What is the republican solution to ending mass shootings? Why don’t they ever offer solutions?

[2aguy]

am glad mass shooting idiots have not figured this out yet. With buckshot, one magizine could kill 50-100 people in a tight crowed.

We've had shotgun attacks in this country and they invariably lead to lower body counts.

We've SEEN what assault weapons can do to a crowd

The Vegas shooter had 23 rifles in that room, he was firing from a concealed and fortified position into a tightly packed crowd of over 23,000 people...... that had nothing to do with his rifle, all with his selection of firing position and target...

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Candyass, pants-shitting hoplophobes are causing mass shootings.

Fix the problem, pants shitters.

 

[Lesh]

Crimea 2 weeks ago, 5 shot, pump action shotgun against college students.... 21 dead.

Can you read?

IN THIS COUNTRY

The Crimea attack occurred across the street from a police station and the response was incredibly slow.

The Pittsburg shooting that just occurred was responded to in like TWO minutes

W Virginia was NOT a shotgun attack stupid. You evene noted that

 

[2aguy]

'Because I disagree with most of what you have to say (your fruitcake logic) does that mean that I want to disarm everyone? No, just the crazy people and it appears you may fit that definition.

It's the classic camel's nose under the tent

So you ban the Ar 15 then the next school shooter uses a Mini 14 then you want to ban that gun so the Mini 14 gets banned and the next school shooter uses a different semiauto then you want to ban that because it was used in a school shooting etc etc etc

Wrong.

But your post does fail as a classic slippery slope fallacy.

In fact, in jurisdictions where AR platform rifles and carbines have been restricted, no efforts have been made to restrict compliant platforms such as the Mini 14 or SU 16.

YET

The focus right now is solely on the AR but when you idiots finally wise up and realize the AR is no different from any other semiauto then the push will be to ban those as well

That is the game plan.....that is why they focus so hard on the AR-15...if they can get that banned because they can get gullible people to think it is too dangerous...there is no reason to prevent them from banning all other semi automatic rifles, pistols, shotguns and revolvers.......

Ban assault typerifles & high capacity magazines. You need neither.

I need whatever I need.....

the AR-15 is not an Assault rifle, so it is okay...right? And again, you have seen the research, standard capacity magazines do not matter in a mass public shooting, yet you still want them banned....you are irrational...

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research

Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages by Gary Kleck :: SSRN

Do bans on large-capacity magazines (LCMs) for semiautomatic firearms have significant potential for reducing the number of deaths and injuries in mass shootings?


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 journal research

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.

 

[Wry Catcher]

There is no “common sense” type of gun control. The solution is common sense person control, by removing the liberal social structure that has been forced on our country. Remove the idea of entitlement, remove the basis for perceived injustice and you remove the persons reasoning behind mass shootings. Our schools have breeding grounds for this type of person. The ruling class narrative pushed by them is anti constitution, anti individual, and anti American.

It seems to me the idea that no solution exists is your only strength. Solutions exist, they work in the vast majority of Western Democracies because they do not have a 2nd A.

Come try and take my guns kid...…

Just don't shoot someone in back, or the UPS driver.

I bet Doc1 is one of those cowards who feel the need to carry a gun to go buy a six pack of Bud at the grocery store.

Ain't nobody gonna get that 6 pack without a fight is my bet.. Go Doc.... lol

If the store is deep in the Demon-crats created povertyville, one better carry a weapon if smart.

Seems you suffer from the Zimmerman Syndrome. Must very suck to awaken scared and feel in danger 24-7. I pity your kind, do you shit your pants whenever you feel in the range of every "Demon-crat" (code word for the color of a man?).

 

[Skull Pilot]

Crimea 2 weeks ago, 5 shot, pump action shotgun against college students.... 21 dead.

Can you read?

IN THIS COUNTRY

The Crimea attack occurred across the street from a police station and the response was incredibly slow.

The Pittsburg shooting that just occurred was responded to in like TWO minutes

W Virginia was NOT a shotgun attack stupid. You evene noted that

The point that flew right over your blunt little head is that a person hell bent on killing people doesn't need a rifle and if you ban one weapon then that person who is hell bent on murder will simply use a different weapon

 

[2aguy]

Crimea 2 weeks ago, 5 shot, pump action shotgun against college students.... 21 dead.

