Another mass shooting. Another assault rifle

[RealDave]

Mass shooting in hospital where the shooter used an assault type rifle.

But hey, if only doctors were armed.

You can remove guns but they will find another means of killing people. If a person wants to kill they will find a way. This man could have used a baseball bat,knife, bomb,chemical agent,vehicle. Timothy McVeigh and the first bombing of the WTC in 1993 were both trucks with bombs. The 2001 WTC were planes loaded with jet fuel, no gun necessary.

Timothy McVeigh - Wikipedia
1993 World Trade Center bombing - Wikipedia

The difference is in killing power.

Trucks & planes of other uses that killing.

This guy killed 1 person injured 5....with this rifle.

Nice, France, the guy used a truck and killed 89 people and injured 400......

The killing power of a truck is higher than that of any rifle used by an individual....

Guns save more lives than they take in this country. According to bill clinton and barak obama, guns are used 1,500,000 times a year to save lives and to stop violent criminal attack......and the majority of the time they aren't even fired.....

When was the ;last time you used your gun to delivery goods? Trucks have another purpose., Guns do not.

Take away law enforcement & guns like;y kill more than they save.

I have no problem with trained law enforcement being armed. Its the idiot that has little training toting around this loaded weapon just waiting for an accident or a child's hand.

Placing a gun in your ho,me increases the chances of death or injury. Not lessens it as you claim.

 

[2aguy]

Mass shooting in hospital where the shooter used an assault type rifle.

But hey, if only doctors were armed.

He could have done the same attack with a lever action rifle or a revolver.....probably even a bolt action rifle considering it was a gun free zone...

Blah Blah Blah.

Even an asshole like you knows that assault type weapons have more killing power than a bolt action rift.

No...moron, they don't.....not in a mass public shooting where everyone around the shooter is unarmed.......you can commit the same number of killings with a bolt action rifle as this guy did with his 10 round magazines.....1 dead, 5 injured...

Nice, France, the truck was used to murder 89 people and injure 400......

And the hospital shooter could have used a pump action shotgun, a lever action rifle, a bolt action rifle or revolvers to do the same thing...

 

[bodecea]

Mass shooting in hospital where the shooter used an assault type rifle.

But hey, if only doctors were armed.

The rifle used was an AR-15, which is semi-automatic. The primary performance characteristic of an assault rifle is full-automatic function.

Unfortunately the vast majority of anti-gun commentators know absolutely nothing about guns, they are afraid of guns, and they are not inclined to defend themselves under any circumstances -- which accounts for their ignorance.

What today's shooter did with his AR-15 could have been done just as well, if not even better, with some of the most ordinary hunting rifles available. In fact there are a number of ordinary hunting rifles and shotguns with which he could have done a lot more damage.

For your information, the AR-15 is mainly a fetish firearm, adored because of its cosmetic resemblance to the military standard M-16. It is over-priced and over-rated. And it is not an "assault" rifle or an "assault-type" rifle. In fact there is no such thing as an "assault-type" rifle. That is a jerk-off designation.

The reason they are using the AR-15 is because of the media...they are glamorizing the AR-15 over other weapons...and it is becoming the favorite gun of mass shooters, not because it is effective, but because the media have hyped it......

Media's fault...of course.

 

[Iceweasel]

Mass shooting in hospital where the shooter used an assault type rifle.

But hey, if only doctors were armed.

Another thread exists...

But you are right..if another Doctor or nurse had been armed he could have been stopped...like at this hospital...

Penn. psychiatric center shooting intended mass killing: DA

The Pennsylvania patient accused of killing his caseworker in a psychiatric center shooting carried dozens of bullets — and he would have likely continued shooting if a doctor didn’t fire back, officials said.

Richard Plotts, 49, is expected to be charged with murder for allegedly opening fire at Sister Marie Lenahan Wellness Center in Darby Thursday.

After he killed his caseworker, 53-year-old Theresa Hunt, and shot his psychiatrist, Lee Silverman, the wounded doctor fired back, stopping the attack, District Attorney Jack Whelan said in a Friday press conference.

Plotts had 39 more bullets on him. He intended a mass shooting, Whelan said.

Oh yeah, let us all carry guns everywhere. Church, school, grocery store, everywhere. That is the society you desire. What an asshole you are. There never was a society like that in these United States. In the old western towns, when the cowboys came in, they had to check in their guns. Not good for business to have paying customers killing each other. And the town fathers paid people like Earp and Masterson to lay a gun barrel across the head of those that tried to keep their guns.

