Zone1 There's no rational, reasoned argument for a ban on AR15s (2)

[The5thHorseman]

And killed 6......

The mass public shooter at the Navy Yard did not use an AR-15 rifle, he used a 5 shot, pump action shotgun, not a rifle, no magazine......

He murdered 12 people.

The mass public shooter in Kerch, Russia, did not use an AR-15 rifle, he used aa 5 shot, pump action shotgun, not a rifle, no magazine.....

Murdered 20 people...


What you don't care about is the truth, facts and reality.

It isn't the weapon that makes a difference in the number of people killed in mass public shootings......because all except one mass public shooting takes place in confined spaces.......buildings with hallways and rooms.........

The thing that makes the real difference is how soon you can get someone confronting and shooting back at the attacker.....

Uvalde....cops waited outside 90 minutes

21 dead

Nashville....cops stormed the building in 14 minutes...

6 dead

You don't want to understand the issue because you don't really care about stopping these attacks.....you simply want to ban guns no matter what......that is your only concern.....so the truth, facts, and reality do not matter to you.

Why did the Uvaldes take 90 minutes?

 

[M14 Shooter]

It's an assault weapon....doing what it's designed to do.

Thank you for proving my point.

 

[2aguy]

Why did the Uvaldes take 90 minutes?

The leadership of the cops were cowards.....they even had cops restraining other cops from going in.

 

[2aguy]

Why did the Uvaldes take 90 minutes?

And before you go there.....and I can tell you are.......

The cops in Nashville ran into the building knowing they were facing the same rifle...so no, the rifle did not keep Uvalde or the Nashville cops from taking on the shooter....

And the AR-15 did not stop these civilians from taking on these AR-15 armed shooters...

Within 15 seconds of a gunman opening fire inside a mall in Greenwood, Indiana, Elisjsha Dicken was able to step in and prevent further deaths.





https://fox59.com/news/national-wor...ped-indiana-mall-shooter-in-15-seconds/======



West Virginia woman....



Witnesses said Butler seemed agitated and left but returned to the complex shortly after, armed with an AR-15 style rifle, and started shooting at the crowd.

Police said a woman pulled out her pistol, shooting and killing him.

"This lady was carrying a lawful firearm," Hazelett said. "A law abiding citizen who stopped the threat of probably 20 or 30 people getting killed. She engaged the threat and stopped it. She didn't run from the threat, she engaged it. Preventing a mass casualty event here in Charleston."






Woman credited with stopping mass shooting at apartment complex in West Virginia

======





Southerland Springs Church shooting .....



Willeford propped his AR-15 on the pickup’s hood and peered through the sight. He could see a holographic red dot on the man’s chest. He fired twice. He wasn’t sure he’d hit him, though he was later told that the man had contusions on his chest and abdomen consistent with getting shot while wearing body armor. Regardless, the gunman stopped shooting and ran for a white Ford Explorer that was idling outside the chapel, roughly twenty yards from where Willeford had positioned himself.



The Hero of Sutherland Springs Is Still Reckoning with What Happened that Day

 

[Bell Huey]

Have you found that source confirming your 2nd Design Hypothesis?

Then sit on your hands.

Oh, I have posted it dozens of times to you over the years.

And then you have the ATF.

 

[Bell Huey]

It isn't an assault weapon...it is a civilian rifle....created as a civilian rifle...

The FOIA request itself was prompted from a Nov. 2017 article in The Atlantic in which the magazine, unsurprisingly to anyone familiar with its anti-gun bent, attempted to bolster a claim that “these rifles were meant for the military, not civilians.”


https://www.ammoland.com/2021/12/original-atf-ar-15-classification-refutes-claim-that-rifle-not-meant-for-civilians/#axzz7DtllKxCK

It isn't an assault weapon...it is a civilian rifle....created as a civilian rifle...

The FOIA request itself was prompted from a Nov. 2017 article in The Atlantic in which the magazine, unsurprisingly to anyone familiar with its anti-gun bent, attempted to bolster a claim that “these rifles were meant for the military, not civilians.”


https://www.ammoland.com/2021/12/original-atf-ar-15-classification-refutes-claim-that-rifle-not-meant-for-civilians/#axzz7DtllKxCK

I have given him that link quite a few times elsewhere. He doesn’t understand it nor does he read the embedded BATF letter.

 

[The5thHorseman]

Thank you for proving my point.

What point is that?

 

[The5thHorseman]

I have given him that link quite a few times elsewhere. He doesn’t understand it nor does he read the embedded BATF letter.

“One was an automatic rifle, and the other was the modified rifle made to be not a machinegun

 

[Blaster]

The Nashville shooter got off 152 rounds with his AR-15.

Too bad none of the teachers were armed.

 

[Bell Huey]

It's an assault weapon....doing what it's designed to do.

And yet, this weapon was never issued to the military as an assault or a combat weapon. Mighty odd it wasn't used used in the manner you falsely claim it was designed for.

 

[The5thHorseman]

And yet, this weapon was never issued to the military as an assault or a combat weapon. Mighty odd it wasn't used used in the manner you falsely claim it was designed for.

Irrelevant to the issue of the purpose for which it was DESIGNED.

 

[Bell Huey]

You should read on...

Read more: Original ATF AR-15 Classification Refutes Claim that Rifle ‘Not Meant’ for Civilians
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

He and Savage also cleared up a point of potential confusion on why the classification letter refers to the AR-15 as an “automatic rifle.”​

And did you get to the part of the actual letter where this is written:

”have changed the weapon in basic design…”

Here's your sign......

 

[The5thHorseman]

And did you get to the part of the actual letter where this is written:

”have changed the weapon in basic design…”

Here's your sign......

Tiny,

The ATF has NOTHING to do with this.

Nothing at all.

The weapon was already designed, developed and modified

 

[Bell Huey]

Irrelevant to the issue of the purpose for which it was DESIGNED.

Oh, it was designed for civilians and LEOs as just another semi automatic weapon.

 

[Bell Huey]

Tiny,

The ATF has NOTHING to do with this.

Nothing at all.

The weapon was already designed, developed and modified

And changed in basic design. And yes the ATF, or the BATF at the time, played a major role.

You are not going to win this argument, with any of us.

PS. You got your source. Now make a logical, sourced argument or sit on YOUR hands.

 

[Bell Huey]

Tiny,

The ATF has NOTHING to do with this.

Nothing at all.

The weapon was already designed, developed and modified

Just to give you a heads up...this is the Clean Debate Forum. You might want to read the rules of this forum before continuing.

 

[The5thHorseman]

Oh, it was designed for civilians and LEOs as just another semi automatic weapon.

There is no such design.

There is a weapon "modified", a variant.

 

[The5thHorseman]

Just to give you a heads up...this is the Clean Debate Forum. You might want to read the rules of this forum before continuing.

Did I say something incorrect?

 

[The5thHorseman]

And changed in basic design. And yes the ATF, or the BATF at the time, played a major role.

You are not going to win this argument, with any of us.

PS. You got your source. Now make a logical, sourced argument or sit on YOUR hands.

No....that's ATF.

They have nothing to do with development, design or modification - except to certify that it is not a machine gun.

 

[Hector12]

This is not a bad idea, but it should be accomplished at the time of manufacture and sent to a central database before the gun is sold. The serial number on the gun would tie the two after sale. I believe that would pass constitutional muster as well. As far as licensing and testing go, those are infringements on a right. Do you have to have a license or pass a test in order to breathe?

The right to own a gun is not the same as the right to breathe.