LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS***[W:13]***[W:1213] (1 Viewer)

[Tigerace117]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

there is no doubt the STG helped inspire Comrade Kalashnikov earn his "hero of the soviet Union" award. Other interesting facts-the ancestor of both the M14 and the Beretta BM-59 was apparently an MI Garand that some tanker rigged up to use 20 round BAR automatic rifle magazines rather than the issued 8 round bloc clips

I think that was the M2 carbine, descended from the M1 carbine, rather than the Garand but I could be wrong.

 

[TurtleDude]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

I think that was the M2 carbine, descended from the M1 carbine, rather than the Garand but I could be wrong.

you are right and the M2 carbine is nothing more than a MI carbine with a selector switch. Later models of both had a beefed up magazine release to accommodate the heavier 30 round magazine (the MI originally had a 15 round lighter magazine)

the MI Garand was a the 8 shot 30-06 main battle rifle which I was referring to as the ancestor of the M14 and the BM 59. (Italy got a ton of Garands from Uncle Sam after the war)

 

[Plus Ultra]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

Yes I do. I actually read to the bottom but did not look, as I thought they were all Indiana lawyers. Where I saw this...

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has held that a person who unintentionally injures a third party bystander while using justifiable force in self-defense may not be criminally liable for his injury to the bystander.

The rest of those Lawyers should have checked with the SCOTUS...

In 1 Whart. Crim. Law, (9th Ed.) § 488, the author says: ‘It is conceded on all sides that it is enough if the danger which the defendant seeks to avert is apparently imminent, irremediable, and actual.’ Bang v. State, 60 Miss. 571; Shorter v. People, 2 N.Y. 193; Logue v. Com., 38 Pa. St. 265. And the same rule of immunity extends to civil as to criminal cases. If the injury was done by the defendant in justifiable self-defense, he can neither be punished criminally, nor held responsible for damages in a civil action. Because the act was lawful, he is wholly relieved from responsibility for its consequences. 3 Bl. Comm. 121. The case of Morris v. Platt, 32 Conn. 75, fully illustrates the extent to which immunity goes. In that case it appeared that the defendant when assaulted had fired in self-defense, and, missing the assailant, had wounded an innocent by-stander, and the court held that the party thus assailed was free from both civil and criminal liability. The act which he had done was lawful, and without negligence, and no one, not even a third party, not an assailant, but an innocent by-stander, could make him answer in damages for the injury occasioned thereby. - http://gosnellpc.com/2017/01/24/self-defense-liability/

Anything else?

Solid rebuttal, no, there's nothing else on this issue.

 

[Atomic Kid]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

Yes I do. I actually read to the bottom but did not look, as I thought they were all Indiana lawyers. Where I saw this...

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has held that a person who unintentionally injures a third party bystander while using justifiable force in self-defense may not be criminally liable for his injury to the bystander.

The rest of those Lawyers should have checked with the SCOTUS...

In 1 Whart. Crim. Law, (9th Ed.) § 488, the author says: ‘It is conceded on all sides that it is enough if the danger which the defendant seeks to avert is apparently imminent, irremediable, and actual.’ Bang v. State, 60 Miss. 571; Shorter v. People, 2 N.Y. 193; Logue v. Com., 38 Pa. St. 265. And the same rule of immunity extends to civil as to criminal cases. If the injury was done by the defendant in justifiable self-defense, he can neither be punished criminally, nor held responsible for damages in a civil action. Because the act was lawful, he is wholly relieved from responsibility for its consequences. 3 Bl. Comm. 121. The case of Morris v. Platt, 32 Conn. 75, fully illustrates the extent to which immunity goes. In that case it appeared that the defendant when assaulted had fired in self-defense, and, missing the assailant, had wounded an innocent by-stander, and the court held that the party thus assailed was free from both civil and criminal liability. The act which he had done was lawful, and without negligence, and no one, not even a third party, not an assailant, but an innocent by-stander, could make him answer in damages for the injury occasioned thereby. - http://gosnellpc.com/2017/01/24/self-defense-liability/

Anything else?

Well just make sure if that you shoot someone that you do it Pennsylvania then. LOL! Every shooting case different is must be looked at individually so it's not like one size fits all and even that opinion that doesn't mean that you will be completely insulated from having defend yourself in a suit. With that I shall end this discussion for tonight for I've had enough of going around in circles now. So have yourself a good night.

