CDZ Do "liberals" really want to ban the AR-15 ?

[JQPublic1]

There's no such thing as a liberal.

They all died off.

No 'liberal' would be for banning our rights, it goes against the very definition of the word.

I used the term "liberal' loosely. But anyone who has been on these boards for any length of time knows how UNIVERSAL it has become as a euphemism for anyone who doesn't wholly agree with RW conservative principles. But the op is not about that. It is about a method to put teeth into the ban on Assault type rifles or those rifles with the potential to be assault rifles with a little modification.

this thread is about using fear to undermine our Constitutional rights.

something a liberal would never do, but leftist do on a regular basis.

The NRA thanks you for lining their pockets. Because that's literally all you're doing.

I support the free market.
I support freedom
I support the Constitution


Why don't you?

Do you think more laws will stop the violence?

look up how many laws and bans on arms there already are, then ask yourself that again.

if you still think it's yes, there's no hope for you

I'd like to intervene here: Here is a report on the Australian ban:

"Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms: faster falls in firearm deaths, firearm suicides, and a decade without mass shootings

Background: After a 1996 firearm massacre in Tasmania in which 35 people died, Australian governments united to remove semi-automatic and pump-action shotguns and rifles from civilian possession, as a key component of gun law reforms.

Objective: To determine whether Australia’s 1996 major gun law reforms were associated with changes in rates of mass firearm homicides, total firearm deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides, and whether there were any apparent method substitution effects for total homicides and suicides.

Design: Observational study using official statistics. Negative binomial regression analysis of changes in firearm death rates and comparison of trends in pre–post gun law reform firearm-related mass killings. Setting: Australia, 1979–2003.

Main outcome measures: Changes in trends of total firearm death rates, mass fatal shooting incidents, rates of firearm homicide, suicide and unintentional firearm deaths, and of total homicides and suicides per 100 000 population.

Results: In the 18 years before the gun law reforms, there were 13 mass shootings in Australia, and none in the 10.5 years afterwards. Declines in firearm-related deaths before the law reforms accelerated after the reforms for total firearm deaths (p = 0.04), firearm suicides (p = 0.007) and firearm homicides (p = 0.15), but not for the smallest category of unintentional firearm deaths, which increased. No evidence of substitution effect for suicides or homicides was observed. The rates per 100 000 of total firearm deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides all at least doubled their existing rates of decline after the revised gun laws. Conclusions: Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms were followed by more than a decade free of fatal mass shootings, and accelerated declines in firearm deaths, particularly suicides. Total homicide rates followed the same pattern. Removing large numbers of rapid-firing firearms from civilians may be an effective way of reducing mass shootings, firearm homicides and firearm suicides."

http://jeffsachs.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Australia-Gun-Law-Reforms.pdf

 

[JQPublic1]

The pathos-driven warrant suggested by the OP, though quite macabre, could well work if combined with the rational appeals that have been tried to date. Rhetoric 101: make a strong rational argument and drive it home with an emotion inspiring warrant, but the warrant alone won't do the trick.

What's clear is that the rational approach alone hasn't worked; a more poignant solution is needed. Strangely, the video sequences showing several sanguinary survivors is insufficiently inspiring. Perhaps we can blame bloody video games and crime dramas for our cultural insouciance toward the reality of death by gunshot.

This is what gunshot violence looks like in video games, idealized art and television

(Boston Massacre)


​

This is what it actually looks like when people get shot:

I hope my friend 2AGUY is taking all of this in. And these are just the pictures of adults.

 

[320 Years of History]

The pathos-driven warrant suggested by the OP, though quite macabre, could well work if combined with the rational appeals that have been tried to date. Rhetoric 101: make a strong rational argument and drive it home with an emotion inspiring warrant, but the warrant alone won't do the trick.

What's clear is that the rational approach alone hasn't worked; a more poignant solution is needed. Strangely, the video sequences showing several sanguinary survivors is insufficiently inspiring. Perhaps we can blame bloody video games and crime dramas for our cultural insouciance toward the reality of death by gunshot.

This is what gunshot violence looks like in video games, idealized art and television

(Boston Massacre)


​

This is what it actually looks like when people get shot:

I hope my friend 2AGUY is taking all of this in. And these are just the pictures of adults.

Red:
Don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen.

 

[candycorn]

That's the frustrating thing. The solution is clear as day

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

'Do "liberals" really want to ban the AR-15 ?'

No. of course not.

The notion that they do is another straw man fallacy contrived by conservatives, a ridiculous rightwing lie.

Liberals respect and support current Second Amendment jurisprudence, they considered Heller/McDonald settled, accepted case law, and have no desire to enact laws or measures in conflict with that current Second Amendment jurisprudence.

What’s telling is how conservatives incorrectly assume that ‘gun control’ means regulating actual firearms, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth; there are measures that can be enacted that place no new restrictions on how citizens access firearms.

 

[2aguy]

Wrong on all counts.....the virginia tech shooter used a pistol and murdered 32....actual research shows that magazine capacity has no bearing on the casualty count..the shooters and their rate of fire are not impacted by magazine capacity.........

How can I be wrong on all counts when I never mentioned the Virginia Tech shooter. The majority of mass shooters in the 21st century seem to prefer an assault TYPE rifle. That is a fact. But if you want to draw attention to semi-automatic pistols having high capacity magazines, those can be included too. Frankly though, I realize that any ban is going to be an uphill battle and near impossible to pull off. Australia was faced with that dilemma and I was surprised to learn that when their ban was initiated on assault style weapons over 640, 00 were turned and compensated for.

