A Reasonable measure to cut the number killed in mass shootings that wouldn't take guns away from anyone.

[Dayton3]

Dayton3Well-Known Member​

Joined:May 3, 2009Messages:22,091Likes Received:5,740Trophy Points:113Gender:Male

I read an opinion piece in this Sundays paper. It said that the muzzle velocity of a bullet from an AR-15 was three times that from a 9mm handgun.

https://smhs.gwu.edu/icu/sites/icu/files/Ballistics.pdf

The extent of injuries is largely directly a result of muzzle velocity. It suggested ammunition manufacturers be required to restrict the propellant loads of AR-15 ammunition so that their velocity is no more than that of a 9mm round. This would result in less severe injuries and fewer deaths from shootings involving AR-15s and make it less likely that AR-15 rounds could penetrate police body armor.

This would certainly save lives while not taking guns away from anyone.

It seems like a reasonable step to me

 

[Seymour Flops]

What you linked to was not an opinion piece. It looks like it may have come from a criminal justice textbook, or something like that. I didn't read every word, but I am pretty sure that article did not recommend the low-propellant rounds.

Does that article you posted recommend these low-power AR15 bullets that you speak of, or is that in the op-ed that you did not link?

The AR 15 is a gas-operated rifle, which means the expanding gases from the fired round are partially diverted to push the bolt back to eject the spent shell and chamber then next round. This vid explains it better than I can:



Reducing the propellant would prevent the gases from pushing the bolt far enough back, resulting in a jam, or else making the AR a single-shot rifle.

I think the writer of that Op Ed should have consulted a person who knows something about firearms. The same round has greater velocity if fired from a pistol caliber carbine (relatively short rifle) than if fired from a pistol. So the AR 15 round would have to have significantly less propellant than a 9mm round to get the same velocity.

 

[mudwhistle]

 

[2aguy]

Dayton3Well-Known Member​

Joined:May 3, 2009Messages:22,091Likes Received:5,740Trophy Points:113Gender:Male

Moron……the killer was locked in a classroom that was likely 40 X40 feet or less….the gun did not matter when he had complete control over defenseless children…the rifle had absolutely no advantage over a pistol or shotgun.

Had the door simply been locked…since it was already supposed to be locked…those kids likely would have been alive.

 

[Batcat]

What you linked to was not an opinion piece. It looks like it may have come from a criminal justice textbook, or something like that. I didn't read every word, but I am pretty sure that article did not recommend the low-propellant rounds.

Does that article you posted recommend these low-power AR15 bullets that you speak of, or is that in the op-ed that you did not link?

The AR 15 is a gas-operated rifle, which means the expanding gases from the fired round are partially diverted to push the bolt back to eject the spent shell and chamber then next round. This vid explains it better than I can:



Reducing the propellant would prevent the gases from pushing the bolt far enough back, resulting in a jam, or else making the AR a single-shot rifle.

I think the writer of that Op Ed should have consulted a person who knows something about firearms. The same round has greater velocity if fired from a pistol caliber carbine (relatively short rifle) than if fired from a pistol. So the AR 15 round would have to have significantly less propellant than a 9mm round to get the same velocity.

If I want a single shot rifle I can buy one. If I had an AR-15 and the only ammo I could buy would be so underpowered it would cause the weapon to malfunction, I would hand load my own ammo.

 

[Seymour Flops]

If I want a single shot rifle I can buy one. If I had an AR-15 and the only ammo I could buy would be so underpowered it would cause the weapon to malfunction, I would hand load my own ammo.

Of course. For every firearm or ammunition restriction that liberals pass based on their own ignorance of firearms and ammunition, there is an unintended corollary which is that Americans will improvise, adapt and overcome that restriction.

 

[Dekster]

Moron……the killer was locked in a classroom that was likely 40 X40 feet or less….the gun did not matter when he had complete control over defenseless children…the rifle had absolutely no advantage over a pistol or shotgun.

Had the door simply been locked…since it was already supposed to be locked…those kids likely would have been alive.

TBH probably not. If you google an image of the school, you will see that the entrance is two sets of glass double doors with a glass panel along the sides and a simple traditional push bar on each of the 4 doors. It wouldn't have taken a homicidal person much effort or delay in penetrating into the school either way. It is true of many schools, especially the ones in my area. Fire codes have doors that will always open from the inside and school doors usually have a lot of glass in them so that you can see if someone is on the other side when opening.