Your gun fetish is far more repulsive than the most perverse sexual fetish. People like you are the reason the US has gun mortality rates like a third world nation.

It's been pointed out to you leftist loons that most murders exist in very gun strict regions. How does that fit in with your old west meme? Your anti-gun fetish is what's perverted. But entirely irrelevant since you are out numbered (and out armed).

 

[2aguy]

Another mass shooting -- Another mentally-ill person who should've been institutionalized by his family like we used to do before ACLU types raised hell.

There is no such thing as an "assault rifle". The military uses "assault weapons" in military assaults. Many modern commercial firearms have cosmetic features which mimic the styling of such weapons. There are also toys that are made to copy this style. This styling feature doesn't cause the weapon to be more deadly. If it did, I would've murdered most of my neighborhood as a kid, along with G.I. Joe! Cosmetic styling is totally harmless.

Some features copied from military styling do have functional value but it has nothing to do with the capability of the weapon. For instance, carbon fiber stocks make the weapon lighter and easier to carry on long hunts. Noise suppressors save hearing. Magazine clips make reloading easier and more convenient.

But none of these styling features have anything to do with the mental health and stability of the individual who possesses them. And regardless of everything else, THAT is the problem!

So why do so many idiots continue to lobby against the weapons? Is it because you are emotionally upset? Is it because you've been misinformed? Or are you a Socialist who understands the importance in disarming people before you strip them of their freedom?

You dumb ass. If you can touch off 30 rounds in under ten seconds, it is an assault rifle. And is very good for cleaning out grade school classrooms, crowded theaters, mall, and hospitals. And who the fuck hunts with these rifles? In our state, you limited to five rounds when hunting big game. Also, those rifles are far less accurate than a standard hunting rifle. I was taught to make single shot kills, not blow the animal to pieces with a 30 round clip.

Moron......AR-15s are the most popular rifle in the country, there are close to 8 million rifles with magazines....that was before obama, and about 5 million of them were AR-15s...they are used to hunt small game, for competition and for self defense.....

And magazines limits do nothing to save lives......they are just the newest fixation by irrational gun haters like you....

 

[2aguy]

Mass shooting in hospital where the shooter used an assault type rifle.

But hey, if only doctors were armed.

He could have done the same attack with a lever action rifle or a revolver.....probably even a bolt action rifle considering it was a gun free zone...

Blah Blah Blah.

Even an asshole like you knows that assault type weapons have more killing power than a bolt action rift.

And they were designed for only one purpose, killing other people.

No...they were designed to keep the owner alive....and they do that most of the time without ever being fired....

Americans use guns 1,500,000 times a year to save lives and to stop violent criminal attack...and only have to kill the dumbest of criminals about 235 times a year....so no....guns save more lives than they take, more innocent lives saved than are taken by criminals using guns...

 

[2aguy]

Another mass shooting -- Another mentally-ill person who should've been institutionalized by his family like we used to do before ACLU types raised hell.

There is no such thing as an "assault rifle". The military uses "assault weapons" in military assaults. Many modern commercial firearms have cosmetic features which mimic the styling of such weapons. There are also toys that are made to copy this style. This styling feature doesn't cause the weapon to be more deadly. If it did, I would've murdered most of my neighborhood as a kid, along with G.I. Joe! Cosmetic styling is totally harmless.

Some features copied from military styling do have functional value but it has nothing to do with the capability of the weapon. For instance, carbon fiber stocks make the weapon lighter and easier to carry on long hunts. Noise suppressors save hearing. Magazine clips make reloading easier and more convenient.

But none of these styling features have anything to do with the mental health and stability of the individual who possesses them. And regardless of everything else, THAT is the problem!

So why do so many idiots continue to lobby against the weapons? Is it because you are emotionally upset? Is it because you've been misinformed? Or are you a Socialist who understands the importance in disarming people before you strip them of their freedom?

Republicans said crazy people can own & carry guns so what is the point?

And shove that stupid argument that there are no such thing as assault rifles. My God, there was a ban on assault rifles.

And if it is all cosmetics then you are saying you dickweeds own them because they look cool & you feel like tough guys when you carry them? Playing soldier? Really?

Ahhhh you can't carry that heavy gun that far.... you hunt with assault type rifles? You can't hit anything on your first shot?