And the rounds you used...are what he used.....and they are not Hellish.....

I didn't say the rounds were hellish, I said the carnage caused by them is hellish.

You are pretending to know about guns......good to know....

Obama stacked the federal bench.....hoping one day to appoint more than one Supreme Court Justice to replace the conservatives.....and he focused on that because his priority was destroying the American health care system and he knew that he would lose support if democrats lost seats fighting for gun control.

I know the end results of what these semi automatic rapid fire weapons are capable of and I want those results publicly displayed so everyone can know. Don't you want the public to know? Don't you think they will buy into your logic after viewing such gore in HD? I don't think you do…. you don't want the majority to be swayed by seeing the end results of mass killing personal weapons.

Obama has nothing to do with any of this, his term is nearly over and you still have your guns.
It is one thing to think thugs are killing each other but when mass shooters, one after another, continue to kill innocent people and children by the dozens in one fell swoop, that warrants action.
Something more than background checks are needed because several of the shooters had no criminal history. And if a deeper probe into the mind of buyers is instituted, there would hardly be anyone fit to own such weapons. Half the crowd here on USMB would be barred for harboring racist and seditious sentiments. But we know how that goes don't we? Corruption is just under the surface and it would rise to prominence so that a select few can-circumvent the system.

Wrong....

So....my source......Mother Jones....has a record of mass shootings from 1982....

US Mass Shootings, 1982-2016: Data From Mother Jones' Investigation

Total deaths from "Assault" rifles since 2006......106 over 10 years..... ( 2006-2016 )

And I will show you how many were murdered with knives, clubs and bare hands....

From the FBI homicide table 8, weapons used to commit murder...

Expanded Homicide Data Table 8

2014....

Knives..... 1,567 in 2014 ---vs-------- 106 for Assault rifles in 10 years including Sunday's....

Hands and feet....660 in 2014---vs.-------- 106 for assault rifles in 10 years......

clubs.... 435 in 2014--- vs.----------------- 106 for assault rifles for the last 10 years....

So tell us oh genius...which is more of a problem....assault weapons or knives, clubs, and bare hands....?

 

[2aguy]

That's the frustrating thing. The solution is clear as day

Exactly...end gun free zones....glad you agree...

 

[Two Thumbs]

There's no such thing as a liberal.

They all died off.

No 'liberal' would be for banning our rights, it goes against the very definition of the word.

I used the term "liberal' loosely. But anyone who has been on these boards for any length of time knows how UNIVERSAL it has become as a euphemism for anyone who doesn't wholly agree with RW conservative principles. But the op is not about that. It is about a method to put teeth into the ban on Assault type rifles or those rifles with the potential to be assault rifles with a little modification.

this thread is about using fear to undermine our Constitutional rights.

something a liberal would never do, but leftist do on a regular basis.

The NRA thanks you for lining their pockets. Because that's literally all you're doing.

I support the free market.
I support freedom
I support the Constitution


Why don't you?

Do you think more laws will stop the violence?

look up how many laws and bans on arms there already are, then ask yourself that again.

if you still think it's yes, there's no hope for you

I'd like to intervene here: Here is a report on the Australian ban:

"Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms: faster falls in firearm deaths, firearm suicides, and a decade without mass shootings

Background: After a 1996 firearm massacre in Tasmania in which 35 people died, Australian governments united to remove semi-automatic and pump-action shotguns and rifles from civilian possession, as a key component of gun law reforms.

Objective: To determine whether Australia’s 1996 major gun law reforms were associated with changes in rates of mass firearm homicides, total firearm deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides, and whether there were any apparent method substitution effects for total homicides and suicides.

Design: Observational study using official statistics. Negative binomial regression analysis of changes in firearm death rates and comparison of trends in pre–post gun law reform firearm-related mass killings. Setting: Australia, 1979–2003.

Main outcome measures: Changes in trends of total firearm death rates, mass fatal shooting incidents, rates of firearm homicide, suicide and unintentional firearm deaths, and of total homicides and suicides per 100 000 population.

Results: In the 18 years before the gun law reforms, there were 13 mass shootings in Australia, and none in the 10.5 years afterwards. Declines in firearm-related deaths before the law reforms accelerated after the reforms for total firearm deaths (p = 0.04), firearm suicides (p = 0.007) and firearm homicides (p = 0.15), but not for the smallest category of unintentional firearm deaths, which increased. No evidence of substitution effect for suicides or homicides was observed. The rates per 100 000 of total firearm deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides all at least doubled their existing rates of decline after the revised gun laws. Conclusions: Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms were followed by more than a decade free of fatal mass shootings, and accelerated declines in firearm deaths, particularly suicides. Total homicide rates followed the same pattern. Removing large numbers of rapid-firing firearms from civilians may be an effective way of reducing mass shootings, firearm homicides and firearm suicides."

http://jeffsachs.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Australia-Gun-Law-Reforms.pdf

they never had the right, we do.

Not that the fact it's a right means anything to leftist, but it's important to all of us that love and support America.

 

[2aguy]

There's no such thing as a liberal.

They all died off.

No 'liberal' would be for banning our rights, it goes against the very definition of the word.