Can you read?

IN THIS COUNTRY

The Crimea attack occurred across the street from a police station and the response was incredibly slow.

The Pittsburg shooting that just occurred was responded to in like TWO minutes

W Virginia was NOT a shotgun attack stupid. You evene noted that

And you refuse to understand it isn't the weapon...it is the choice of target....mainly the gun free status.

I showed you that the 5 shot, pump action shotgun, an actual weapon of war, killed more people than the AR-15 at Parkland, showing that you have no point...your argument has no basis in fact...

And again...the Synagogue shooting...AR-15.... 11 people killed.

Crimea...pump action shotgun, 5 shot before reloading....21 people killed.

Virginia Tech...2 pistols.....32 people killed.

Luby's cafe....2 pistols....24 people killed.

 

[Rustic]

That statement is just foolish.

Please give us your definition of an assault weapon. Not your fantasies, what is the definition of an assault weapon. What is the difference between that and, say, an AR-15?

You will agree that a M-16 is an assault rifle, right? And that definition has nothing to do with the A in the AR. It's used to assault in a war condition and it's pretty damned good at it. It's normally used in it's single shot setting because it just wastes ammo otherwise. So now you have a single shot M-16. Can you tell me the difference between an AR-15 and a M-16/M-4? And don't give me that crap about the AR must being a sporting rifle. You may be right but the sport animal it was designed to assault is human. All other uses are secondary.

So you agree that the AR-15 is far from being any sort of Assault Weapon. THANK YOU!

Follow along kiddies.

We're told that it's important to have an AR-15 because it is a good gun for shooting squirrels...

We're also told that it's not a good self defense weapon (there are many much better)...

And that the main reason for having one is a "defense against the government"...but that it's not a military grade weapon.

Of course defending oneself against an actual military with a weapon that is admittedly not military grade sounds silly but then the entire gun hugger argument is pretty ******* silly so....

Oh and no...the gun huggers have no solution to mass shootings or gun violence because ...they just don't see it as a problem

That's your imagination. Of course it's a problem. The question is if it can be solved. Our stance is that disarming the public and even the removal of AR's will not solve anything. It would only make people like yourself feel better.

But even if you could accomplish either of those things, and the next mass shooting takes place, you will want to advance to the next step, and the next, and the next.

That is where we really stand.

The only thing we can do is actually a social problem. Yah, I know, I type social and you transpose "Socialist" over it. But social change has nothing to do with a bunch of commies. Here are some steps that have helped here, at the permission of the Voters

1. Put in detectors right on the front door of the School, or any public gathering place. This stops even handguns from being brought in. Yah, I know, there are still stupid kids that try and bring in their Daddys handgun out of kicks but the get bagged very quickly and the gun gets confiscated by the Police to never be returned. The Onus is on the Parents in this case. And put well trained Armed Security on that Gate. It prevents or slows down firearms being brought into the public areas where you have no choice but to have as a Gun Free Zone.

2. Educate the general public. In Texas, you may see people walking around on a hot sunny dry day wearing Rain Coats or Dusters. Here, if you see that, the Cops are called if you are within 1000 feet of a School. The Cops respond. 3 times the cops have been called. 2 of the times, it was a stupid fashion statement that I doubt if that student will ever do again. The 3rd time, under that Rain Coat was an AR and 4 30 round mags. The School didn't call it in. A concerned Citizen called it in and the Cops took all 3 as serious as a heart attack.

You don't need every Teacher Armed. Right after the States Board of Education approved that the Teachers can be armed, the Teachers Association along with the PTAs turned it down. There have been accidental discharged by teachers in schools that have done this. And if you same one life then you should do it. There are other methods.

There are other methods that can be used at the same time. If you want to see them, google Colorado Firearms Regulations. When you total it all together, you end up with a much safter place.

South Dakota Attorney General

 

[2aguy]

Crimea 2 weeks ago, 5 shot, pump action shotgun against college students.... 21 dead.

Can you read?