No, actually, they said you can't take away a human Right without due process.....and they were joined by the ACLU who also said the exact same thing.....dumb ass.....

No...there was a ban on rifles the democrats didn't like......moron.....

People own them because they are easy to use by all types of people......they aren't heavy, they are easy to shoot, and they are great for self defense.....

 

[2aguy]

Mass shooting in hospital where the shooter used an assault type rifle.

But hey, if only doctors were armed.

You can remove guns but they will find another means of killing people. If a person wants to kill they will find a way. This man could have used a baseball bat,knife, bomb,chemical agent,vehicle. Timothy McVeigh and the first bombing of the WTC in 1993 were both trucks with bombs. The 2001 WTC were planes loaded with jet fuel, no gun necessary.

Timothy McVeigh - Wikipedia
1993 World Trade Center bombing - Wikipedia

The difference is in killing power.

Trucks & planes of other uses that killing.

This guy killed 1 person injured 5....with this rifle.

Nice, France, the guy used a truck and killed 89 people and injured 400......

The killing power of a truck is higher than that of any rifle used by an individual....

Guns save more lives than they take in this country. According to bill clinton and barak obama, guns are used 1,500,000 times a year to save lives and to stop violent criminal attack......and the majority of the time they aren't even fired.....

When was the ;last time you used your gun to delivery goods? Trucks have another purpose., Guns do not.

Take away law enforcement & guns like;y kill more than they save.

I have no problem with trained law enforcement being armed. Its the idiot that has little training toting around this loaded weapon just waiting for an accident or a child's hand.

Placing a gun in your ho,me increases the chances of death or injury. Not lessens it as you claim.

And you would be wrong.....

Guns are used 1,500,000 times to save lives and to stop violent criminal attack.....guns were used in the murder of 9,616 people, mostly criminals, in 2015......here is the breakdown of gun deaths....

Gun suicide..

Leading Causes of Death | WISQARS | Injury Center | CDC

2015
Gun suicide...

22,018

Non Gun suicide...

22,078
========================

Gun Accidental death.....
2015

489

==================

Gun murder ( 70-80% of the victims of gun murder are actual criminals, not law abiding people)

Expanded Homicide Data Table 8


2015--

9,616

=======================

Suicide
So you lie....you hide what the numbers actually are...and you lie about suicide as the highest number of gun deaths...even though Japan, Korea, China, all have absolute gun control for law abiding citizens...only criminals and cops can have guns.......and they have higher suicide rates than we do....and our non-gun suicide rate has been higher than our gun suicide rate for 2 years in a row.....

Gun Accidental Death...

Gun accidents....in a country with over 320,000,000 people...... with close to 600 million guns in private hands, and over 15,700,000 people carrying guns for self defense..... 489 accidental gun deaths....

Gun murder
Of the 9,616 gun murders in this country, 70-80% of the victims are criminals, engaged in criminal activity or part of the criminal life style....and of the remaining victims....many of them are friends and family of the criminal...caught up in the criminal's lifestyle.....

 

[2aguy]

Mass shooting in hospital where the shooter used an assault type rifle.

But hey, if only doctors were armed.

You can remove guns but they will find another means of killing people. If a person wants to kill they will find a way. This man could have used a baseball bat,knife, bomb,chemical agent,vehicle. Timothy McVeigh and the first bombing of the WTC in 1993 were both trucks with bombs. The 2001 WTC were planes loaded with jet fuel, no gun necessary.

Timothy McVeigh - Wikipedia
1993 World Trade Center bombing - Wikipedia

The difference is in killing power.

Trucks & planes of other uses that killing.

This guy killed 1 person injured 5....with this rifle.

Nice, France, the guy used a truck and killed 89 people and injured 400......

The killing power of a truck is higher than that of any rifle used by an individual....

Guns save more lives than they take in this country. According to bill clinton and barak obama, guns are used 1,500,000 times a year to save lives and to stop violent criminal attack......and the majority of the time they aren't even fired.....

When was the ;last time you used your gun to delivery goods? Trucks have another purpose., Guns do not.

Take away law enforcement & guns like;y kill more than they save.

I have no problem with trained law enforcement being armed. Its the idiot that has little training toting around this loaded weapon just waiting for an accident or a child's hand.

Placing a gun in your ho,me increases the chances of death or injury. Not lessens it as you claim.