I used the term "liberal' loosely. But anyone who has been on these boards for any length of time knows how UNIVERSAL it has become as a euphemism for anyone who doesn't wholly agree with RW conservative principles. But the op is not about that. It is about a method to put teeth into the ban on Assault type rifles or those rifles with the potential to be assault rifles with a little modification.

this thread is about using fear to undermine our Constitutional rights.

something a liberal would never do, but leftist do on a regular basis.

The NRA thanks you for lining their pockets. Because that's literally all you're doing.

I support the free market.
I support freedom
I support the Constitution


Why don't you?

Do you think more laws will stop the violence?

look up how many laws and bans on arms there already are, then ask yourself that again.

if you still think it's yes, there's no hope for you

I'd like to intervene here: Here is a report on the Australian ban:

"Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms: faster falls in firearm deaths, firearm suicides, and a decade without mass shootings

Background: After a 1996 firearm massacre in Tasmania in which 35 people died, Australian governments united to remove semi-automatic and pump-action shotguns and rifles from civilian possession, as a key component of gun law reforms.

Objective: To determine whether Australia’s 1996 major gun law reforms were associated with changes in rates of mass firearm homicides, total firearm deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides, and whether there were any apparent method substitution effects for total homicides and suicides.

Design: Observational study using official statistics. Negative binomial regression analysis of changes in firearm death rates and comparison of trends in pre–post gun law reform firearm-related mass killings. Setting: Australia, 1979–2003.

Main outcome measures: Changes in trends of total firearm death rates, mass fatal shooting incidents, rates of firearm homicide, suicide and unintentional firearm deaths, and of total homicides and suicides per 100 000 population.

Results: In the 18 years before the gun law reforms, there were 13 mass shootings in Australia, and none in the 10.5 years afterwards. Declines in firearm-related deaths before the law reforms accelerated after the reforms for total firearm deaths (p = 0.04), firearm suicides (p = 0.007) and firearm homicides (p = 0.15), but not for the smallest category of unintentional firearm deaths, which increased. No evidence of substitution effect for suicides or homicides was observed. The rates per 100 000 of total firearm deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides all at least doubled their existing rates of decline after the revised gun laws. Conclusions: Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms were followed by more than a decade free of fatal mass shootings, and accelerated declines in firearm deaths, particularly suicides. Total homicide rates followed the same pattern. Removing large numbers of rapid-firing firearms from civilians may be an effective way of reducing mass shootings, firearm homicides and firearm suicides."

http://jeffsachs.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Australia-Gun-Law-Reforms.pdf

Yeah...not true...the Australians had few mass shootings before the ban......in fact they have had 3 since the ban....they just pretend they didn't happen

The suicide rate was falling and then stopped falling.....

And now there has been in an increase in gun crime in Australia....they don't report that in the U.S. and gun ownership levels are now back to where they were before the confiscation......

 

[2aguy]

The pathos-driven warrant suggested by the OP, though quite macabre, could well work if combined with the rational appeals that have been tried to date. Rhetoric 101: make a strong rational argument and drive it home with an emotion inspiring warrant, but the warrant alone won't do the trick.

What's clear is that the rational approach alone hasn't worked; a more poignant solution is needed. Strangely, the video sequences showing several sanguinary survivors is insufficiently inspiring. Perhaps we can blame bloody video games and crime dramas for our cultural insouciance toward the reality of death by gunshot.

This is what gunshot violence looks like in video games, idealized art and television

(Boston Massacre)


​

This is what it actually looks like when people get shot:

I hope my friend 2AGUY is taking all of this in. And these are just the pictures of adults.

Yeah...that is the thing....we know that you anit gunners pray for these mass shootings and wade through the blood of the victims to drag their bodies in front of the camera...we get that....

See, mass shootings do not help the cause of the pro 2nd Amendment side.....when an armed citizen stops an attacker with a gun.....there are fewer dead, if any....and no pictures to go with that.....since most defensive gun use is accomplished without firing a shot....we don't have pictures to show....since the people saved by the good guy with the gun is still alive.....

In reality...what your pictures will show...is what happens when you disarm normal, law abiding people......the carnage that results...as we saw in this nightclub.....where time after time there were opportunities for a civilian with a gun to stop the shooter, if they had only had a gun themselves....

Those pictures are what you create....when you create gun free zones, and disarm normal people...

So you have to lie....and say that those pictures represent the good people owning guns...and it is a lie.....the entire anti gun movement is based on lies.....thanks for showing that.....and admitting it.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

If they do, they haven't been serious about it. They have ignored one of the most convenient tools for getting that message across to the public. That tool is graphics. Before you protest consider this:


When I was in high school, we were shown graphic scenes of traffic accident fatalities in vivid color. Those imagers still haunt me to day, and definitely had an immediate effect on most of us. We didn't stop driving but most students didn't speed as much or drink and drive as much for weeks.

Also consider this: There are places where you could walk down a busy thoroughfare and see poster sized images of aborted fetuses in vivid color. Those images, undoubtedly caused a lot of public backlash against abortion and contributed greatly to the RW Pro-Life cause.

But we have been spared the images of the mangled bodies of children killed at Sandy Hook by weapons like the AR-15. The liberals have not been as aggressive as the conservatives have at getting depictions of carnage posted and published. Liberals, if you want to be taken seriously on banning weapons like the AR-15 post images of the massacred people in Florida and of Sandy Hook. Bring those images forth to dwell on the public conscience. Be as dogged in that quest as the RW zealots have been in theirs.

