• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

School shooting: but don't mention guns!

I could get behind an age hike , though, I don't know if it would do much in the way of stemming gun violence. But i could see the point of waiting until age 25 for that (you can't rent a car until then)
 
Profanz said:
I'm not a gun guy. I'm sure you could educate me on it. It just seems to me that guns are becoming more efficient at killing large amounts of people in a short time. You don't even need to be a good shot. Just wave the gun and pull the trigger and its over. 20 kids dead or a theater full of movie goers.

If someone buys several of these weapons in a short period of time shouldn't it raise a red flag somewhere? What war are they planning on fighting?
Click to expand...

Several of what weapons? Assault weapons have full auto capability. They are rare in general and almost unheard of in crime.

I don't think I can educate you on it if you think you can wave a gun and hit anything at all...

If you don't need to be a good shot, then how come the guy in the mall didn't kill more people when he had one of the best "assault weapons" made?
 
Autolite said:
By definition, an "assault rifle" is a selective fire semi-automatic/automatic firearm. The media intentionally misuse the term to further sensationalize the report.

The Connecticut school shooter DID NOT USE an assault weapon.
The Oregon mall shooter DID NOT USE an assault weapon.
The Colorado theatre shooter DID NOT USE an assault weapon.

If we're going to ignore the correct definition of an 'assault weapon' then we can ban, prohibit or restrict anything we don't approve of by placing the word 'assault' in front of it...
Click to expand...

So a semi-automatic is not an assault weapon by definition? Is that it? Because if it fires five bullets in a second that's pretty damn automatic and not what guns were capable of when we chose the right to bear arms in this country.

We have moved on to nukes. Can I nuke my neighbor if his dog craps on my lawn? Am I really allowed to have the same weapons that my government has access to these days?

These gun nuts are just that. Nuts.
 
Profanz said:
I'm not a gun guy. I'm sure you could educate me on it. It just seems to me that guns are becoming more efficient at killing large amounts of people in a short time. You don't even need to be a good shot. Just wave the gun and pull the trigger and its over. 20 kids dead or a theater full of movie goers.

If someone buys several of these weapons in a short period of time shouldn't it raise a red flag somewhere? What war are they planning on fighting?
Click to expand...

There is not a firearm on the planet (short of a mini-gun) where your scenario would work.

I've instructed for going on 35 years on military small arms and law enforcement firearms and that spray fire fiction is just flat out nonsense. Unaimed fire, no matter the caliber or quantity, is just making noise and if someone is injured during the course of it, it's luck, bad or good, depending.

The ATF requires FFL's to report multiple handgun sales to one individual in a given time frame, but long guns are currently exempt from that reporting requirement.

FFL's themselves often tip ATF to stinky buyers, as was the case with the Fast & Furious operation. The dealers reported to ATF that they suspected straw sales, ATF told them to go ahead with the sales.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
LTC8K6 said:
Semi-auto actions are found in all types of guns, not just whatever you want to label an "assault weapon".
Click to expand...

Canada's gun laws limit the ammunition capacity for magazines used in semi-automatic firearms. 10 rounds limit for pistols and 5 rounds limit on rifles larger than .22 cal.

These ammunition capacity laws mitigate the concerns many people have with respect to the private ownership of semi-automatic firearms, however, those with criminal intent simply choose to ignore them...
 
BStrong said:
A skilled shooter can "bump-fire" a semi-auto pistol at close to theoretic cyclic rate - as a parlor trick. No accuracy, period.

And before our gun-ignorant posters jump on board, firing in this fashion is the single worst tactical and/or defensive use of a firearm, period. If such a shooter could actually hit an individual target by intent, I'd be astounded.
Click to expand...

It's much more difficult for a stock pistol with a safe trigger, and a long pull.
 
lionking said:
You are not free to own whatever you want. As someone pointed out earlier, there is a line preventing you from owning a bazooka. The line is drawn at semi-automatic and above in Australia. It's possible to move the line in the US. That's how democracy works.
Click to expand...

A bazooka isn't a firearm.

The line is different in America. That's how we chose to draw it. With the proper licensing you can own pretty much whatever you want as long as it's a firearm. We don't want to move the line.

I also thought the line in Australia was drawn below all repeating weapons, including pump and lever-action.
 
Last edited:
Profanz said:
So a semi-automatic is not an assault weapon by definition? Is that it? Because if it fires five bullets in a second that's pretty damn automatic and not what guns were capable of when we chose the right to bear arms in this country.

We have moved on to nukes. Can I nuke my neighbor if his dog craps on my lawn? Am I really allowed to have the same weapons that my government has access to these days?

These gun nuts are just that. Nuts.
Click to expand...

Excuse me while I sweep up the straw.
 
Profanz said:
So a semi-automatic is not an assault weapon by definition? Is that it? Because if it fires five bullets in a second that's pretty damn automatic and not what guns were capable of when we chose the right to bear arms in this country.

We have moved on to nukes. Can I nuke my neighbor if his dog craps on my lawn? Am I really allowed to have the same weapons that my government has access to these days?

These gun nuts are just that. Nuts.
Click to expand...

No, "semi-auto" is a common ordinary weapon type.

And again, 5 rounds a second seems unlikely under ordinary conditions.
 
Giz said:
When people want to restrict the amount of gun related death, what do they actually mean?

Suicide? That's the majority of deaths. Sad certainly, but seems like it's an issue with suicide rather than guns.

Homicide is around 40% of the gun deaths, but that's mostly criminals rather than spree killers or temporarily enraged legal owners. Seems like a problem to be addressed by anti-gang and turning around dysfunctional communities (banning guns is just a - probably ineffectual - band aid).

Seems like the mass shootings are a very minor part of the losses. Perhaps these psychologically driven crimes would be best addressed by asking the media to cover it differently? Deny future killers the prospect of glamorous news coverage...? Perhaps also say that you have to waive medical confidentiality as part of the background check so people can check if you have a condition?
Click to expand...

The media would hate it, and I don't like the idea of messing with any fundemental right, but a news blackout on the killer and a less than 24/7 obssession with the suffering of the victims might not be a bad thing.
 
Profanz said:
So a semi-automatic is not an assault weapon by definition? Is that it? Because if it fires five bullets in a second that's pretty damn automatic and not what guns were capable of when we chose the right to bear arms in this country.

We have moved on to nukes. Can I nuke my neighbor if his dog craps on my lawn? Am I really allowed to have the same weapons that my government has access to these days?

These gun nuts are just that. Nuts.
Click to expand...

No, there was a perfectly good definition of "assault weapon" before the fanatic idiot Feinstein muddied the waters in 1994. A true assault weapon has to be a rifle firing an intermediate-size cartridge (meaning 5.56mm NATO, 7.62x39mm, that sort of thing - larger weapons like the FN-FAL and G3 fire 7.62x51 and are classified as "battle rifles"), and must be fully automatic. Also keep in mind that when the 2nd Amendment was ratified the weapons in the hands of civilians were the M16s of their day - they were the same weapons used by the British Army.

Nukes are not firearms. Only firearms are firearms. That's the only thing the 2nd Amendment covers. Don't be ridiculous.
 
L.Y.S. said:
What's making all these young guys goo off though? I'm just wondering. I know there is increased coverage, but there seems to be a lot more mass shootings like this. I can't remember a time where there were so many mass shootings in surburbs. Something about these young surburban males that is setting them off.
Click to expand...

Probably young women (and in some cases young men). Oh, you meant "go off"...we're working on that.
 
StankApe said:
I could get behind an age hike , though, I don't know if it would do much in the way of stemming gun violence. But i could see the point of waiting until age 25 for that (you can't rent a car until then)
Click to expand...

Age does not necessarily represent an individual's maturity or level of responsibility.

25 year olds crewed heavy bombers during the Second World War (weapons of mass destruction). 27 years of age was considered by some as 'too-old' for fighter aircraft.

OTOH, there are some sixty year olds I wouldn't trust with a sharpened pencil...
 
BStrong said:
Excuse me while I sweep up the straw.
Click to expand...

I've talked to some of these gun nuts. And they always seem to get around to claiming that they need the right to own these weapons is in case the country gets too oppressive and tyrannical. They actually believe that they could go up against the US government if it came down to it.

That's just insane. Its crazy. They watch movies like Red Dawn and believe it could actually happen. They're idiots.

And this is the mentality in America that allows this kind of crap to happen.
 
Profanz said:
I've talked to some of these gun nuts. And they always seem to get around to claiming that they need the right to own these weapons is in case the country gets too oppressive and tyrannical. They actually believe that they could go up against the US government if it came down to it.

That's just insane. Its crazy. They watch movies like Red Dawn and believe it could actually happen. They're idiots.

And this is the mentality in America that allows this kind of crap to happen.
Click to expand...

that's quite a broad brush yer swinging around there
 
Autolite said:
Age does not necessarily represent an individual's maturity or level of responsibility.
Click to expand...
I brought up the age of 25 not because of those reasons, but because it is well after the age which schizophrenia typically manifests itself.
 
StankApe said:
that's quite a broad brush yer swinging around there
Click to expand...

Maybe. I've said that I have defended the right to own a gun to protect your home or for hunting.

But when someone orders three guns like the ones this murderer did it needs to raise a red flag. But he was able to do it because of the NRA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom