RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


tazzygirl -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 2:29:00 PM)

quote:

all of the shooters mentioned were under 21 an thus it was a violation of federal law for them to own a handgun


We know..... you are late to the party.

All were legally obtained by someone they knew.

quote:

It claims to tell us how many times something of which there is no record happenes there it is nothing but a wag (wild a!! guess)


Its been documented.




BamaD -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 2:54:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Ugh.... this is what you arent getting.

Consider how long it takes to operate a pump shot gun. Hard to kill 39 people with it, no?

How about a pistol? Time to reload eventually before you hit that magical number you want to claim.

If the killer had not had two semi automatic weapons in that school, would he have killed as many as he did? The answer is no.

How many guns would someone have to take with them to do the same type of damage as it would take with a semi automatic or an automatic. These kids grabbed those weapons to so the maximum amount of damage in a short period of time. Thats the goal. Kill as many as possible then themselves before being caught. But, like those in Columbine, and those yesterday, if they did not have access to those guns, to any guns, they would have had to find a different avenue to killing.

Somehow, I think you missed my whole discussion with LaT about gun safes.




A pump shotgun works faster than you think(in the right hands) never has to run out of shells (you can reload without empting the weapon ) and a 12 ga is far more leathal than a .223 meaning you would need less amunition todo the same damage




jlf1961 -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 3:06:06 PM)

Hmm, I think I see a trend here.

I read a post and then went back through the entire thread.

And the phrase "hundreds of bullets" has indeed come up repeatedly.

Red Jacket Firearms of Louisiana made a twin mount full auto set of AR15's with beta mags (mags that hold 100 rounds.)

IN the mag dump test fire (mag dump, change mags and maintain fire) in one minute the weapon was so hot that the gas return tube was red hot and the weapon actually ceased to function.

They had to water cool the barrels to make it functional.

There is no way humanly possible that you can achieve the maximum rate of fire from any semi automatic weapon.

Full auto assault weapons can have a cycle rate of 600 to 1200 rounds a minute, not that you want to do that, you will as has been said, melt the barrel. For the record that happened quite often to the belt fed M60 SAW in the Vietnam conflict.

So with a semi auto rifle, lets figure a max rate of fire of say 60 rounds a minute at a range. I doubt very seriously if this shooter got even close to that.




freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 3:13:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Uh, may I ask a simple question?

Considering guns are easier to smuggle than drugs, and the ATF has intercepted large numbers of guns entering the country, what do you propose to do about the guns that weren't intercepted.

Hell we cant even keep the illegal aliens with back packs full of cocaine from coming across the Mexican border, unless we put an ICE agent every five feet along the border and inspect every vehicle that crosses the border by tearing every body panel in it out, and inspecting every box and crate in every container that arrives in every port and crosses the borders every day, how in the hell to you propose to keep the damn things out?

For drugs, they have many sniffer dogs.
They don't go searching every person or their baggage at airports do they?
No, they only stop those indicated by sniffer dogs and some at random where they have some sort of suspicion or it shows that they have a previous infringement.

They can also use swabs and stick that in a machine to detect all sorts of drugs.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
2000 people a year die by privately owned and legal guns of all types and calibers.

30000 men, women and children die each year by illegal guns in the hands of gang members.

Save 2000 and ignore the others because the majority if them live in poor neighborhoods where drive by shootings are the norm.

You come up with a way to effectively and realistically get rid of every illegal gun in this country and keep more from getting in, then we can talk. Until then, more people are gonna die with illegal guns and a fucking hell of a lot of them are going to be kids.

So why not just ban all privately owned guns like they did in the UK??
Anyone caught with with a gun, any sort of gun, they get a minimum of 10 years inside - no bargaining and no parole.

They did it in the UK, so why not the US??
Give them 3 months amnesty to turn in all weapons and ammo before the law becomes a statute.
Simples! [;)]

And as I suggested before - round up all the gang members at regular intervals and confiscate any drugs or weapons. Those that are caught, bang them up for posession.
They are doing that over here to try and reduce the amount of drugs hitting the streets.
They are also prosecuting gang members for having knives too.


You just can't see a life without your precious toys can you.
And like all the other NRA supporters, you'll fight tooth and nail just because it says you can in the 2nd.
Simple solution... Make civilian gun ownership illegal and the 2nd becomes redundant and can be abolished.
I just fail to see why you and similar others have such a problem with it.
If the 2nd is severely curtailed or abolished, you no longer have that right to lose [:D]


My grandfather fought in both world wars.
He was alive when they initially banned guns in the UK and he fought, just like you, to protect his rights to own guns. After all, he served his country, twice, and thought he deserved to have his guns "for protection".
Our government at the time just changed the law for the good of the country.
It was a case of like it or lump it - there wasn't any choice given.