You're correct and if the Progressive wanted to ban the AR-15 they would be working harder than waiting for the next lone wolf attack and praying it is the AR-15 or another semi-automatic weapon that kills scores of people.

Also let stop with the nonsense and admit that President Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi failed the Progressive left on this issue. From 2009 to 2011 the Progressive Left had a House and Senate that could have passed another Assault Weapon Ban and did not, so why did they fail the Progressive Left?

Also why is it that President Obama waited until his own party lost the House to make their argument about having another Assault Weapon Ban?

Why wait until the GOP was in power of the House and now the Senate to push this agenda?

Simple, it is a wedge issue like immigration and he is using the Assault Weapon Ban to score political points with the hope the American people will forget his own Party did nothing when they had the chance to do something.

I am against anymore laws that will not do a damn thing and if President Obama had really cared about stopping those Semi-Automatic weapons like the AR-15 getting into the hands of criminals and terrorists then his own political party should have done something when they had the power to do something and not expect the opposition party to do their job for them...

 

[2aguy]

There's no such thing as a liberal.

They all died off.

No 'liberal' would be for banning our rights, it goes against the very definition of the word.

I used the term "liberal' loosely. But anyone who has been on these boards for any length of time knows how UNIVERSAL it has become as a euphemism for anyone who doesn't wholly agree with RW conservative principles. But the op is not about that. It is about a method to put teeth into the ban on Assault type rifles or those rifles with the potential to be assault rifles with a little modification.

this thread is about using fear to undermine our Constitutional rights.

something a liberal would never do, but leftist do on a regular basis.

The NRA thanks you for lining their pockets. Because that's literally all you're doing.

I support the free market.
I support freedom
I support the Constitution


Why don't you?

Do you think more laws will stop the violence?

look up how many laws and bans on arms there already are, then ask yourself that again.

if you still think it's yes, there's no hope for you

I'd like to intervene here: Here is a report on the Australian ban:

"Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms: faster falls in firearm deaths, firearm suicides, and a decade without mass shootings

Background: After a 1996 firearm massacre in Tasmania in which 35 people died, Australian governments united to remove semi-automatic and pump-action shotguns and rifles from civilian possession, as a key component of gun law reforms.

Objective: To determine whether Australia’s 1996 major gun law reforms were associated with changes in rates of mass firearm homicides, total firearm deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides, and whether there were any apparent method substitution effects for total homicides and suicides.

Design: Observational study using official statistics. Negative binomial regression analysis of changes in firearm death rates and comparison of trends in pre–post gun law reform firearm-related mass killings. Setting: Australia, 1979–2003.

Main outcome measures: Changes in trends of total firearm death rates, mass fatal shooting incidents, rates of firearm homicide, suicide and unintentional firearm deaths, and of total homicides and suicides per 100 000 population.

Results: In the 18 years before the gun law reforms, there were 13 mass shootings in Australia, and none in the 10.5 years afterwards. Declines in firearm-related deaths before the law reforms accelerated after the reforms for total firearm deaths (p = 0.04), firearm suicides (p = 0.007) and firearm homicides (p = 0.15), but not for the smallest category of unintentional firearm deaths, which increased. No evidence of substitution effect for suicides or homicides was observed. The rates per 100 000 of total firearm deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides all at least doubled their existing rates of decline after the revised gun laws. Conclusions: Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms were followed by more than a decade free of fatal mass shootings, and accelerated declines in firearm deaths, particularly suicides. Total homicide rates followed the same pattern. Removing large numbers of rapid-firing firearms from civilians may be an effective way of reducing mass shootings, firearm homicides and firearm suicides."

http://jeffsachs.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Australia-Gun-Law-Reforms.pdf

I have listed the number of shootings that have happened in Australia in the years after the confiscation that could have been mass shootings...I have posted this several times....

What kept these shootings in Australia from becoming mass shootings...the shooter decided not to shoot a lot of people...

Last year, a muslim terrorist took over a Starbucks.....instead of killing everyone, which he could have done because he had a gun, he did a hostage stand off...and still people were killed....

A 15 year old muslim terrorist used an illegal pistol to murder a police employee last year in Australia.....he could have walked into a school and killed more kids...he chose not to...

So please, tell me....which of the Australian gun laws and confiscation kept those two....two of many, many shootings in Australia, from being mass shootings....?

And then there was the Monash university shooting...2 dead...and would have been more but the chinese immigrant didn't know how to operate the rifle he was using...but he killed 2 and wounded 5.....

That report is wrong.....

 

[2aguy]

There's no such thing as a liberal.

They all died off.

No 'liberal' would be for banning our rights, it goes against the very definition of the word.

I used the term "liberal' loosely. But anyone who has been on these boards for any length of time knows how UNIVERSAL it has become as a euphemism for anyone who doesn't wholly agree with RW conservative principles. But the op is not about that. It is about a method to put teeth into the ban on Assault type rifles or those rifles with the potential to be assault rifles with a little modification.

this thread is about using fear to undermine our Constitutional rights.

something a liberal would never do, but leftist do on a regular basis.

The NRA thanks you for lining their pockets. Because that's literally all you're doing.

I support the free market.
I support freedom
I support the Constitution


Why don't you?

