The Guns thread - Part 1

[DarthSkywalker]

Third-Grader Reaches into Maplewood Officer's Holster, Fires Weapon in School Gym



http://kstp.com/news/no-one-hurt-wh...mony-learning-center-maplewood/4773777/?cat=1 (Feb. 5, 2018)

A good example of how more guns at school make things much safer. Should totally arm the teachers.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

A good example of how more guns at school make things much safer. Should totally arm the teachers.

Going by some of the logic in this thread, this wouldn't have happened had it been a teacher with less training for weapons than an officer.

 

[Kelly]

The NO GUNS crowd vs The ALL GUNS crowd in this thread is eating away at intelligent discourse....seriously.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

I am not part of the NO GUNS crowd. I am part of the GUNS NEED TO BE MORE TIGHTLY REGULATED crowd.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

Same here, I'm a gun owner as I've stated before. I'm just sick of the mentality that the needs of a few are somehow more important than literally the most defenseless citizens of this country.

 

[dnno1]

So handguns and shotguns have no place? You can fire off an awful lot of shots with those yet it's a form of protection for many that is necessary.

Pay attention to what he said and ask yourself if shotguns or hand guns can kill a lot of people. Sure, You can fire off a lot of shot of toys and to call 2 to 9 shots per repose a lot. Compared to and assault rifel, though, it isn't.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

I don't give a **** what the name of the gun, rifle, whatever is......if it can shoot enough rounds within a few minutes to kill a lot of people, it has no place in our society. Done......

The NO GUNS crowd vs The ALL GUNS crowd in this thread is eating away at intelligent discourse....seriously.

 

[samsnee]

Politicians who are for lax gun laws should vote to allow conceal and carry in Congress and let their staff be armed.

 

[TheJL]

Politicians who are for lax gun laws should vote to allow conceal and carry in Congress and let their staff be armed.

A cop/staffer that shoots an unarmed civilian in Congress would be international news.

That person's family would receive a huge sum of money and that cop/staffer would be given an express ticket to prison, since there are cameras all over the place.

Go ahead.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

Pay attention to what he said and ask yourself if shotguns or hand guns can kill a lot of people. Sure, You can fire off a lot of shot of toys and to call 2 to 9 shots per repose a lot. Compared to and assault rifel, though, it isn't.

After getting through all your auto-corrected garble, any person will get off a lot of rounds if given a few minutes and plenty of ammo (even pistols and shotguns) so Kelly's statement would seeming rule out most, if not all, currently available weapons for civilians. Firing rates for semi-autos of all kinds are basically the same because they're limited by how fast one can physically pull a trigger, reload time, and one's stamina. Semi-autos never get anywhere close to their theoretical cyclic rates.

 

[Hotwire]

After getting through all your auto-corrected garble, any person will get off a lot of rounds if given a few minutes and plenty of ammo (even pistols and shotguns) so Kelly's statement would seeming rule out most, if not all, currently available weapons for civilians. Firing rates for semi-autos of all kinds are basically the same because they're limited by how fast one can physically pull a trigger, reload time, and one's stamina. Semi-autos never get anywhere close to their theoretical cyclic rates.

And the AR-15 is designed to allow long periods of sustained fire with minimal stamina. Go fire 30 rounds as fast as you can from a 12 gauge and 30 rounds through an AR and get back to me on how your shoulder is feeling. Also, let me know how long it takes for each. Feel free to do the same comparison with other guns vs. the AR.

 

[Ouch]

And virtually no one has enemies out to get them. Who are you afraid of? I live where there are bears, wolves and coyotes. And feel no need to own a gun. I also know that the odds of someone breaking into my home while I'm there, are low, not to mention they'd probably not aim to hurt me.

The odds of a targeted home invasion are low, the odds of a serial killer are low. All of those things are unlikely to happen. So who are you afraid of?

If you're living a life where you need an AR-15 for protection, it's time to make a serious self-assessment.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

And the AR-15 is designed to allow long periods of sustained fire with minimal stamina. Go fire 30 rounds as fast as you can from a 12 gauge and 30 rounds through an AR and get back to me on how your shoulder is feeling. Also, let me know how long it takes for each. Feel free to do the same comparison with other guns vs. the AR.

You've got me on the shotgun but firing rates for semi-auto handguns and rifles are not going to be much different. They're both limited by how fast people can actually pull the trigger, which for most is 2-4 shots a second for a very limited amount of time due to trigger finger fatigue, magazine capacity and heat buildup. The only things that a rifle has over a pistol are range and damaging power but when put into a closed-in environment of a building, the range advantage is gone and the close-in power is not much different from a pistol.

 

[Aximili86]

Yep, regarding the range advantage, none of these school things have been long-range affairs anyway.

 

[Bobber]

Yep, regarding the range advantage, none of these school things have been long-range affairs anyway.

Las Vegas.

 

[Orba]

Politicians who are for lax gun laws should vote to allow conceal and carry in Congress and let their staff be armed.

Or how about the fact that there are all those right wingers at CPAC atm which is a gun free zone. The NRA awarded Ajit Pai a rifle for "saving the internet" by killing net neutrality, except the rifle wasn't there because of it being a gun free zone. Yet these are the same people that keep saying that gun free zones are useless.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Yep, regarding the range advantage, none of these school things have been long-range affairs anyway.

