My annual report on the 'assault weapon' scourge

[Flash]

It's obvious that handguns are where the meat is.

And rifles are more of a militia weapon than a handgun any day.

I have almost 50 of what the Libtards call "assault weapons" and I am not a member of any militia. Unless you count my shooting club where they refer to us Baby Boomers as "The Old Fart Militia".

I suspect any member of any real militia probably has an assortment of weapons.

 

[Flash]

Gotta link?

Anything like this?

View attachment 578886

Expanded Homicide Data Table 8​

Murder Victims
by Weapon, 2015–2019

Blunt objects (clubs, hammers, etc.)
Weapons	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019
Total	13,847	15,355	15,206	14,446	13,927
Total firearms:	9,143	10,398	11,014	10,445	10,258
Handguns	6,194	6,778	7,052	6,683	6,368
Rifles	215	300	389	305	364
Shotguns	248	247	263	237	200
Other guns	152	172	178	164	45
Firearms, type not stated	2,334	2,901	3,132	3,056	3,281
Knives or cutting instruments	1,533	1,562	1,608	1,542	1,476

Firearms type not stated?

You know that what you stupid Libtards call "assault weapons" are only a subset of what is listed as "Rifles", don't you?

A very small number. Especially when you consider the tens of millions of them in the US.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You know that what you stupid Libtards call "assault weapons" are only a subset of what is listed as "Rifles", don't you?

He has to lie to make a point.

 

[2aguy]

Not me. dipshit.
I don't need a training wheel weapon.

You nut jobs claim that all the time 'gun free zone'.
'had anyone been armed at the club, they could have stopped the attack..'
An off duty Orlando police officer was there.

Officer Adam Gruler, a uniformed off-duty Orlando Police Department (OPD) officer working extra duty as a security guard, entered the building through its southern entrance, Gruler took cover and called in a signal for assistance. He told a post-incident Police Foundation assessment team that he had immediately recognized that his handgun would be no match for Mateen's rifle.




Your FOS shit, moron.


So, the truck is used for driving, not killing.

More rounds, higher capacity magazine, moron.

See above moron.

In May, for example, a military veteran engaged in a standoff with police in Houston managed to fire off 212 shots from an AR-15 before a SWAT sniper killed him. He injured six people with the rifle, all after killing a man in an ambush with a handgun.

This week in Detroit, armed gunmen used an AK-47 and another weapon to open fire on a vehicle, killing two and injuring one more in a hail of 50 bullets. An AK-47 was also used in a mass shooting in Pittsburgh earlier this year, when gunmen unloaded 49 rounds into a crowd of partygoers, killing five and wounding three.

Other shootings have flown further under the radar, likely because they didn't result in casualties. Earlier this week, a man reportedly armed with an AR-type rifle fired between 40 and 50 shots at police officers in Georgia. Nobody was injured.

See, a training wheel weapon for people who can't shoot.



With an AR- or an AK- 47, more could have been killed.



Accounts vary but the guy set off a nail bomb too.

Yes, they do in injuries and death.
Nine people died and 27 were injured in a mass shooting in Dayton, Ohio in an attack that lasted 32 seconds. The killer used an AR-15 style assault rifle.

You can't kill and injure that many people that quick with any other weapon.

Dipshit, he ran away and didn’t engage the shooter. He left them defenseless without firing a shot.

So it was a gun free zone when he took the only gun and ran away.

The actual people in the club who survived described multiple points where he could have adult been shot……the documentary series has their eyewitness accounts. They had people who could have shot him in the dance area, they could have shot him in the bathroom and when he was executing the wounded, one of them stated he watched him from the ground…..if that guy had had a gun he could have killed him took

You idiot.

The nightclub was a tiny area, any other gun would have killed just as many people in a gun free zone

 

[2aguy]

Not me. dipshit.
I don't need a training wheel weapon.

You nut jobs claim that all the time 'gun free zone'.
'had anyone been armed at the club, they could have stopped the attack..'
An off duty Orlando police officer was there.

Officer Adam Gruler, a uniformed off-duty Orlando Police Department (OPD) officer working extra duty as a security guard, entered the building through its southern entrance, Gruler took cover and called in a signal for assistance. He told a post-incident Police Foundation assessment team that he had immediately recognized that his handgun would be no match for Mateen's rifle.




Your FOS shit, moron.