Do you think more laws will stop the violence?

look up how many laws and bans on arms there already are, then ask yourself that again.

if you still think it's yes, there's no hope for you

I'd like to intervene here: Here is a report on the Australian ban:

"Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms: faster falls in firearm deaths, firearm suicides, and a decade without mass shootings

Background: After a 1996 firearm massacre in Tasmania in which 35 people died, Australian governments united to remove semi-automatic and pump-action shotguns and rifles from civilian possession, as a key component of gun law reforms.

Objective: To determine whether Australia’s 1996 major gun law reforms were associated with changes in rates of mass firearm homicides, total firearm deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides, and whether there were any apparent method substitution effects for total homicides and suicides.

Design: Observational study using official statistics. Negative binomial regression analysis of changes in firearm death rates and comparison of trends in pre–post gun law reform firearm-related mass killings. Setting: Australia, 1979–2003.

Main outcome measures: Changes in trends of total firearm death rates, mass fatal shooting incidents, rates of firearm homicide, suicide and unintentional firearm deaths, and of total homicides and suicides per 100 000 population.

Results: In the 18 years before the gun law reforms, there were 13 mass shootings in Australia, and none in the 10.5 years afterwards. Declines in firearm-related deaths before the law reforms accelerated after the reforms for total firearm deaths (p = 0.04), firearm suicides (p = 0.007) and firearm homicides (p = 0.15), but not for the smallest category of unintentional firearm deaths, which increased. No evidence of substitution effect for suicides or homicides was observed. The rates per 100 000 of total firearm deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides all at least doubled their existing rates of decline after the revised gun laws. Conclusions: Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms were followed by more than a decade free of fatal mass shootings, and accelerated declines in firearm deaths, particularly suicides. Total homicide rates followed the same pattern. Removing large numbers of rapid-firing firearms from civilians may be an effective way of reducing mass shootings, firearm homicides and firearm suicides."

http://jeffsachs.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Australia-Gun-Law-Reforms.pdf

The only reason the following actual shootings in Australia were not mass shootings is that the shooter chose not to kill more people...they had a gun...and not one gun law in Australia stopped them....


These all happened after the confiscation........so tell me how that report is even close to being accurate...


Okay....I have isolated shooting incidents in Australia that could just as easily have turned into mass shooting events....and yes, I know, you are going to move the goal posts and change the results.......in your post you qouted a study that showed no mass shootings in Australia after the ban..and that is obviously not true...look below.....and the only thing that kept some of these shootings from being mass shootings is pure dumb luck...

So no, the gun confiscation in Austrulia did not stop mass shootings....dumb luck did.....since all of these shooters had no trouble getting guns.....right?


Tell me.....how is anything other than luck that kept these from being mass shootings...since the shooter obviously was able to get a gun and shoot people in gun free Australia...right?

March 2016....


Number of shootings in Melbourne area continues to rise

Three people will appear in court in Geelong after shots were fired between two moving cars on Thursday night, as the problem with gun-related violence in the Melbourne area continues to escalate.

The shooting at Geelong and another separate incident at Frankston brings to 10 the number of shootings in the Melbourne and Geelong areas since February 2.

Three people were arrested after shots were fired between two moving cars just before 6:30pm at Norlane.
--------
4/28/16 gang shooting in Perth


No Cookies | Perth Now

tensions had since risen between the Rebels and the Coffin Cheaters, he said.


“That’s something that I cannot elaborate on further at this time,” Det Insp Fyfe said.

“We know both gangs were there.

“The offender or offenders, I do not believe they are a threat to the community in general.”

He said police were yet to identify a suspect, but were speaking with the two surviving victims.

Det Insp Fyfe said at least eight shots were fired from two different types of guns, one of which was a semi-automatic, and one bullet went through a car in the street, so it was fortunate no innocent bystanders were hurt.

4/28/16 port arthur shooting with assault rifle..

Man found shot in Port Arthur

Port Arthur Police are investigating a shooting at Dewalt and W. 14th Street. Police got the call at about 10:45 p.m. Thursday. When they arrived on the scene they found a 29-year-old man laying outside a car that was riddled with bullets. The man had a gunshot wound to the leg and was taken to Christus Southeast Texas St. Elizabeth in Beaumont. His injuries are not life-threatening.
Police say they believe the gun used was some sort of an assault rifle. There is no word on any suspects at this time.

----------------------
4/29/16....

'This isn't a random shooting': Man targeted in Sydney killing

A gunman is at large after a "targeted" shooting in Sydney's south-west that has left one man dead and two other people injured.
---------------------
Timeline of major crimes in Australia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

25 January 1996 – Hillcrest murders – Peter May shot and killed his three children, his estranged wife and her parents in the Brisbane suburb of Hillcrest before killing himself.[54]

• 16 August 1998 – Victorian police officers Gary Silk and Rodney Miller were shot dead in an ambush by Bendali Debs and Jason Joseph Roberts in the Moorabbin Police murders.

• 3 August 1999 – La Trobe University shooting – Jonathan Brett Horrocks walked into the cafeteria in La Trobe university in Melbourne Victoria armed with a 38 caliber revolver handgun and opened fire killing Leon Capraro the boss and manager off the cafeteria and wounding a woman who was a student at the university.

• 26 May 2002 – A Vietnamese man walked into a Vietnamese wedding reception in Cabramatta Sydney, New South Wales armed with a handgun and opened fire wounding seven people.

• • 21 October 2002 – Monash University shooting – Huan Xiang opened fire in a tutorial room, killing two and injuring five.

