3 mass shooting, three semi automtic rifles

[Daryl Hunt]

But the rifle makes certain intents more deadly.

Your statement was "If you change the looks you also change the features and the use and the intent. Simple as that.". That is simply wrong. The functions are not what people freak out about. It is the appearance.

The functions make the features and that makes the appearance. The AR was made for one thing and one thing only. And it was, and still is, the best at it. It was made for a firefight to kill or wound as many combatants as possible in the shortest amount of time under the highest degree of pressure on the shooter. It's perfect in it's design, performance and function. Change any of those 3 and you lessen it's capability. You keep saying that people are saying"Black Gun Bad" but in reality, it's it's use and capability that people really fear. To get those capabilities, it MUST look the way it does.

Pure nonsense. What makes the AR good at what it does is mostly internal components. The plastic stocks, carry handle, and weirdly tall front sight do little to make them accurate and rapid shooters. Earlier I mentioned owning a Mini-14. It was not accurate at much distance. But for the purposes of this discussion, it was capable of doing what these mass shooters do with the AR. I have read, and been told, the new Rugers are far more accurate.

Then you haven't handled both in a combat situation. Handling a M-14 versus a M-16 and you will see the difference in a matter of about an hour of carrying the M-14 around and having to change out the mags to reload. I don't expect you Rexall Rangers to understand because you are fruitcakes on a mission. And I don't expect the youngsters that have never lugged, much less fired a M-14 around for any length of time to understand either.

You have read, you have been told. That's the extent of your experience. I've been told the world is flat and ended last Thursday, should I believe that as well?

View attachment 250770

I have handled an M14. I own an M1A (the civilian version). But that has little to do with what I said.

A Mini-14 is not an M14. Nor is an M14 the only other semi-auto out there. It is one of the heaviest, most unwieldy rifles ever issued.

But that does not change what I said. The Mini-14 is neither as heavy or as long. The AK-47 is not as heavy, and is less likely to jam. The shorter versions of the FN-FAL are not as unwieldy or as heavy.

The main point is, the appearance is not what makes a rifle what it is.

 

[Blues Man]

Odd the m4 has a 3 shot burt whoch qualified as full auto and the m16are full auto as some m4 guns areperhaps you need to pull your head out of your ass for awhile and get some fresh air.

The A1 and the A2 were full auto. The A3 and A4 had that function changed. You are just making shit up as you go. Here's a picture made just for you.
View attachment 250793

Yes 3 round burst and some also had full auto meat head while the saw was indeed set up cover fire there still were full auto m16s and m4s out there

Ok moron i hate to do this to you fag bait but look Wikipedia m4 it tells you the cycle rate shit hear 650 to 950 rounds per mim.
Now pull your head out of your ass and tell us about all the fire fights you were in did you ever shoot one of them

Seems hunts to busy to respond to his own bullshit

View attachment 250866

I used to work with mentally retarded kids who had to use picture books to communicate.

IS that you, Corky?

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The A1 and the A2 were full auto. The A3 and A4 had that function changed. You are just making shit up as you go. Here's a picture made just for you.
View attachment 250793

Yes 3 round burst and some also had full auto meat head while the saw was indeed set up cover fire there still were full auto m16s and m4s out there

Ok moron i hate to do this to you fag bait but look Wikipedia m4 it tells you the cycle rate shit hear 650 to 950 rounds per mim.
Now pull your head out of your ass and tell us about all the fire fights you were in did you ever shoot one of them

Seems hunts to busy to respond to his own bullshit

View attachment 250866

I used to work with mentally retarded kids who had to use picture books to communicate.

IS that you, Corky?

I am just using a method that is efficient and something you can easily identify without having to move your lips, sound it out and ask your mommy to explain it to you.

