Yes, there is a HUGE difference and if you knew anything about what you are bloviating about, you would reealize how HUGE a difference there is between fully automatic guns and semi-automatic guns.
You sound like some young earth creationists spouting on about how flawed carbon dating is when you are plainly ignorant on the subject, lol.
-- This from the sterling intellect who created this thread based apparently on a bad comic book plot (to wit: "Americans have a highly trained cadre of experienced military that many of whom would be very effective at fighting a partisan war against a President that most of them hate and despise. Anyone who cant [sic] see the dangers frought [sic] with a civil war in such a context is either ignorant, stupid or a fucking traitor who wants to see our nation destroyed from the ground up*" and whose logical reasoning prowess is apparently limited to "Fuck you, libtard".
(*"Doctor Doom" season four, wasn't it?)
Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed
Packing heat may backfire. People who carry guns are far likelier to get shot and killed than those who are unarmed, a study of shooting victims in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, has found.
...Overall, Branas's study found that people who carried guns were 4.5 times as likely to be shot and 4.2 times as likely to get killed compared with unarmed citizens. When the team looked at shootings in which victims had a chance to defend themselves, their odds of getting shot were even higher.
While it may be that the type of people who carry firearms are simply more likely to get shot, it may be that guns give a sense of empowerment that causes carriers to overreact in tense situations, or encourages them to visit neighbourhoods they probably shouldn't, Branas speculates. Supporters of the Second Amendment shouldn't worry that the right to bear arms is under threat, however. "We don't have an answer as to whether guns are protective or perilous," Branas says. "This study is a beginning."