Placing a gun in your ho,me increases the chances of death or injury.


Wrong....you still don't do your research...it is drugs, alcohol, and prior history of crime and violence that kills, not the gun......those factors lead to death in a home, not the gun...homes with guns and without drug abuse, alcohol abuse past criminal history and or history of violence do not have higher gun death rates....

 

[2aguy]

Mass shooting in hospital where the shooter used an assault type rifle.

But hey, if only doctors were armed.

Assault rifle: A fully automatic military rifle.
Doctor shot victims with: A semi-automatic rifle, not an assault rifle.
Of course, if you wish to describe the weapon as an assault rifle simply because he "assaulted" the victims with it, then you are obligated to identify all other devices used to harm people as, say: assault hammer, assault knife, assault screwdriver, assault shoe, assault rock and of course, the ever favorite....assault fist.
Example: "There was a fight at the local bar and one of the drunk assailants used his "assault fist" to cause bodily harm to the other drunk individual and the blow to the side of the victim's head caused enough trauma to cause his death."

But, the AR-15 LOOKS scary--AND it's BLACK That makes it "assault rifle."

No, you lying little cocksuck, it is an assault rifle because it fire 30 rounds in under 10 seconds, and be reloaded with another magazine in under 2 seconds. It was designed for only one purpose, killing human beings, and has a very good record of doing that in this nation.

No...moron...a military rifle has to have select fire capability...the AR-15 has never been a military rifle..it is the most popular civilian rifle....

And as a fact...knives kill more people every single year, over 1,500 people than AR-15s have killed in 35 years.....altogether.........about 167 people......in 35 years....

Knives are deadlier than these rifles...

 

[RealDave]

Mass shooting in hospital where the shooter used an assault type rifle.

But hey, if only doctors were armed.

You can remove guns but they will find another means of killing people. If a person wants to kill they will find a way. This man could have used a baseball bat,knife, bomb,chemical agent,vehicle. Timothy McVeigh and the first bombing of the WTC in 1993 were both trucks with bombs. The 2001 WTC were planes loaded with jet fuel, no gun necessary.

Timothy McVeigh - Wikipedia
1993 World Trade Center bombing - Wikipedia

The difference is in killing power.

Trucks & planes of other uses that killing.

This guy killed 1 person injured 5....with this rifle.

Nice, France, the guy used a truck and killed 89 people and injured 400......

The killing power of a truck is higher than that of any rifle used by an individual....

Guns save more lives than they take in this country. According to bill clinton and barak obama, guns are used 1,500,000 times a year to save lives and to stop violent criminal attack......and the majority of the time they aren't even fired.....

When was the ;last time you used your gun to delivery goods? Trucks have another purpose., Guns do not.

Take away law enforcement & guns like;y kill more than they save.

I have no problem with trained law enforcement being armed. Its the idiot that has little training toting around this loaded weapon just waiting for an accident or a child's hand.

Placing a gun in your ho,me increases the chances of death or injury. Not lessens it as you claim.

Placing a gun in your ho,me increases the chances of death or injury.


Wrong....you still don't do your research...it is drugs, alcohol, and prior history of crime and violence that kills, not the gun......those factors lead to death in a home, not the gun...homes with guns and without drug abuse, alcohol abuse past criminal history and or history of violence do not have higher gun death rates....

I'll believe the CDC over a gunaholic like you.

 

[2aguy]

Mass shooting in hospital where the shooter used an assault type rifle.

But hey, if only doctors were armed.

The rifle used was an AR-15, which is semi-automatic. The primary performance characteristic of an assault rifle is full-automatic function.

Unfortunately the vast majority of anti-gun commentators know absolutely nothing about guns, they are afraid of guns, and they are not inclined to defend themselves under any circumstances -- which accounts for their ignorance.

What today's shooter did with his AR-15 could have been done just as well, if not even better, with some of the most ordinary hunting rifles available. In fact there are a number of ordinary hunting rifles and shotguns with which he could have done a lot more damage.

For your information, the AR-15 is mainly a fetish firearm, adored because of its cosmetic resemblance to the military standard M-16. It is over-priced and over-rated. And it is not an "assault" rifle or an "assault-type" rifle. In fact there is no such thing as an "assault-type" rifle. That is a jerk-off designation.

Do you think that the people on the receiving end of these bullets give a shit?

Yeah...when they weren't allowed to have their own gun to save their own lives because morons like you forced them into gun free zones....