 

[Seymour Flops]

TBH probably not. If you google an image of the school, you will see that the entrance is two sets of glass double doors with a glass panel along the sides and a simple traditional push bar on each of the 4 doors. It wouldn't have taken a homicidal person much effort or delay in penetrating into the school either way. It is true of many schools, especially the ones in my area. Fire codes have doors that will always open from the inside and school doors usually have a lot of glass in them so that you can see if someone is on the other side when opening.

Yes, he already shot at the building while he was outside. If the door had been locked, he would have shot out a glass panel and reached into pull the door open.

 

[2aguy]

Yes, he already shot at the building while he was outside. If the door had been locked, he would have shot out a glass panel and reached into pull the door open.

Not the classroom doors….the teachers in those two classrooms didn’t lock there doors on the lockdown order…

 

[Seymour Flops]

Not the classroom doors….the teachers in those two classrooms didn’t lock there doors on the lockdown order…

Oh, I see what you mean.

Yes, if the classroom doors are locked, the shooter would have likely looked for a way to find some kids, and that extra few minutes would have given police time to get in and kill or capture him. Unless they were standing around with their thumbs up their butts, in which case the extra time might not have mattered.

 

[2aguy]

Oh, I see what you mean.

Yes, if the classroom doors are locked, the shooter would have likely looked for a way to find some kids, and that extra few minutes would have given police time to get in and kill or capture him. Unless they were standing around with their thumbs up their butts, in which case the extra time might not have mattered.

Yep, the classroom doors would have been harder to get through, even with the rifle.......had he been in the hallway he wouldn't have been killing children trapped in a classroom with him...

 

[Batcat]

Of course. For every firearm or ammunition restriction that liberals pass based on their own ignorance of firearms and ammunition, there is an unintended corollary which is that Americans will improvise, adapt and overcome that restriction.

Reloading ammo is easy and can save a lot of money. When i was target shooting handguns I used to reload about 6000 rounds a year.

 

[there4eyeM]

Another thing that could be done to protect firearms fanatics would be to limit how many people could gather together in one place. A limit of three would be best. That way, mass shootings would be rare, and fewer bullets necessary.

 

[Dekster]

Yes, he already shot at the building while he was outside. If the door had been locked, he would have shot out a glass panel and reached into pull the door open.

It is part of the tension in how do we better fortify schools when they are session--fire/building codes vs. active shooters.

 

[2aguy]

Another thing that could be done to protect firearms fanatics would be to limit how many people could gather together in one place. A limit of three would be best. That way, mass shootings would be rare, and fewer bullets necessary.

Yep....make any public gathering, in stores, malls, theaters, churches, over 2 people a felony, and punishable by 20 years in prison......unless it is a blm/antifa rally......they should be allowed to burn, loot and kill in whatever numbers they want...

 

[Seymour Flops]

It is part of the tension in how do we better fortify schools when they are session--fire/building codes vs. active shooters.

I hear you. Preventing children from being killed in school fires is one of the few things that government has been highly successful at, and I don't want to mess that up. That's why I favor a barrier around the school instead of waiting until the intruder is at the door, and blocking him in ways that might lead to trapped children in a fire.

I think some people have a hard time accepting that a patrolled fence is the best way to keep kids safe, because that are caught up in the whole, "barriers don't work, fences are racist, build bridges, not walls" vibe. Sorry, but when an armed maniac approaches a school, he needs to be stopped with a wall, not welcomed with a bridge.

 

[Canon Shooter]

Dayton3Well-Known Member​

Joined:May 3, 2009Messages:22,091Likes Received:5,740Trophy Points:113Gender:Male

Many people I know do their own reloading..

 

[there4eyeM]

"Good guys with guns" should patrol around schools. They could pretend to be a militia or something.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Joined:May 3, 2009Messages:22,091Likes Received:5,740Trophy Points:113Gender:Male

What is "AR15 ammunition"?

 

[Rigby5]

Dayton3Well-Known Member​

Joined:May 3, 2009Messages:22,091Likes Received:5,740Trophy Points:113Gender:Male

Sorry, but that is really, really naive.
First of all, an AR is built for the bullets that exist, so will not function on weaker bullets.
Second is that the AR is already about the weakest rifle made, and is so weak that it can not legally be used for hunting deer in many states.
Making it even weaker would render it useless completely.
Third is that lots of people reload their own bullets to save money, so these weak would be pointless.