No, the Assault weapon ban didn't do anything, no matter how they lie about it...

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by 2aguy, Sep 6, 2019.

  1. Jitss617
    Online

    Jitss617 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2019
    Messages:
    12,436
    Thanks Received:
    1,097
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Ratings:
    +7,928
    Umm ok .. most of America voted for him
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  2. playtime
    Offline

    playtime Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2015
    Messages:
    19,836
    Thanks Received:
    8,972
    Trophy Points:
    2,295
    Location:
    Land of the sane.
    Ratings:
    +19,566
    high capacity mags & drums are huge part of the problem, dummy.... not to mention high velocity ammo. the type of ammo that military style weapons use are far more destructive to human flesh than 'ordinary' bullets.
     
  3. playtime
    Offline

    playtime Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2015
    Messages:
    19,836
    Thanks Received:
    8,972
    Trophy Points:
    2,295
    Location:
    Land of the sane.
    Ratings:
    +19,566
    [​IMG]
     
  4. 2aguy
    Offline

    2aguy Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    74,051
    Thanks Received:
    13,478
    Trophy Points:
    2,180
    Ratings:
    +55,160

    No, moron, they aren't. What do you mean, High Velocity Ammo? Do you asshats sit around and just make this crap up....? You must, there is so much of it.....

    What creates the number of dead in a mass public shooting isn't the magazine, even a drum magazine, especially, dumb ass....since drum magazines have a horrible rate of simply jamming under use......what causes the death rate in a mass public shooting is the gun free zone where no one except the shooter has a gun, so the shooter can shoot unarmed people for at least 5-6 minutes, or more, before someone gets a gun to the scene and can make him stop.......

    You obviously know nothing about guns or ammunition.........there is no such thing as ammo for military weapons, you doofus....unless you mean tanks and cannons...you dope....

    SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

    Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages by Gary Kleck :: SSRN


    I.

    Do bans on large-capacity magazines (LCMs) for semiautomatic firearms have significant potential for reducing the number of deaths and injuries in mass shootings?
    ========
    In sum, in nearly all LCM-involved mass shootings, the time it takes to reload a detachable magazine is no greater than the average time between shots that the shooter takes anyway when not reloading.

    Consequently, there is no affirmative evidence that reloading detachable magazines slows mass shooters’ rates of fire, and thus no affirmative evidence that the number of victims who could escape the killers due to additional pauses in the shooting is increased by the shooter’s need to change magazines.

    ==========
    The most common rationale for an effect of LCM use is that they allow mass killers to fire many rounds without reloading.
    LCMs are used is less than 1/3 of 1% of mass shootings.
    News accounts of 23 shootings in which more than six people were killed or wounded and LCMs were used, occurring in the U.S. in 1994-2013, were examined.
    There was only one incident in which the shooter may have been stopped by bystander intervention when he tried to reload.
    In all of these 23 incidents the shooter possessed either multiple guns or multiple magazines, meaning that the shooter, even if denied LCMs, could have continued firing without significant interruption by either switching loaded guns or by changing smaller loaded magazines with only a 2-4 second delay for each magazine change.
    Finally, the data indicate that mass shooters maintain slow enough rates of fire such that the time needed to reload would not increase the time between shots and thus the time available for prospective victims to escape.

    --------

    We did not employ the oft-used definition of “mass murder” as a homicide in which four or more victims were killed, because most of these involve just four to six victims (Duwe 2007), which could therefore have involved as few as six rounds fired, a number that shooters using even ordinary revolvers are capable of firing without reloading.

    LCMs obviously cannot help shooters who fire no more rounds than could be fired without LCMs, so the inclusion of “nonaffectable” cases with only four to six victims would dilute the sample, reducing the percent of sample incidents in which an LCM might have affected the number of casualties.

    Further, had we studied only homicides with four or more dead victims, drawn from the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports, we would have missed cases in which huge numbers of people were shot, and huge numbers of rounds were fired, but three or fewer of the victims died.


