CDZ 1 killed, 6 injured, could the Hospital shooter have done this with another gun?

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by 2aguy, Jul 2, 2017.

  1. 2aguy
    Offline

    2aguy Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    54,875
    Thanks Received:
    9,500
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +37,405
    So.....the left wing, anti gunners are in a tizzy because the hospital shooter used an AR-15.....with 10 round magazines, to shoot up a hospital....killing 1 and injuring 6.....a place he had worked at for maybe a year before he resigned due to sexual harrasment allegations, and hadn't been there for 2 years before the shooting.......and he told them he was going to do it....

    The discussion is this...could he have done the same thing with another type of gun.....

    For example.....a revolver....6 shots, .357....a much bigger bullet

    The British banned guns in 1996......in 2010 24 years after the ban and confiscation, a guy in Cumbria, Britain, used a double barreled shotgun and a .22 caliger bolt action rifle to kill 12 people.....

    So....could the hospital shooter have killed more if he had used a different weapon?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Correll
    Offline

    Correll Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2015
    Messages:
    34,860
    Thanks Received:
    3,775
    Trophy Points:
    1,170
    Ratings:
    +19,998
    My fear is that someday, the anti-guns manage to make self defense guns rare enough that criminals are actually driven to use hunting guns.


    The death toll would certainly rise. SHotguns? Large rifles? Much more deadly than an "Assault rifle".
     
  3. jwoodie
    Offline

    jwoodie Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2012
    Messages:
    10,065
    Thanks Received:
    1,514
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +5,192
    Although I think that the "assault" weapon distinction is idiotic, extra-large capacity magazines seem to have no legitimate civilian purpose. Thoughts?
     
  4. 2aguy
    Offline

    2aguy Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    54,875
    Thanks Received:
    9,500
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +37,405

    A rifle with dear slugs......

    a pistiol.....44 caliber.... .357

    A rental truck driven through the parking lot......
     
  5. Correll
    Offline

    Correll Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2015
    Messages:
    34,860
    Thanks Received:
    3,775
    Trophy Points:
    1,170
    Ratings:
    +19,998

    Unless you are caught in an urban riot zone. Then they will have a very useful purpose, ie defending yourself from a mob.
     
    • Funny and Agree!! Funny and Agree!! x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. 2aguy
    Offline

    2aguy Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    54,875
    Thanks Received:
    9,500
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +37,405

    Yes...they actually do. The "large capacity magazine" title is a bait and switch. When they first used terms like that, they said it was for 100 round drum magazines for rifles.......and they used the same argument you just made...who needs a 100 round drum magazine....for a rifle.....

    Then, when the uninformed said..."Yeah...who needs that?" And the uniformed believed they meant ...for rifles.......... The anti gunners switched the the item to......the regular magazines found in most, semi auto pistols......19, 15 round magazines common in all types of pistols.....so the uninformed then voted to ban these magazines, thinking they just meant 100 round drum magazines for rifles....and ended up empowering the anti gunners to ban magazines that are standard issue for pistols........

    it was a bait and switch tactic.....and just that dishonesty shows that their intentions were a lie...

    also....

    In a self defense situation, many times the victim will likely be injured in some way...when you are injured, and even when you are not....you get hit with a spike of adrenaline to deal with the situation....and the adrenaline affects your ability to do small motor movement...like changing a magazine.

    So....a standard capacity magazine means you don't have to change your magazine as often if you really have to take on a determined attacker or attackers.....that could mean your life or the life of your family.

    A criminal...if they run out of ammo...they can run away...you can't.....

    Have you read the ruling by the Judge in the Magazine ban in San Diego...he goes through this exactly, step by step....I posted a thread on it, and he actually addresses your question far better than I can.....

    http://michellawyers.com/wp-content...rra_Order-Granting-Preliminary-Injunction.pdf

    b. Constitutionally suspect under the simple test

    Under the simple Heller test, § 32310 (c) & (d) are highly suspect.


    Magazines holding more than 10 rounds are useful for self-defense by law-abiding citizens.

    And they are common.

    Lawful in at least 43 states and under federal law, these magazines number in the millions.Cf. Hollis v. Lynch, 827 F.3d 436, 449 (5th Cir. 2016) (defining the term “common” by applying the Supreme Court test in Caetano of 200,000 stun guns owned and legal in 45 states being “common”); see also NYSR&PA v. Cuomo, 804 F.3d 242, 255-57 (2nd Cir. 2015) (noting large-capacity magazines are “in common use” as the term is used in Heller based on even the most conservative estimates).

    To the extent they may be now uncommon within California, it would only be the result of the State long criminalizing the buying, selling, importing, and manufacturing of these magazines.

