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.

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.

Correct, it is a tool for use in killing in mass, especially when equipped with a large magazine and a quick release magnet.

No.....wrong...again...The AR-15 is the most popular rifle in the United States, over 5 million in private hands.....and in 35 years how many people have been murdered with one......less than 167, ...in 35 years....hardly a mass killing weapon...

Knives on the other hand...kill over 1,500 every single year. Knives are actually deadlier by body count than these rifles....

AJune 2016 article: "At least 84 people have been killed and 119 have been injured so far this year in 86 shooting incidents involving assault-style rifles, according to data compiled by the Gun Violence Archive, a not-for-profit corporation that tracks gun violence. Those numbers include the casualties at Pulse nightclub over the weekend."

84 in half of 2016. Assault type rifles. Yet you are claiming 137 in 35 years........

 

[Old Rocks]

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.

Fucking bullshit, Boss. Here is a fellow doing just that.

 

[Geaux4it]

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

But hey, if only doctors were armed.

Acceptable risk to live in America

-Geaux

 

[Divine Wind]

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.

That's the commonly used term these days for a gun that will spray multiple bullets in a minute, a dozen or more depending on who you ask. That makes it an "assault" weapon, indeed, if you are the person being fired upon.

No...it doesn't...that is the lie the anti gunners use because they want to ban the weapon. The truth is that a military rifle must have select fire capability.......the AR-15 does not, and never has had this...and has never been used by the military....the definition you gave...fits most modern pistols...which is another thing the gun grabbers do...they bait and switch, here we were talking about rifles...but the definition you gave fits pistols too....which is why we don't trust anti gunners....

We had a ban on assault type rifles. Where were the other bans you keep whining about?

Many LWs want to ban all guns. This forum is replete with that idea. However, shredding the Constitution isn't a practical path for them. Slowly eating away at individual rights and eroding the meaning and intent of the Second Amendment in particular works much better for them. They use words like "for the children" and "common sense" but when it comes down to the nitty-gritty it's statements that mean restricting all free citizens from exercising their natural right of self-defense.

BTW, there is not such thing as an "assault rifle" much less an "assault type rifle". It's a fabricated term used by the anti-gun left that means "scary-looking rifle".

What is the difference between these two rifles, RealDave?

Would you call CPS on the parents of this young man?

 

[RealDave]

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.

That's the commonly used term these days for a gun that will spray multiple bullets in a minute, a dozen or more depending on who you ask. That makes it an "assault" weapon, indeed, if you are the person being fired upon.

No...it doesn't...that is the lie the anti gunners use because they want to ban the weapon. The truth is that a military rifle must have select fire capability.......the AR-15 does not, and never has had this...and has never been used by the military....the definition you gave...fits most modern pistols...which is another thing the gun grabbers do...they bait and switch, here we were talking about rifles...but the definition you gave fits pistols too....which is why we don't trust anti gunners....

We had a ban on assault type rifles. Where were the other bans you keep whining about?

Many LWs want to ban all guns. This forum is replete with that idea. However, shredding the Constitution isn't a practical path for them. Slowly eating away at individual rights and eroding the meaning and intent of the Second Amendment in particular works much better for them. They use words like "for the children" and "common sense" but when it comes down to the nitty-gritty it's statements that mean restricting all free citizens from exercising their natural right of self-defense.

BTW, there is not such thing as an "assault rifle" much less an "assault type rifle". It's a fabricated term used by the anti-gun left that means "scary-looking rifle".

What is the difference between these two rifles, RealDave?

Would you call CPS on the parents of this young man?

Show me the posts where people are calling for banning of all guns. There aren't any.

You are a lying fuck.

As for your two guns, one has a clip that holds far more bullets. A gun that you would need to hunt because you likely can't hit shit.

That kids looks like he is about 12 years old & child psychologists will tell you that is too young to fully grasp the concept of risk. So, if the gun is real, his parents are fucking idiots.

 

[August West]

Hey, here's an idea that will settle all this...

Since it's always some fucked up left wing loony tune who commits these mass shootings... we pass a law that you can't own a firearm if you voted Democrat in the last 20 years. If you've voted for a Democrat and you're caught with a firearm, we can lock you away.

The justification being, you're just not fucking mentally stable enough to have a gun.

Our inalienable rights are the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, not shootouts. Do you lie all the time like the president or are you just stupid, again, like the president? You`re welcome but now you owe me.

No! Our inalienable rights INCLUDE life, liberty and pursuit of happiness....

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Our inalienable rights are the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, not shootouts. Do you lie all the time like the president or are you just stupid, again, like the president? You`re welcome but now you owe me.

No! Our inalienable rights INCLUDE life, liberty and pursuit of happiness....

