Explain the Focus on AR-15s and Mass Shootings

Ya INDOOR, that's a heart stopper LMAO Try in-between two concrete walls, that will get your attention!!

 

ee=

Easy. Simple, lightweight guns like the AR-15 are simple, light weight and easy to use

 

i have two sets of hearing enhancing head sets that block gun fire . One's in my upstairs office next to my SIG MCX and the other is in my downstairs bedroom next to my FAXON 9mm Carbine. I probably am going to buy a HM Defense with an internal suppressor in the near future for that reason alone.

 

It's hilarious watching people who have a political hard on against AR 15s trying to argue against a weapon they have no clue about with those of us who own and use them constantly

 

Personally I have fired a few hundred rounds from an AR-15 in the past.

 

I don't shoot my 556 versions much these days-but i run several thousand rounds a year through my two PCC race guns I use for steel competitions. If I had to guess it would be

about 25K of 556
about 1000 rounds of 545x39 (I have an AR 15 in that caliber)
about 500 rounds of 308 through an AR 10
about 4000 rounds through various AKs in 556
another 5K through 762x39 AK
another 2500 rounds through FN -FALs in 762 NATO
and a few thousand in stuff like HK93, HK or CETME 91s and VALMET 76 and AR 180

 

Sorry but rights aren't unlimited.

 

That's one.

 

Because the (D)ishonest are very good at preying on the emotions of the ignorant. I know.
They do it because they know it works.

Fact is, there are 20,000,000 AR15s in the US
Fact, is, in the 636 mass shootings in the US, a total of 8 involved the AR15.
Where's the red herring?

The operable term is "bearable arm"
There is no sound argument to support the premise the AR15 does not qualify as one.

Sorry, no.

 

Can we count 22LR if the rifle's were semi auto If yes, I'd low ball 200K easy

 

Oh yeah, one of my archery students was shooting with me today-she was using a 617 ten shot smith and wesson revolver with ANSAC (the best there is) speed loaders and a Tippman 22 AR 15 race gun. She really liked the AR in 22 after shooting my HM Defense 223 a couple weeks ago. The Tippman is set up for shooting steel plate matches

 

I remember the Gov lockdown on 22 ammo when Reagan was shot.. Them was rough days for a spell Most fun I ever had was with a 44mag carbine It started my reloading addiction as it would not cycle with a factory round and required hot loads to function correctly and reliably. We used to laugh, the range was so short we'd pretend it was a mortar. But 100yrds or less it was a blunder buster, hit a prairie dog and it would vaporize it Finally got strapped for cash and pawned it, wish I hadn't now

 

That's one what?

I gave several reasons why attempting to reduce school mass killings by eliminating "assault weapons" is a proven failure and you cannot refute even one.

 

There's not really a connection.


It's just a means to an end and it's just one step In the journey that they're doing and they already taken quite a few steps.

They don't know anything about the AR-15 they don't want to know anything about the AR-15 or what it does or how it's just a rifle they don't care. They just want to take an inch and they are stupid any low level they can to get it including using the corpses of children as a pedestal to set their soapbox upon.

A lot of the people that post on here supporting this that are United States citizens don't really understand the danger the opinions they hold are cultural. Don lemon or Rachel maddow tell them that people who have guns are also the people who vote for republicans and who are Christian and who hate gay people and so forth they do this with everything electric cars environmentalism diet. Everything

So it really is a cult of personality. But this is really rather a 30,000 ft view.

 

One bombing.

 

well yeah self defense. That was easy.

If I was going to shoot in close quarters I wouldn't pick an AR-15 it's not a good firearm for that. Idiots in the media decided that it was and that's why.

Call something an assault weapon enough times people will believe it. Kind of like a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Reality is most people who commit mass murder use pistols. It's not like they're anymore or less deadly

 

What was unique about that particular bombing is that it was deadlier than any other school mass shooting.

I believe that you're missing my point which is that if there were no access to firearms, determined killers will simply switch to using crude WMDs that kill even more people than firearms due to collateral damage as was the case at the "Happy Land Fire" (1).

The determined killer in this case only wanted to kill one person; his ex-girlfriend. Since this occurred in NYC, the killer couldn't find a gun so he does what every determined killer will do if he can't find a gun.

No, he doesn't give up, go home and turn from his life of crime as gun control advocates would have you believe.

He makes a crude but simple WMD requiring only one dollar's worth of gasoline and successfully killed 86 innocent people plus his ex-girlfriend.

This is why I predict that America's homicide rate will actually climb if and when guns become hard to find.

Killers who only want to kill just one person will firebomb an entire home or apartment building to kill an adversary so rather than just one homicide by gun, you have many more homicides by crude WMD and America's homicide rate climbs to that of the 60+ countries(2) that already have stricter gun laws AND higher homicide rates than the US.

If stricter gun laws worked, they would work everywhere, not just in a handful of mostly wealthy, White, older and smaller countries unlike the US that have much more affordable and assessable mental health care to help detect, treat and monitor homicidal individuals before they kill.

Finally, since there are countless substances and objects that are cheap and readily available to act as crude but lethal WMDs, it makes no sense to try to control human behavior by attempting to control inanimate objects.
The only way that America is going to lower its homicide rate is to upgrade its mental health care system so that it can detect, treat and monitor homicidal individuals before they kill.

Thanks,






(1). "Happy Land fire"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_Land_fire

EXCERPT "González went to an Amoco gas station, then returned to the establishment with a plastic container with $1 worth of gasoline.[2][4] He spread the fuel at the base of a staircase, the only access into the club, and then ignited the gasoline.[5]

Eighty-seven people died in the resulting fire."CONTINUED


(2). "Intentional homicides (per 100,000 people) - Country Ranking"
https://www.indexmundi.com/facts/indicators/VC.IHR.PSRC.P5/rankings

 

No they won't.

 

Well, there are over 60 countries with higher homicide rates than the US and much stricter gun laws.

If not guns, what are those people using to kill each other at such a fast rate?

 

They meant the bombing. I do agree that bombs aren’t a good counterexample. They do require a lot more skill and expertise than using a rifle, and so is an option more for “evil geniuses” like the unabomber or those with military training. Consider the 2017 Spain terrorist cell attacks. They attempted to build a large bomb, I think even with some training on it, and ended up blowing up their own hideout with it. In the end their most effective attack was with a vehicle on a crowded street.

 

My point was that crude but deadly WMDs are not limited to bombs and if guns are not available, you can be sure to see some nasty Bio - Chemical concoctions as well as plenty of gasoline based creations.

After all, people figured out how to kill each other long before guns were invented and I see no signs of things changing soon.

Thanks,

 

Bravo! That is an excellent response. Thanks for taking the time.

I do want to take a deeper look at the paragraph I included from your response above. To me, the fentanyl problem is a lot like the school shooting issue, maybe even more scary. It seems that most people know of at least one person that has been killed by overdoses, if it hasn't even happened to someone in their family. That is not necessarilly the case with mass shootings. You send your kids to school and expect them to be safe. You don't expect that they might get killed by trying some drug that get's pushed to them on the way home. Guns are not not nearly as prevalent in school settings as drugs are. But I agree with you that people seem to think that drug problems are a problem that people bring upon themselves. That is true to some extent but right now, a lot of the fairly safe drugs are laced with really bad drugs. That is something that those people don't bring upon themselves. Can you immagine the outcry if people started lacing chicken nuggets with fentanyl?

 

What does "shall not be infringed" mean?