CDZ The Dallas Shooter

[HereWeGoAgain]

so...is it that he killed 5 people in one go that is more important than 1,567 people over a whole year....and 1,500 every year...vs. about 248 a year with rifles...is that the important thing for you....you just don't care if the murders are spread out over a year....

AR-15s are used in fewer crimes than knives or hands and feet....far fewer..


Here you go...the updated table....

Expanded Homicide Data Table 8



For 2014 included......


All rifles: 248 ------------(2013....285 (that means AR-15s kill even fewer than that))

Knives: 1,567-------------( 2013....1,490)

Hands and feet: 660----( 2013 .......687 )

Blunt objects: 435------ ( 2013....428)

And gun murders by rifle...been going down....

2009...351

2010...367

2011...332

2012...298

2013...285

2014...248

This is called a red herring fallacy.

You are trying to throw up a smoke screen to hide the killing power (force multiplication factor) of the AR's and AK's and their clones.

I can do the same thing with a semi auto deer rifle.
In fact I could kill more with the deer rifle.

No you can't. Not even Lee Harvey Oswald could do that, and he is the undisputed champion of operating a bolt action Mannlicker Carcano. You may think you are some Lee Harvey Oswald yourself but you are not.

You obviously have no clue what Oswald used or what a semi auto deer rifle is.
I'll give you a hint.....it was made in Italy.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Are you thinking of the forward assist?

That forward assist that Stoner dreamed up does not work. You cannot work the bolt with it. You can only push it forward and make the jam worse.

Ultimately if you have an AR then you need to have a flathead screwdriver and a hammer with you to clear it at all times, and/or beat the butt on the ground or floor really hard.

By then your opponent/enemy will have shot you with his AK or AK clone or whatever else he has with him, lever action Winchester, or whatever.

So don't sass me boy with your forward assist bullsh!t.

I've put well over 10,000 rounds through my AR without a single jam.
I have had a few FF's due to bad ammo but a quick pull on the charging handle was all it took to get it going again.

You should stop reading the history of the AR and start looking at how it functions today.

Anecdotal fallacy.

Guy who has zero gun knowledge....

 

[yiostheoy]

Bottom line is that more and more cities and states are going to ban the AR-15 and it's clones.

California just did.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Bottom line is that more and more cities and states are going to ban the AR-15 and it's clones.

California just did.

No they haven't.

 

[BlueGin]

Yeah...its the guns fault.

How convenient that is. It relieves Obama and Black Lives Matter of their responsibility for the killings.

That's what they are hoping anyway

 

[westwall]

so...is it that he killed 5 people in one go that is more important than 1,567 people over a whole year....and 1,500 every year...vs. about 248 a year with rifles...is that the important thing for you....you just don't care if the murders are spread out over a year....

AR-15s are used in fewer crimes than knives or hands and feet....far fewer..


Here you go...the updated table....

Expanded Homicide Data Table 8



For 2014 included......


All rifles: 248 ------------(2013....285 (that means AR-15s kill even fewer than that))

Knives: 1,567-------------( 2013....1,490)

Hands and feet: 660----( 2013 .......687 )

Blunt objects: 435------ ( 2013....428)

And gun murders by rifle...been going down....

2009...351

2010...367

2011...332

2012...298

2013...285

2014...248

This is called a red herring fallacy.

You are trying to throw up a smoke screen to hide the killing power (force multiplication factor) of the AR's and AK's and their clones.

It's you spewing the propaganda. The most devastating weapon out there is a shotgun. Bar none. The AR doesn't have a "special recoil reduction system". That is horse poo. It doesn't recoil much because of the size, and weight of the round that is fired which in modern form is a 62 grain projectile. About 50% heavier than a standard .22 Long Rifle. It's just going faster.

Any hunting rifle would have done the exact same job as the AR. In fact, it probably would have been far worse. A 7mm magnum in the chest and you're toast. There are multiple victims who were hit multiple times and they are still alive.

