Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Side Arm for Grizzly Country
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Pdvdh" data-source="post: 2047843" data-attributes="member: 4191"><p>Wow, there's an energetic mouthful. Was there an attempt to say the 10mm with the best bullet will out-penetrate the big bore revolver cartridges with the worst bullet selection? It seems penetration, or the lack thereof, pushed you over the edge. I wasn't expecting to learn the 10mm could compete. Everyone knows that's not possible given equal bullet selections. Was just looking for some real-life 10mm penetration depths on game. After all, we are discussing defensive sidearms for big animals. But maybe my question was unfair because the 10mm can't compete, and irrelevant because bears are the largest man-eating predator on the North American continent.</p><p></p><p>If you wanna be credible, be truthful.</p><p>Point 1) I quote your statement:</p><p></p><p>"Would that matter to someone that believes revolvers NEVER fail but semi's do."</p><p></p><p>That's a real <strong><em>whopper</em></strong> of a fabrication. What prompted that? Remind us all? In which post did I make that statement?</p><p></p><p>Point 2) I quote your statement:</p><p></p><p>"These facts still wouldn't change your opinions on the 10mm being an adequate bear defense round."</p><p></p><p>Here you go - again. In which post did I comment on the adequacy of the 10mm for bear defense. All my posts related to 10mm have been comparisons to larger bore, more powerful, revolver cartridges. Was it when I stated <em>"This is why I always add, wish you well with the 10mm. Because there's a lotta wishful thinking going on there."?</em> Did you conclude, <em>ah-hah!</em>, phorwath just said 10mms are inadequate, and decide it would make great reading? Rather than miss-translate my statements, why not just include my statements in "quotations" to your post? No doubt it'll lack flair and drama, won't echo off the sides of the mountains, <u>but at least it'll be truthful and accurate</u>. I prefer revolvers and their more powerful cartridges, which is to say, I think the 10mm is inferior, in comparison. I never stated the 10mm was adequate or inadequate. I don't miss-translate and miss-represent your statements. Would be wonderful if you extended the same courtesy.</p><p></p><p>Point 3) I quote your statement:</p><p></p><p>"I'd say giving any further opinions let alone facts on this subject is a waste of time."</p><p></p><p>Only you can decide if your opinions and facts are a waste of your time. Your false characterizations of my post, and complete fabrications… they're a problem no matter what you decide.</p><p></p><p>Point 4) I quote your statement:</p><p></p><p>"I've read 51 pages of 2-3 members running a bone up the backside of the 10mm user's opinions.</p><p></p><p>Agree to disagree is where that puts us."</p><p></p><p>Must be something about "50" pages. As in 49 is still OK… </p><p>I'm glad you said you agree to disagree. You sure had me fooled with the "bone up the backside" statement. Didn't think you had the capability of agreeing to disagree. My opinions run a bone up your backside, correct? I'm soooo fortunate that your expressed opinions have no such affect. Never knew the goal was agreement, never expected it, never demanded it.</p><p></p><p>Crediting me with fabricated statements, I admit that's an irritant. Suggests little tolerance for disagreement and the need to prevail. No reason to fabricate false statements, and then promote them as "facts". Your choice. Your prerogative. As it's mine to correct your false categorizations of my prior posts. Consequence... your credibility suffers all the way around.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Pdvdh, post: 2047843, member: 4191"] Wow, there's an energetic mouthful. Was there an attempt to say the 10mm with the best bullet will out-penetrate the big bore revolver cartridges with the worst bullet selection? It seems penetration, or the lack thereof, pushed you over the edge. I wasn't expecting to learn the 10mm could compete. Everyone knows that's not possible given equal bullet selections. Was just looking for some real-life 10mm penetration depths on game. After all, we are discussing defensive sidearms for big animals. But maybe my question was unfair because the 10mm can't compete, and irrelevant because bears are the largest man-eating predator on the North American continent. If you wanna be credible, be truthful. Point 1) I quote your statement: “Would that matter to someone that believes revolvers NEVER fail but semi's do.” That’s a real [B][I]whopper[/I][/B] of a fabrication. What prompted that? Remind us all? In which post did I make that statement? Point 2) I quote your statement: “These facts still wouldn't change your opinions on the 10mm being an adequate bear defense round.” Here you go - again. In which post did I comment on the adequacy of the 10mm for bear defense. All my posts related to 10mm have been comparisons to larger bore, more powerful, revolver cartridges. Was it when I stated [I]“This is why I always add, wish you well with the 10mm. Because there's a lotta wishful thinking going on there.”?[/I] Did you conclude, [I]ah-hah![/I], phorwath just said 10mms are inadequate, and decide it would make great reading? Rather than miss-translate my statements, why not just include my statements in “quotations” to your post? No doubt it’ll lack flair and drama, won’t echo off the sides of the mountains, [U]but at least it’ll be truthful and accurate[/U]. I prefer revolvers and their more powerful cartridges, which is to say, I think the 10mm is inferior, in comparison. I never stated the 10mm was adequate or inadequate. I don’t miss-translate and miss-represent your statements. Would be wonderful if you extended the same courtesy. Point 3) I quote your statement: “I'd say giving any further opinions let alone facts on this subject is a waste of time.” Only you can decide if your opinions and facts are a waste of your time. Your false characterizations of my post, and complete fabrications… they’re a problem no matter what you decide. Point 4) I quote your statement: “I've read 51 pages of 2-3 members running a bone up the backside of the 10mm user’s opinions. Agree to disagree is where that puts us.” Must be something about “50” pages. As in 49 is still OK… I’m glad you said you agree to disagree. You sure had me fooled with the “bone up the backside” statement. Didn't think you had the capability of agreeing to disagree. My opinions run a bone up your backside, correct? I’m soooo fortunate that your expressed opinions have no such affect. Never knew the goal was agreement, never expected it, never demanded it. Crediting me with fabricated statements, I admit that’s an irritant. Suggests little tolerance for disagreement and the need to prevail. No reason to fabricate false statements, and then promote them as “facts”. Your choice. Your prerogative. As it’s mine to correct your false categorizations of my prior posts. Consequence... your credibility suffers all the way around. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Side Arm for Grizzly Country
Top