IN THIS COUNTRY

The Crimea attack occurred across the street from a police station and the response was incredibly slow.

The Pittsburg shooting that just occurred was responded to in like TWO minutes

W Virginia was NOT a shotgun attack stupid. You evene noted that

The point that flew right over your blunt little head is that a person hell bent on killing people doesn't need a rifle and if you ban one weapon then that person who is hell bent on murder will simply use a different weapon

And whatever weapon that is will be the next one they demand be banned....

 

[Rustic]

All I have seen in any gun control thread is the same old tired shit statements by liberal leftist who for the most part have no idea what they are talking about, have never even held a gun or been in any serious fight for their life, have never spent much time in an intercity ghetto They are intent on deciding what rights other people can exercise while at the same time believing their right to dictate to others what they can have, what they must pay for, what their choices can be and what they must use for their different needs. They presume to know and want to dictate to people they do not know or have no idea the needs of how they can protect themselves and their families in situations they have no knowledge of whatsoever. They have no working knowledge of the area, threat, opponent timeline or possible help involved yet their self professed intellectual superiority gives them those dictatorial rights. BULLSHIT! You idiots take care of your own dumb asses just wait for the cops. What you dumb asses don’t realize is that most of those murders that don’t involve a gun happen because the dead person waited on and depended on the cops to protect them. Being a liberal you should want a gun since your neighborhoods have made the cops have to wait till a gun is pointed at them before they shoot. Their job has become investigate the murder don’t shoot unless you are shot at.

Are you saying that I have NEVER held a gun in my life? Are you saying that I promote the confiscation of all firearms? Are you saying because I disagree with you that I am a liberal? Simple yes or no answer.

You’re a progressive control freak, that wants to get involved in other people’s personal lives...
When are you gonna learn that firearm ownership is personal and people like you need to stay the **** out of other people’s personal lives...

 

[Lesh]

The .223 is a 22 caliber round you idiot

Wow...you're going off on guns and don't know that there is a significant difference between a .223 round and a .22 long/long rifle/short?

Yes they have (almost) the same diameter...but you DO understand that the casings (which hold the propellent) are considerably different? No? Then you need to shut the **** up junior.

And "Lesh" ain't a she. Add that to the list of shit you get wrong

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Crimea 2 weeks ago, 5 shot, pump action shotgun against college students.... 21 dead.

Can you read?

IN THIS COUNTRY

The Crimea attack occurred across the street from a police station and the response was incredibly slow.

The Pittsburg shooting that just occurred was responded to in like TWO minutes

W Virginia was NOT a shotgun attack stupid. You evene noted that

The point that flew right over your blunt little head is that a person hell bent on killing people doesn't need a rifle and if you ban one weapon then that person who is hell bent on murder will simply use a different weapon

Don't waste your breath.

Lesh is a candyass, pants-shitting hoplophobe who is dumber that a bag of wet mice.

.

 

[Rustic]

We get to keep our AR 15. Go ahead and cry you pussies.

You wil never ever EVER get another "assault weapons" ban. That was your best shot and it turned oht to be a huge loser.

Scared? GOOD. **** you.



We really need to break up this shitty, dead union. I do not want to share a nation with all these gun-grabbing fucktards. I ******* hate them. They are not human beings. They have no value and must be eliminated forever.

.

You don't get to keep your ARs in certain Cities. And if it' keeps being used as the primary Mass Shooting Tool, look for at least a few states to follow. If you want to keep your AR and continue to be a law abiding citizen I suggest you work on the social issues of the AR Cult which you are a member of.

Urban America is fucked up

 

[Skull Pilot]

The .223 is a 22 caliber round you idiot

Wow...you're going off on guns and don't know that there is a significant difference between a .223 round and a .22 long/long rifle/short?

Yes they have (almost) the same diameter...but you DO understand that the casings (which hold the propellent) are considerably different? No? Then you need to shut the **** up junior.

And "Lesh" ain't a she. Add that to the list of shit you get wrong

They are both .22 caliber rounds and that is a fact

The only real difference is the muzzle velocity of the rounds

 

[Skull Pilot]

The .223 is a 22 caliber round you idiot

Wow...you're going off on guns and don't know that there is a significant difference between a .223 round and a .22 long/long rifle/short?