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. ​

These are areas which comprise a great number of liberties. The Second Amendment specifies that our right shall not be infringed. Doesn't matter who the president is, how smart the president is, or if you dislike the president. None of that has a thing to do with the Second Amendment.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.​

If you believe I owe you something, I demand a refund, shithead. Don't come at me with your little left-wing commie blogs trying to debate the Constitution.... I'll mop the floor with your bitch ass punk!

So you`re going tell me where your militia trains and who your commander is? Until now, I`ve never heard of the Declaration of Independence referred to as a commie blog. If you could mop the floor with anyone you wouldn`t need guns to hide behind....not so tough guy.

You didn't present anything from the DoI, you posted some stupid link telling us what to think. I posted from the DoI and it refutes your claim outright. It's none of your business where my militia trains or who the commander is and that's not a prerequisite for my unalienable rights anyway. It's more evidence of your abject stupidity and failure to understand our founding documents.

Now the floor has been mopped with you twice, bitch. I don't need a gun to do it. All I have to do is sit back and wait for you to open your stupid little punk mouth and spew out something else you don't know what you're talking about.

These are areas which comprise a great number of liberties. The Second Amendment specifies that our right shall not be infringed. Doesn't matter who the president is, how smart the president is, or if you dislike the president. None of that has a thing to do with the Second Amendment.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.​

If you believe I owe you something, I demand a refund, shithead. Don't come at me with your little left-wing commie blogs trying to debate the Constitution.... I'll mop the floor with your bitch ass punk!

So you`re going tell me where your militia trains and who your commander is? Until now, I`ve never heard of the Declaration of Independence referred to as a commie blog. If you could mop the floor with anyone you wouldn`t need guns to hide behind....not so tough guy.

You didn't present anything from the DoI, you posted some stupid link telling us what to think. I posted from the DoI and it refutes your claim outright. It's none of your business where my militia trains or who the commander is and that's not a prerequisite for my unalienable rights anyway. It's more evidence of your abject stupidity and failure to understand our founding documents.

Now the floor has been mopped with you twice, bitch. I don't need a gun to do it. All I have to do is sit back and wait for you to open your stupid little punk mouth and spew out something else you don't know what you're talking about.

The only floor you mopped was in the shithouse of your 7-11. The next time you`re stopped at a metal detector because you`re afraid to be without your little gun, give the officer your little "infringement" speech. Cops like a good laugh now and then too.

 

[Geaux4it]

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.

That's the commonly used term these days for a gun that will spray multiple bullets in a minute, a dozen or more depending on who you ask. That makes it an "assault" weapon, indeed, if you are the person being fired upon.

No...it doesn't...that is the lie the anti gunners use because they want to ban the weapon. The truth is that a military rifle must have select fire capability.......the AR-15 does not, and never has had this...and has never been used by the military....the definition you gave...fits most modern pistols...which is another thing the gun grabbers do...they bait and switch, here we were talking about rifles...but the definition you gave fits pistols too....which is why we don't trust anti gunners....

We had a ban on assault type rifles. Where were the other bans you keep whining about?

Many LWs want to ban all guns. This forum is replete with that idea. However, shredding the Constitution isn't a practical path for them. Slowly eating away at individual rights and eroding the meaning and intent of the Second Amendment in particular works much better for them. They use words like "for the children" and "common sense" but when it comes down to the nitty-gritty it's statements that mean restricting all free citizens from exercising their natural right of self-defense.

BTW, there is not such thing as an "assault rifle" much less an "assault type rifle". It's a fabricated term used by the anti-gun left that means "scary-looking rifle".

What is the difference between these two rifles, RealDave?

Would you call CPS on the parents of this young man?

Show me the posts where people are calling for banning of all guns. There aren't any.

You are a lying fuck.

As for your two guns, one has a clip that holds far more bullets. A gun that you would need to hunt because you likely can't hit shit.

That kids looks like he is about 12 years old & child psychologists will tell you that is too young to fully grasp the concept of risk. So, if the gun is real, his parents are fucking idiots.

I would think they understand the risk better than you do.

As I said earlier, its a manageable risk and one that is acceptable to live in America

-Geaux
==========

 

[Boss]

Making assault type rifles illegal will make them harder to obtain, allow police to arrest them on the way to commit their slaughter, or arrest them in the planning stages.

This doesn't even make rational sense. A retarded person makes better sense. Seriously!

How does making a certain style of gun illegal allow police to arrest nutbags on the way to commit slaughter or in the planning stages (if they have them)?

You're making an emotive claim that has no connection with reality.

So... we outlaw scary-looking rifles and suddenly police have the ability of mental telepathy?

Really.... How old are you?

 

[Boss]

The only floor you mopped was in the shithouse of your 7-11. The next time you`re stopped at a metal detector because you`re afraid to be without your little gun, give the officer your little "infringement" speech. Cops like a good laugh now and then too.

Metal detectors don't infringe on my rights because I have a choice. In certain circumstances, I have chosen to allow restriction of firearms for all, like in a courtroom. My fellow citizens and I made this choice in the interest of public safety but it doesn't impugn my right to own a gun.

Funny.. I keep on mopping the floor with you and it just gets dirtier.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I have owned and shot a "22" bolt action rifle (held 12 shots + 1 in chamber) Remington? An AR-15 is a "22", correct? Just better quality, higher velocity? is that 0.22 inches diameter?

My Dad had a "410" shotgun that I shot into the hill as a kid. Hurt my skinny collar bone bad when age 12?

I don't know crap about guns. But I would like to have one easy to get to, loaded? in case of break-in or home-invasion. I have no guns now. I am not in a good situation to get one either at this time.

Old Yeller

I have several guns but they're not my first choice for self defense. I have air tasers - three in the house and one in the car. I also have a gun in the, but under a mat in the back, because it's not there for self defense.

Anyway, the air tasers inhale have the capability of taking down a person at 15' and they are also stun guns.


BTW, 2aguy - some untrained kid at a free speech rally in PA shot himself in the thigh yesterday. If only he had had a gun which to defend himself from -- himself. Seriously, it's always luck, not skill, when one of you nutters shoots himself instead of an innocent child forced to be there.




Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Divine Wind]

Show me the posts where people are calling for banning of all guns. There aren't any.

You are a lying fuck.

Since you are so sure, you wouldn't mind betting a $25 USMB Gold membership on it. Loser pays USMB for an additional year of Gold Supporting Member; cost $25. This way I'll be able to collect the bet without learning any personal information about you and the forum admin will be able to verify you're not a "lying fuck" in paying off the bet. Are you game?

. . . . .

 

[Boss]

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.

Fucking bullshit, Boss. Here is a fellow doing just that.

Yes, that's a semi-automatic weapon that fires one bullet each time the trigger is pulled... the same as an automatic pistol which has been on the market for a century.

 

[RealDave]

Making assault type rifles illegal will make them harder to obtain, allow police to arrest them on the way to commit their slaughter, or arrest them in the planning stages.

This doesn't even make rational sense. A retarded person makes better sense. Seriously!

How does making a certain style of gun illegal allow police to arrest nutbags on the way to commit slaughter or in the planning stages (if they have them)?

You're making an emotive claim that has no connection with reality.

So... we outlaw scary-looking rifles and suddenly police have the ability of mental telepathy?

Really.... How old are you?

1) If assault rifles are legal, how can the shooter be arrested prior to the attack if he is spotted with such a weapon?

2) Illegal means harder to obatain & the better the chances of stopping it at that stasge.

It's not rocket science.

 

[Boss]

Trucks & knives have actual uses outside of killing things.

So do guns!! Like I said... Some people use them for target practice. Some people collect them and look at them. Some people use them to decorate their gun rack. I would surmise that the overwhelming and vast majority of the 300 million guns in America have NEVER been used to kill another person.

 

[Divine Wind]

Making assault type rifles illegal will make them harder to obtain, allow police to arrest them on the way to commit their slaughter, or arrest them in the planning stages.

This doesn't even make rational sense. A retarded person makes better sense. Seriously!

How does making a certain style of gun illegal allow police to arrest nutbags on the way to commit slaughter or in the planning stages (if they have them)?

You're making an emotive claim that has no connection with reality.

So... we outlaw scary-looking rifles and suddenly police have the ability of mental telepathy?

Really.... How old are you?

1) If assault rifles are legal, how can the shooter be arrested prior to the attack if he is spotted with such a weapon?

2) Illegal means harder to obatain & the better the chances of stopping it at that stasge.

It's not rocket science.

Translation: Ban all semi-automatic firearms. Next stop, ban all guns.

Say, Dave; President Obama wanted to ban "weapons of war" from the streets of America. Which of the two rifles below is a "weapon of war"?

 

[Boss]

Making assault type rifles illegal will make them harder to obtain, allow police to arrest them on the way to commit their slaughter, or arrest them in the planning stages.

This doesn't even make rational sense. A retarded person makes better sense. Seriously!

How does making a certain style of gun illegal allow police to arrest nutbags on the way to commit slaughter or in the planning stages (if they have them)?

You're making an emotive claim that has no connection with reality.

So... we outlaw scary-looking rifles and suddenly police have the ability of mental telepathy?

Really.... How old are you?

1) If assault rifles are legal, how can the shooter be arrested prior to the attack if he is spotted with such a weapon?

2) Illegal means harder to obatain & the better the chances of stopping it at that stasge.

It's not rocket science.

Well because he would be careful and not be spotted with the weapon which could also be any number of other weapons that aren't banned. Again.... the police can't stop something unless they know something is about to happen. You seem to think banning guns gives them some sort of super power of telepathy.

You just keep making this emotive idiotic argument that banning scary-looking guns will somehow prevent nutbags from doing crazy shit. It just won't!

 

[Divine Wind]

Trucks & knives have actual uses outside of killing things.

So do guns!! Like I said... Some people use them for target practice. Some people collect them and look at them. Some people use them to decorate their gun rack. I would surmise that the overwhelming and vast majority of the 300 million guns in America have NEVER been used to kill another person.

Agreed, but Dave is using the same old LW anti-gun logic that guns serve no purpose in the 21st Century.

 

[Divine Wind]

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.

Correct, it is a tool for use in killing in mass, especially when equipped with a large magazine and a quick release magnet.

No.....wrong...again...The AR-15 is the most popular rifle in the United States, over 5 million in private hands.....and in 35 years how many people have been murdered with one......less than 167, ...in 35 years....hardly a mass killing weapon...

Knives on the other hand...kill over 1,500 every single year. Knives are actually deadlier by body count than these rifles....

AJune 2016 article: "At least 84 people have been killed and 119 have been injured so far this year in 86 shooting incidents involving assault-style rifles, according to data compiled by the Gun Violence Archive, a not-for-profit corporation that tracks gun violence. Those numbers include the casualties at Pulse nightclub over the weekend."

84 in half of 2016. Assault type rifles. Yet you are claiming 137 in 35 years........

It's pretty clear why you didn't include a link to that article, isn't it? Could it be that most of those killed were killed by terrorists? Would you be happier is the terrorists just used trucks to commit mass murder?

The fact remains, most murders are done with handguns and involve gang-bangers shooting other gang-bangers or domestic violence. More than half of the "gun violence" (a term the LW antigunners love to toss around) are suicides. Gang-bangers is an inner-city crime problem. Domestic violence and suicides are a mental health issue. If the LW really gave a shit about saving lives, they'd focus on fixing those areas and less on shredding the Constitution for their authoritarian agenda.

 

[RealDave]

Making assault type rifles illegal will make them harder to obtain, allow police to arrest them on the way to commit their slaughter, or arrest them in the planning stages.

This doesn't even make rational sense. A retarded person makes better sense. Seriously!

How does making a certain style of gun illegal allow police to arrest nutbags on the way to commit slaughter or in the planning stages (if they have them)?

You're making an emotive claim that has no connection with reality.

So... we outlaw scary-looking rifles and suddenly police have the ability of mental telepathy?

Really.... How old are you?

1) If assault rifles are legal, how can the shooter be arrested prior to the attack if he is spotted with such a weapon?

2) Illegal means harder to obatain & the better the chances of stopping it at that stasge.

It's not rocket science.

Well because he would be careful and not be spotted with the weapon which could also be any number of other weapons that aren't banned. Again.... the police can't stop something unless they know something is about to happen. You seem to think banning guns gives them some sort of super power of telepathy.

You just keep making this emotive idiotic argument that banning scary-looking guns will somehow prevent nutbags from doing crazy shit. It just won't!

As it is now, carrying an assault weapon is not illegal. Police would see him & do nothing

With a ban, the guy could be arrested for carrying it. They don't need telepathy as the law is being broken.

If these assault weapons provide no advantage other than looking scary, why the FUCK do you want them?

You are sofa king stupid you think the death toll between a crazy person with an assault weapon & one with a bolt action rifle or a knife or a baseball bat is all the same.

 

[RealDave]

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.

Correct, it is a tool for use in killing in mass, especially when equipped with a large magazine and a quick release magnet.

No.....wrong...again...The AR-15 is the most popular rifle in the United States, over 5 million in private hands.....and in 35 years how many people have been murdered with one......less than 167, ...in 35 years....hardly a mass killing weapon...

Knives on the other hand...kill over 1,500 every single year. Knives are actually deadlier by body count than these rifles....

AJune 2016 article: "At least 84 people have been killed and 119 have been injured so far this year in 86 shooting incidents involving assault-style rifles, according to data compiled by the Gun Violence Archive, a not-for-profit corporation that tracks gun violence. Those numbers include the casualties at Pulse nightclub over the weekend."

84 in half of 2016. Assault type rifles. Yet you are claiming 137 in 35 years........

It's pretty clear why you didn't include a link to that article, isn't it? Could it be that most of those killed were killed by terrorists? Would you be happier is the terrorists just used trucks to commit mass murder?

The fact remains, most murders are done with handguns and involve gang-bangers shooting other gang-bangers or domestic violence. More than half of the "gun violence" (a term the LW antigunners love to toss around) are suicides. Gang-bangers is an inner-city crime problem. Domestic violence and suicides are a mental health issue. If the LW really gave a shit about saving lives, they'd focus on fixing those areas and less on shredding the Constitution for their authoritarian agenda.

The post that claimed 135 people killer had no link. So fuck you & your link. The post clearly stated who did the numbers. Grow the fuck up.