Your information is simply wrong on all levels.

 

[westwall]

Are you thinking of the forward assist?

That forward assist that Stoner dreamed up does not work. You cannot work the bolt with it. You can only push it forward and make the jam worse.

Ultimately if you have an AR then you need to have a flathead screwdriver and a hammer with you to un-jam it at all times, and/or beat the butt on the ground or floor really hard.

By then your opponent/enemy will have shot you with his AK or AK clone or whatever else he has with him, lever action Winchester, or whatever.

So don't sass me boy with your forward assist bullsh!t.

Once again, you show that you nothing of what you speak.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Used a gun similar to those used in recent mass shootings.

He killed FIVE police officers.

How many of these weapons wouldn't be in circulation if the assault weapons ban hadn't been allowed to expire twenty years ago?

He would have had a weapon simillar just without the legally restricted features that the law would hqve banned.

lol

 

[FA_Q2]

so...is it that he killed 5 people in one go that is more important than 1,567 people over a whole year....and 1,500 every year...vs. about 248 a year with rifles...is that the important thing for you....you just don't care if the murders are spread out over a year....

AR-15s are used in fewer crimes than knives or hands and feet....far fewer..


Here you go...the updated table....

Expanded Homicide Data Table 8



For 2014 included......


All rifles: 248 ------------(2013....285 (that means AR-15s kill even fewer than that))

Knives: 1,567-------------( 2013....1,490)

Hands and feet: 660----( 2013 .......687 )

Blunt objects: 435------ ( 2013....428)

And gun murders by rifle...been going down....

2009...351

2010...367

2011...332

2012...298

2013...285

2014...248

This is called a red herring fallacy.

You are trying to throw up a smoke screen to hide the killing power (force multiplication factor) of the AR's and AK's and their clones.

No, it is not a red herring. Those statistics are directly relevant to the asinine attempt to ban a popular rifle. The facts are blatant - banning this particular weapon will have zero results in reducing deaths.

Just be glad this shooter used a weapon rather than a bomb - something else he was clearly dabbling in, or you could have had a lot more killed.

 

[Agit8r]

so...is it that he killed 5 people in one go that is more important than 1,567 people over a whole year....and 1,500 every year...vs. about 248 a year with rifles...is that the important thing for you....you just don't care if the murders are spread out over a year....

AR-15s are used in fewer crimes than knives or hands and feet....far fewer..


Here you go...the updated table....

Expanded Homicide Data Table 8



For 2014 included......


All rifles: 248 ------------(2013....285 (that means AR-15s kill even fewer than that))

Knives: 1,567-------------( 2013....1,490)

Hands and feet: 660----( 2013 .......687 )

Blunt objects: 435------ ( 2013....428)

And gun murders by rifle...been going down....

2009...351

2010...367

2011...332

2012...298

2013...285

2014...248

This is called a red herring fallacy.

You are trying to throw up a smoke screen to hide the killing power (force multiplication factor) of the AR's and AK's and their clones.

No, it is not a red herring. Those statistics are directly relevant to the asinine attempt to ban a popular rifle. The facts are blatant - banning this particular weapon will have zero results in reducing deaths.

Just be glad this shooter used a weapon rather than a bomb - something else he was clearly dabbling in, or you could have had a lot more killed.

Are bombs always more deadly? 3 dead in Boston bombing. 6 dead in Dallas shooting. Not looking good for that myth.

 

[westwall]

so...is it that he killed 5 people in one go that is more important than 1,567 people over a whole year....and 1,500 every year...vs. about 248 a year with rifles...is that the important thing for you....you just don't care if the murders are spread out over a year....

AR-15s are used in fewer crimes than knives or hands and feet....far fewer..


Here you go...the updated table....

Expanded Homicide Data Table 8



For 2014 included......


All rifles: 248 ------------(2013....285 (that means AR-15s kill even fewer than that))

Knives: 1,567-------------( 2013....1,490)

Hands and feet: 660----( 2013 .......687 )

Blunt objects: 435------ ( 2013....428)

And gun murders by rifle...been going down....

2009...351

2010...367

2011...332

2012...298

2013...285

2014...248

This is called a red herring fallacy.

You are trying to throw up a smoke screen to hide the killing power (force multiplication factor) of the AR's and AK's and their clones.

No, it is not a red herring. Those statistics are directly relevant to the asinine attempt to ban a popular rifle. The facts are blatant - banning this particular weapon will have zero results in reducing deaths.

Just be glad this shooter used a weapon rather than a bomb - something else he was clearly dabbling in, or you could have had a lot more killed.

Are bombs always more deadly? 3 dead in Boston bombing. 6 dead in Dallas shooting. Not looking good for that myth.

Nope. Bombs are not always more deadly. They do tend to kill more in a particular blast but they are not always more deadly. It's a game of statistics. Bombs on average are going to kill more people in any particular attack. But they don't always. However, we have a pretty good handle on mass shooting statistics and lo and behold Norway, which has the sort of gun ban you want, has a higher mass shooting rate than the USA. Congrats. Your assertions are proven wrong yet again.

UPDATED: Comparing Death Rates from Mass Public Shootings and Mass Public Violence in the US and Europe - Crime Prevention Research Center

 

[yiostheoy]

Well this CDZ debate quickly got really nasty, and the mod instead of cleaning it up just joined in on the food fight.

 

[yiostheoy]

2016 shooting of Dallas police officers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Here is the latest wiki on the Dallas shooter.

It refers to mental issues alleged by a former girlfriend in the Army in A-stan.

Although racially motivated, this crime seems to fall into the wacko category with Holmes in Colorado and other wacko's across the USA.

Unfortunately with 7 wounded and 5 dead cops, it was a bad day for law enforcement -- the worst one since Sept 11 2001 apparently.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

‘"The AR-15 Assault weapon is the preferred weapon of these mass killers," former NYPD sergeant and FBI special agent Manuel Gomez said.

Gomez says that until Congress reinstates the ban on these military-style weapons, they will continue to be used in mass shootings because of their killing efficiency.’

There will be no ‘new’ AWB, anyone who makes such a claim is a liar.

Even if Clinton is elected president and the Senate is controlled by democrats next year, there will be no ‘new’ AWB; anyone who claims otherwise is a liar.

Moreover, the AWB was not ‘un-Constitutional,’ the Supreme Court has never ruled on whether such bans violate the Second Amendment or not – anyone who makes the claim that advocating for the reinstatement of the AWB is to be ‘against’ the Second Amendment is a liar.

That most on the right attempt to contrive and propagate such lies comes as no surprise, of course.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Used a gun similar to those used in recent mass shootings.

He killed FIVE police officers.

How many of these weapons wouldn't be in circulation if the assault weapons ban hadn't been allowed to expire twenty years ago?

Reagan's rolling in his grave.

NEW YORK (WABC) -- Details are emerging about the weapon used to carry out the deadly ambush on police officers in Dallas, and while not confirmed, it is believed that the sniper used what is increasingly the weapon of choice in mass shootings.

"We will find that it was a military-style assault weapon with a large capacity magazine on it," Citizens Crime Commission president Richard Aborn said. "And this happens over and over and over again."

Last month, a military-style rifle was used by the gunman who killed 49 people at an Orlando nightclub. And last December, a husband and wife terrorist team killed 14 using a similar semi-automatic rifle. Adam Lanza used a military-type rifle in 2012 to kill 26 students and teachers at a school in Newtown Connecticut, and a similar AR-15-type military rifle was used to kill 12 people earlier that year in a Colorado movie theater.

"The AR-15 Assault weapon is the preferred weapon of these mass killers," former NYPD sergeant and FBI special agent Manuel Gomez said.

