Parkland Shooting

[MTK]

Asking why someone needs an AR-15 isn't the same as calling for a ban so please don't lump me in with the pro banning crowd.

I'm perfectly fine with responsible gun owners having one, but I also think it's perfectly fine to question why civilians need military style weapons.

[Chief X_Phackter]

Originally Posted by MTK

Asking why someone needs an AR-15 isn't the same as calling for a ban so please don't lump me in with the pro banning crowd.

I'm perfectly fine with responsible gun owners having one, but I also think it's perfectly fine to question why civilians need military style weapons.

Sorry, I thought that was acceptable practice on here...jumping to conclusions, making assumptions, and lumping people into certain categories... Maybe only one side can do that...

Is it the style we are concerned about or the function. Because there is a distinct difference.

It's the function that makes a weapon an assault rifle/weapon, not the "style".

AR doesn't equal Assault Rifle or military style weapon. It's merely a semi-automatic rifle. Can it be modified to be more dangerous - to fit the category of an assault rifle? Yes...but that is illegal.

[Giantone]

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Chief X_Phackter

Sorry, I thought that was acceptable practice on here...jumping to conclusions, making assumptions, and lumping people into certain categories... Maybe only one side can do that...

Is it the style we are concerned about or the function. Because there is a distinct difference.

It's the function that makes a weapon an assault rifle/weapon, not the "style".

AR doesn't equal Assault Rifle or military style weapon. It's merely a semi-automatic rifle. Can it be modified to be more dangerous - to fit the category of an assault rifle? Yes...but that is illegal.

I wasn't trying to be snarky I was just defending my position.

I know AR does not mean assault rifle.

Let me just ask this, why is it such a popular gun with mass shooters? I'm guessing it has to do with the function of it, being able to mow down many people quickly.

[Chief X_Phackter]

Originally Posted by MTK

I wasn't trying to be snarky I was just defending my position.

I know AR does not mean assault rifle.

Let me just ask this, why is it such a popular gun with mass shooters? I'm guessing it has to do with the function of it, being able to mow down many people quickly.

Well, unless they are illegally modified, the legal AR-15 style rifle can't shoot any faster than your run of the mill Winchester semi-automatic hunting rifle - basically as fast as your finger can pull the trigger - one round per pull. However, the magazine capacity is generally higher, so a shooter can shoot more rounds without reloading than with other rifles that don't have the same capacity. Some states have put restrictions on what they have deemed "large capacity" magazines. Others have not.

All that being said, and to answer your question, the AR-15 style rifle could be popular with mass shooters because of it's capacity potential, compared to other options. But that's just my speculation.

[Giantone]

To add.............

https://news.yahoo.com/tulsa-police-...173926786.html


Yahoo News Video
Tulsa police: Gunman bought rifle hours before hospital shooting, targeted doctor
Thu, June 2, 2022, 1:39 PM
Officials in Tulsa, Okla., said the gunman who fatally shot four people at Saint Francis Hospital on Wednesday targeted his surgeon, blaming him for ongoing pain following a recent back surgery. Police also said the gunman bought an AR-15-style rifle hours before the killings.

- Now, we know, through the help of our ATF and their gun tracing, that at 2:00 PM on June 1, Mr Lewis purchased a semi-automatic rifle from a local gun store. That semi-automatic rifle was an AR-15-style rifle.

We know that Mr Lewis purchased a semi-automatic handgun, a 40 caliber Smith and Wesson pistol, on May 29, from a local pawn shop.

We have also found a letter on the suspect which made it clear that he came in with the intent to kill Dr. Phillips and anyone who got in his way. He blamed Dr. Phillips for the ongoing pain following the surgery.

[punch it in]

Originally Posted by Chief X_Phackter

Sorry, I thought that was acceptable practice on here...jumping to conclusions, making assumptions, and lumping people into certain categories... Maybe only one side can do that...

Is it the style we are concerned about or the function. Because there is a distinct difference.

It's the function that makes a weapon an assault rifle/weapon, not the "style".

AR doesn't equal Assault Rifle or military style weapon. It's merely a semi-automatic rifle. Can it be modified to be more dangerous - to fit the category of an assault rifle? Yes...but that is illegal.

Technically no it is not an assault rifle in its unmodified state, BUT, it is clearly capable of killing more people faster with no need to be even remotely accurate- it is no doubt over kill for john q public who just wants protection at home. 45 rounds a minute is perfect for a mass shooter, and clearly over kill for a home invasion unless there is a small army invading.

