5wim

joined 11 months ago
[–] [email protected] 18 points 4 months ago

How a gun "works" is that a thick-walled chamber houses the cartridge, so that as the powder ignited within rapidly expands (deflagration) there is nowhere for it to go besides violently propelling the projectile into the barrel. If there is no chamber, the thin walls of the cartidge are the path of least resistence, and the bullet likely stays put as the gases escape from cracks in the casing.

So no, while this wouldn't be "safe" (eye damage comes to mind), there would not be enough energy to significantly wound a human by striking a round's primer without a chamber.

[–] [email protected] 39 points 4 months ago (11 children)

No barrel makes the whole round detonate. The bullet is ineffective, the "gun" explode :(

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

autististic

Repeating patterns, checks out

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 months ago (1 children)

"Did you think I was gonna mug you?" came from the girl, not 2A bro

[–] [email protected] 16 points 4 months ago

Not to mention her luxury room and board, the shopping sprees, and the jewelry gifts.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago

I'm familiar with every large "delivery app" service, and none involve a situation where the driver fronts their personal money. That's ridiculous. The app service gives the driver a credit card for situations where in-person payment is required.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Everything you're quoting is from the link I posted, saying things I've already said in other comments. I'm proud of you for reading the information.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (4 children)

Based on a 100-gram comparison, the Impossible Burger has more favorable stats for protein (17.2 g compared with beef’s 16.8 g), fiber (4.4 g to beef’s 0 g), and iron (3.7 mg to beef’s 2 mg) than traditional beef. It’s also lower in calories with fewer grams of total fat (11.5 g vs beef’s 19.9 g) and saturated fat (5.3 g vs beef’s 7.3 g)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

Did I ask you to continue providing studies? Agenda? Good luck, friend.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I just told you why the study you linked is invalid for this conversation. Do you want me to quote the comment you just replied to so you can reread it?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago (4 children)

Oh honey, your stealth edit shows that you don't understand. I'll explain it to you: the study you keep linking doesn't differentiate between those foods in that "range of ultra-processed foods (UPF)," so that means data coming from "sugar-sweetened beverages, snacks, confectionery" is getting all mixed in with the data of the "‘plant-sourced’ sausages, nuggets, and burgers," which unfortunately renders the conclusions of the study rather meaningless when we're talking about the CVD outcomes of just one of the data sets.

view more: ‹ prev next ›