Gomez says that until Congress reinstates the ban on these military-style weapons, they will continue to be used in mass shootings because of their killing efficiency.

"You can shoot 50, 60, up to 100 rounds in one minute," he said. "And each round designed to enter the body and tear that piece that it entered apart."

A report by New York's Citizen Crime Commission concluded that after Congress lifted the ban on these military-style rifles in 2004, the number of people killed by semi-automatic, high-capacity guns tripled. Aborn said the Dallas police killings adds to their death toll.

Less than two percent of gun crimes are committed with long guns, an even smaller percentage by AR platform rifles.

To ‘ban’ such firearms will have little effect on overall gun crime deaths, if any effect at all.

Consequently, advocating for a ‘new’ AWB is unwarranted.

 

[yiostheoy]

Less than two percent of gun crimes are committed with long guns, an even smaller percentage by AR platform rifles.

To ‘ban’ such firearms will have little effect on overall gun crime deaths, if any effect at all.

Consequently, advocating for a ‘new’ AWB is unwarranted.

Straw man AND red herring.

The issue with the assault style guns is force multiplication not number of deaths per year.

 

[yiostheoy]

‘"The AR-15 Assault weapon is the preferred weapon of these mass killers," former NYPD sergeant and FBI special agent Manuel Gomez said.

Gomez says that until Congress reinstates the ban on these military-style weapons, they will continue to be used in mass shootings because of their killing efficiency.’

There will be no ‘new’ AWB, anyone who makes such a claim is a liar.

Even if Clinton is elected president and the Senate is controlled by democrats next year, there will be no ‘new’ AWB; anyone who claims otherwise is a liar.

Moreover, the AWB was not ‘un-Constitutional,’ the Supreme Court has never ruled on whether such bans violate the Second Amendment or not – anyone who makes the claim that advocating for the reinstatement of the AWB is to be ‘against’ the Second Amendment is a liar.

That most on the right attempt to contrive and propagate such lies comes as no surprise, of course.

At the Federal level nothing is likely to happen because Hillary would need a super majority Senate and control of the House.

The States however are free to do as they please.

Bill Text - AB-1135 Firearms: assault weapons.

 

[westwall]

Well this CDZ debate quickly got really nasty, and the mod instead of cleaning it up just joined in on the food fight.

Oh? Posting facts is now considered "nasty"? Do tell....

 

[westwall]

Less than two percent of gun crimes are committed with long guns, an even smaller percentage by AR platform rifles.

To ‘ban’ such firearms will have little effect on overall gun crime deaths, if any effect at all.

Consequently, advocating for a ‘new’ AWB is unwarranted.

Straw man AND red herring.

The issue with the assault style guns is force multiplication not number of deaths per year.

Untrue. If your goal is indeed to lessen gun crimes and homicides in general then you should be focusing on the one common denominator that crosses the majority of these crimes and that is the violent offenders. The overwhelming majority of gun crimes are done by gangbangers. Chicago alone has 150,000 KNOWN gang members. The police finally decided to crack down on the gangs due to the horrendous murder rate. I found it interesting that one of the BIG things they were going to do was actually arrest gangsters who had not only been convicted of murder but were stating they were going to do more.

Why on Earth were these scumbags on the street in the first place?

You want to reduce murders? Lock these people up and throw away the key. THAT would actually accomplish something. Your "plan" won't. It already exists in Norway and France and between to two of them they have had more people murdered in mass shootings than all of the mass shootings in the USA over the last 20 years. That's not exactly a ringing endorsement don't you think?

And for the record the CDZ only means that we don't swear and otherwise belittle. Demolishing arguments with facts is totally acceptable. Deal with facts, don't whine about moderators blowing your arguments out of the water.

 

[320 Years of History]

How many of these weapons wouldn't be in circulation if the assault weapons ban hadn't been allowed to expire twenty years ago?

I don't know nor can I estimate the sum, but it's safe to say that fewer of them would be in circulation had the ban been maintained.