AR-15 massacres 9 shoppers and cop!

[Revoltingest]

Assault weapon is a dog whistle term that has no rigorous definition.

It has long had one....a small arm capable of select fire
(semi & full auto). That's still the definition. So the poll
makes no sense.
Private ownership of assault rifles is legal, but with great
restriction & cost. The AR-15 is a "look-alike".

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Just to amend the OP: 3 of the victims worked at the store.

 

[Audie]

Then why do we see more things like knives being used in other countries, and far fewer people being killed in these attacks?

You seriously doubt that there
are more effective weapons readily available?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You seriously doubt that there
are more effective weapons readily available?

That has nothing to do with what I asked.
So, again, why do we not see such damage and death in countries that have effectively banned them? The UK, they haven't had a school shooting since they banned handguns. Japan, shootings are not a problem. Countries that have strict gun laws, demented killers grab what they can. They rarely kill more than a few people.
No. Gun laws don't stop demented killers. Nothing will. But strict gun laws makes killing harder for them to do.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

How many AR-15's have you converted to fully automatic?
I would have to say not a single one.
For if you had, you would know it is not nearly as easy as you are making it sound...
Can it be done? yes.
Is it easy? no.

I watched somebody do it once. It didn't seem hard.

Yes, because California hasn't had one...wait..

I don't know what you're meaning/getting at with this.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Isn't that because you have to change the mentality of your citizens? This whole gun ownership mentality was OK in the wild west, but suburbia ain't the Alamo....

Why does America have a ridiculously disproportionate murder rate with easy gun ownership of rapid fire weapons, compared to every other nation? Do you guys understand how ridiculous you appear to be in this world, thinking that your guns will stop people being killed?? Or that if you need to fight your government that they won't have weapons that make yours look like water pistols?

Do you understand that constantly being fed fear in your media has made you all afraid of your own neighbors? From a perspective outside of America's, you are painting yourselves as the most uncivilized people on the planet......it isn't terrorists you need protection from...its your own citizens! What's up with that?

In Australia we have stringent gun laws, and assault weapons are banned. Only criminals want them and only the police can fire back legally anyway. It is illegal to discharge a firearm in a suburban area. Only farmers and rifle club members can be licensed to own firearms and they have to be locked away when not in use....no automatic weapons are permitted.

I don't think we will ever understand the mentality that feeds you love affair with weapons......

One thing I find helpful to remind myself of is that most Americans don't actually own guns.

The US has a ridiculously high number of firearms per capita, but they're very unevenly distributed. Most Americans (~70%) have no guns at all, and a small minority (~9%) of Americans own five or more guns.

The demographics of gun ownership in the U.S.

As for the "wild west" mentality... that's a big part of it, I think.

There's a line that Dan Carlin used in his podcast about the US's "coming of age": "The United States never got over the closing of the frontier." Its self-identity was wrapped up in being a self-reliant "frontier people"... but what does that mean when you don't have a frontier? In the case of many Americans, they decided to double down on their "frontier" identity even though it didn't really fit any more.

It's kind of like what happened with the samurai: they were warriors, and it was obvious that they were warriors because they fought wars. But then the warring states period ended and the samurai class ended up as civil servants, basically, so to maintain the idea that they were still warriors, they approached everything with a "warrior" ethos, more rigid than anything that existed when samurai were actually fighting wars on a regular basis.

Something similar happened with (at least some people in) the US. When it was actually a frontier nation, guns were more heavily restricted without issue. As @We Never Know points out, there were plenty of towns in the Old West where guns were prohibited; you had to turn your guns in with the sheriff when you arrived and you'd get them back when you left. Now, though, the gun has become a symbol of self-reliance, so it's only now that they aren't really needed that people push back against firearm restrictions.

 

[esmith]

If it makes proper restrictions easier to implement, then sure.

Canada doesn't class rimfire semi-auto rifles as restricted weapons; that might be workable as a compromise, but I'm fine with them being banned along with semi-auto firearms generally.

Bolt and pump action weapons have a legitimate place in hunting and sport shooting.

Then stay in Canada.
For what it's worth, you really don't have any say what does or does not happen in this country other than an opinion.

 

[esmith]

Wouldn't know it from this thread.

Of course not the majority of the members of this forum follow the Democrat party in lock step

 

[Revoltingest]

Of course not the majority of the members of this forum follow the Democrat party in lock step

I get the impression that most Democrats live in some other country.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Then stay in Canada.
For what it's worth, you really don't have any say what does or does not happen in this country other than an opinion.

No, I just don't get a vote. I can say what I please.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Of course not the majority of the members of this forum follow the Democrat party in lock step

It's cute that "Democrat" is as far left as you can imagine.

 

[Suave]

Do you mean like my tube fed 22 long rifle squirrel gun? Should it be banned?
Do you think we should go back 185 years to only single shot weapons?

I have no qualms with any law-abiding gun enthusiast possessing one six-shot revolver. Also, I have no objections to any hunter having a bolt-action rifle or pump action shotgun. However, for public safety's sake, I don't want anybody outside the military having semi-auto guns.

 

[Suave]

It has long had one....a small arm capable of select fire
(semi & full auto). That's still the definition. So the poll
makes no sense.
Private ownership of assault rifles is legal, but with great
restriction & cost. The AR-15 is a "look-alike".

I suppose you are at least somewhat familiar with the National Firearms Act of 1934. I like there being heavy taxation imposed against the private ownership of fully automatic guns, thereby making these weapons cost prohibitive. Likewise, I'd like there to be heavy taxation imposed against the private ownership of semi auto guns making these weapons cost prohibitive in order to prevent mass shooting massacres.

 

[Suave]

Just to amend the OP: 3 of the victims worked at the store.

Sorry I can't amend the OP title to AR-15 massacres 6 shoppers, 3 workers and cop.

 

[Suave]

All firearms can kill. A simple auto loader makes a revolver a quick load. Plus because they are smaller it is easy to carry more than one revolver. Plus you are ignoring that rapid firing is not the important factor. Rapid hitting is. There have been all together too many mass murders in which the killer used pistols and revolvers. Did you already forget last week’s shooting in Atlanta? The killer used a 9mm gun, not an AR15. He was able to kill 8 people. Banning AR15 rifles would not eliminate mass murders.

If private ownership of more than one revolver per individual were heavily taxed, then possessing more than one revolver would be cost prohibitive; this limitation of only one revolver per gun owner might effectively prevent mass shootings.

 

[Suave]

I tried to convince my Amrtican boyfriend years
ago on that idea.

He convinced me very easily that I, like
you, had no idea what I was talking about.

I will refrain from giving any particulars but he
also pointed out that for mass killing a gun plus untrained shooter is very inefficient.

There are way worse weapons, easily obtained and used.

Any notion that firearms laws are going to stop
a determined killer is fantasy.

After (the assault weapon ban) passed in 1994, there was a big drop in mass shooting deaths.

 

[Audie]

After (the assault weapon ban) passed in 1994, there was a big drop in mass shooting deaths.

No

 

[Suave]

No

Yes...the numbers don't lie.

 

[Audie]

Yes...the numbers don't lie.

Please identify exactly what was banned and how that kept anyone from buying a weapon
fully capable of thevsame type of attack.

"Numbers don't lie:" but people sure use them to
lie. Stats paeticularly.

 

[Suave]

Please identify exactly what was banned and how that kept anyone from buying a weapon
fully capable of thevsame type of attack.

"Numbers don't lie:" but people sure use them to
lie. Stats paeticularly.