I was born after that time and obviously brought up without the populace owning guns.
My grandfather didn't regret it (eventually), my father never regretted it, and neither do I.
I daresay there were a few that took their grievences to their grave.
But just look at the number of gun-related crimes that we have in the UK (per capita) to that of the US.
Isn't it plainly obvious that the new laws to drastically reduce firearms were quite effective??

I don't think any child's life, or any gun-related victim, is worth the freedom to bear arms.




tazzygirl -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 3:20:53 PM)

There were 3 - 11 shots in those bodies, according to the coroner.

quote:

He said all of the victims at the school, including 20 first-graders and six adults, were shot with a Bushmaster AR-15 assault rifle and that "numerous" magazines were emptied at the scene. Lanza, a quiet young man described as developmentally disabled and who struggled socially, had hundreds of bullets that went unused, Vance said.

"There was a lot of ammo, a lot of clips," he said. "Certainly a lot of lives were potentially saved" by first responders approaching the school.


http://www.newsday.com/news/nation/officials-adam-lanza-shot-way-into-sandy-hook-elementary-1.4339051




Aswad -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 3:48:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

At what point do the lives of innocent children ever be less than the price of some freedoms??


Nearly fourteen billion years ago, pretty much, but we can still play ball.

And, really, what's wrong with taking the time to think before acting?

I wish the shooter had taken more time to think before acting.

That way, we would've had less corpses lying around.

Anyway, I don't see it as an unreasonable measure to impose a storage requirement based on a gun safe with either keys or code lock or both (mandating both strikes me as being unlikely to provide a major benefit over using one of the two, but I personally favor both, and personally prefer to keep the bolt stored seperate from the rifles; I don't see the potential benefit as consummate with its effect on the probability of passing such a measure). Nor do I see it as unreasonable to ban private ownership of large magazines. Heck, I don't even mind collecting previously sold large magazines, though I do think it would be better to instate a buyback programme.

That strikes me as a less impulsive, more palatable and likely far more effective measure than trying to restrict.

And, as I've said before, my country has digits fewer gun deaths per capita, with restrictions that wouldn't have stopped this incident and gun ownership rates that rank 11th in the world (out of 170'ish countries), so I think there's other measures that will make a difference I don't think you'll see from restrictions. Where there's enough suffering, alienation, disempowerment and fear, you will always find people killing each other. Try solving those problems, and focus on the restrictions that make sense because they make a difference.

Legislating from a fear of guns and gun related violence strikes me as irrational, as human fear is usually based on shitty risk assessment overall.

Rushing such legislation strikes me as downright irresponsible.

IWYW,
— Aswad.




tazzygirl -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 3:56:22 PM)

quote:

And, as I've said before, my country has digits fewer gun deaths per capita, with restrictions that wouldn't have stopped this incident and gun ownership rates that rank 11th in the world (out of 170'ish countries), so I think there's other measures that will make a difference I don't think you'll see from restrictions. Where there's enough suffering, alienation, disempowerment and fear, you will always find people killing each other. Try solving those problems, and focus on the restrictions that make sense because they make a difference.


I agree, there are other measures we need to take. I mentioned to GotSteel on another thread (I think it wasnt this one) that we have to talk about now only guns, but other issues as well. In many of these cases, mental health is a problem.




Just0Plain0Mike -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 4:48:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Hmm, I think I see a trend here.

I read a post and then went back through the entire thread.

And the phrase "hundreds of bullets" has indeed come up repeatedly.

Red Jacket Firearms of Louisiana made a twin mount full auto set of AR15's with beta mags (mags that hold 100 rounds.)

IN the mag dump test fire (mag dump, change mags and maintain fire) in one minute the weapon was so hot that the gas return tube was red hot and the weapon actually ceased to function.

They had to water cool the barrels to make it functional.

There is no way humanly possible that you can achieve the maximum rate of fire from any semi automatic weapon.

Full auto assault weapons can have a cycle rate of 600 to 1200 rounds a minute, not that you want to do that, you will as has been said, melt the barrel. For the record that happened quite often to the belt fed M60 SAW in the Vietnam conflict.

So with a semi auto rifle, lets figure a max rate of fire of say 60 rounds a minute at a range. I doubt very seriously if this shooter got even close to that.