Yes they have (almost) the same diameter...but you DO understand that the casings (which hold the propellent) are considerably different? No? Then you need to shut the **** up junior.

And "Lesh" ain't a she. Add that to the list of shit you get wrong

So Lesh isn't a she Then I guess Lesh is an it because Lesh ain't a man

 

[Rustic]

That's your imagination. Of course it's a problem. The question is if it can be solved. Our stance is that disarming the public and even the removal of AR's will not solve anything. It would only make people like yourself feel better.

But even if you could accomplish either of those things, and the next mass shooting takes place, you will want to advance to the next step, and the next, and the next.

That is where we really stand.

What we have here is too fringe groups yelling at each other while they are so LOUD that the rest of us have trouble discussing anything. You people aren't necessarily right, you are just LOUD.

Well......loud is how you are heard. The left is loud via MSM. We don't have that, so we need to yell louder. All we really have is AM radio and Fox news. The MSM, Hollywood, education, the internet is all dominated by the left.

But because we yell louder doesn't mean we are wrong either.

In an 8 hour period in there, I saw just a couple or three posts by a few people. But there were 64 posts by the same 4 people trying to yell down everyone else though insulting posts. Your bunch tries to bury everyone elses inputs. It's hard to weed through all the Insulting Posts to get to the meat of the subject. Once your posts goes into the loud venue, people just stop reading it and your real message is lost whether its right or not.

So what you are saying is the left does not "yell?"

What you're really upset about is not the number of posts, but that you are outnumbered. The majority on this subject are pro-gun. Therefore for every one post a leftist makes, it's battled with four opposition posts regardless of who posts them. Insults? That comes from both sides if you've been here long enough to realize it. I object to insulting posts unless one is reacting to a personal attack. I do that myself, but I never draw first blood.

I like civil discussions when it comes to politics. Insults are teen chat room exchanges. I avoid participating with flamers if possible. Speaking for myself only of course, I conduct myself here as if we were discussing issues at a bar or club in person. I don't believe in hiding behind a keyboard and tossing insults at people that may be 500 miles or more from where I live.

I am so difficult to handle there ain't enough of you to go around. So you just get LOUD. I am not loud but I do have a message without the petty insults to try and make myself look smarter, better looking, etc.. I have noticed that you are easier to read than most. I just don't particularly agree with everything you have to say. But, hey, that's what makes life interesting.

Yes, the Left Yells but I don't. But I find, in here, the major source of "Yelling" is from the fringe group of guncrazies. Rather than discuss and actually coming up with a solution (and yes, any solution I see I will pass on to other voters) they start in insulting and degrading the other person. I can't speak for MSN since I don't listen to that. I can't speak for Talk Radio since I don't listen to that. And I can't speak for
Pauxsnews since I don't watch nor listen to that. I speak for myself and the community for which I live in who have made changes to confront all the evils that are being shouted out to cover up an chance of coming to a solution. Newsflash: There is always a solution for most problems if we stop yelling and insulting each other long enough.

Right now, the Right needs to clean it's act in here and out of here. Do it before you lose more than you can afford to lose. And put a cork on the NRA meddling in local elections. One of the reasons so many Dems were elected into the house is that the NRA put money against the other side and the voters said enough. And the people voted in are Moderates. That should scare the hell out of everyone that is in the fringe on both sides.

Progressives are not moderate… In fact it’s impossible for them to be so

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Please don't play stupid. Fire up the old google and look it up yourself.

There aren't any jurisdictions where AR-15 are prohibited. You wrote a check with your mouth your behind refuses to cash. Not surprising.

Here, chew on this.

U.S. judge upholds Massachusetts assault weapons ban | Reuters

(Reuters) - A federal judge on Friday upheld a Massachusetts law banning assault weapons including the AR-15, saying the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment guarantee of Americans’ right to bear firearms does not cover them.
U.S. District Judge William Young in Boston ruled that assault weapons and large capacity magazines covered by the 1998 law were most useful in military service and fall outside the scope of the Second Amendment’s personal right to bear arms.

“In the absence of federal legislation, Massachusetts is free to ban these weapons and large capacity magazines,” Young wrote.

He also rejected a challenge to an enforcement notice Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey issued in 2016 to gun manufacturers and dealers clarifying what under the law is a “copy” of an assault weapon like the Colt AR-15.

Healey announced that notice after a gunman killed 49 people at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida.

Healey welcomed Young’s ruling. “Strong gun laws save lives, and we will not be intimidated by the gun lobby in our efforts to end the sale of assault weapons and protect our communities and schools,” she said in a statement.

The decision came amid renewed attention to gun violence and firearms ownership after a gunman killed 17 students and staff at a Florida high school in February, prompting a surge of gun control activism by teenage students.

Young acknowledged that the plaintiffs had cited the semi-automatic AR-15 rifle’s popularity in arguing the law must be unconstitutional because it would ban a class of firearms Americans had overwhelming chosen for legal purposes.

“Yet the AR-15’s present-day popularity is not constitutionally material,” Young wrote. “This is because the words of our Constitution are not mutable. They mean the same today as they did 227 years ago when the Second Amendment was adopted.”

The Gun Owners’ Action League of Massachusetts, which was among the plaintiffs who sued in 2017, said in a statement that it was concerned by the ruling, which sets a “dangerous precedent.” It said it would consider its next steps.
The U.S. Supreme Court in 2008 held for the first time that the Second Amendment guaranteed an individual’s right to bear arms, but the ruling applied only to firearms kept in the home for self-defense.

The justices have avoided taking another major gun case for eight years. Most recently, in November, the court refused to hear a case challenging Maryland’s 2013 state ban on assault weapons.

That means that there ARE areas where the AR-15 is banned and it's been upheld in Federal Court. Heller V only dealt with DC and Handguns in the home. The places that spelled out the bans with general definitions were turned down. But these places specifically read "AR-15 and the clones". These have stood in the Federal Courts. Now, don't you feel foolish.

 

[Rustic]

Okay, so any level gun control is bad which is of course retarded on its own, but the right can’t even think of any alternatives to curbing gun violence. Saying “no” to everything accomplishes absolutely nothing. It’s astounding we are still at square one.

Oh, they do. Their solution is to arm everyone, because apparently this will somehow work. Yeah, more guns will mean more people die, which will then destroy humans in the US and when they're all dead, there won't be any gun crime.

Funny I never said anything about arming everyone
I do know disarming everyone (who would obey the law) won't lower the murder rate

'Because I disagree with most of what you have to say (your fruitcake logic) does that mean that I want to disarm everyone? No, just the crazy people and it appears you may fit that definition.

It's the classic camel's nose under the tent

So you ban the Ar 15 then the next school shooter uses a Mini 14 then you want to ban that gun so the Mini 14 gets banned and the next school shooter uses a different semiauto then you want to ban that because it was used in a school shooting etc etc etc

Wrong.

But your post does fail as a classic slippery slope fallacy.

In fact, in jurisdictions where AR platform rifles and carbines have been restricted, no efforts have been made to restrict compliant platforms such as the Mini 14 or SU 16.

Because progressives don’t know their ass from a hole in the ground… They’re all just sporting rifles

 

[Lesh]

The point that flew right over your blunt little head is that a person hell bent on killing people doesn't need a rifle and if you ban one weapon then that person who is hell bent on murder will simply use a different weapon

And you keep pretending that all weapons are equal.

They aren't

A baseball bat is a weapon...but much less lethal than a machine gun. No?

A shot gun is lethal...but far less lethal than a semi-auto magazine fed assault weapon

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

The .223 is a 22 caliber round you idiot

Wow...you're going off on guns and don't know that there is a significant difference between a .223 round and a .22 long/long rifle/short?

Yes they have (almost) the same diameter...but you DO understand that the casings (which hold the propellent) are considerably different? No? Then you need to shut the **** up junior.

And "Lesh" ain't a she. Add that to the list of shit you get wrong

A .22 long will take down a whitetail deer.

You can see your therapist about your hoplophobia. That will help you deal with life in America. Or, better yet, take your commie ass to Canada.

.