 

[Blues Man]

Yes 3 round burst and some also had full auto meat head while the saw was indeed set up cover fire there still were full auto m16s and m4s out there

Ok moron i hate to do this to you fag bait but look Wikipedia m4 it tells you the cycle rate shit hear 650 to 950 rounds per mim.
Now pull your head out of your ass and tell us about all the fire fights you were in did you ever shoot one of them

Seems hunts to busy to respond to his own bullshit

View attachment 250866

I used to work with mentally retarded kids who had to use picture books to communicate.

IS that you, Corky?

I am just using a method that is efficient and something you can easily identify without having to move your lips, sound it out and ask your mommy to explain it to you.

View attachment 250870

Poor retarded man

Maybe one day you'll actually be able to use words like these

NUT SACK

 

[WinterBorn]

Your statement was "If you change the looks you also change the features and the use and the intent. Simple as that.". That is simply wrong. The functions are not what people freak out about. It is the appearance.

The functions make the features and that makes the appearance. The AR was made for one thing and one thing only. And it was, and still is, the best at it. It was made for a firefight to kill or wound as many combatants as possible in the shortest amount of time under the highest degree of pressure on the shooter. It's perfect in it's design, performance and function. Change any of those 3 and you lessen it's capability. You keep saying that people are saying"Black Gun Bad" but in reality, it's it's use and capability that people really fear. To get those capabilities, it MUST look the way it does.

Pure nonsense. What makes the AR good at what it does is mostly internal components. The plastic stocks, carry handle, and weirdly tall front sight do little to make them accurate and rapid shooters. Earlier I mentioned owning a Mini-14. It was not accurate at much distance. But for the purposes of this discussion, it was capable of doing what these mass shooters do with the AR. I have read, and been told, the new Rugers are far more accurate.

Then you haven't handled both in a combat situation. Handling a M-14 versus a M-16 and you will see the difference in a matter of about an hour of carrying the M-14 around and having to change out the mags to reload. I don't expect you Rexall Rangers to understand because you are fruitcakes on a mission. And I don't expect the youngsters that have never lugged, much less fired a M-14 around for any length of time to understand either.

You have read, you have been told. That's the extent of your experience. I've been told the world is flat and ended last Thursday, should I believe that as well?

View attachment 250770

I have handled an M14. I own an M1A (the civilian version). But that has little to do with what I said.

A Mini-14 is not an M14. Nor is an M14 the only other semi-auto out there. It is one of the heaviest, most unwieldy rifles ever issued.

But that does not change what I said. The Mini-14 is neither as heavy or as long. The AK-47 is not as heavy, and is less likely to jam. The shorter versions of the FN-FAL are not as unwieldy or as heavy.

The main point is, the appearance is not what makes a rifle what it is.

View attachment 250869

Isn't that cute? But not really much in the way of saying anything.

If you want to believe that the ARs function the way they do based on appearance, that is up to you. It is wrong. But still, up to you.

And if your only argument is silly/cutesy graphics, saying nothing at all, I have no need to have you cluttering up my view of the pages.

 

[skookerasbil]

The OP is a walking billboard for SNOWFLAKES who tend to the hysterical on everything in life....though I must say, this is the first snowflake I've seen who gets hysterical over "tactical gear". Dang......

 

[Crixus]

The last three whack jobs that went on a shooting spree used semi automatic rifles. The last two wore tactical gear.

Background checks?

If all these nutsos want them then I suggest that the idea some one wants them is a sign they are mentally off.

The more they assault type rifles want, the more whacked they are. Probably at least at by the square of that number.

Have two, 4 times as as crazy. Have 4, 16 times as crazy.

Next, add another factor of ten for every piece of "tactical gear" they own.

Really, you are way off the deep end if you have to dress up in this tactical gear.

Real sane gun owners wouldn't own an assault type rifle. Not good for hunting, not good for self defense. They would be safe.

Just those crazy fucks running around in tactical gear toting their AR-15, round them up & send them to the psycho ward.

The last three whack jobs that went on a shooting spree used semi automatic rifles. The last two wore tactical gear.

Background checks?

If all these nutsos want them then I suggest that the idea some one wants them is a sign they are mentally off.