So, the truck is used for driving, not killing.

More rounds, higher capacity magazine, moron.

See above moron.

In May, for example, a military veteran engaged in a standoff with police in Houston managed to fire off 212 shots from an AR-15 before a SWAT sniper killed him. He injured six people with the rifle, all after killing a man in an ambush with a handgun.

This week in Detroit, armed gunmen used an AK-47 and another weapon to open fire on a vehicle, killing two and injuring one more in a hail of 50 bullets. An AK-47 was also used in a mass shooting in Pittsburgh earlier this year, when gunmen unloaded 49 rounds into a crowd of partygoers, killing five and wounding three.

Other shootings have flown further under the radar, likely because they didn't result in casualties. Earlier this week, a man reportedly armed with an AR-type rifle fired between 40 and 50 shots at police officers in Georgia. Nobody was injured.

See, a training wheel weapon for people who can't shoot.



With an AR- or an AK- 47, more could have been killed.



Accounts vary but the guy set off a nail bomb too.

Yes, they do in injuries and death.
Nine people died and 27 were injured in a mass shooting in Dayton, Ohio in an attack that lasted 32 seconds. The killer used an AR-15 style assault rifle.

You can't kill and injure that many people that quick with any other weapon.

Shitheqd…. I listed multiple shootimgs
With more killed using pistols and shotguns…..the weapon didn’t matter you doofus .

The only shooting where a rifle mattered was
Vegas…..because the range was 400 meters.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

2017: 6 mass shootings, 111 deaths
2018: 8 mass shootings, 68 deaths – down 38.7%
2019: 7 mass shootings, 65 deaths – down 4.4%
2020: 2 mass shootings, 9 deaths – down 86.1%
2021: 6 mass shootings, 43 deaths – up 477%
#ThankYouBrandon

1982-2021 – 39 years:

63 mass shootings w/ handguns - 459 deaths
35 mass shootings with ‘assault weapons’ 428 deaths
Weapon of choice for mass shootings? Handguns
Weapon responsible for most mass shooting deaths? Handguns

20,000,000 ‘assault weapons’ in the US
35 mass shootings with “assault weapons” – less than 1 rifle per year.
428 people killed in mass shootings with ‘assault weapons – less than 11 people pr year.
Less than 1 rifle / year… out of 20,000,000 rifles.

20,000,000 ‘assault weapons’ in the US
5 school shootings with ‘assault weapons’ - 1 every 7.9 years
73 people killed in school shootings with ‘assault weapons’ - less than 2 per year.
1 rifle every ~8 years… out of 20,000,000 rifles.

Conclusion:
It is impossible to soundly demonstrate the necessity for, and the efficacy of, a ban on ‘assault weapons’.

Source:
U.S. Has At Least 20 Million Assault Rifles. A Ban Wouldn’t Reduce That Number.
US mass shootings, 1982–2021: Data from Mother Jones’ investigation

This is a little early this year as I am headed out of the country for the holidays.
I'm sure everyone hopes nothing happens to cause these numbers to change in any meaningful way.

No, your annual strawman fallacy.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It's obvious that handguns are where the meat is.

And rifles are more of a militia weapon than a handgun any day.

And neither will be subject to a ‘ban.’

But conservatives are liars and demagogues – they’ll continue to lie about ‘bans’ and ‘confiscation’ in contempt of the fact that neither will happen.

 

[tahuyaman]

If you need a AR or AK, you're living proof you can't shoot, they're the training wheels for amateurs and children...

:

That wasn't a smart comment. It was made by someone who doesn't know what they're talking about.

 

[M14 Shooter]

No, your annual strawman fallacy.

^^^
Another lie, from a known liar.

 

[M14 Shooter]

But conservatives are liars and demagogues – they’ll continue to lie about ‘bans’ and ‘confiscation’ in contempt of the fact that neither will happen.

As you are well aware, this is only true if "they" know the Democrats are lying when they say they will ban rifles and pistols and handguns, if elected.
Why are the Democrats lying about this, and why do you think "they" know?

 

[2aguy]

Not me. dipshit.
I don't need a training wheel weapon.

You nut jobs claim that all the time 'gun free zone'.
'had anyone been armed at the club, they could have stopped the attack..'
An off duty Orlando police officer was there.