[nonniey]

If you could snap your fingers and instantly eliminate one type of fire arm from public possession what kind would you pick?

A. Semi-Automatic Rifles capable of having a large magazine capacity.
B. Other types of rifles.
C. Shot Guns
D. Handguns.

[sdskinsfan2001]

Originally Posted by nonniey

If you could snap your fingers and instantly eliminate one type of fire arm from public possession what kind would you pick?

A. Semi-Automatic Rifles capable of having a large magazine capacity.
B. Other types of rifles.
C. Shot Guns
D. Handguns.

My real answer is: E. None of the above

If I absolutely had to remove 1 of the 4, I'd pick shotguns. Not because I think they're bad, but that you can replace them with other great options for self-defense/protection. I'd say they are the most easily "replaceable" for a majority of Americans.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by nonniey

If you could snap your fingers and instantly eliminate one type of fire arm from public possession what kind would you pick?

A. Semi-Automatic Rifles capable of having a large magazine capacity.
B. Other types of rifles.
C. Shot Guns
D. Handguns.

A , no justifiable need for them, none.

[Chief X_Phackter]

Originally Posted by nonniey

If you could snap your fingers and instantly eliminate one type of fire arm from public possession what kind would you pick?

A. Semi-Automatic Rifles capable of having a large magazine capacity.
B. Other types of rifles.
C. Shot Guns
D. Handguns.

E. None of the above.

How about making the large capacity magazine illegal rather than lumping the rifle into that option. 9 states have done that.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by nonniey

If you could snap your fingers and instantly eliminate one type of fire arm from public possession what kind would you pick?

A. Semi-Automatic Rifles capable of having a large magazine capacity.
B. Other types of rifles.
C. Shot Guns
D. Handguns.

E. Bite Deetz

[nonniey]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

E. Bite Deetz

It was a trap question to see which of the gun control advocates on this board knew what they were talking about - for them the correct answer would have been handguns but none of them responded.

[punch it in]

Originally Posted by nonniey

It was a trap question to see which of the gun control advocates on this board knew what they were talking about - for them the correct answer would have been handguns but none of them responded.

Shouldn’t we all be “gun control” advocates at this point? Clearly there isn’t enough control. I know that is a dirty oppressive word, but idc. I mean we control driving, alcohol, weed, etc etc for the most part. Why not guns?

Can I be pro gun control and pro second amendment, or has the NRA done their job? Anyone who would like guns to stay out of bad peoples hands (or at the very least harder to get ur hands on than a beer), is now someone who wants to take everyone’s guns away…..
It is a fuckin joke how easy it is for any jerk off to get their hands on a gun, and it is a fuckin joke that thinking that makes me anti guns, anti American, etc etc etc.

There is a lot of highway between me having a gun at home for safety and self defense purposes and the crazy 18 year old kid down the street buying an ar 15 and 100 rounds of ammo. No doubt changes are needed asap.

[nonniey]

Originally Posted by punch it in

Shouldn’t we all be “gun control” advocates at this point? Clearly there isn’t enough control. I know that is a dirty oppressive word, but idc. I mean we control driving, alcohol, weed, etc etc for the most part. Why not guns?

Can I be pro gun control and pro second amendment, or has the NRA done their job? Anyone who would like guns to stay out of bad peoples hands (or at the very least harder to get ur hands on than a beer), is now someone who wants to take everyone’s guns away…..
It is a fuckin joke how easy it is for any jerk off to get their hands on a gun, and it is a fuckin joke that thinking that makes me anti guns, anti American, etc etc etc.

There is a lot of highway between me having a gun at home for safety and self defense purposes and the crazy 18 year old kid down the street buying an ar 15 and 100 rounds of ammo. No doubt changes are needed asap.

I was a bit irritated when I posted this. I was just coming off a discussion with one of my coworkers who was convinced an outsized proportion of homicides were committed with "assault rifles" and wouldn't accept that approximately 90% were actually committed using handguns (close to 95% of firearm deaths overall). I think too much attention and energy is focused on trying to ban AR15s (I'd be all for raising the age to purchase and own them to 21/use requiring someone over 21 being present) but focus should be on how to reduce number deaths where handguns are used.

Still think my ideas of incentivizing the sale and development of smart weapons(which is essentially banned in this country), gun safes, better locks and training are good ones.