The more they assault type rifles want, the more whacked they are. Probably at least at by the square of that number.

Have two, 4 times as as crazy. Have 4, 16 times as crazy.

Next, add another factor of ten for every piece of "tactical gear" they own.

Really, you are way off the deep end if you have to dress up in this tactical gear.

Real sane gun owners wouldn't own an assault type rifle. Not good for hunting, not good for self defense. They would be safe.

Just those crazy fucks running around in tactical gear toting their AR-15, round them up & send them to the psycho ward.

I thought you said they were semi-automatics. If that is the case, they are not an assault rifle. I think like most gun grabbers, you are hopelessly confused.

They sure killed a lot of people fast.

So do rental trucks

Yes you want as many options available. Seems guns are used a whole lot more.

Cars are getting popular fast though.

 

[Crixus]

The last three whack jobs that went on a shooting spree used semi automatic rifles. The last two wore tactical gear.

Background checks?

If all these nutsos want them then I suggest that the idea some one wants them is a sign they are mentally off.

The more they assault type rifles want, the more whacked they are. Probably at least at by the square of that number.

Have two, 4 times as as crazy. Have 4, 16 times as crazy.

Next, add another factor of ten for every piece of "tactical gear" they own.

Really, you are way off the deep end if you have to dress up in this tactical gear.

Real sane gun owners wouldn't own an assault type rifle. Not good for hunting, not good for self defense. They would be safe.

Just those crazy fucks running around in tactical gear toting their AR-15, round them up & send them to the psycho ward.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The functions make the features and that makes the appearance. The AR was made for one thing and one thing only. And it was, and still is, the best at it. It was made for a firefight to kill or wound as many combatants as possible in the shortest amount of time under the highest degree of pressure on the shooter. It's perfect in it's design, performance and function. Change any of those 3 and you lessen it's capability. You keep saying that people are saying"Black Gun Bad" but in reality, it's it's use and capability that people really fear. To get those capabilities, it MUST look the way it does.

Pure nonsense. What makes the AR good at what it does is mostly internal components. The plastic stocks, carry handle, and weirdly tall front sight do little to make them accurate and rapid shooters. Earlier I mentioned owning a Mini-14. It was not accurate at much distance. But for the purposes of this discussion, it was capable of doing what these mass shooters do with the AR. I have read, and been told, the new Rugers are far more accurate.

Then you haven't handled both in a combat situation. Handling a M-14 versus a M-16 and you will see the difference in a matter of about an hour of carrying the M-14 around and having to change out the mags to reload. I don't expect you Rexall Rangers to understand because you are fruitcakes on a mission. And I don't expect the youngsters that have never lugged, much less fired a M-14 around for any length of time to understand either.

You have read, you have been told. That's the extent of your experience. I've been told the world is flat and ended last Thursday, should I believe that as well?

View attachment 250770

I have handled an M14. I own an M1A (the civilian version). But that has little to do with what I said.

A Mini-14 is not an M14. Nor is an M14 the only other semi-auto out there. It is one of the heaviest, most unwieldy rifles ever issued.

But that does not change what I said. The Mini-14 is neither as heavy or as long. The AK-47 is not as heavy, and is less likely to jam. The shorter versions of the FN-FAL are not as unwieldy or as heavy.

The main point is, the appearance is not what makes a rifle what it is.

View attachment 250869

Isn't that cute? But not really much in the way of saying anything.

If you want to believe that the ARs function the way they do based on appearance, that is up to you. It is wrong. But still, up to you.

And if your only argument is silly/cutesy graphics, saying nothing at all, I have no need to have you cluttering up my view of the pages.

It's features and functions dictate it's appearance. If you have no need in my cluttering up your view page, stop with your nonsense.

Oh, and.