• 18 June 2007 – Melbourne CBD shooting – Christopher Wayne Hudson opened fire on three people, killing one and seriously wounding two others who intervened when Hudson was assaulting his girlfriend at a busy Melbourne intersection during the morning peak. He gave himself up to police in Wallan, Victoria on 20 June.[71]

• 28 April 2011 – 2011 Hectorville siege – Donato Anthony Corbo shot dead Kobus and Annetjie Snyman and their son-in-law Luc Mombers and seriously wounded Mr Mombers' 14-year-old son Marcel and a police officer at Hectorville, South Australia before being arrested after an eight-hour stand off.

• 28 April 2012 – A man opened fire in a busy shopping mall in Robina on the Gold Coast shooting Bandidos bikie Jacques Teamo. A woman who was an innocent bystander was also injured from a shotgun blast to the leg. Neither of the victims died, but the incident highlighted the recent increase in gun crime across major Australian cities including Sydney, Brisbane and Adelaide.[citation needed]

• 23 May 2012 – Christopher 'Badness' Binse, a career criminal well known to police, was arrested after a 44-hour siege at an East Keilor home in Melbourne's north west. During the siege, Binse fired several shots at police and refused to co-operate with negotiators; eventually tear gas had to be used to force him out of the house, at which point he refused to put down his weapon and was then sprayed with a volley of non-lethal bullets.[citation needed]

• 8 March 2013 – Queen Street mall siege – Lee Matthew Hiller entered the shopping mall on Queen Street Brisbane Queensland armed with a revolver and threatened shoppers and staff with the revolver, causing a 90-minute siege which ended when Hiller was shot and wounded in the arm by a police officer from the elite Specialist Emergency Response Team. Hiller was then later taken to hospital and was treated for his injury; he pleaded gulity to 20 charges and was sentenced to four-and-a-half years in jail with a non-parole period of two years and three months.[citation needed]

• 9 September 2014 – Lockhart massacre – Geoff Hunt shot and killed his wife, Kim, his 10-year-old son Fletcher, and his daughters Mia, eight and Phoebe, six before killing himself on a farm in Lockhart in the Riverina district near Wagga Wagga New South Wales. The body of Geoff Hunt and a firearm are later found in a dam on the farm by police divers and a suicide note written by Geoff Hunt is also found inside the house on the farm.[citation needed]

• 7 November 2014 – Jordy Brook carjacked a Channel 7 news cameraman at gun point during a crime spree on the Sunshine Coast, Queensland. He was later captured and arrested by police after luring police on a high speed chase and crashing the car.[citation needed

• 15 December 2014 – 2014 Sydney hostage crisis – Seventeen people were taken hostage in a cafe in Martin Place, Sydney by Man Haron Monis. The hostage crisis was resolved in the early hours of 16 December, sixteen hours after it commenced, when armed police stormed the premises. Monis and two hostages were killed in the course of the crisis.[87]

• 27 June 2015 – Hermidale triple murder – the bodies of three people, two men and a woman are found shot dead on a property in a rural farming community in the town of Hermidale west of Nyngan, the bodies of 28-year-old Jacob Cumberland his father 59-year-old Stephen Cumberland and a 36-year-old woman were found with gun shot wounds, the body of Jacob Cumberland was found on the drive way of the property, the body of the 36-year-old woman was found in the backyard of the property and the body of Stephen Cumberland was found in a burnt out caravan on the property. 61-year-old Allan O'Connor is later arrested and charged with the murders.

• 10 September 2015 – A 49-year-old woman is shot dead in a Mc Donald's restaurant in Gold Coast by her 57-year-old ex partner, who then turned the gun on himself afterwards and shot himself dead.
• 
  
• 2 October 2015 - 2015 Parramatta shooting On 2 October 2015, Farhad Khalil Mohammad Jabar, a 15-year-old boy, shot and killed Curtis Cheng, an unarmed police civilian finance worker, outside the New South Wales Police Force headquarters in Parramatta, Australia. Jabar was subsequently shot and killed by special constables who were protecting the police station.

 

[frigidweirdo]

If they do, they haven't been serious about it. They have ignored one of the most convenient tools for getting that message across to the public. That tool is graphics. Before you protest consider this:


When I was in high school, we were shown graphic scenes of traffic accident fatalities in vivid color. Those imagers still haunt me to day, and definitely had an immediate effect on most of us. We didn't stop driving but most students didn't speed as much or drink and drive as much for weeks.

Also consider this: There are places where you could walk down a busy thoroughfare and see poster sized images of aborted fetuses in vivid color. Those images, undoubtedly caused a lot of public backlash against abortion and contributed greatly to the RW Pro-Life cause.

But we have been spared the images of the mangled bodies of children killed at Sandy Hook by weapons like the AR-15. The liberals have not been as aggressive as the conservatives have at getting depictions of carnage posted and published. Liberals, if you want to be taken seriously on banning weapons like the AR-15 post images of the massacred people in Florida and of Sandy Hook. Bring those images forth to dwell on the public conscience. Be as dogged in that quest as the RW zealots have been in theirs.

My view, as a Liberal, is that America is so messed up, changing laws slightly to ban or not ban isn't going to make much difference. So many things don't work properly, from democracy to education and beyond, that the US is going downhill and individual laws on insignificant things like this don't matter much any more.

