This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
100% on psycho but
30% leftist
20% Muslim
20% Identifiably right wing
5% Christian extremist
25% total dingbat
I confess to forgetting about muslims. If its a palestinian (black haired man, so not a small chance its an arab) with a social media history of pro-palestinian leanings I will fucking laugh. I think an attempt will be made to make the shooter right wing regardless of leaning, like how Europe defines muslim antisemitism as right wing because islamism is a right wing ideology according to the authorities. In this case if the shooter at any point expressed concerns about state overreach he will be cast as right wing, if the fact that he held a gun without bursting into flames isn't enough for that label to be thrown.
If its MUSLIM, fully expect it to be entirely memory holed and for endless pro-islam marches to be made. Pulse nightclub is now cast as a right wing incel attack, and the Fort Hood and DC sniper attacks are also forgotten. Fuck even 911 is forgotten by leftists who find it irritating that America dared to strike back against brown terrorists.
I honestly doubt its a right wing gun nut. Any gun enthusiast will know that a .22 is a joke round and will go for .223, 30-06 or .308 for an assassination. Someone using a .22 seems just bafflingly incompetent.
As someone who doesn’t know about guns, what’s the difference? And why not the common 5.56 round?
.223 is just a cheaper generic version of 5.56. .223 is technically a lower pressure round than a 5.56 but they're interchangeable in any firearm chambered for them.
.22 is a small round not recommended for using to shoot at anything bigger than a squirrel. A sniper in particular should be using a deer cartridge like .308(the standard US military sniper round) or 30-06, both of which are substantially bigger and more powerful rounds than a .223 which is more powerful than .22.
More options
Context Copy link
Simplified version: 5.56 is .223, 5.56 uses the same bullet as .22 but throws it a lot faster. Speed makes aiming way easier, and just like in car accidents, speed kills.
We don't know yet. Shooters of this type tend to be shockingly incompetent (generally because there are other things wrong with them)- and making aiming harder in a life-or-death situation and using a round that isn't sufficiently powerful is incompetence.
I think you meant to say .223.
No, .22 and 5.56 use what is, functionally, the same projectile; the simplest explanation for 5.56 is just a .22 with anger issues.
Sure, the projectile for 5.56 needs to be pointier and covered in copper so it doesn't disintegrate due to spinning at ~300,000 RPM, but it's not meaningfully different in terms of weight (from "slightly heavier" at 55-62 grains to "exactly the same" at 40) and identical in terms of diameter.
22 and 556 bullets are not interchangeable. They are shaped significantly differently, despite the similar nominal diameter. One is a little nub like a pencil eraser. The other is a long pointy spike.
More options
Context Copy link
The bullet is very, very, very different. Like twice as heavy for one thing, 30-40 grains vs 55 to 90 grains.
Plus 223s are engineered for controlled fragmentation while your average 22 is, uh, a lead blob with some copper painted on, lightly crimped into a case. The ones I buy in 1k buckets wobble and can be pulled with multitool pliers.
The 90 grain projectiles are memes, though, as they're too long to fit in the most common magazine; 77 grain OTMs are usable but not particularly common. (Interestingly, it's possible to find .223 with 40-grain projectiles as well.) 55 and 62 are the two most common, and ~1.5x a small weight is still a small weight.
Again, this is the simplest version. (Is a Miata with a 500 HP LS1 still a Miata to someone who doesn't understand what a drivetrain swap is?)
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
.223 is, essentially, 5.56. There's some variations between the two as .223 specifications were developed by civilians and 5.56 specifications were written by the military, but it's essentially the same round for most practical purposes, and most guns can fire most loadings of the two rounds interchangably.
.22 refers to .22 Long Rifle, an extremely weak round used for hunting rabbits and target shooting. The .22 LR has the same bore diameter as a .223/5.56, but has a significantly shorter and lighter bullet, and fires it at significantly lower velocity; 1000 feet per second, rather than the 3000 feet per second of the later. .22 LR would be an extremely poor choice for an attempted sniper assassination; it's plenty accurate at a hundred yards, but the low velocity means bullet drop, wind drift, and lethal effect are all greatly reduced. A perfectly-centered .22 shot to the head from a hundred yards has a so-so chance of killing the target. Anything less than perfectly centered and it's entirely possible the round would deflect off the skull or fail to penetrate into the brain.
By contrast, a perfectly-centered 5.56 to the head from a hundred yards is a modulo-certain instant kill, and has a decent chance of literally blowing their head apart from the hydraulic force of the impact.
Reminds me how this is a plot point in Day of the Jackal, where the assassin deliberately picks explosive rounds to make up for it.
More options
Context Copy link
To add on to this, @mdurak, 5.56 is basically .223 described in international-standard (rather than American) terms, in order to aid military standardisation among NATO. .223 means "0.223 inches across the rifle barrel, in the rifling grooves" - imperial measurements and the American practice of measuring calibre across the grooves. 5.56 means "5.56 mm across the rifle barrel, not in the grooves" - metric measurements and the international practice of measuring calibre across the ungrooved parts of the barrel (the "lands"). (5.56 mm is, as you might expect, very slightly less than 0.223 inches.)
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
It was a .223, was it not?
If it was an AR platform, yes.
BTW Nobody shoots 30-06 anymore.
People who have 30-06 caliber rifles shoot 30-06. It's just that the two main choices in an AR platform rifle, unless you happen to be a gun nut, are .223 and .308.
