and all you’ve brought is nonsense. If you’d been able to back up that misinformation nonsense in any way - say, by addressing and refuting points made - you may have had a point.

jeremy_sylvis ,
@jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social avatar

I have to suggest you take your own advice and, once more, highlight the absurdity of your position in baseless “lol no ur wrong”.

You’re right that Garand Thumb has great videos. You’re wrong that FMJ universally goes through human-form ballistic dummies. It can, sure. Is guaranteed to? Far from it. You seem to be pointedly ignoring the assumptions necessary for you to make such a ridiculous generalization.

Edit: had you mixed up with a troll; removed the irrelevant parts.

jeremy_sylvis ,
@jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social avatar

Considering your “source” is “trust me bro Garand Thumb showed it bro”, I’ll give your trolling concerns due consideration.

jeremy_sylvis ,
@jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social avatar

In the same sense that your response was in any way tied to anything stated, sure.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • All magazines
    •