 

[JQPublic1]

I used the term "liberal' loosely. But anyone who has been on these boards for any length of time knows how UNIVERSAL it has become as a euphemism for anyone who doesn't wholly agree with RW conservative principles. But the op is not about that. It is about a method to put teeth into the ban on Assault type rifles or those rifles with the potential to be assault rifles with a little modification.

this thread is about using fear to undermine our Constitutional rights.

something a liberal would never do, but leftist do on a regular basis.

The NRA thanks you for lining their pockets. Because that's literally all you're doing.

I support the free market.
I support freedom
I support the Constitution


Why don't you?

Do you think more laws will stop the violence?

look up how many laws and bans on arms there already are, then ask yourself that again.

if you still think it's yes, there's no hope for you

I'd like to intervene here: Here is a report on the Australian ban:

"Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms: faster falls in firearm deaths, firearm suicides, and a decade without mass shootings

Background: After a 1996 firearm massacre in Tasmania in which 35 people died, Australian governments united to remove semi-automatic and pump-action shotguns and rifles from civilian possession, as a key component of gun law reforms.

Objective: To determine whether Australia’s 1996 major gun law reforms were associated with changes in rates of mass firearm homicides, total firearm deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides, and whether there were any apparent method substitution effects for total homicides and suicides.

Design: Observational study using official statistics. Negative binomial regression analysis of changes in firearm death rates and comparison of trends in pre–post gun law reform firearm-related mass killings. Setting: Australia, 1979–2003.

Main outcome measures: Changes in trends of total firearm death rates, mass fatal shooting incidents, rates of firearm homicide, suicide and unintentional firearm deaths, and of total homicides and suicides per 100 000 population.

Results: In the 18 years before the gun law reforms, there were 13 mass shootings in Australia, and none in the 10.5 years afterwards. Declines in firearm-related deaths before the law reforms accelerated after the reforms for total firearm deaths (p = 0.04), firearm suicides (p = 0.007) and firearm homicides (p = 0.15), but not for the smallest category of unintentional firearm deaths, which increased. No evidence of substitution effect for suicides or homicides was observed. The rates per 100 000 of total firearm deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides all at least doubled their existing rates of decline after the revised gun laws. Conclusions: Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms were followed by more than a decade free of fatal mass shootings, and accelerated declines in firearm deaths, particularly suicides. Total homicide rates followed the same pattern. Removing large numbers of rapid-firing firearms from civilians may be an effective way of reducing mass shootings, firearm homicides and firearm suicides."

http://jeffsachs.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Australia-Gun-Law-Reforms.pdf

they never had the right, we do.

Not that the fact it's a right means anything to leftist, but it's important to all of us that love and support America.

Stop patting yourself on the back. So-called "leftists" have fought in all of our wars and have been overrepresented in our voluntary armed forces. "Leftists" don't have to talk about their patriotism, they prove it with action by fighting for this country while a lot of RW sunshine patriots mouth the words but never serve. Sorry but "Leftists" have contributed or supported America just as much or more than many on the right..

There is no "right" to own an AR-15 type rifle. Our elected officials make that determination based on public opinion and sentiments aroused by multiple mass shootings. The NRA is the RW lobby organization but that voice is going to be less effective in legislative circles as the numbers of mass murders with AR-15 style rifles continue to rise.

 

[JQPublic1]

I used the term "liberal' loosely. But anyone who has been on these boards for any length of time knows how UNIVERSAL it has become as a euphemism for anyone who doesn't wholly agree with RW conservative principles. But the op is not about that. It is about a method to put teeth into the ban on Assault type rifles or those rifles with the potential to be assault rifles with a little modification.

this thread is about using fear to undermine our Constitutional rights.

something a liberal would never do, but leftist do on a regular basis.

The NRA thanks you for lining their pockets. Because that's literally all you're doing.

I support the free market.
I support freedom
I support the Constitution


Why don't you?

Do you think more laws will stop the violence?

look up how many laws and bans on arms there already are, then ask yourself that again.

if you still think it's yes, there's no hope for you

I'd like to intervene here: Here is a report on the Australian ban:

"Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms: faster falls in firearm deaths, firearm suicides, and a decade without mass shootings

Background: After a 1996 firearm massacre in Tasmania in which 35 people died, Australian governments united to remove semi-automatic and pump-action shotguns and rifles from civilian possession, as a key component of gun law reforms.

Objective: To determine whether Australia’s 1996 major gun law reforms were associated with changes in rates of mass firearm homicides, total firearm deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides, and whether there were any apparent method substitution effects for total homicides and suicides.

Design: Observational study using official statistics. Negative binomial regression analysis of changes in firearm death rates and comparison of trends in pre–post gun law reform firearm-related mass killings. Setting: Australia, 1979–2003.

Main outcome measures: Changes in trends of total firearm death rates, mass fatal shooting incidents, rates of firearm homicide, suicide and unintentional firearm deaths, and of total homicides and suicides per 100 000 population.

Results: In the 18 years before the gun law reforms, there were 13 mass shootings in Australia, and none in the 10.5 years afterwards. Declines in firearm-related deaths before the law reforms accelerated after the reforms for total firearm deaths (p = 0.04), firearm suicides (p = 0.007) and firearm homicides (p = 0.15), but not for the smallest category of unintentional firearm deaths, which increased. No evidence of substitution effect for suicides or homicides was observed. The rates per 100 000 of total firearm deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides all at least doubled their existing rates of decline after the revised gun laws. Conclusions: Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms were followed by more than a decade free of fatal mass shootings, and accelerated declines in firearm deaths, particularly suicides. Total homicide rates followed the same pattern. Removing large numbers of rapid-firing firearms from civilians may be an effective way of reducing mass shootings, firearm homicides and firearm suicides."

http://jeffsachs.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Australia-Gun-Law-Reforms.pdf

Yeah...not true...the Australians had few mass shootings before the ban......in fact they have had 3 since the ban....they just pretend they didn't happen

The suicide rate was falling and then stopped falling.....