No, no Jeff. The newspaper says that his pistols all fire 5 rounds per second, and if it's in a newspaper it MUST be true. ;)




tazzygirl -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 5:04:22 PM)

For an M-16A1

650 - 750 rounds per minute

For an M-16 A2

700 - 950 rounds per minute

http://world.guns.ru/assault/usa/m16-m16a1-m16a2-m16a3-e.html

Bushmaster

Cyclic rate of Fire: 45 - 90 in Semi-Automatic

http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=7&f=21&t=446537




jlf1961 -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 5:20:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

For an M-16A1

650 - 750 rounds per minute

For an M-16 A2

700 - 950 rounds per minute

http://world.guns.ru/assault/usa/m16-m16a1-m16a2-m16a3-e.html

Bushmaster

Cyclic rate of Fire: 45 - 90 in Semi-Automatic

http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=7&f=21&t=446537



Tazzy, the M16, A1, A2, A3 are military weapons not in the hands of the general public. And the rate of fire you are quoting is in full auto.

The bushmaster, AR 15, and all those weapons civilians can buy based on the AR frame are all semi automatic.

Dont believe me, go to your local gun store and ask for yourself.

In other words, you are comparing apples to steak.




tazzygirl -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 5:22:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

For an M-16A1

650 - 750 rounds per minute

For an M-16 A2

700 - 950 rounds per minute

http://world.guns.ru/assault/usa/m16-m16a1-m16a2-m16a3-e.html

Bushmaster

Cyclic rate of Fire: 45 - 90 in Semi-Automatic

http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=7&f=21&t=446537



Tazzy, the M16, A1, A2, A3 are military weapons not in the hands of the general public. And the rate of fire you are quoting is in full auto.

The bushmaster, AR 15, and all those weapons civilians can buy based on the AR frame are all semi automatic.

Dont believe me, go to your local gun store and ask for yourself.

In other words, you are comparing apples to steak.


Im not comparing anything.

I posted the M 16 so no one would think I am pulling numbers out of no where.

SOME of us actually do research this shit.




Just0Plain0Mike -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 5:24:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

For an M-16A1

650 - 750 rounds per minute

For an M-16 A2

700 - 950 rounds per minute

http://world.guns.ru/assault/usa/m16-m16a1-m16a2-m16a3-e.html

Bushmaster

Cyclic rate of Fire: 45 - 90 in Semi-Automatic

http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=7&f=21&t=446537



Tazzy, the M16, A1, A2, A3 are military weapons not in the hands of the general public. And the rate of fire you are quoting is in full auto.

The bushmaster, AR 15, and all those weapons civilians can buy based on the AR frame are all semi automatic.

Dont believe me, go to your local gun store and ask for yourself.

In other words, you are comparing apples to steak.


And since I specifically said pistols, comparing apples to steak when I mentioned tuna fish.




tazzygirl -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 5:28:32 PM)

quote:

And since I specifically said pistols, comparing apples to steak when I mentioned tuna fish.


Since most of the fire came from the Bushmaster

Lanza shot his mother, Nancy Lanza, to death at the home they shared Friday, then drove to Sandy Hook Elementary School in her car with at least three of her guns, forced his way in by breaking a window and opened fire, authorities said. Within minutes, he killed the children, six adults and himself.

All the victims at the school were shot with a rifle, at least some of them up close, and all were apparently shot more than once, Chief Medical Examiner Dr. H. Wayne Carver said. There were as many as 11 shots on the bodies he examined. Lanza died of a gunshot wound to the head that was self-inflicted, the medical examiner said Sunday.


http://www.salon.com/2012/12/16/lanzas_body_found_with_ammo_for_even_more_carnage/

.... the rifle is more pertinent.




Moonhead -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 5:29:33 PM)

So the twat only used a pistol to put a bullet through his own head, then?




LookieNoNookie -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 5:30:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Starting this thread to keep the one about the Massacre in Connecticut from going to far off the point, one mentally unbalanced individual killing people for no good reason.

Now for some facts:

quote:

More than 53,000 people have been murdered in Mexico in the last six years—most of them by a variety of pistols, rifles, and assault weapons owned by Mexican drug cartels. While the exact number of firearms in circulation in Mexico eludes everyone, we know tens of thousands are seized every year by Mexican authorities.