More options
Context Copy link
Saw people here say .22, so I ran with that. Updated info points to AR style, so bushmaster XM15 is the most likely candidate just for availability. So, .223.
Also, boo on 30-06 not being fired anymore. Military doesn't, true, but home pressers usually load up .308 or 30-06. Admittedly I haven't been in the scene for years, but all the small town rednecks who pivoted away from walmart supplies during the 2020 ammo shortage swear by their old reliable hunting rugers.
.30-06 is obsoleted by .308 on the low end (and in most tactical/fighting rifles) and .300 Winchester Magnum on the high end (and in hunting rifles).
Modern gunmakers, when designing hunting rifles, build their receivers for the physically largest cartridge they'll offer first. .300 Win Mag is that cartridge, so if you buy that rifle in .30-06 you're taking a rifle that's already sized for a more powerful cartridge and, well, nerfing it. And when hunting, people generally welcome the extra power, since you only really want to take (and frequently, only get) one shot.
As for .308, there's no .30-06 Pmag, and why would a manufacturer reinvent the wheel when a different company has already designed it for them? And if you're designing a hunting rifle with its own custom magazine, the above point applies.
Don't worry, though. If it makes you feel any better, in the next 20 years all .30 caliber cartridges will be obsoleted by a hybrid-case high-pressure .308-sized round that delivers .300 Win Mag performance, and I don't believe any mass-market cartridge is going to bother going higher because .300 Win Mag is already at the upper limit of human recoil tolerance.
.300M sounds interesting, never fired that. My experience is oriented to a pretty specific niche, with a period of extremely fun mag dumping 12.7 and 7.62 surplus. Only plonked marksman rifles at a ranch with some buddies in the 2010s and thats when I discovered an appreciation for .308 and 30-06 guns and a deep loathing of .22LR plinkers.
.300 Win Mag isn't really all that much more powerful than .30-06 is. It's actually kind of too bad that it exists because .300 WSM is arguably a better cartridge (and doesn't need that belt, so it feeds from magazines better), but it's much less popular specifically because the shortness is never taken advantage of and "but you could get 100 more FPS from the full-sized version".
It also does beat you up just that little bit more. I think that if I ever buy a rifle in that cartridge it's going to be a heavier semi-auto rifle with a brake; basically an HCAR but with all the meme removed (in an even more powerful cartridge).
The Ruger 10/22 is not that great a rifle (partially because it hasn't changed in 60+ years) and I'm amazed people sink the kinds of money they do into them. Actually, it's also amazing to me that .22LR has lasted so long; I think that if there ever was a cartridge to replace, it's either that or shotgun cartridges (because all repeating shotguns are ultimately hacks to manage a cartridge design that just doesn't work well at all in repeaters).
What would you want to try replacing 22LR with? Something center-fire?
I've given it some thought and could never come up with something cheaper (which let's face it matters a lot more for plinking and practical use than ballistic performance)
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Point of pedantry, but the AR platform covers just about every commercially available cartridge, from .17 rimfire to .50 BMG.
It was probably a .223/5.56mm, but the AR platform is extremely popular and absurdly diverse.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
The first discussion I had brought Muslim front of mind, because I wasn't really upset by it and my friend said come on its a big deal, and I said hey Trump's had people assassinated turnabout is fair play. So like the first discussion I had was if it would be valid by the USAs own interpretation of international law for Iran to kill Trump.
Also not all right wingers are gun nuts.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I think if it was any variety of right wing or Christian we would have heard by now.
How? I don't even think there's a name yet
Eta: I should note that two different baptist friends have told me in recent weeks that based on biblical prophecy their bible study groups think Trump might be the antichrist. Just a weird thing that's going around I guess, I wasn't sure what to make of it.
Interesting -- are the evangelical elements of the red tribe shifting against him?
I guess my response is, of course he's the antichrist, have you seen the guy talk about his relationship with the divine and how his most ardent supporters talk about him? But then again, I also think Joe Biden, Vladimir Putin, Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Henry VIII, Peter the Great, and of course the OG Nero are the antichrist, there are many of them. So that's not a particularly spectacular claim for me to make.
The actually-religious parts of the republican base are consistently the last people to line up behind Trump who will ultimately do so anyways.
More options
Context Copy link
Amusingly enough, it is true that Moscow "sits on many waters", and it was, at least under the USSR, "drunk with the blood of the saints".
More options
Context Copy link
I'm not really sure if it even means they aren't voting for him! Some prophetically inclined evangelicals seem to be interested in triggering the end times, what with Israel and red heifers and whatnot. Although my impression is that one is always choosing sides against the antichrist even if his coming it's inevitable and ultimately welcome.
Reminds me of the Lizardman's Constant post.
"Well, on the one hand, Obama is the Anti-Christ. On the other, do I really want four years of Romney?"
Moreso that a lot of prophecy-obsessed prots want to trigger the end times and the kingdom of heaven.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Revelation 13:3…
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I am 90% on psycho, but only 60% on obviously psycho given what comes out. The guy is dead, so we won't have a prison psychiatrist's report. This is unfortunate, because the guy turning out to be unfit-to-plead level mentally ill like the guy who shot Reagan would defuse things a bit.
I just think people tend to weirdly equate "identifiable ideological point" with "rational" and that's silly. One can be a psycho for Islam or Mainstream Democratic politics or for the Dallas cowboys.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link