And now there has been in an increase in gun crime in Australia....they don't report that in the U.S. and gun ownership levels are now back to where they were before the confiscation......

Sorry, but I'd like to see a link backing your assertions that Australia's ban on assault type rifles and pump shotguns has failed. And why would that knowledge be surpassed in the USA if it had? Fox News would be all over it!

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

There's no such thing as a liberal.

They all died off.

No 'liberal' would be for banning our rights, it goes against the very definition of the word.

I used the term "liberal' loosely. But anyone who has been on these boards for any length of time knows how UNIVERSAL it has become as a euphemism for anyone who doesn't wholly agree with RW conservative principles. But the op is not about that. It is about a method to put teeth into the ban on Assault type rifles or those rifles with the potential to be assault rifles with a little modification.

this thread is about using fear to undermine our Constitutional rights.

something a liberal would never do, but leftist do on a regular basis.

The NRA thanks you for lining their pockets. Because that's literally all you're doing.

I support the free market.
I support freedom
I support the Constitution


Why don't you?

Do you think more laws will stop the violence?

look up how many laws and bans on arms there already are, then ask yourself that again.

if you still think it's yes, there's no hope for you

I'd like to intervene here: Here is a report on the Australian ban:

"Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms: faster falls in firearm deaths, firearm suicides, and a decade without mass shootings

Background: After a 1996 firearm massacre in Tasmania in which 35 people died, Australian governments united to remove semi-automatic and pump-action shotguns and rifles from civilian possession, as a key component of gun law reforms.

Objective: To determine whether Australia’s 1996 major gun law reforms were associated with changes in rates of mass firearm homicides, total firearm deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides, and whether there were any apparent method substitution effects for total homicides and suicides.

Design: Observational study using official statistics. Negative binomial regression analysis of changes in firearm death rates and comparison of trends in pre–post gun law reform firearm-related mass killings. Setting: Australia, 1979–2003.

Main outcome measures: Changes in trends of total firearm death rates, mass fatal shooting incidents, rates of firearm homicide, suicide and unintentional firearm deaths, and of total homicides and suicides per 100 000 population.

Results: In the 18 years before the gun law reforms, there were 13 mass shootings in Australia, and none in the 10.5 years afterwards. Declines in firearm-related deaths before the law reforms accelerated after the reforms for total firearm deaths (p = 0.04), firearm suicides (p = 0.007) and firearm homicides (p = 0.15), but not for the smallest category of unintentional firearm deaths, which increased. No evidence of substitution effect for suicides or homicides was observed. The rates per 100 000 of total firearm deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides all at least doubled their existing rates of decline after the revised gun laws. Conclusions: Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms were followed by more than a decade free of fatal mass shootings, and accelerated declines in firearm deaths, particularly suicides. Total homicide rates followed the same pattern. Removing large numbers of rapid-firing firearms from civilians may be an effective way of reducing mass shootings, firearm homicides and firearm suicides."

http://jeffsachs.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Australia-Gun-Law-Reforms.pdf

Australia is a big Island surrounded by water so getting weapons into the country is a little harder and easier to control than doing it here.

Also this country already had one assault weapon ban from 1994 to 2004 and mass shootings still occur within the U.S. borders and lone wolf terrorist attacks still happen but with bombs instead.

So you can not compare Australia to the U.S. because even though it can work on a Island does not mean it will work here in the States which is surrounded by two other countries and has a massive cartel problem that import illegal materials daily...

 

[M14 Shooter]

Why does the NRA support a ban on publicly owned hand grenades. How anti 2nd amendment them!

Mindless nonsense, as per the norm.

 

[M14 Shooter]

They do.

They cannot present a sound argument as to why; all of their arguments to that effect are rooted in fallacious appeals to emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.

No "sound" argument is needed if pictures of assault type rifle victims are dis[played as vividly as those displayed by abortion protestors or the gory scenes of traffic fatalities shown in high school driver's ed classes.

Yes... that's the "fallacious appeals to emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty" I mentioned.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I know the end results of what these semi automatic rapid fire weapons are capable of....

You know that the AR15 has the same rate of fire as a revolver, right?
As fast as you can pull the trigger.

and I want those results publicly displayed so everyone can know

Because you know the only argument you have against 'assault weapons' are fallacious appeals to emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.
Why do yo believe rational, thinking people will be swayed by fallacious appeals to emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty>

It is one thing to think thugs are killing each other but when mass shooters, one after another, continue to kill innocent people and children by the dozens in one fell swoop, that warrants action.

Another fallacious appeal to emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty

Something more than background checks are needed because several of the shooters had no criminal history.

How do you stop people who have the right to buy a gun from buying a gun?

And if a deeper probe into the mind of buyers is instituted, there would hardly be anyone fit to own such weapons. Half the crowd here on USMB would be barred for harboring racist and seditious sentiments.

Another fallacious appeal to emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty