Time for bow and arrow control

[M14 Shooter]

They were banned because dumbasses needed 30 rounds to wound it.

This is a lie, as it is so wrong you cannot help but be aware of it.

 

[Smokin' OP]

It isnt what about when it actually happened you dipshit.

Yes, it is, lying, moron.

 

[Smokin' OP]

He killed more than the Boulder shooter who had n AR-15….why? Because in Boulder the police went right in and he stopped shooting people……it isnt the gun it is the gun free zone locaton, you idiot

The police wouldn't have if there was a suspicion of a bomb in the school.
Moron.

 

[Smokin' OP]

You arent even trying to hide your stupidity and ignorance… you are simply tolling at this point.

Sure Q NUT.
How useful are these various kinds of AR-15's for hunting? Well, the claim that you wouldn't hunt a deer with one is only sometimes true — if, and only if, you are talking about .223 chambered AR-15's, and more critically, depending on where you live. In many states — but not all — it's not legal to hunt deer with this round because some believe the round isn't powerful enough to kill a deer, but just badly wound it. But some states allow deer hunting with .223 bullets for a variety of reasons and differing circumstances. At any rate, a .223 is perfect for small-game hunting, like coyote, fox, prairie dog, or other similar small-sized game. This is also sometimes referred to varmint hunting and many AR-15's are designed and marketed specifically as varmint hunting rifles. These typically have longer barrels to give the bullet better accuracy at the longer ranges typically involved when hunting this kind of game.

So while many AR-15's are chambered for .223 (5.56 metric), they can also be chambered for .204 Ruger, 5.7x28, .243 WIN, .260 REM, 6.5 Grendel, 6.5 Creedmoor, 6.8SPC, 7mm, .30 REM, 7.62x39, .308, .338 Lapua, .338 Federal, .450 Bushmaster, .458, .50 Beowulf, .50 BMG and even 9mm, .40 and .45ACP handgun cartridges.

2 days of back and forth, you are a waste of my time.

 

[Smokin' OP]

This is a lie, as it is so wrong you cannot help but be aware of it.

See above.

 

[Smokin' OP]

Indeed.
Every mass shooting in the US - save one - could have been equally perpetrated with a pump-action shotgun.

Could have been but not equally, they don't have the same capacity.
Granted you could change magazines in 5 seconds, times 6 but imagine if you didn't have change them but twice.
More efficient in that regard.

 

[Smokin' OP]

The obvious point you missed:
If all (but one) of the mass shootings cperpetraed withan 'assault weapon' could have been equallp perpetraed with a pump-action shotgun, then rate of fire and magazine capacity does no thave an effect on the number of casualties in mass shootings.

See above.

 

[Smokin' OP]

Entitled to... exercise their right to keep and bear arms without infringement?
You bet. Constitution says so.
Why do you hate the constitution?

Sure, what militia do you belong to?
Break out your musket.

And still not a sound argument for banning 'assault weapons'

You're opinion.

1999-2019, accidental gun deals average 612 per year.
Thus: minuscule
And has nothing to do with a sound argument against 'assault weapons'.

You're opinion.

A question is not a fact, and does not constitute as sound argument against 'assault wepaons'

Fallacy: Straw man.

You're opinion.

20,000,000 AR15s in the US
Over the last 40 years, 16 of them have been used to kill 266 people in 'mass shootings'
That's 0.4 rifles per year, to kill 6.65 people per year.
Out of 20,000,000 guns, over 40 years.
There's no rational basis for your "if" proposition; this being the case, the "then" is moot.

By me.
You have not, and can not, present a sound argument against 'assault weapons' because there is none.
Thus, your statement is a lie.

You're opinion.

Take it up with the courts, theirs is the only one that matters.

 

[2aguy]

Could have been but not equally, they don't have the same capacity.
Granted you could change magazines in 5 seconds, times 6 but imagine if you didn't have change them but twice.
More efficient in that regard.

Shithead.....do you even do any actual research....

Magazine capacity has no impact on mass public shootings, you doofus........

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

 

[M14 Shooter]

Could have been but not equally, they don't have the same capacity.

Aside from LV, what mass US mass shooting comitted with an 'assault weapon' could not have been equally perpetrated -- that is, the same number of people killed - with a pump action shotgun - and why?
The "and why" is what matters here, BTW.

 

[M14 Shooter]

See above.

Your repsonse is meaningless.
I accept your concession.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Sure Q NUT.
How useful are these various kinds of AR-15's for hunting?

Funny how you answer your own question, and negate your own position.

 

[M14 Shooter]

See above.

Your response is meaningless.
I accept your concession.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Sure, what militia do you belong to?
Break out your musket.

Ah. You are (willfully) ignorant of the fact the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms is unrelated to service in the militia.
And thus, my response stands.
So does my question: Why do you hate the constitution?
And another question:
Why do you believe the law abiding are NOT entitled to.exercise their right to keep and bear arms without infringement?

You're opinion.
You're opinion.
You're opinion.
You're opinion.

"YOUR" opinion.
Your inability to provide a meaningful response forces me to accept your concession of the points made.