 

[RealDave]

Mass shooting in hospital where the shooter used an assault type rifle.

But hey, if only doctors were armed.

Assault rifle: A fully automatic military rifle.
Doctor shot victims with: A semi-automatic rifle, not an assault rifle.
Of course, if you wish to describe the weapon as an assault rifle simply because he "assaulted" the victims with it, then you are obligated to identify all other devices used to harm people as, say: assault hammer, assault knife, assault screwdriver, assault shoe, assault rock and of course, the ever favorite....assault fist.
Example: "There was a fight at the local bar and one of the drunk assailants used his "assault fist" to cause bodily harm to the other drunk individual and the blow to the side of the victim's head caused enough trauma to cause his death."

But, the AR-15 LOOKS scary--AND it's BLACK That makes it "assault rifle."

No, you lying little cocksuck, it is an assault rifle because it fire 30 rounds in under 10 seconds, and be reloaded with another magazine in under 2 seconds. It was designed for only one purpose, killing human beings, and has a very good record of doing that in this nation.

No...moron...a military rifle has to have select fire capability...the AR-15 has never been a military rifle..it is the most popular civilian rifle....

And as a fact...knives kill more people every single year, over 1,500 people than AR-15s have killed in 35 years.....altogether.........about 167 people......in 35 years....

Knives are deadlier than these rifles...

Knives have other uses. Do you cut your steak with your gun?

 

[2aguy]

Mass shooting in hospital where the shooter used an assault type rifle.

But hey, if only doctors were armed.

The rifle used was an AR-15, which is semi-automatic. The primary performance characteristic of an assault rifle is full-automatic function.

Unfortunately the vast majority of anti-gun commentators know absolutely nothing about guns, they are afraid of guns, and they are not inclined to defend themselves under any circumstances -- which accounts for their ignorance.

What today's shooter did with his AR-15 could have been done just as well, if not even better, with some of the most ordinary hunting rifles available. In fact there are a number of ordinary hunting rifles and shotguns with which he could have done a lot more damage.

For your information, the AR-15 is mainly a fetish firearm, adored because of its cosmetic resemblance to the military standard M-16. It is over-priced and over-rated. And it is not an "assault" rifle or an "assault-type" rifle. In fact there is no such thing as an "assault-type" rifle. That is a jerk-off designation.

Do you think that the people on the receiving end of these bullets give a shit?

I think that when the use of an assault type rifle kills 20 people instead of 5 that numbers 6 through 20 care.

They do when they are in a gun free zone that people like you created which left them unarmed in the face of a killer......with no way to stop him....

 

[2aguy]

The doctor is BLACK. Like Bill Clinton, he lost his job over sexual harassment.

I'm going to make a wild guess and bet he's a DEMOCRAT.

Why do THESE FOLKS always go on killing sprees?

It`s not a wild guess that the perp here was one of those red hatted morons.
Father of road rage victim expresses anger as manhunt continues

Funny how the last two mass shootings were democrats ...too close to the truth for you?

 

[2aguy]

You can remove guns but they will find another means of killing people. If a person wants to kill they will find a way. This man could have used a baseball bat,knife, bomb,chemical agent,vehicle. Timothy McVeigh and the first bombing of the WTC in 1993 were both trucks with bombs. The 2001 WTC were planes loaded with jet fuel, no gun necessary.

Timothy McVeigh - Wikipedia
1993 World Trade Center bombing - Wikipedia

The difference is in killing power.

Trucks & planes of other uses that killing.

This guy killed 1 person injured 5....with this rifle.

Nice, France, the guy used a truck and killed 89 people and injured 400......

The killing power of a truck is higher than that of any rifle used by an individual....

Guns save more lives than they take in this country. According to bill clinton and barak obama, guns are used 1,500,000 times a year to save lives and to stop violent criminal attack......and the majority of the time they aren't even fired.....

When was the ;last time you used your gun to delivery goods? Trucks have another purpose., Guns do not.

Take away law enforcement & guns like;y kill more than they save.

I have no problem with trained law enforcement being armed. Its the idiot that has little training toting around this loaded weapon just waiting for an accident or a child's hand.

Placing a gun in your ho,me increases the chances of death or injury. Not lessens it as you claim.

Placing a gun in your ho,me increases the chances of death or injury.