Dude?


Seriously? Google is your friend. Multiple incidents easily searched for prove that statement to be silly. Far sillier than correcting people on using the term assault weapon.

 

[TheCommissioner]

I am not for banning anything

I am for background checks, mandatory minimum purchase age, seizing weapons from domestic abusers

and personally, I want an arsenal tax

if you own more than 4 weapons, you pay a percenage tax every year - similar to property taxes

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

I am not for banning anything

I am for background checks, mandatory minimum purchase age, seizing weapons from domestic abusers

and personally, I want an arsenal tax

if you own more than 4 weapons, you pay a percenage tax every year - similar to property taxes

All of this and we need some clear of definitions and guidelines for what "mental health" is. That's one of the biggie's nobody wants to tackle. I'm not sure what the solution is there but literally doing nothing just because it's complicated is the worst possible outcome.

 

[Aximili86]

Las Vegas.

Looks like you missed the "school".

And Krypton, you could elaborate on the long-range thing if you're saying it's incorrent. Sandy Hook? Nope. Columbine? Nope. This? Nope. Even outside of school incidents, the Florida nightclub shooting? Nope. The church shooting recently? Nope. Aurora? Nope.



These things tend to be up-close-and-personal horribleness. Handguns, unfortunately, can inflict just this same sort of carnage, and have.

 

[Hotwire]

You've got me on the shotgun but firing rates for semi-auto handguns and rifles are not going to be much different. They're both limited by how fast people can actually pull the trigger, which for most is 2-4 shots a second for a very limited amount of time due to trigger finger fatigue, magazine capacity and heat buildup. The only things that a rifle has over a pistol are range and damaging power but when put into a closed-in environment of a building, the range advantage is gone and the close-in power is not much different from a pistol.

The AR/M-series is designed to negate trigger finger fatigue and heat build-up while having 28 rounds in the magazine. As I previously stated, the AR is a near carbon copy of the M-16, minus burst-fire. All of its other features that allow it to fire large numbers of rounds over extended periods of time, are still there. There is no denying that it was straight up designed for military combat. Anyone who tries to argue that the AR-15 is not a military weapon, while only clinging to the fire rate as their defense, is kidding themselves.

 

[Kelly]

Don't insult my intelligence with infantile memes...

The Federal Assault Weapons Bill, which became law in 1994 (and expired in 2004), banned specific types of guns such as AR15s, MAC10s, and TEC9s, but it also forbade possession of rifles and handguns that featured two or more military-style modifications (pistol grips, oversize magazines, and folding stocks.

Yes, we had shootings during that time period. Columbine being the most well known. More than half of the 16 in that time period were in 1999 alone. But since the ban expired in 2004.

There have been 27 mass shootings.
An increase that that is increasing within a shorter amount of time.
Have inflicted far more Casualties as well.

So if you want me to be specific so as not to incur anymore dumb ass memes on this debate, there ya go.

 

[Aximili86]

If you want to get into numbers like that, Kelly, probably fair to also include that shootings are down from what they were in the 80s and 90s, despite more guns floating around.

Hotwire, so ban the additional military features. Legally mandate they have to be redesigned somewhat and manufactured in a less-modular way so as not able to be altered. Put the onus on the manufacturers, we regulate plenty of other industries the same way.

That way they don't get to cry that their product's being banned, the NRA doesn't get to claim bans, you're just requiring that the older ones get swapped in for newer, more standardized and unmodifiable versions. Yes, the hardcore militia types will whine about it, Armalite will too, but it's about the closest to a reasonable compromise that's getting achieved on t his. They're going to have to suck it up.

The sticking point really is this semi-automatic thing. The public feels it's fine to own a 14 bullet handgun with a similar firing rate to an AR-10, or various versions of carbines, but the AR-10's the threshold cut-off?

Enough of the country still thinks that's crazy. Further regulation needs to happen, but someone says the word "ban" and any potential discussion just grinds to a halt. Neither side trusts one another on this.

 

[Hotwire]

Hotwire, so ban the additional military features. Legally mandate they have to be redesigned somewhat and manufactured in a less-modular way so as not able to be altered. Put the onus on the manufacturers, we regulate plenty of other industries the same way.

Okay. That takes away everything about the AR-15. Remember, it's a copy of a military weapon, converted, not designed, for civilian use. Hell, even the bullets it fires are military! You might get to keep the iron sights.

 

[Aximili86]

The functionality isn't really any different to any other semi-auto though. That gets into a weird place, where suddenly all semi-autos (or rifles at least, that use similar ammunition and have a similar firing rate) are suddenly unacceptable. And hell, the firing rate alone is iffy, as plenty of various weapons have similar firing rates.

If the position is "ban 'em all!", then okay, that's consistent. I wouldn't agree it's necessary, but it's intellectually constant. But the "some of these are too far and the others aren't" thing is going to cause issues.

Surely by that rationale a pistol that can fire a bullet a second, holds 14 bullets, and extra clips are available anywhere and everywhere, should be a problem too, right?