 

[Smokin' OP]

Shithead.....do you even do any actual research....

Magazine capacity has no impact on mass public shootings, you doofus........

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

Even your own evidence proves my point idiot.

'On the other hand, if mass shooters fire their guns with the average interval between shots lasting more than 2-4 seconds'.

IF they fire their guns every 2-4 seconds.

The plausibility of the “victims escape” rationale depends on the average rates of fire that shooters in mass shootings typically maintain.

Depends?
Typically?

'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'.

Every situation in mass shooting is different, slightly or obvious.
To claim a weapons bullet capacity is definitely not a factor is ridiculous.

You think magazine capacity is a non-factor to this guy?

 

[Smokin' OP]

Aside from LV, what mass US mass shooting comitted with an 'assault weapon' could not have been equally perpetrated -- that is, the same number of people killed - with a pump action shotgun - and why?
The "and why" is what matters here, BTW.

• The 2019 Dayton shooting in Ohio
• Investigators are working through evidence as they grapple with the aftermath of the deadly shooting in downtown Dayton, Ohio, and what it means to have citizens armed with powerful weaponry.
• The suspected shooter, identified by police as 24-year-old Connor Stephen Betts, allegedly carried out the massacre with a .223-caliber rifle that he legally purchased.
• Evidence is still being collected, but if all of the shooter's magazines were full at the time of the shooting, the suspect would have had "a maximum of 250 rounds in his possession at the time" of the shooting. He added that investigators have found "at least 41 spent shell casings".
• On Sunday, officials said that 30 seconds after the gunman fired the first shots, he was killed by an officer in front of the Ned Peppers bar.
• 41 Shots fired, 9 dead, 27 injured in under 30 seconds?

On February 14, 2018, an expelled student entered Parkland, Florida’s Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School and opened fire, killing 17 people and wounding 17 others, in what became the deadliest shooting at a high school in United States history.

In all, Cruz’s attack lasted less than four minutes and left 17 dead.


In the Sutherland Springs church shooting, Devin Patrick Kelley shot and killed dozens of people at the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas on November 5, 2017. Kelley killed 25 people and wounded 22 others before dying of a self-inflicted gunshot wound.

Around 11:20 a.m., Kelley stepped out of the SUV, wearing black tactical gear, a ballistic vest, and a black face-mask featuring a white skull, and wielding a Ruger AR-556 semi-automatic rifle.

Inside, he yelled, "Everybody dies, motherfuckers," as he proceeded up and down the center aisle and shot at people in the pews. Police found 15 empty magazines capable of holding 30 rounds each. Authorities stated Kelley fired approximately 700 rounds during the estimated 11 minute long shooting.
According to investigators, the shooting was captured on a camera set up at the back of the church to record regular services for uploading online. The footage shows Kelley methodically shooting the victims, pausing only to reload his rifle.

700 rounds in 11 minutes?

'The "and why" is what matters here, BTW'.
OK.

 

[Smokin' OP]

Funny how you answer your own question, and negate your own position.

Funny how it didn't.

So while many AR-15's are chambered for .223 (5.56 metric), they can also be chambered for .204 Ruger, 5.7x28, .243 WIN, .260 REM, 6.5 Grendel, 6.5 Creedmoor, 6.8SPC, 7mm, .30 REM, 7.62x39, .308, .338 Lapua, .338 Federal, .450 Bushmaster, .458, .50 Beowulf, .50 BMG and even 9mm, .40 and .45ACP handgun cartridges.

So the stock AR-15 has be be modified to kill a deer, but not a human.

 

[Smokin' OP]

Ah. You are (willfully) ignorant of the fact the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms is unrelated to service in the militia.
And thus, my response stands.

So, go out and buy a Howitzer, a 50. cal. and a RPG.

So does my question: Why do you hate the constitution?

Just the gun nuts that take advantage of and twist it to suit their needs.

And another question:
Why do you believe the law abiding are NOT entitled to.exercise their right to keep and bear arms without infringement?

Gun nuts, that's why.
Who needs 4500 rounds and 60 weapons?

"YOUR" opinion.
Your inability to provide a meaningful response forces me to accept your concession of the points made.

No, it doesn't.

 

[2aguy]

Even your own evidence proves my point idiot.

'On the other hand, if mass shooters fire their guns with the average interval between shots lasting more than 2-4 seconds'.

IF they fire their guns every 2-4 seconds.

The plausibility of the “victims escape” rationale depends on the average rates of fire that shooters in mass shootings typically maintain.

Depends?
Typically?

'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'.

Every situation in mass shooting is different, slightly or obvious.
To claim a weapons bullet capacity is definitely not a factor is ridiculous.

You think magazine capacity is a non-factor to this guy?

Get back to us when a mass public shooter uses a crew served, tripod mounted, belt fed, fully automatic machine gun.....you moron.

 

[Smokin' OP]

Get back to us when a mass public shooter uses a crew served, tripod mounted, belt fed, fully automatic machine gun.....you moron.

Holy fuck you're a moron, just the way your fat, orange, dear leader loves his cult.

That wasn't the point, you ignorant imbecile.