Wrong....you still don't do your research...it is drugs, alcohol, and prior history of crime and violence that kills, not the gun......those factors lead to death in a home, not the gun...homes with guns and without drug abuse, alcohol abuse past criminal history and or history of violence do not have higher gun death rates....

I'll believe the CDC over a gunaholic like you.

Here....the actual research.....

Public Health and Gun Control: A Review



Since at least the mid-1980s, Dr. Kellermann (and associates), whose work had been heavily-funded by the CDC, published a series of studies purporting to show that persons who keep guns in the home are more likely to be victims of homicide than those who don¹t.

In a 1986 NEJM paper, Dr. Kellermann and associates, for example, claimed their "scientific research" proved that defending oneself or one¹s family with a firearm in the home is dangerous and counter productive, claiming "a gun owner is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than an intruder."8

In a critical review and now classic article published in the March 1994 issue of the Journal of the Medical Association of Georgia (JMAG), Dr. Edgar Suter, Chairman of Doctors for Integrity in Policy Research (DIPR), found evidence of "methodologic and conceptual errors," such as prejudicially truncated data and the listing of "the correct methodology which was described but never used by the authors."5

Moreover, the gun control researchers failed to consider and underestimated the protective benefits of guns.

Dr. Suter writes: "The true measure of the protective benefits of guns are the lives and medical costs saved, the injuries prevented, and the property protected ‹ not the burglar or rapist body count.

Since only 0.1 - 0.2 percent of defensive uses of guns involve the death of the criminal, any study, such as this, that counts criminal deaths as the only measure of the protective benefits of guns will expectedly underestimate the benefits of firearms by a factor of 500 to 1,000."5

In 1993, in his landmark and much cited NEJM article (and the research, again, heavily funded by the CDC), Dr. Kellermann attempted to show again that guns in the home are a greater risk to the victims than to the assailants.4 Despite valid criticisms by reputable scholars of his previous works (including the 1986 study), Dr. Kellermann ignored the criticisms and again used the same methodology.

He also used study populations with disproportionately high rates of serious psychosocial dysfunction from three selected state counties, known to be unrepresentative of the general U.S. population.

For example,

53 percent of the case subjects had a history of a household member being arrested,

31 percent had a household history of illicit drug use, 32 percent had a household member hit or hurt in a family fight, and

17 percent had a family member hurt so seriously in a domestic altercation that prompt medical attention was required.
Moreover, both the case studies and control groups in this analysis had a very high incidence of financial instability.

In fact, in this study, gun ownership, the supposedly high risk factor for homicide was not one of the most strongly associated factors for being murdered.

Drinking, illicit drugs, living alone, history of family violence, living in a rented home were all greater individual risk factors for being murdered than a gun in the home. One must conclude there is no basis to apply the conclusions of this study to the general population.

All of these are factors that, as Dr. Suter pointed out, "would expectedly be associated with higher rates of violence and homicide."5

It goes without saying, the results of such a study on gun homicides, selecting this sort of unrepresentative population sample, nullify the authors' generalizations, and their preordained, conclusions can not be extrapolated to the general population.

Moreover, although the 1993 New England Journal of Medicine study purported to show that the homicide victims were killed with a gun ordinarily kept in the home, the fact is that as Kates and associates point out 71.1 percent of the victims were killed by assailants who did not live in the victims¹ household using guns presumably not kept in that home.6

 

[2aguy]

Mass shooting in hospital where the shooter used an assault type rifle.

But hey, if only doctors were armed.

Assault rifle: A fully automatic military rifle.
Doctor shot victims with: A semi-automatic rifle, not an assault rifle.
Of course, if you wish to describe the weapon as an assault rifle simply because he "assaulted" the victims with it, then you are obligated to identify all other devices used to harm people as, say: assault hammer, assault knife, assault screwdriver, assault shoe, assault rock and of course, the ever favorite....assault fist.
Example: "There was a fight at the local bar and one of the drunk assailants used his "assault fist" to cause bodily harm to the other drunk individual and the blow to the side of the victim's head caused enough trauma to cause his death."

But, the AR-15 LOOKS scary--AND it's BLACK That makes it "assault rifle."

No, you lying little cocksuck, it is an assault rifle because it fire 30 rounds in under 10 seconds, and be reloaded with another magazine in under 2 seconds. It was designed for only one purpose, killing human beings, and has a very good record of doing that in this nation.

No...moron...a military rifle has to have select fire capability...the AR-15 has never been a military rifle..it is the most popular civilian rifle....

And as a fact...knives kill more people every single year, over 1,500 people than AR-15s have killed in 35 years.....altogether.........about 167 people......in 35 years....

Knives are deadlier than these rifles...

Knives have other uses. Do you cut your steak with your gun?

Guns save more lives than they take.....and knives kill more people than AR-15s...they are deadlier than these rifles...you can use a plastic knife to cut your steak...you don't need an assault knife to cut meat......you do need a rifle to protect your home, especially when democrats are rioting and killing republicans....

 

[2aguy]

You dumb ass. If you can touch off 30 rounds in under ten seconds, it is an assault rifle. And is very good for cleaning out grade school classrooms, crowded theaters, mall, and hospitals. And who the fuck hunts with these rifles? In our state, you limited to five rounds when hunting big game. Also, those rifles are far less accurate than a standard hunting rifle. I was taught to make single shot kills, not blow the animal to pieces with a 30 round clip.

But you can't... not with a semi-automatic weapon. You're talking about a fully automatic weapon, a machine gun. These haven't been legal in the US since the 1920s. If you are in the military, that's the kind of weapon you have.

But let's get back to the mowing down people in schools and theaters... do you not think that might be a problem with the individual's mental state instead of the inanimate gun? Are you so fucking stupid that you believe merely having a gun that looks bad ass makes someone want to commit mass killings with it?

And to answer your other question, lots of people do hunt with these weapons which are essentially the same as standard hunting rifles. Some people use them as range rifles for target practice. Some people collect them and never shoot them. The 2nd Amendment doesn't stipulate conditions for use. It is an "unalienable" right... means you can't alienate us from it, stupid.

The NRA & Republicans said crazy people can own guns.

The Second Amendment also does not say that you can own every weapon ever made.

The ACLU led the charge on that issue ......and 23 other organizatrions that weren't republicans or the NRA......do some freaking research....

Gun Control Laws Should Be Fair

The thousands of Americans whose disability benefits are managed by someone else range from young people with depression and financial inexperience to older adults with Down syndrome needing help with a limited budget. But no data — none — show that these individuals have a propensity for violence in general or gun violence in particular.

To the contrary, studies show that people with mental disabilities are less likely to commit firearm crimes than to be the victims of violence by others.

Data show that young, white men are most likely to be mass shooters — the issue that politicians care about most, despite accounting for a tiny fraction of gun violence. And men under 35 commit most murders. Shall we enter all young men into the national database? The statistical correlation with gun violence would be stronger.

The ACLU and 23 national disability groups did not oppose this rule because we want more guns in our community. This is about more than guns. Adding more innocent Americans to the National Instant Criminal Background database because of a mental disability is a disturbing trend — one that could be applied to voting, parenting or other rights dearer than gun ownership. We opposed it because it would do little to stem gun violence but do much to harm our civil rights.

 

[2aguy]

You dumb ass. If you can touch off 30 rounds in under ten seconds, it is an assault rifle. And is very good for cleaning out grade school classrooms, crowded theaters, mall, and hospitals. And who the fuck hunts with these rifles? In our state, you limited to five rounds when hunting big game. Also, those rifles are far less accurate than a standard hunting rifle. I was taught to make single shot kills, not blow the animal to pieces with a 30 round clip.

But you can't... not with a semi-automatic weapon. You're talking about a fully automatic weapon, a machine gun. These haven't been legal in the US since the 1920s. If you are in the military, that's the kind of weapon you have.

But let's get back to the mowing down people in schools and theaters... do you not think that might be a problem with the individual's mental state instead of the inanimate gun? Are you so fucking stupid that you believe merely having a gun that looks bad ass makes someone want to commit mass killings with it?

And to answer your other question, lots of people do hunt with these weapons which are essentially the same as standard hunting rifles. Some people use them as range rifles for target practice. Some people collect them and never shoot them. The 2nd Amendment doesn't stipulate conditions for use. It is an "unalienable" right... means you can't alienate us from it, stupid.

The NRA & Republicans said crazy people can own guns.

The Second Amendment also does not say that you can own every weapon ever made.

That is what The ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller addressed...read it sometime...

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment.

We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997), and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 35–36 (2001), the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.

 

[koshergrl]

Put crazy people away and the mass shootings will stop except for the ones perpetrated on us by illegals and muslims that haven't been scooped up yet.