Mass Shootings

[BretJ]

Alright...But number one, pepper spray... and number two, isn't it the police's job to protect these people?

It is not law enforcements job to protect anyone. That has been settled by the courts. Cops are armed historians.

 

[BretJ]

But...without guns we wouldn't need guns?

So again, how dio the weak and elderly protect themselves from larger, stronger thugs? How would you protect yourself from 2 or more thugs? Whole families have been killed by people without guns.

 

[ecofarm]

So again, how dio the weak and elderly protect themselves from larger, stronger thugs? How would you protect yourself from 2 or more thugs?

Oh, great. Now we're gonna have to hear about the awesomeness of nun-chucks.

 

[TurtleDude]

Oh, great. Now we're gonna have to hear about the awesomeness of nun-chucks.

Massad Ayoob (google him if his name is unfamiliar) noted to a class I was one of his guest instructors at

If I go into a room with a knife and the other guy has nunchucks-I walk out with a broken arm and he won't walk out at all

truth

 

[genghis khan]

And with that comes the argument "If the founding fathers were aware that guns would eventually take less then an entire minute to fire a whole bullet, would they have written the constitution differently"

I see where the Puckle Gun has already been presented, so I'll add a few other "Assault Rifles" that were available long before the Bill of Rights were written and presented to the states for ratification...

► An unknown German gunsmith before 1600 crafted this oval-bore .67-caliber rifle that was designed to fire 16 stacked charges of powder and ball in a rapid "Roman candle" fashion. One mid-barrel wheel lock mechanism ignited a fuse to discharge the upper 10 charges, and another rearward wheel lock then fired the remaining six lower charges.

► The Founding Fathers also knew about the Cookson Repeater (a.k.a. Lorenzoni System), circa 1680: a 12 shot, lever-action breech-loading, repeating flintlock.

► Lorenzoni Flintlock Repeating Pistol, 7-shot and 9-shot versions, circa 1680:

• A 7-shot version
• A9-shot version

► The rapid-fire, Ferguson Rifle, breech-load flintlock, patented 1721:
NRA Museums:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgf5FwjZYBo
Ferguson Rifle

► Girardoni Air Rifle, circa 1780: 22 round magazine, .46 caliber air rifle. (Thomas Jefferson owned two, and gave them to Lewis & Clark for their journey)

• Slide show from the NRA Museums
• NRA Youtube presentation

► The Nock Volley Gun, circa 1780: seven 20-inch .60-caliber barrels, one in the centerline with the other six clustered and brazed around it like a handful of flowers.
The Nock Volley Gun: Seven shot 'Sea-sweeper' - from Guns.com
NRA video loading/firing the gun

The Ottoman Empire had 9-and-11 barrel cannon as early as the 1300's:
Volley Gun (Object) - Giant Bomb

And we shouldn't leave out things like the 44-barreled mortar designed by A K Nartov and built in the St. Petersburg Arsenal in 1754:
Wargaming Miscellany: the Artillery Museum, St Petersburg: Artillery up to 1860

For future reference, I will add an advertisement for the Puckle gun, circa 1718, which could hold "11 pre-loaded rounds in a cylinder and fire 63 shots in 7 minutes."

So yeah, the Founding Fathers knew weapon technology wasn't stagnant, and would evolve!

 

[LagerHead]

America has come to accept that with the second amendment, we must deal with around three or more mass shootings a year (not counting the ones that don't receive media coverage.) Number One, I must point out that it is totally legal to sport your assault rifle to the supermarket BUT we make switch blades illegal?! Number two, I'm sick of all the senseless death... Back in the 80's, Australia had a single mass shooting, after that the president seized all firearms and you know what happened? There was NEVER a mass shooting after that...

You're erroneously equating correlation and causation.

Well murder as well as violence HAD been way down up until two years ago Violent crime rises for second consecutive year "Violent crime in the United States rose for the second year in a row" and that was from 2013. Also in 34 out of 50 states we do have "Permissive Carry Laws" which is basically "A state has passed full preemption of all firearms laws. They do not prohibit open carry for all non-prohibited citizens and do not require a permit or license to open carry." People don't even have to PROVE they own the weapon to carry it around willy nilly. Also "Only Seven states and the District of Columbia have enacted laws banning assault weapons" Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence So, if anything things are getting worse...

Oh my God! What is this world come to when a citizen of the "freest" nation the world has ever know doesn't have to prove they are not guilty of a crime to exercise their rights? Next thing you know, I won't even have to prove that I have never been convicted of liable or slander before exercising my right to free speech. You're absolutely right, this "willy nilly" exercising of rights without prior government approval must be stopped in its tracks.

 

[genghis khan]

Back in the 80's, Australia had a single mass shooting, after that the president seized all firearms...

A popular misconception. For example...
► New South Wales issues licenses to own a gun. To get a license, you have to have a "genuine reason." After you get a license, you then have to get a Permit To Acquire (PTA) a gun before buying one.

► Ditto Queensland.

► Ditto Western Australia

If you'd like, I can go through all the various states of Australia, but I think you get the point: there is no "ban" on guns in Australia! Just restrictions.

So how are these new restrictions working? Let's take a quick tour, shall we???

Australia, where "[In 2012], there was a public shooting in Sydney, on average, every three days. The pace has not slackened. In the past month there has been a shooting, on average, every two days."

Australia, where:
» Gun ownership is back at pre-Port Arthur massacre levels.
» There has been a steady increase in gun-related crimes over the past seven years.
» Gun murders across Australia almost doubled between 2005 to 2012.
» The incidence of guns used in kidnappings have trebled.
» The total number of crimes in which a firearm was used rose 47 per cent between 2005 to 2012.
Is Australia staring down the barrel of a gun crisis? | News.com.au

Australia, where estimates released in April 2013 by the Australian Crime Commission shocked everyone when the Commission suggested there are enough illegal guns in Australia to arm every member of the military with eight weapons each! And that's just the illegal weapons!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=0GPPxGX8pdA

Australia, where on 23 Jan 2013 Mike Gallacher, the New South Wales Police Minister, told ABC News Australia "New South Wales police identify that a syndicate had gone and purchased, for want of a better term, a post office franchise and were bringing hand guns in directly from the manufacturer and the records police have show that hundreds of guns have come in through our borders into New South Wales alone, it really is a significant problem that the Federal Government is now recognizing."
7.30 - ABC

Australia, where in 2008, the Melbourne Institute reported "The Australian Firearms Buyback and Its Effect on Gun Deaths." The Institute concluded "Although gun buyback's appear to be a logical and sensible policy that helps to placate the public’s fears, the evidence so far suggests that in the Australian context, the high expenditure incurred to fund the 1996 gun buyback has not translated into any tangible reductions in terms of firearm deaths."
(PDF) http://www.melbourneinstitute.com/downloads/working_paper_series/wp2008n17.pdf#24

You mean THAT Australia???

 

[cpgrad08]

America has come to accept that with the second amendment, we must deal with around three or more mass shootings a year (not counting the ones that don't receive media coverage.) Number One, I must point out that it is totally legal to sport your assault rifle to the supermarket BUT we make switch blades illegal?! Number two, I'm sick of all the senseless death... Back in the 80's, Australia had a single mass shooting, after that the president seized all firearms and you know what happened? There was NEVER a mass shooting after that...

2nd Amendment has nothing do with mass shootings. Criminal lifestyle and mental health have to do with mass shootings.

 

[jaeger19]

Mass murders would be down without guns, take any school shooting, if said culprits didn't have access to firearms, and instead used knives, the body count would be FAR less.

How about a plane filled with jet fuel... or a truck with fertilizer?

Or pools... those darn pools.. know how many kids die or are injured in pools per pool versus the number hurt with a firearm? Pools are more dangerous by far.

 

[jaeger19]

And I've already told you hardly any American civilian legally owns an actual assault rifle.

Actually, that's really not true.. I know lots of folks that legally do... its just that statistically they are not used in crimes.

 

[TurtleDude]

Actually, that's really not true.. I know lots of folks that legally do... its just that statistically they are not used in crimes.

in some states you cannot own real assault rifles

in some areas, assholes in civilian LE won't sign off on the forms

and no one can own one made after May 19, 1986 ( which should be overturned by the courts and Hughes-if still alive-tried for treason)

 

[beerftw]

America has come to accept that with the second amendment, we must deal with around three or more mass shootings a year (not counting the ones that don't receive media coverage.) Number One, I must point out that it is totally legal to sport your assault rifle to the supermarket BUT we make switch blades illegal?! Number two, I'm sick of all the senseless death... Back in the 80's, Australia had a single mass shooting, after that the president seized all firearms and you know what happened? There was NEVER a mass shooting after that...

well you are blatantly ignorant,australia has had instances of such since then

List of massacres in Australia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[beerftw]

Mass murders would be down without guns, take any school shooting, if said culprits didn't have access to firearms, and instead used knives, the body count would be FAR less.

the highest body count to date in any gun related mass shooting isnt even held by the united states,but by norway which has extremely restricted gun laws compared to the us.


and even further in japan there was an incident where a man with a kitchen knife killed 8 and injured 13 people
Osaka school massacre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[beerftw]

How exactly would this be accomplished. You can disarm the law abiding perhaps, but criminals have this odd habit of not obeying the law.... and there are already 300 million guns in the USA, many of which have never been registered.


... and the Drug War has been SO effective at getting weed, coke, crack, meth and heroin off the streets, right? :roll: (/irony)

add to the fact guns are extremely easy for criminals to manufacture,and so long as a demand exists,someone will supply it.anti gunners act like making a gun is rocket science and impossible outside a manufacturor,but in reality its extremely common in third worl countries.heck people in afghanistan make explosives so sophisticated it makes the us military cringe yet most there cant read or add,if uneducated people can pull that off,simple firearms is childsplay.

second threat is former weapons of the soviet union,which is still plentifull and cheap,to the point people in third world countries who cant even afford electricity can afford them,simply because how large the supply is.

 

[LagerHead]

add to the fact guns are extremely easy for criminals to manufacture,and so long as a demand exists,someone will supply it.anti gunners act like making a gun is rocket science and impossible outside a manufacturor,but in reality its extremely common in third worl countries.heck people in afghanistan make explosives so sophisticated it makes the us military cringe yet most there cant read or add,if uneducated people can pull that off,simple firearms is childsplay.

second threat is former weapons of the soviet union,which is still plentifull and cheap,to the point people in third world countries who cant even afford electricity can afford them,simply because how large the supply is.

This is true. A firearm only need to perform three basic functions: 1) ignite a primer to fire a projectile; 2) eject the spent shell; and 3) load a new round. Numbers 2 and 3 can both be performed automatically (as in a semiautomatic firearm), mechanically (as in a bolt action firearm), or manually (as in a single shot firearm). The level of sophistication required to make the firearm is dependent on the level of sophistication desired in the action.

 

[NonoBadDog]

Thank you, that is correct (surprisingly).


Are you aware that such weapons are already heavily restricted under Class III and hardly any American citizen owns one?

Damn, good catch.

 

[NonoBadDog]

And with that comes the argument "If the founding fathers were aware that guns would eventually take less then an entire minute to fire a whole bullet, would they have written the constitution differently"

I totally disagree with that. It amuses me when people say stuff like that. Just like when they say the Constitution is a living document.

Benjamin Franklin:
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

 

[NonoBadDog]

Alright...But number one, pepper spray... and number two, isn't it the police's job to protect these people?

The police respond in minutes when seconds count. The police write reports after the crime is done. They don't mystically appear. It takes the Sheriff up to 90 minutes to respond where I live. Where do I get a live in cop?

 

[Citizen.Seven]

Quick question, I can't use 22 LR rounds though in my M&P 15 that fires 223 though right? Cause that would actually save me a lot of money on ammunition...

You can get conversion kits, either a whole upper or a drop in, so that you can fire 22 with an ar15. Out of the box, no, it wouldn't feed or cycle correctly.

 

[NonoBadDog]

Uh... AR-15 fires a what bullet?

I know there's a version of the M&P 15 that fires a 22 caliber, but the military rifle fires something with a little more umph.

The M&P is made by Smith and Wesson. The AR-15 model shoots a 22 caliber round. The 22 caliber for target shooting is a 22 caliber. The difference is that one is a .22 and one is a .223 which is a NATO round. The .223 weighs more and has a larger shell/casing.

 

[NonoBadDog]

Quick question, I can't use 22 LR rounds though in my M&P 15 that fires 223 though right? Cause that would actually save me a lot of money on ammunition...

It scares me when people that own weapons ask questions like this. This lack of knowledge about a weapon you own is dangerous. I am not even going to answer this one. You should sell your weapon and buy a pet turtle.

 

[Jerry]

America has come to accept that with the second amendment, we must deal with around three or more mass shootings a year (not counting the ones that don't receive media coverage.) Number One, I must point out that it is totally legal to sport your assault rifle to the supermarket BUT we make switch blades illegal?! Number two, I'm sick of all the senseless death... Back in the 80's, Australia had a single mass shooting, after that the president seized all firearms and you know what happened? There was NEVER a mass shooting after that...

FYI assult rifles made and/or registered after 1987 are completely illegal to own. You can't even get a special licence or tax stamp, you cannot own one at all.

If you see someone carrying an assult rifle please know it's an antique and the carrier has passed extencive backround checks to and holds a special and expensive colector license to have it. That person must carry all such paperwork on them at all times or face feloney charges just for not having the paperwork on their person even if they simply left it in the car.

 

[Jerry]

An assault rifle is a selective fire rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine.

That is a true definition, and no private person is allowed to own one made or registered after 1987.

 

[Jerry]

Yes but not SENSLESS killing, I.E. someone walking into a grocery store and shooting up the place because he lost his job.

No assult rifle was used in any such shooting, though.

 

[jet57]

FYI assult rifles made and/or registered after 1987 are completely illegal to own. You can't even get a special licence or tax stamp, you cannot own one at all.

If you see someone carrying an assult rifle please know it's an antique and the carrier has passed extencive backround checks to and holds a special and expensive colector license to have it. That person must carry all such paperwork on them at all times or face feloney charges just for not having the paperwork on their person even if they simply left it in the car.

I live in California and I own an M1 Carbine, and I've taken it out to the range many times over the years and none of that has ever been demanded of me or even suggested.

Do you write your own material?