    For example, in one widely publicized shooting carried out in Los Angeles on February 28, 1997, two bank robbers shot a total of 18 people - surely a mass shooting by any reasonable standard (Table 1).

    Yet, because none of the people they shot died, this incident would not qualify as a mass murder (or even murder of any kind).

    Exclusion of such incidents would bias the sample against the proposition that LCM use increases the number of victims by excluding incidents with large numbers of victims. We also excluded shootings in which more than six persons were shot over the entire course of the incident but shootings occurred in multiple locations with no more than six people shot in any one of the locations, and substantial periods of time intervened between episodes of shooting. An example is the series of killings committed by Rodrick Dantzler on July 7, 2011.

    Once eligible incidents were identified, we searched through news accounts for details related to whether the use of LCMs could have influenced the casualty counts.

    Specifically, we searched for

    (1) the number of magazines in the shooter’s immediate possession,

    (2) the capacity of the largest magazine,

    (3) the number of guns in the shooter’s immediate possession during the incident,

    (4) the types of guns possessed,

    (5) whether the shooter reloaded during the incident,

    (6) the number of rounds fired,

    (7) the duration of the shooting from the first shot fired to the last, and (8) whether anyone intervened to stop the shooter.

    Findings How Many Mass Shootings were Committed Using LCMs?

    We identified 23 total incidents in which more than six people were shot at a single time and place in the U.S. from 1994 through 2013 and that were known to involve use of any magazines with capacities over ten rounds.


    Table 1 summarizes key details of the LCMinvolved mass shootings relevant to the issues addressed in this paper.

    (Table 1 about here) What fraction of all mass shootings involve LCMs?

    There is no comprehensive listing of all mass shootings available for the entire 1994-2013 period, but the most extensive one currently available is at the Shootingtracker.com website, which only began its coverage in 2013.

    -----


    -----
    The offenders in LCM-involved mass shootings were also known to have reloaded during 14 of the 23 (61%) incidents with magazine holding over 10 rounds.

    The shooters were known to have not reloaded in another two of these 20 incidents and it could not be determined if they reloaded in the remaining seven incidents.

    Thus, even if the shooters had been denied LCMs, we know that most of them definitely would have been able to reload smaller detachable magazines without interference from bystanders since they in fact did change magazines.

    The fact that this percentage is less than 100% should not, however, be interpreted to mean that the shooters were unable to reload in the other nine incidents.

    It is possible that the shooters could also have reloaded in many of these nine shootings, but chose not to do so, or did not need to do so in order to fire all the rounds they wanted to fire. This is consistent with the fact that there has been at most only one mass shootings in twenty years in which reloading a semiautomatic firearm might have been blocked by bystanders intervening and thereby stopping the shooter from doing all the shooting he wanted to do. All we know is that in two incidents the shooter did not reload, and news accounts of seven other incidents did not mention whether the offender reloaded.

    ----

    For example, a story in the Hartford Courant about the Sandy Hook elementary school killings in 2012 was headlined “Shooter Paused, and Six Escaped,” the text asserting that as many as six children may have survived because the shooter paused to reload (December 23, 2012). ''

    The author of the story, however, went on to concede that this was just a speculation by an unnamed source, and that it was also possible that some children simply escaped when the killer was shooting other children.

    There was no reliable evidence that the pauses were due to the shooter reloading, rather than his guns jamming or the shooter simply choosing to pause his shooting while his gun was still loaded.

    The plausibility of the “victims escape” rationale depends on the average rates of fire that shooters in mass shootings typically maintain.

    If they fire very fast, the 2-4 seconds it takes to change box-type detachable magazines could produce a slowing of the rate of fire that the shooters otherwise would have maintained without the magazine changes, increasing the average time between rounds fired and potentially allowing more victims to escape during the betweenshot intervals.

    On the other hand, if mass shooters fire their guns with the average interval between shots lasting more than 2-4 seconds, the pauses due to additional magazine changes would be no longer than the pauses the shooter typically took between shots even when not reloading.

    In that case, there would be no more opportunity for potential victims to escape than there would have been without the additional magazine changes
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  5. playtime
    Offline

    playtime Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2015
    Messages:
    19,836
    Thanks Received:
    8,972
    Trophy Points:
    2,295
    Location:
    Land of the sane.
    Ratings:
    +19,566
    :yapyapyapf:

    the good guys with guns down in el paso didn't have a chance.
     
  6. Jitss617
    Online

    Jitss617 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2019
    Messages:
    12,436
    Thanks Received:
    1,097
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Ratings:
    +7,928
    1BAE2D2E-5464-465F-B8BC-055991208C56.jpeg
    I said most of America . This has to hurt lol
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  7. 2aguy
    Offline

    2aguy Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    74,051
    Thanks Received:
    13,478
    Trophy Points:
    2,180
    Ratings:
    +55,160

    He shot unarmed people, doofus.....how old are you...10? Shouldn't you be out mowing your Parent's lawn, taking out the trash? Go to school, learn something, then come back and post....

    Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events [FBI]

    Of all the active shooter events there were 33 at which an armed citizen was present. Of those, Armed Citizens were successful at stopping the Active shooter 75.8% of the time (25 incidents) and were successful in reducing the loss of life in an additional 18.2% (6) of incidents. In only 2 of the 33 incidents (6.1%) was the Armed Citizen(s) not helpful in any way in stopping the active shooter or reducing the loss of life.

    Thus the headline of our report that Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events.



    In the 2 incidents at which the armed citizen “failed” to stop or slow the active shooter, one is the previously mentioned incident with hunters. The other is an incident in which the CCWer was shot in the back in a Las Vegas Walmart when he failed to identify that there were 2 Active Shooters involved in the attack. He neglected to identify the one that shot him in the back while he was trying to ambush the other perpetrator.

    We also decided to look at the breakdown of events that took place in gun free zones and the relative death toll from events in gun free zones vs non-gun-free zones.

    Of the 283 incidents in our data pool, we were unable to identify if the event took place in a gun-free zone in a large number (41%) of the events. Most of the events took place at a business, church, home, or other places at which as a rule of law it is not a gun free zone but potentially could have been declared one by the property owner. Without any information in the FBI study or any indication one way or the other from the news reports, we have indicated that event with a question mark.

    If you look at all of the Active Shooter events (pie chart on the top) you see that for those which we have the information, almost twice as many took place in gun free zones than not; but realistically the vast majority of those for which we have no information (indicated as ?) are probably NOT gun free zones.

    If you isolate just the events at which 8 or more people were killed the data paints a different picture (pie chart on the bottom). In these incidents, 77.8% took place in a gun-free zone suggesting that gun free zones lead to a higher death rate vs active shooter events in general

    =====

    One of the final metrics we thought was important to consider is the potential tendency for armed citizens to injure or kill innocent people in their attempt to “save the day.” A common point in political discussions is to point out the lack of training of most armed citizens and the decrease in safety inherent in their presence during violent encounters.

    As you can see below, however, at the 33 incidents at which Armed Citizens were present, there were zero situations at which the Armed Citizen injured or killed an innocent person. It never happened.
     
  8. playtime
    Offline

    playtime Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2015
    Messages:
    19,836
    Thanks Received:
    8,972
    Trophy Points:
    2,295
    Location:
    Land of the sane.
    Ratings:
    +19,566
    ummm... only the electoral college & he won by < than 75K. thems the facts.
     
  9. Jitss617
    Online

    Jitss617 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2019
    Messages:
    12,436
    Thanks Received:
    1,097
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Ratings:
    +7,928
    30 million illegals voting democrat. Democrat party is over lol
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  10. 2aguy
    Offline

    2aguy Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    74,051
    Thanks Received:
    13,478
    Trophy Points:
    2,180
    Ratings:
    +55,160

    Moron.....you win the electoral college to become President....you are the same asshat who would sit there and say your team actually won the football game because you threw more passes.......while the other team had actual touchdowns...
     

Share This Page