 

[Atomic Kid]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

And after it is dropped for being frivolous, then what? What happened to the proof of criminal charges? Which is what Atomic, originally claimed.

Oh wait I forgot. Just one more thing. That is not what I originally claimed. I claimed that you will have to answer for it. You're the one that took that as being only in the criminal sense and not in the civil.

 

[justabubba]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

translation, more government is your answer to every issue

for this issue it will be a significant component
sound public policy is needed

 

[justabubba]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

Because the fact remains that the US 30 years ago had an astronomical number of guns and this wasn’t the problem it’s becoming. It’s not the guns. It’s the shooters. 30 years ago schools had shooting clubs. 30 years ago students had guns in their cars to go hunting after school.

It’s not the guns. Blaming it on guns is simple minded.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

not seeing that too easy access to guns is a big part of the problem is what is found simple minded

 

[Parrish]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

What is the NRA's solution to mass shootings? Besides fewer doors.

 

[vegas giants]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

What is the NRA's solution to mass shootings? Besides fewer doors.

Expanded thoughts and prayers

 

[Lursa]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

It's not just about shooting faster. It's about being able to reload faster and the other add on that AR 15 has the type of platform that has a high degree of flexibility and adaptability that can easily accommodate additions. Like folding or telescoping stocks, forward pistol grips, tripods flash suppressors, laser sights and optics and etc. Those are features you won't find on your typical hunting rifle. If you want a semi-auto rifle that has some of the capabilities of AR but still able to fall within the legal limits of the laws some states have against assault weapons. The Mini 14 would be an excellent choice.

The .223 is generally thought to be the standard caliber for a AR 15. A small caliber high velocity round that is quite accurate. An AR 15 that is originally chambered for .223 can only shoot .223. However AR 15s that are originally chambered for 5.56 NATO can shoot either .223 or 5.56 safely. Ammo selection as to bullet weight depends on the barrel twist rate. Faster twist rates such as 1/7 are capable of firing bullets up to 77 grains, while slower twist such as 1/12 can only stabilize lighter bullets, such as 55 grain FMJ. The AR 15 platform does lend it self to fairly easy conversions to other calibers. Although this will be somewhat limited by magazine size. Such as the heavier rifle rounds such as the 7.62x35mm (AK 47), .300 Blackout, .30 carbine or even pistol rounds such as 9mm, 10mm or 45 ACP. You just may have to change out things such as the upper receiver or other parts such as the bolt carrier and or barrel accordingly. AR 15s generally aren't recommended for large game where you would prefer rounds that provides for a very quick and clean kills. So as you see it's a very flexible platform. You can really trick them out.

A tactical shot gun has it's limits in a comparison to a high velocity assault rifle. Such as effective range, number of shots and the reloading mechanism and the ability for rapid and accurate followup shots. But for defensive purposes, especially in close quarter confrontations, there aren't too many things out there that can beat a shotgun.

That's alot of dancing around a pretty simple question: arent there other rifles that do the same thing with the same ammo?

And the answer is yes.

And any differences are very negligible. And the Santa Fe shooter did a ton of damage with a shotgun. While holding off 2 cops.

You have provided no valid reasons to restrict ownership of ARs.

 

[TurtleDude]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

for this issue it will be a significant component
sound public policy is needed

passing laws that merely inconvenience lawful gun owners without impacting those who harm others or failing to address why we have kids snapping today when this was rare back when kids were allowed to take guns to school is a waste of time

 

[TurtleDude]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

not seeing that too easy access to guns is a big part of the problem is what is found simple minded

that's a loaded question. those whose demand more gun laws think that restricting honest people = decreasing easy access to guns. In many cases, easy access involves the black market. Handguns were banned in Chicago but it seemed as if every gangbanger had one. one thing is true-all of the proposed gun laws don't change the fact that those who don't mind breaking the law will still have easy access to firearms. and that is the real issue. The attitude that "if we ban 100 million people from legally owning something, it might prevent 100 thugs from getting it" is a non-starter and those who push it clearly are more interested in banning guns for everyone than actually stopping criminals

heroin, LSD, Crank and coke are all completely banned and any college kid can tell you its easily accessible (save perhaps at BYU)

 

[TurtleDude]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

What is the NRA's solution to mass shootings? Besides fewer doors.

what's the NAACPs?
the ACLUs?
the LGTB movement's?
the Teamsters?
the AFL-CIOs?
The American Association of Distillers?
NASCAR's?