 

[WinterBorn]

Pure nonsense. What makes the AR good at what it does is mostly internal components. The plastic stocks, carry handle, and weirdly tall front sight do little to make them accurate and rapid shooters. Earlier I mentioned owning a Mini-14. It was not accurate at much distance. But for the purposes of this discussion, it was capable of doing what these mass shooters do with the AR. I have read, and been told, the new Rugers are far more accurate.

Then you haven't handled both in a combat situation. Handling a M-14 versus a M-16 and you will see the difference in a matter of about an hour of carrying the M-14 around and having to change out the mags to reload. I don't expect you Rexall Rangers to understand because you are fruitcakes on a mission. And I don't expect the youngsters that have never lugged, much less fired a M-14 around for any length of time to understand either.

You have read, you have been told. That's the extent of your experience. I've been told the world is flat and ended last Thursday, should I believe that as well?

View attachment 250770

I have handled an M14. I own an M1A (the civilian version). But that has little to do with what I said.

A Mini-14 is not an M14. Nor is an M14 the only other semi-auto out there. It is one of the heaviest, most unwieldy rifles ever issued.

But that does not change what I said. The Mini-14 is neither as heavy or as long. The AK-47 is not as heavy, and is less likely to jam. The shorter versions of the FN-FAL are not as unwieldy or as heavy.

The main point is, the appearance is not what makes a rifle what it is.

View attachment 250869

Isn't that cute? But not really much in the way of saying anything.

If you want to believe that the ARs function the way they do based on appearance, that is up to you. It is wrong. But still, up to you.

And if your only argument is silly/cutesy graphics, saying nothing at all, I have no need to have you cluttering up my view of the pages.

It's features and functions dictate it's appearance. If you have no need in my cluttering up your view page, stop with your nonsense.

Oh, and.

View attachment 250921

Most of the desirable functions of the AR are internal.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Then you haven't handled both in a combat situation. Handling a M-14 versus a M-16 and you will see the difference in a matter of about an hour of carrying the M-14 around and having to change out the mags to reload. I don't expect you Rexall Rangers to understand because you are fruitcakes on a mission. And I don't expect the youngsters that have never lugged, much less fired a M-14 around for any length of time to understand either.

You have read, you have been told. That's the extent of your experience. I've been told the world is flat and ended last Thursday, should I believe that as well?

View attachment 250770

I have handled an M14. I own an M1A (the civilian version). But that has little to do with what I said.

A Mini-14 is not an M14. Nor is an M14 the only other semi-auto out there. It is one of the heaviest, most unwieldy rifles ever issued.

But that does not change what I said. The Mini-14 is neither as heavy or as long. The AK-47 is not as heavy, and is less likely to jam. The shorter versions of the FN-FAL are not as unwieldy or as heavy.

The main point is, the appearance is not what makes a rifle what it is.

View attachment 250869

Isn't that cute? But not really much in the way of saying anything.

If you want to believe that the ARs function the way they do based on appearance, that is up to you. It is wrong. But still, up to you.

And if your only argument is silly/cutesy graphics, saying nothing at all, I have no need to have you cluttering up my view of the pages.

It's features and functions dictate it's appearance. If you have no need in my cluttering up your view page, stop with your nonsense.

Oh, and.

View attachment 250921

Most of the desirable functions of the AR are internal.

 

[Rustic]

I have handled an M14. I own an M1A (the civilian version). But that has little to do with what I said.

A Mini-14 is not an M14. Nor is an M14 the only other semi-auto out there. It is one of the heaviest, most unwieldy rifles ever issued.

But that does not change what I said. The Mini-14 is neither as heavy or as long. The AK-47 is not as heavy, and is less likely to jam. The shorter versions of the FN-FAL are not as unwieldy or as heavy.

The main point is, the appearance is not what makes a rifle what it is.

View attachment 250869

Isn't that cute? But not really much in the way of saying anything.

If you want to believe that the ARs function the way they do based on appearance, that is up to you. It is wrong. But still, up to you.

And if your only argument is silly/cutesy graphics, saying nothing at all, I have no need to have you cluttering up my view of the pages.

