Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What horse shit. Aim is always affected by recoil.The recoil is nothing and unless you are a wimp firing a shotgun is not affected by it. As for loading when you are the only one with a firearm there is no time constraint to loading. We have had several fairly recent examples of a shotgun being a tool for a mass shooter and they were not hampered AT ALL by reloading.
he was taken down because someone he shot and thought was out of action wasn't. He was taken by surprise not from the crowd in front of him. At least get your facts straight. And recoil doesn't affect the shot going down range all it does is require you to reacquire your target after each shot.What horse shit. Aim is always affected by recoil.
And I remind you that I’m the case of Gabby Giffords the shooter was ONLY overcome because he was reloading and that makes the shooter vulnerable.
The longer it takes to reload, the longer that shooter is vulnerable
Rittenhouse wanted to be Batman. Vigilanti. Bad
You guys say if the constitution doesn’t mention something specifically, it can’t be unconstitutional. Arms doesn’t mean you can have a pew pew gun. Too deadly.
If society keeps getting more fucked up, we may need more regulations. More amendments.
Or we could have all cars rendered incapable of traveling faster than 35mph. That would save a lot of lives every year. Of course, then people wouldn't be able to drive fast, but really, why do we want to cater to them?Others have argued, "I left my gun on the counter and it didn't kill anyone."
Great, so true.
Why is a 'Car' such a threat to you?
You can leave it in your garage, and it won't kill anyone.
1. Kyle wasn't trying to be Batman or vigilante. We had a whole trial on that where people got to present all your favorite headlines, remember?Rittenhouse wanted to be Batman. Vigilanti. Bad
You guys say if the constitution doesn’t mention something specifically, it can’t be unconstitutional. Arms doesn’t mean you can have a pew pew gun. Too deadly.
If society keeps getting more fucked up, we may need more regulations. More amendments.
What horse shit. Aim is always affected by recoil.
And I remind you that I’m the case of Gabby Giffords the shooter was ONLY overcome because he was reloading and that makes the shooter vulnerable.
The longer it takes to reload, the longer that shooter is vulnerable
abcnews.go.com
Hey you're the one who said a shotgun "kicks like a mule".So reading isn’t your strong suit huh?
Have someone read the first paragraph you quoted to you
Like I said my wife is 5'6 and 130 lbs and has no problem with my 12 ga.The recoil is nothing and unless you are a wimp firing a shotgun is not affected by it. As for loading when you are the only one with a firearm there is no time constraint to loading. We have had several fairly recent examples of a shotgun being a tool for a mass shooter and they were not hampered AT ALL by reloading.
So your contention is that a 12 ga shotgun has the same lock as an AR?Hey you're the one who said a shotgun "kicks like a mule".
Have you ever been kicked by a mule?
Can she fire 6 shots rapidly and accurately?Like I said my wife is 5'6 and 130 lbs and has no problem with my 12 ga.
Lesh must be a real pansy
“Otherwise he would have reloaded “That is a lie...
the only reason they were able to wrestle him....just plain, stupid luck........otherwise, he would have reloaded and kept shooting...he missed this guy....
Woman Wrestled Fresh Ammo Clip From Tucson Shooter as He Tried to Reload
Patricia Maisch says she wrestled a magazine of bullets away from Tucson shooter Jared Loughner to prevent more carnage. She was one of four people credited with stopping the slaughter, incuding Bill Badger, Roger Sulzgeber and Joseph Zimudie.
Badger told the paper, "I turned and saw him running down the line of people on the chairs. He ran between me and the store. Someone hit him with a chair and he flinched a little. That's when I grabbed his left arm. Someone grabbed his right arm and we got him to the ground.
"The other guy put his knee into the back of his neck and I grabbed him around the throat. We held him until police got there. While we had him on the ground I saw blood running and it wasn't until then I realized it was coming from the back of my head," Badger said.
As to magazine changing saving lives....nope...
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1525107116674926
Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages by Gary Kleck :: SSRN
I.
Do bans on large-capacity magazines (LCMs) for semiautomatic firearms have significant potential for reducing the number of deaths and injuries in mass shootings?
========
In sum, in nearly all LCM-involved mass shootings, the time it takes to reload a detachable magazine is no greater than the average time between shots that the shooter takes anyway when not reloading.
Consequently, there is no affirmative evidence that reloading detachable magazines slows mass shooters’ rates of fire, and thus no affirmative evidence that the number of victims who could escape the killers due to additional pauses in the shooting is increased by the shooter’s need to change magazines.
==========
The most common rationale for an effect of LCM use is that they allow mass killers to fire many rounds without reloading.
LCMs are used is less than 1/3 of 1% of mass shootings.
News accounts of 23 shootings in which more than six people were killed or wounded and LCMs were used, occurring in the U.S. in 1994-2013, were examined.
There was only one incident in which the shooter may have been stopped by bystander intervention when he tried to reload.
In all of these 23 incidents the shooter possessed either multiple guns or multiple magazines, meaning that the shooter, even if denied LCMs, could have continued firing without significant interruption by either switching loaded guns or by changing smaller loaded magazines with only a 2-4 second delay for each magazine change.
Finally, the data indicate that mass shooters maintain slow enough rates of fire such that the time needed to reload would not increase the time between shots and thus the time available for prospective victims to escape.
--------
We did not employ the oft-used definition of “mass murder” as a homicide in which four or more victims were killed, because most of these involve just four to six victims (Duwe 2007), which could therefore have involved as few as six rounds fired, a number that shooters using even ordinary revolvers are capable of firing without reloading.
LCMs obviously cannot help shooters who fire no more rounds than could be fired without LCMs, so the inclusion of “nonaffectable” cases with only four to six victims would dilute the sample, reducing the percent of sample incidents in which an LCM might have affected the number of casualties.
Further, had we studied only homicides with four or more dead victims, drawn from the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports, we would have missed cases in which huge numbers of people were shot, and huge numbers of rounds were fired, but three or fewer of the victims died.
For example, in one widely publicized shooting carried out in Los Angeles on February 28, 1997, two bank robbers shot a total of 18 people - surely a mass shooting by any reasonable standard (Table 1).
Yet, because none of the people they shot died, this incident would not qualify as a mass murder (or even murder of any kind).
Exclusion of such incidents would bias the sample against the proposition that LCM use increases the number of victims by excluding incidents with large numbers of victims. We also excluded shootings in which more than six persons were shot over the entire course of the incident but shootings occurred in multiple locations with no more than six people shot in any one of the locations, and substantial periods of time intervened between episodes of shooting. An example is the series of killings committed by Rodrick Dantzler on July 7, 2011.
Once eligible incidents were identified, we searched through news accounts for details related to whether the use of LCMs could have influenced the casualty counts.
Specifically, we searched for
(1) the number of magazines in the shooter’s immediate possession,
(2) the capacity of the largest magazine,
(3) the number of guns in the shooter’s immediate possession during the incident,
(4) the types of guns possessed,
(5) whether the shooter reloaded during the incident,
(6) the number of rounds fired,
(7) the duration of the shooting from the first shot fired to the last, and (8) whether anyone intervened to stop the shooter.
Findings How Many Mass Shootings were Committed Using LCMs?
We identified 23 total incidents in which more than six people were shot at a single time and place in the U.S. from 1994 through 2013 and that were known to involve use of any magazines with capacities over ten rounds.
Table 1 summarizes key details of the LCMinvolved mass shootings relevant to the issues addressed in this paper.
(Table 1 about here) What fraction of all mass shootings involve LCMs?
There is no comprehensive listing of all mass shootings available for the entire 1994-2013 period, but the most extensive one currently available is at the Shootingtracker.com website, which only began its coverage in 2013.
-----
-----
The offenders in LCM-involved mass shootings were also known to have reloaded during 14 of the 23 (61%) incidents with magazine holding over 10 rounds.
The shooters were known to have not reloaded in another two of these 20 incidents and it could not be determined if they reloaded in the remaining seven incidents.
Thus, even if the shooters had been denied LCMs, we know that most of them definitely would have been able to reload smaller detachable magazines without interference from bystanders since they in fact did change magazines.
The fact that this percentage is less than 100% should not, however, be interpreted to mean that the shooters were unable to reload in the other nine incidents.
It is possible that the shooters could also have reloaded in many of these nine shootings, but chose not to do so, or did not need to do so in order to fire all the rounds they wanted to fire. This is consistent with the fact that there has been at most only one mass shootings in twenty years in which reloading a semiautomatic firearm might have been blocked by bystanders intervening and thereby stopping the shooter from doing all the shooting he wanted to do. All we know is that in two incidents the shooter did not reload, and news accounts of seven other incidents did not mention whether the offender reloaded.
----
For example, a story in the Hartford Courant about the Sandy Hook elementary school killings in 2012 was headlined “Shooter Paused, and Six Escaped,” the text asserting that as many as six children may have survived because the shooter paused to reload (December 23, 2012). ''
The author of the story, however, went on to concede that this was just a speculation by an unnamed source, and that it was also possible that some children simply escaped when the killer was shooting other children.
There was no reliable evidence that the pauses were due to the shooter reloading, rather than his guns jamming or the shooter simply choosing to pause his shooting while his gun was still loaded.
The plausibility of the “victims escape” rationale depends on the average rates of fire that shooters in mass shootings typically maintain.
If they fire very fast, the 2-4 seconds it takes to change box-type detachable magazines could produce a slowing of the rate of fire that the shooters otherwise would have maintained without the magazine changes, increasing the average time between rounds fired and potentially allowing more victims to escape during the betweenshot intervals.
On the other hand, if mass shooters fire their guns with the average interval between shots lasting more than 2-4 seconds, the pauses due to additional magazine changes would be no longer than the pauses the shooter typically took between shots even when not reloading.
In that case, there would be no more opportunity for potential victims to escape than there would have been without the additional magazine changes
-----
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1525107116674926
Where did I say that?So your contention is that a 12 ga shotgun has the same lock as an AR?
Really?
“Reacquire your target..”he was taken down because someone he shot and thought was out of action wasn't. He was taken by surprise not from the crowd in front of him. At least get your facts straight. And recoil doesn't affect the shot going down range all it does is require you to reacquire your target after each shot.
Can she fire 6 shots rapidly and accurately?
I’m calling bullshit on that
Sensitivity to recoil can cause a flinch, which can affect accuracy. I only (used to) think about when shooting targets. When I shoot a deer I never think about it, or even feel it. In Army 'train fire' you shoot so much that you get used to it. I shot "Expert" twice with the M14, and recoil didn't bother me at all.he was taken down because someone he shot and thought was out of action wasn't. He was taken by surprise not from the crowd in front of him. At least get your facts straight. And recoil doesn't affect the shot going down range all it does is require you to reacquire your target after each shot.
Slugs kick like a mule, even in a 20 gauge.How weak are you if you think a shotgun kicks like a mule?
Slugs kick like a mule, even in a 20 gauge.
That depends on how your shoulders are built, length of arms, length of stock.HAve you ever been kicked by a mule?
It fucking hurts. Shot gun recoil doesn;t hurt
which a mass shooter has to do anyway as he shoots different people not the same person over and over.“Reacquire your target..”
Exactly
“Otherwise he would have reloaded “
Fail junior