 

[Atomic Kid]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

That's alot of dancing around a pretty simple question: arent there other rifles that do the same thing with the same ammo?

And the answer is yes.

And any differences are very negligible. And the Santa Fe shooter did a ton of damage with a shotgun. While holding off 2 cops.

You have provided no valid reasons to restrict ownership of ARs.

I'm beginning to get the impression whether it's a 5 word explanation or 500 word explanation you're just never going to get it anyway. A trapped quarry is in big trouble anyway no matter how you look at it. But I have great confidence in believing that the carnage would have been worse if he had a AR 15 instead of a shotgun and a .38.

 

[Lursa]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

I'm beginning to get the impression whether it's a 5 word explanation or 500 word explanation you're just never going to get it anyway. A trapped quarry in big trouble anyway you look at it. But I have great confidence in believing that the carnage would have been worse if he had a AR 15 instead of a shotgun and a .38.

Because you seem to be making a pretty useless distinction.

The point is...no matter what restrictions on guns you make, these 'motivated,' strategizing shooters are going to commit these terrible events...all you are doing is presenting new challenges that stoke their egos to overcome.

Maybe your and everyone else's attention would be better spend on identifying, tracking and helping/stopping these losers.

 

[Atomic Kid]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

Because you seem to be making a pretty useless distinction.

The point is...no matter what restrictions on guns you make, these 'motivated,' strategizing shooters are going to commit these terrible events...all you are doing is presenting new challenges that stoke their egos to overcome.

Maybe your and everyone else's attention would be better spend on identifying, tracking and helping/stopping these losers.

Better to make them to have to do so with the least lethal device they get their hands then, wouldn't you say? Like I said you're just not going to get it so have a good night

 

[TurtleDude]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

I'm beginning to get the impression whether it's a 5 word explanation or 500 word explanation you're just never going to get it anyway. A trapped quarry is in big trouble anyway no matter how you look at it. But I have great confidence in believing that the carnage would have been worse if he had a AR 15 instead of a shotgun and a .38.

I am curious since I actually know the answer to this question and the answer is based on several factors including target density, range to the targets and so forth. For example if you are shot once or twice in chest at ten feet with an AR 15 your chance of survival is less than 20%. if you are shot once in the chest with a shotgun using annoying heavier than #7.5 shot your chance at survival is less than 5%. When I was a younger man I was a 95% rated shooter in USPSA-that is now grand master-then it meant I was competitive but not winning Class A pro events. I could shoot an AR 15 fast enough to hit ten stationary targets spaced a yard apart, 25 yards away in less than four seconds. I could do the same with my ten shot benelli shotgun slightly faster. with #4 to 000 buck, the shotgun "wounds" would have been invariably fatal. the rifle "wounds" would have "killed" most of the targets but not with the certainty of the shotgun. Now at 200 yards the shotgun would be rather ineffective. the rifle, still very much so. But save for the aberrations in Texas (Charles Whitman on the Texas Tower) and the far more recent Vegas shooting-two cases where the shooters were shooting from rather substantial distances into massed targets, almost every other mass shooting was perpetrated at essentially point-blank ranges. Sandyhook, the Aurora theater, Fort Hood, the nightclub in Orlando etc were mainly consisting of ranges less than 10 yards. So your claims about AR 15s are specious.

Most of the killers were using the cheapest ammo available-FMJ. FMJ tends to blow right through bodies at close range where the bullet is still spinning extremely fast since most AR 15s use military surplus barrels that are designed to stabilize STANAG tracer rounds or the heavier military rounds/ the normal surplus or commercial ammo is 55 grains which is far less likely to deviate in flesh

shotguns, on the other hand-especially those shooting bird hunting loads like #5 or #6 shot or buckshot tend to dump far more energy and cause far more tissue damage then a single 55 grain bullet spinning extremely quickly due to the 1X7 twist

so your claims about shotguns are just plain wrong in the environments most school shootings feature

 

[VanceMack]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

not seeing that too easy access to guns is a big part of the problem is what is found simple minded

Again...theaccess to weapons today is no different than it was 30 years ago. What HAS changed is society. Society has been in a free fall decline, and leftists merrily have led the rats off the cliff. The breakdown of the family, the destruction of values, the abandonment of traditions, roles, hell...people are so ****ed up in todays society that you would look at a 57 year old man that proclaims he is a 7 year old girl and say sure...as long as thats what he FEELS like inside.

No...you bleat on about guns, but you DO know how stupid you sound. You just dont have the courage to admit that there are greater problems facing society creating the problems involving mass shooters.

 

[Lursa]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

Better to make them to have to do so with the least lethal device they get their hands then, wouldn't you say? Like I said you're just not going to get it so have a good night

Wooosh! Point went right over your head.

They communicate and feed off each other. They'll find the next thing...they already are. Santa Fe was trying to add pipe bombs and pressure cookers.

They live for the planning, for the revenge, for the 'I'll make them all sorry.' They'll just find something else 'cooler' and plenty deadly.

Inventing the idea that ARs are the boogieman is a waste of time and unfair to the thousands of people that own them.

 

[Black Dog]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

Well just make sure if that you shoot someone that you do it Pennsylvania then. LOL!

I guess you missed this...

In 1 Whart. Crim. Law, (9th Ed.) § 488, the author says: ‘It is conceded on all sides that it is enough if the danger which the defendant seeks to avert is apparently imminent, irremediable, and actual.’ Bang v. State, 60 Miss. 571; Shorter v. People, 2 N.Y. 193; Logue v. Com., 38 Pa. St. 265. And the same rule of immunity extends to civil as to criminal cases. If the injury was done by the defendant in justifiable self-defense, he can neither be punished criminally, nor held responsible for damages in a civil action. Because the act was lawful, he is wholly relieved from responsibility for its consequences. 3 Bl. Comm. 121. The case of Morris v. Platt, 32 Conn. 75, fully illustrates the extent to which immunity goes. In that case it appeared that the defendant when assaulted had fired in self-defense, and, missing the assailant, had wounded an innocent by-stander, and the court held that the party thus assailed was free from both civil and criminal liability. The act which he had done was lawful, and without negligence, and no one, not even a third party, not an assailant, but an innocent by-stander, could make him answer in damages for the injury occasioned thereby. - http://gosnellpc.com/2017/01/24/self-defense-liability/

That is from the Supreme Court of the United States. Not Pennsylvania, as the first part of my post pointed out.

Every shooting case different is must be looked at individually so it's not like one size fits all and even that opinion that doesn't mean that you will be completely insulated from having defend yourself in a suit.

As I already said Mr. trying to move th4 goal posts AGAIN. Unless negligence is found, you ARE indeed insulated. This according to the Supreme Court.

With that I shall end this discussion for tonight for I've had enough of going around in circles now. So have yourself a good night.

You are the only one who went around in circles. Not a single point you made was accurate. You have been unable to rebut a single point I have made. So yes you call it a night.

 

[Black Dog]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

Oh wait I forgot. Just one more thing. That is not what I originally claimed. I claimed that you will have to answer for it. You're the one that took that as being only in the criminal sense and not in the civil.

Irrelevant now. The Supreme Court of the United States says you were wrong. Take it up with them.

 

[Black Dog]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

Solid rebuttal, no, there's nothing else on this issue.

Still ignored the rulings by the Supreme Court, because they did not fit his world view.

 

[bluesmoke]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

Nicholas Cruz used 10 round magazines.

“Nicholas Cruz used 10 round magazines.”

Really? That’s your rebuttal? One, single case? The Orlando shooter used 30-round magazines. Half of All Mass Shooters Used High-Capacity Magazines:

http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/VPCshootinglist.pdf

Trolls don’t do the work of research.

 

[Black Dog]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

“Nicholas Cruz used 10 round magazines.”

Really? That’s your rebuttal? One, single case? The Orlando shooter used 30-round magazines. Half of All Mass Shooters Used High-Capacity Magazines:

http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/VPCshootinglist.pdf

Trolls don’t do the work of research.

The point is even if the other shooters had used 10 round magazines it would have made little to no difference. It takes a few seconds to swap out a magazine. Now half of all mass shooters use high capacity mags, and yet the death toll is about the same. What does this tell you about the effectiveness of high capacity magazine bans?

 

[apdst]

Re: LIVE COVERAGE: Active shooter in custody at Santa Fe HS

“Nicholas Cruz used 10 round magazines.”

Really? That’s your rebuttal? One, single case? The Orlando shooter used 30-round magazines. Half of All Mass Shooters Used High-Capacity Magazines:

http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/VPCshootinglist.pdf

Trolls don’t do the work of research.

The Orlando shooter stopped shooting long enough to post some **** on Facebok and no one did anything.

The Santa Fe shooter had a tube fed pump shotgun that has to be reliaded one round at a time. No one jumped him.