It's features and functions dictate it's appearance. If you have no need in my cluttering up your view page, stop with your nonsense.

Oh, and.

View attachment 250921

Most of the desirable functions of the AR are internal.

View attachment 250926

 

[Godboy]

Trump should have stopped all of those killings - he promised he would stop terrorism during his campaign - in fact, almost daily.

WTF happened

You think a president can stop mass shootings? What on earth gave you this retarded idea? Furthermore, what on earth possessed you to actually embarrass yourself by posting it?

 

[2aguy]

Moron, the Vegas shooter was firing into an unknowing, tightly packed crowd of 22,000 people from a concealed and fortified position...he didn't need 30 round magazines to do what he did....

The Virginia tech shooter, who killed 32 people with 2 pistols did so without 30 round magazines.....

The Mosque shooter used 10 round magazines.....you moron.....

Once again, we get to revisit VT at your request. This was before Schools were being prepared for this type of thing. There was NO security, locked doors, nothing. The shooter moved from building to building killing at will and no alarms were set off until very late in his little adventure. This was the first. Hell, if he had been a decent shooter and had an AR with 6 30 shot mags, the death toll could have been 10 times the number. By the mass shooters that came later, he was an ill equipped piker. Try that today. You might get one or two before they bring you down. Mass Shooters have to be much better prepared and armed these days. Nevada Shooter was the best prepared and armed of them all and holds the highest body count. Nevada was a Red State at the time, it turned purple in 2018 and will probably turn blue in 2020. Guess what happens then? All the tools the NV shooter used gets either banned or severely regulated in Nevada. Your VT shooter was a piker.

Moron.......anyone in a gun free zone would get the same count if they were organized and picked the right target.....

And had the right tools. He would have 90 seconds. Not a second more. Handguns won't cut it anymore. You need high capacity, quick change mags with a gun that has a low jam rate. One that is designed for that type of shooting. To be specific, you need an AR with a whole bunch of 30 round mags. Anything less and you would be drummed right out of the Best Dressed Mass Shooters Union.

You are too stupid for words. Virginia Tech happened in 2007......and any number of places are easy pickings for a shooter because they are gun free zones, where people are unarmed in the face of an attacker....

The AR-15 is a lousy weapon.....it isn't even a full size battle rifle, you mope.

So, the solution is to pass guns out at the door. Or put all children everywhere at risk because you can't live without tever guin ever made.

No, the first solution is to deal with society and the increase in Fatherless boys. Next, you deal with the revolving door policy that democrat judges, politicians and prosecutors have for repeat, known, violent gun offenders......why do they keep releasing these shooters? Then, you end gun free zones, allowing normal, law abiding people to carry their legal guns with them ..... this will keep mass public shooters away, and we know this because actual mass public shooters say so.

 

[RealDave]

Once again, we get to revisit VT at your request. This was before Schools were being prepared for this type of thing. There was NO security, locked doors, nothing. The shooter moved from building to building killing at will and no alarms were set off until very late in his little adventure. This was the first. Hell, if he had been a decent shooter and had an AR with 6 30 shot mags, the death toll could have been 10 times the number. By the mass shooters that came later, he was an ill equipped piker. Try that today. You might get one or two before they bring you down. Mass Shooters have to be much better prepared and armed these days. Nevada Shooter was the best prepared and armed of them all and holds the highest body count. Nevada was a Red State at the time, it turned purple in 2018 and will probably turn blue in 2020. Guess what happens then? All the tools the NV shooter used gets either banned or severely regulated in Nevada. Your VT shooter was a piker.

Moron.......anyone in a gun free zone would get the same count if they were organized and picked the right target.....

And had the right tools. He would have 90 seconds. Not a second more. Handguns won't cut it anymore. You need high capacity, quick change mags with a gun that has a low jam rate. One that is designed for that type of shooting. To be specific, you need an AR with a whole bunch of 30 round mags. Anything less and you would be drummed right out of the Best Dressed Mass Shooters Union.