These facts and figures might lead one to believe that it’s easy for cartels to buy or otherwise acquire guns in Mexico. In fact, Mexico has some of the strictest gun control laws on the entire planet—as well as one of the planet’s highest annual death tolls as a result of gun violence.
source


Now before you anti-gun fanatics start saying that the drug thugs are just going across the border into the states to get their firearms, I might as well point out that these cartels are using a lot of automatic weapons, meaning they primarily use the "spray and pray" style of shooting.

quote:

On the other hand, you might look at this little set of facts.

In Sandpoint, North Idaho, where I live for most of the summer, it's extremely easy to buy a gun. You can buy them at stores and at gun shows, or just at yard sales. Yet there are almost no gun deaths in Bonner County, Idaho.

The last ones of note in North Idaho were done by the FBI at Ruby Ridge, and that's a different story./snip

On the other hand, in my beloved Los Angeles, where I live most of the year, there's extremely strict gun control. It's a real project to buy a gun.

Here, we have gang shootings and death by guns on a terrifying scale. In my native city of Washington, D.C., the same goes: Strict gun control and lots of shootings.

The same goes for Chicago. Strict gun control and a lot of killing.

source


Another example of a country with strict gun control laws is Jamaica, very strict laws and a very high rate of gun violence.

Of course there is Israel, very lax gun laws and very low rate of gun violence.

And people who are pro-gun are not monsters who care nothing for human life or the damage a gun can do. I am a combat vet, and I know full and well what a weapon in the right or even wrong hands can do.

I can also say that if I had to, I could go to the nearest large city, spend a day or two and come home with a few untraceable weapons that may or may not be available legally.

Of course, you could look at the rampant use of firearms in the various civil and tribal wars going on in Africa. I can guarantee that those killers did not go down to the local sporting goods store and buy those weapons.

I own sporting weapons and some collectables. There is one weapon that I have been trying to get in my collection for a number of years, a Soviet Era Dragunov sniper rifle. They are illegal to import into the United States and have been for a number of years. The only ones legally allowed to be sold in the United States are those that got here before the ban.

Recently, at a gun show I was told that I could buy one, but the price was 3 times the market price, which to me indicated the weapon would be illegal.

The point, anyone can get a gun at any time, anyplace for the right price.


Ya know what...I get this whole thing but, the world has changed.

It is true...in the U.S. at least, where there are more gun owners, crime is less....but, I don't give a shit what hunters say...no one needs a gun that can rip off 43 rounds in a second.

Not needed to protect your house, or fill your freezer.

I hate guns, yet I have almost 20 of them, largely because I live in a rural area on a large property and I simply ain't 23 any more.

I do believe the second amendment is sacrosanct and it mandates that to be in a position to challenge our own government, we need to be able to bear arms....not just have the right to but in fact be able to.

But no one needs a Gattling gun which can rip someones torso in half with one pull, and 2.7 seconds effort.

There's got to be some middle ground...psychological testing....maybe no more than 5 guns per owner/household....I don't know but the current shit ain't working.




tazzygirl -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 5:30:38 PM)

Seems that way... we also dont know what may have been used in the hallways.




Politesub53 -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 5:32:58 PM)

The 1994 ban on assault rifles would still have stopped people owning the gun used.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/07/20/557811/expired-assault-weapons-ban-would-have-covered-rifle-used-in-colorado-shooting/?mobile=nc




slvemike4u -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 5:39:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

This discussion can no longer afford to be had on such levels Aswad.


Kindly stuff it:

One group doesn't get to set the parameters of governance on behalf of the rest of the population.

Similarly, one poster doesn't get to set the parameters of debate on behalf of the rest of the participants.

quote:

when you can ay the same about your statue than I am sure the authorities in your country will consider appropriate restricions.


I think it's already endangered, on account of too high heavy metal content, to which I can only say as it does: moλov λaße.

— Aswad.

P.S.: I was alerted to the post I replied to. I usually don't see yours, as per our conversation. Please don't waste more time on me.


One poster does not get to set who I reply to and who I don't
The rest of it ,just isn't worth it.




slvemike4u -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 5:45:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

I don't think any of the gun control crowd is under the impression that it will eliminate mass murder but that regulation would mitigate the frequency of such events.

Wow,someone actually gets it !!!!!!
Imagine that,imagine that these things do not happen so often that we have grown desensitized to it ?
But some would suggest if we cannot prohibit all such incidences than we have no right to do anything at all




Aswad -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 6:01:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

The 1994 ban on assault rifles would still have stopped people owning the gun used.


Assault weapons, not assault rifles; there's a difference.

The gun used is actually legal in Norway, as noted.

No school shootings so far (fingers crossed).

IWYW,
— Aswad.




Page: <<   < prev  13 14 [15] 16 17   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625