Officer Adam Gruler, a uniformed off-duty Orlando Police Department (OPD) officer working extra duty as a security guard, entered the building through its southern entrance, Gruler took cover and called in a signal for assistance. He told a post-incident Police Foundation assessment team that he had immediately recognized that his handgun would be no match for Mateen's rifle.




Your FOS shit, moron.


So, the truck is used for driving, not killing.

More rounds, higher capacity magazine, moron.

See above moron.

In May, for example, a military veteran engaged in a standoff with police in Houston managed to fire off 212 shots from an AR-15 before a SWAT sniper killed him. He injured six people with the rifle, all after killing a man in an ambush with a handgun.

This week in Detroit, armed gunmen used an AK-47 and another weapon to open fire on a vehicle, killing two and injuring one more in a hail of 50 bullets. An AK-47 was also used in a mass shooting in Pittsburgh earlier this year, when gunmen unloaded 49 rounds into a crowd of partygoers, killing five and wounding three.

Other shootings have flown further under the radar, likely because they didn't result in casualties. Earlier this week, a man reportedly armed with an AR-type rifle fired between 40 and 50 shots at police officers in Georgia. Nobody was injured.

See, a training wheel weapon for people who can't shoot.



With an AR- or an AK- 47, more could have been killed.



Accounts vary but the guy set off a nail bomb too.

Yes, they do in injuries and death.
Nine people died and 27 were injured in a mass shooting in Dayton, Ohio in an attack that lasted 32 seconds. The killer used an AR-15 style assault rifle.

You can't kill and injure that many people that quick with any other weapon.

You are an idiot....I gave you shootings where a shotgun, 5 rounds in the tube, killed more than AR-15s with 20-30 round magazines...it isn't the weapon, dumb ass, it is how long the killer is free to shoot in the gun free zone until someone shoots back at them....

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

-----


SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

 

[2aguy]

Not me. dipshit.
I don't need a training wheel weapon.

You nut jobs claim that all the time 'gun free zone'.
'had anyone been armed at the club, they could have stopped the attack..'
An off duty Orlando police officer was there.

Officer Adam Gruler, a uniformed off-duty Orlando Police Department (OPD) officer working extra duty as a security guard, entered the building through its southern entrance, Gruler took cover and called in a signal for assistance. He told a post-incident Police Foundation assessment team that he had immediately recognized that his handgun would be no match for Mateen's rifle.




Your FOS shit, moron.


So, the truck is used for driving, not killing.

More rounds, higher capacity magazine, moron.

See above moron.

In May, for example, a military veteran engaged in a standoff with police in Houston managed to fire off 212 shots from an AR-15 before a SWAT sniper killed him. He injured six people with the rifle, all after killing a man in an ambush with a handgun.

This week in Detroit, armed gunmen used an AK-47 and another weapon to open fire on a vehicle, killing two and injuring one more in a hail of 50 bullets. An AK-47 was also used in a mass shooting in Pittsburgh earlier this year, when gunmen unloaded 49 rounds into a crowd of partygoers, killing five and wounding three.

Other shootings have flown further under the radar, likely because they didn't result in casualties. Earlier this week, a man reportedly armed with an AR-type rifle fired between 40 and 50 shots at police officers in Georgia. Nobody was injured.

See, a training wheel weapon for people who can't shoot.



With an AR- or an AK- 47, more could have been killed.



Accounts vary but the guy set off a nail bomb too.

Yes, they do in injuries and death.
Nine people died and 27 were injured in a mass shooting in Dayton, Ohio in an attack that lasted 32 seconds. The killer used an AR-15 style assault rifle.

You can't kill and injure that many people that quick with any other weapon.

In May, for example, a military veteran engaged in a standoff with police in Houston managed to fire off 212 shots from an AR-15 before a SWAT sniper killed him. He injured six people with the rifle, all after killing a man in an ambush with a handgun.
---
This week in Detroit, armed gunmen used an AK-47 and another weapon to open fire on a vehicle, killing two and injuring one more in a hail of 50 bullets.
----
Earlier this week, a man reportedly armed with an AR-type rifle fired between 40 and 50 shots at police officers in Georgia. Nobody was injured.

Hmmmmmmm ..... AR-15, 212 shots...wounded 6......dumb ass....

-Kerch, Russia, Polytechnic school shooting.... 5 shot, pump action shotgun...which means it had 5 shells which is 5 less than 10........20 killed 70 wounded.

-Kazan, Russia school shooting....semi-automatic shotgun 5 + 1 or 7 +1 capacity...9 killed, 23 injured

-Perm, Russia school shooting.... 4 + 1 capacity, 6 killed, 43 injured


-Virginia Tech...2 pistols, one with 10 round magazine..... 32 killed.

-Luby's Cafe..... 2 pistols....24 killed.

Notice anything about the number of people killed.....and the irrelevance of the weapon?

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

Your opinion does not in any way change the fact they have a right to own such weapons, and only serves to further demonstrate you inability present a sound argument for the necessity/efficacy of a ban on same.
But you knew that.

Not my opinion.
An AR-15 can fire 45 rounds per minute.
An AK-47 can fire up to 60 rounds per minute.

If you need that many shots to kill something, you deserve to die.
No one should have that 'right' to be that incompetent with a weapon.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

Unsupportable nonsense, and further proof you cannot present a sound argument for the necessity for, and efficacy of, a ban on these firearms.
But, you knew that.

See above.

 

[Jarlaxle]

WTF, moron.
OTHER fire arms not stated, WTF is that?
A bb gun?
Nope, no 'fire'.


You certainly are.

Nothing kills more people quicker than the training wheels weapons.

Semi-automatic rifles in the AR-15 style have been the weapon of choice in numerous deadly mass shootings.

June 12, 2016: A gunman began shooting inside the Pulse, killing 49 people and wounding 53. Orlando Police officers shot and killed him after a three-hour standoff. One of the weapons was a SIG Sauer MCX. The SIG Sauer takes a lot of the form and functions of the AR-15 but with reworked internal mechanics and some other changes. For example, the SIG Sauer is built to handle a different caliber round than the standard AR-15.

The two weapons have so much in common that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms called the SIG Sauer used in Orlando a ".223 caliber AR type rifle."

Feb. 14, 2018: A gunman opened fire with a semi-automatic rifle at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla. He killed 17 people and injured 17 others.

Oct. 1, 2017: A gunman opened fire on concertgoers at the Route 91 Harvest music festival on the Las Vegas Strip. From his 32nd-floor hotel room, he killed 60 people and wounded 41. Police found 14 AR-15s, plus other weapons in the gunman’s hotel room.

Are you attempting to stumble upon a point?

 

[fncceo]

An additional item claimed the Federal Bureau of Investigation “indicated” knives were “five times as likely to be used [in murders]” compared to rifles:

Banning knives is next ...

The U.K. Must Ban Pointy Knives, Says Church of England

Despite a host of legal restrictions on firearms and knives, not to mention a society that increasingly resembles a panopticon in the thoroughness of the

reason.com

 

[Jarlaxle]

Not my opinion.
An AR-15 can fire 45 rounds per minute.
An AK-47 can fire up to 60 rounds per minute.

If you need that many shots to kill something, you deserve to die.
No one should have that 'right' to be that incompetent with a weapon.

What sort of drugs did you take before squeezing out THAT jewel?

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

You are an idiot....I gave you shootings where a shotgun, 5 rounds in the tube, killed more than AR-15s with 20-30 round magazines...it isn't the weapon, dumb ass, it is how long the killer is free to shoot in the gun free zone until someone shoots back at them....

YES, it is.
If the person had an AR-15 and knows how to use it, there would be more victims, idiot.

You are an idiot....I gave you shootings where a shotgun, 5 rounds in the tube, killed more than AR-15s with 20-30 round magazines...it isn't the weapon, dumb ass, it is how long the killer is free to shoot in the gun free zone until someone shoots back at them....

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

-----


SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

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

-----


SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

Bullshit from Gary Kleck, a dozen time debunked 'criminologist'?

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

Banning knives is next ...

The U.K. Must Ban Pointy Knives, Says Church of England

Despite a host of legal restrictions on firearms and knives, not to mention a society that increasingly resembles a panopticon in the thoroughness of the

reason.com

The primary use for knives is used for cutting.

What is a primary use of a gun used for?

More people die in car crashes every year, so should we ban cars?

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

What sort of drugs did you take before squeezing out THAT jewel?

WTF?
Do you mean gun nuts don't know that?
Of course, you didn't, why can't you people take at least a grade school course on guns?

I used google, evidently you people can't even do that.