You are too stupid for words. Virginia Tech happened in 2007......and any number of places are easy pickings for a shooter because they are gun free zones, where people are unarmed in the face of an attacker....

The AR-15 is a lousy weapon.....it isn't even a full size battle rifle, you mope.

So, the solution is to pass guns out at the door. Or put all children everywhere at risk because you can't live without tever guin ever made.

No, the first solution is to deal with society and the increase in Fatherless boys. Next, you deal with the revolving door policy that democrat judges, politicians and prosecutors have for repeat, known, violent gun offenders......why do they keep releasing these shooters? Then, you end gun free zones, allowing normal, law abiding people to carry their legal guns with them ..... this will keep mass public shooters away, and we know this because actual mass public shooters say so.

So, we have this problem & you want to give then access to Assault type weapons?

Then you want to give shooters the OK to freely walk into schools armed to kill. Nothing can be done until the shooting starts.

 

[RealDave]

Trump should have stopped all of those killings - he promised he would stop terrorism during his campaign - in fact, almost daily.

WTF happened

You think a president can stop mass shootings? What on earth gave you this retarded idea? Furthermore, what on earth possessed you to actually embarrass yourself by posting it?

They can be reduced. Spewing hate & bigotry does not help.

 

[2aguy]

Moron.......anyone in a gun free zone would get the same count if they were organized and picked the right target.....

And had the right tools. He would have 90 seconds. Not a second more. Handguns won't cut it anymore. You need high capacity, quick change mags with a gun that has a low jam rate. One that is designed for that type of shooting. To be specific, you need an AR with a whole bunch of 30 round mags. Anything less and you would be drummed right out of the Best Dressed Mass Shooters Union.

You are too stupid for words. Virginia Tech happened in 2007......and any number of places are easy pickings for a shooter because they are gun free zones, where people are unarmed in the face of an attacker....

The AR-15 is a lousy weapon.....it isn't even a full size battle rifle, you mope.

So, the solution is to pass guns out at the door. Or put all children everywhere at risk because you can't live without tever guin ever made.

No, the first solution is to deal with society and the increase in Fatherless boys. Next, you deal with the revolving door policy that democrat judges, politicians and prosecutors have for repeat, known, violent gun offenders......why do they keep releasing these shooters? Then, you end gun free zones, allowing normal, law abiding people to carry their legal guns with them ..... this will keep mass public shooters away, and we know this because actual mass public shooters say so.

So, we have this problem & you want to give then access to Assault type weapons?

Then you want to give shooters the OK to freely walk into schools armed to kill. Nothing can be done until the shooting starts.

Wow, the dumb in your post is strong....

The AR-15 is not an assault type weapon.....it is a normal semi-automatic rifle just like all other semi-automatic firearms, no difference.

The shooters are not currently stopped by the Gun Free Zone sign on the door right now....or haven't you noticed? The only people who can't bring guns into a gun free zone are the normal, good people who own and carry guns to stop mass shooters and other criminals.

Are you this dumb in real life, or only when you post?

 

[2aguy]

Moron.......anyone in a gun free zone would get the same count if they were organized and picked the right target.....

And had the right tools. He would have 90 seconds. Not a second more. Handguns won't cut it anymore. You need high capacity, quick change mags with a gun that has a low jam rate. One that is designed for that type of shooting. To be specific, you need an AR with a whole bunch of 30 round mags. Anything less and you would be drummed right out of the Best Dressed Mass Shooters Union.

You are too stupid for words. Virginia Tech happened in 2007......and any number of places are easy pickings for a shooter because they are gun free zones, where people are unarmed in the face of an attacker....

The AR-15 is a lousy weapon.....it isn't even a full size battle rifle, you mope.

So, the solution is to pass guns out at the door. Or put all children everywhere at risk because you can't live without tever guin ever made.

No, the first solution is to deal with society and the increase in Fatherless boys. Next, you deal with the revolving door policy that democrat judges, politicians and prosecutors have for repeat, known, violent gun offenders......why do they keep releasing these shooters? Then, you end gun free zones, allowing normal, law abiding people to carry their legal guns with them ..... this will keep mass public shooters away, and we know this because actual mass public shooters say so.

So, we have this problem & you want to give then access to Assault type weapons?

Then you want to give shooters the OK to freely walk into schools armed to kill. Nothing can be done until the shooting starts.

What problem? We had 117 people killed, total, in mass public shootings in 2017...... 38,000 were killed in cars....which problem are you more concerned about?

 

[RealDave]

And had the right tools. He would have 90 seconds. Not a second more. Handguns won't cut it anymore. You need high capacity, quick change mags with a gun that has a low jam rate. One that is designed for that type of shooting. To be specific, you need an AR with a whole bunch of 30 round mags. Anything less and you would be drummed right out of the Best Dressed Mass Shooters Union.

You are too stupid for words. Virginia Tech happened in 2007......and any number of places are easy pickings for a shooter because they are gun free zones, where people are unarmed in the face of an attacker....

The AR-15 is a lousy weapon.....it isn't even a full size battle rifle, you mope.

So, the solution is to pass guns out at the door. Or put all children everywhere at risk because you can't live without tever guin ever made.

No, the first solution is to deal with society and the increase in Fatherless boys. Next, you deal with the revolving door policy that democrat judges, politicians and prosecutors have for repeat, known, violent gun offenders......why do they keep releasing these shooters? Then, you end gun free zones, allowing normal, law abiding people to carry their legal guns with them ..... this will keep mass public shooters away, and we know this because actual mass public shooters say so.

So, we have this problem & you want to give then access to Assault type weapons?

Then you want to give shooters the OK to freely walk into schools armed to kill. Nothing can be done until the shooting starts.

What problem? We had 117 people killed, total, in mass public shootings in 2017...... 38,000 were killed in cars....which problem are you more concerned about?

Cars serve a needed urpose. Assault type rifles don't.

 

[RealDave]

And had the right tools. He would have 90 seconds. Not a second more. Handguns won't cut it anymore. You need high capacity, quick change mags with a gun that has a low jam rate. One that is designed for that type of shooting. To be specific, you need an AR with a whole bunch of 30 round mags. Anything less and you would be drummed right out of the Best Dressed Mass Shooters Union.

You are too stupid for words. Virginia Tech happened in 2007......and any number of places are easy pickings for a shooter because they are gun free zones, where people are unarmed in the face of an attacker....

The AR-15 is a lousy weapon.....it isn't even a full size battle rifle, you mope.

So, the solution is to pass guns out at the door. Or put all children everywhere at risk because you can't live without tever guin ever made.

No, the first solution is to deal with society and the increase in Fatherless boys. Next, you deal with the revolving door policy that democrat judges, politicians and prosecutors have for repeat, known, violent gun offenders......why do they keep releasing these shooters? Then, you end gun free zones, allowing normal, law abiding people to carry their legal guns with them ..... this will keep mass public shooters away, and we know this because actual mass public shooters say so.

So, we have this problem & you want to give then access to Assault type weapons?

Then you want to give shooters the OK to freely walk into schools armed to kill. Nothing can be done until the shooting starts.

Wow, the dumb in your post is strong....

The AR-15 is not an assault type weapon.....it is a normal semi-automatic rifle just like all other semi-automatic firearms, no difference.

The shooters are not currently stopped by the Gun Free Zone sign on the door right now....or haven't you noticed? The only people who can't bring guns into a gun free zone are the normal, good people who own and carry guns to stop mass shooters and other criminals.

Are you this dumb in real life, or only when you post?

Fuck off with your " OMG OMG OMG its not an assault rifle" bullshit.

You people can't be this fucking stupid.

So, say a policeman sees someone carrying a gun who walks into a school. According to you, he can tell a "good guy" from a "bad guy" by just looking at him.