    -------

    Again, a 33-round magazine would seem unusual. But a Glock 19 with its standard magazine would seem to be the quintessential self-defense weapon

    ------

    Tragically, when 30-round magazines are banned, attackers will use 15 or 17- round magazines. If magazines holding more than 10 rounds are banned they will use multiple 10-round magazines. If all semi-automatic weapons are banned they will use

    40 17cv1017-BEN Case 3:17-cv-01017-BEN-JLB Document 28 Filed 06/29/17 PageID.4156 Page 40 of 66 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28


    shotguns and revolvers. All of these scenarios already occur. Because revolvers and handguns are the quintessential home defense weapon protected by the Second Amendment and specifically approved in Heller, and because the average defensive gun use involves firing 2.2 rounds (according to the State’s experts), states could rationalize a ban on possession of rounds in excess of three per weapon.

    Criminals intent on 13 violence would then equip themselves with multiple weapons.

    The State could then rationalize a one-weapon-per-individual law. Since “merely” brandishing a firearm is usually effective as a defense to criminal attack (according to the State’s experts), it could be argued that a one-revolver-with-one-round-per-individual ban is a reasonable experiment in state police power as a means to protect citizens and law enforcement officers from gun violence


     
    • Winner Winner x 2
  7. 2aguy
    Offline

    2aguy Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    54,875
    Thanks Received:
    9,500
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +37,405

    Here is an example the Judge used to show that the anti-gun expert was incorrect....

    The professor did not need to speculate about some unlikely, hypothetical, future case.

    The scenario has actually played out in the past. And it turns out that his speculation was a bit off. Among the Attorney General’s evidentiary presentation is a news account of a law-abiding woman and her husband who late one night needed to fire a gun in self-defense against armed robbers. Oppo. Gordon Declaration, Exh. 41.


    As two armed men broke in, Susan Gonzalez was shot in the chest. She made it back to their bedroom and found her husband’s .22 pistol. Wasting the first rounds on warning shots, she then emptied the single pistol at one attacker.

    Unfortunately, out of ammunition, she was shot again by the other armed attacker. She was not able to re-load or use a second gun. Both her and her husband were shot twice.

    Forty-two bullets were fired. Id., Exh. 41 (Jacksonville Times-Union, July 18, 2000) (“Suddenly the door flew 46 17cv1017-BEN Case 3:17-cv-01017-BEN-JLB Document 28 Filed 06/29/17 PageID.4162 Page 46 of 66 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 open and two masked men burst into the doublewide wearing gloves and camouflage jackets and waving guns . . . . She was shot in the chest . . . dialed 911 . . . then grabbed her husband’s Ruger .22 from a drawer . . . fired several shots over the robbers’ heads to scare them off . . . saw one of the gunmen . . . crouched near her refrigerator. . . sneaked up behind him and emptied the Ruger, hitting him twice with her seven or eight remaining bullets.

    The other gunman . . . then shot Susan Gonzalez, now out of ammunition.



    [The gunman] fled from the house but returned . . . [.] He put a gun to Susan Gonzalez’s head and demanded the keys to the couple’s truck.”); cf. Oppo. Gordon Declaration, Exh. 102 at 388 (Washington Post, Jan. 30, 2013, Transcript of Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing on Gun Violence), Senator L. Graham remarks: “I do not know if 10 versus 19 is common or uncommon. I do know that 10 versus 19 in the hands of the wrong person is a complete disaster.

    I do know that six bullets in that hands [sic] of a woman trying to defend her children may not be enough. . . [.]

    One bullet in the hands of the wrong person we should all try to prevent.

    But when you start telling me that I am unreasonable for wanting that woman to have more than six bullets, or to have and AR-15 if people [are] roaming around my neighborhood, I reject the concept.”). The Attorney General’s own evidence casts doubt on the reliability of his experts’ opinions.
     
  8. Mudda
    Offline

    Mudda Silver Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    7,981
    Thanks Received:
    335
    Trophy Points:
    95
    Ratings:
    +1,728
    Gee, ANOTHER thread about how you like nice, long, hard guns. What a surprise. :lmao:
     
  9. 2aguy
    Offline

    2aguy Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    54,875
    Thanks Received:
    9,500
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +37,405

    Actually, it is only a surprise to you.....I have made it quite obvious that I post about the 2nd Amendment, the one amendment that is under direct assault by left wingers, and has the least popular support of the general American people....

    And of course, you imply a sexual attitude about guns...which is typical of anti-gunners. I think it has to do with anti gunners having deep seated sexual issues......they see a gun and they become sexually aroused....they feel guilty, and awkward about this feeling of sexual arousal, but they don't know how to stop it.....there only solution is to demand that all guns be banned....and to "project" their confused sexual attraction for guns onto other people......

    Psychological projection - Wikipedia

    Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others.[1]

    Mudda....I suggest that you seek professional help.....your sexual attraction to firearms is not normal, and it is not healthy....please get help before you hurt yourself or others...
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  10. Mudda
    Offline

    Mudda Silver Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    7,981
    Thanks Received:
    335
    Trophy Points:
    95
    Ratings:
    +1,728
    The 2nd amendment doesn't protect an unfettered access to any weapon you want. So the government has already screwed you. :biggrin:
     

Share This Page