Maybe it is the scary looking gun

[jc456]

Maybe we can't see the forest for the trees.

Maybe one of the unfortunate reasons "assault style weapons" are used in many gun violence circumstances is the style. If video games and movies can be blamed for gun violence, why not the 'style' of weaponry? Are violent criminals drawn to the menacing look of these weapons more than the technical aspects of firing systems and round speed and lethality of sporting style weapons? Could similar cultural aspects attract those who watch violent movies and play violent video games to violent looking weapons?

Is it just cooler to carry a gun with a long magazine projecting from it? A gun that's all black and blinded up with military styling?

Gun lovers would agree that other sporting style weapons are just as, or more, deadly? Yet we don't see that many mass shootings committed with those sporting style weapons. If they are just as effective for self defense and a military style weapon, why have the military style weapon around?

As gun violence increased, could a corollary be seen in the increase of popularity of military style weapons, the "scary looking" guns?

I may be wrong, but I never heard this point of view proffered.

Maybe it's also the Rambo mentality that comes with it - and that invincible feeling of power.

Yeah, I bought mine to go all Rambo on wild hogs. You folks are fucking idiots.


.

Wild hogs could never be culled by any other weapon? My God! Are wild hogs the Americanelephant, only to be taken with a particular gun. Are they vampires needing special ammunition to drop them?

No other weapon can deliver the fire power necessary to take on a wild hog?

Why do you care?

 

[jc456]

Maybe we can't see the forest for the trees.

Maybe one of the unfortunate reasons "assault style weapons" are used in many gun violence circumstances is the style. If video games and movies can be blamed for gun violence, why not the 'style' of weaponry? Are violent criminals drawn to the menacing look of these weapons more than the technical aspects of firing systems and round speed and lethality of sporting style weapons? Could similar cultural aspects attract those who watch violent movies and play violent video games to violent looking weapons?

Is it just cooler to carry a gun with a long magazine projecting from it? A gun that's all black and blinded up with military styling?

Gun lovers would agree that other sporting style weapons are just as, or more, deadly? Yet we don't see that many mass shootings committed with those sporting style weapons. If they are just as effective for self defense and a military style weapon, why have the military style weapon around?

As gun violence increased, could a corollary be seen in the increase of popularity of military style weapons, the "scary looking" guns?

I may be wrong, but I never heard this point of view proffered.

Why have the military stylist weapon around? Because I want to. That’s really more explanation then is needed.

If the style of the weapon excites and motivates a killer, what makes your desire to have one a valid position? Does your simple sense of aesthetics trump public safety? How much more selfish could you get?

What about public safety?

 

[jc456]

Maybe we can't see the forest for the trees.

Maybe one of the unfortunate reasons "assault style weapons" are used in many gun violence circumstances is the style. If video games and movies can be blamed for gun violence, why not the 'style' of weaponry? Are violent criminals drawn to the menacing look of these weapons more than the technical aspects of firing systems and round speed and lethality of sporting style weapons? Could similar cultural aspects attract those who watch violent movies and play violent video games to violent looking weapons?

Is it just cooler to carry a gun with a long magazine projecting from it? A gun that's all black and blinded up with military styling?

Gun lovers would agree that other sporting style weapons are just as, or more, deadly? Yet we don't see that many mass shootings committed with those sporting style weapons. If they are just as effective for self defense and a military style weapon, why have the military style weapon around?

As gun violence increased, could a corollary be seen in the increase of popularity of military style weapons, the "scary looking" guns?

I may be wrong, but I never heard this point of view proffered.

One, gun violence has decreased and two, please define military assault weapon. I understand many are confused by appearances.

A gun that a third grader could point to and say "that's an army gun" and see the difference between Daddy's hunting rifle and a cool looking gun like the movie guy.

It's not that complicated.

Why do you care?

 

[jc456]

Maybe we can't see the forest for the trees.

Maybe one of the unfortunate reasons "assault style weapons" are used in many gun violence circumstances is the style. If video games and movies can be blamed for gun violence, why not the 'style' of weaponry? Are violent criminals drawn to the menacing look of these weapons more than the technical aspects of firing systems and round speed and lethality of sporting style weapons? Could similar cultural aspects attract those who watch violent movies and play violent video games to violent looking weapons?

Is it just cooler to carry a gun with a long magazine projecting from it? A gun that's all black and blinded up with military styling?

Gun lovers would agree that other sporting style weapons are just as, or more, deadly? Yet we don't see that many mass shootings committed with those sporting style weapons. If they are just as effective for self defense and a military style weapon, why have the military style weapon around?

As gun violence increased, could a corollary be seen in the increase of popularity of military style weapons, the "scary looking" guns?

I may be wrong, but I never heard this point of view proffered.

One, gun violence has decreased and two, please define military assault weapon. I understand many are confused by appearances.

if by now if anyone is calling an ar a military assault weapon they are either willfully ignorant or simply incapable of learning

You'll note I have never said military assault weapon in this thread.

I've called them military style weapons.

The premise is the style and its effect on lunatic assailants in this discussion.

I've called them military style weapons.


and you are still willfully ignorant

the military style of the rifle has a select fire

the ones on the store do not

but hey remain ignorant that is your fault and that of no one else

I'd wager BB guns produced in a military style outsell BB guns made to look like a hunting rifle or skeet gun.

Go for it

 

[Nosmo King]

I'll tell you jc456,

The premise of this thread is about the style, the 'scary' look k of these weapons and if that influences mass shooters.

Why would I ask that question? If violent movies and video games can be cited as influencing gun violence, what about the aesthetics of the gun itself? And if it can be shown that the look of the gun is a motivating factor, what practical use is that style? Couldn't guns look more like sporting weapons if only that means someone won't be so horny to shoot up a school, church, night club or concert?

 

[Crixus]

Maybe we can't see the forest for the trees.

Maybe one of the unfortunate reasons "assault style weapons" are used in many gun violence circumstances is the style. If video games and movies can be blamed for gun violence, why not the 'style' of weaponry? Are violent criminals drawn to the menacing look of these weapons more than the technical aspects of firing systems and round speed and lethality of sporting style weapons? Could similar cultural aspects attract those who watch violent movies and play violent video games to violent looking weapons?

Is it just cooler to carry a gun with a long magazine projecting from it? A gun that's all black and blinded up with military styling?

Gun lovers would agree that other sporting style weapons are just as, or more, deadly? Yet we don't see that many mass shootings committed with those sporting style weapons. If they are just as effective for self defense and a military style weapon, why have the military style weapon around?

As gun violence increased, could a corollary be seen in the increase of popularity of military style weapons, the "scary looking" guns?

I may be wrong, but I never heard this point of view proffered.

Why have the military stylist weapon around? Because I want to. That’s really more explanation then is needed.

If the style of the weapon excites and motivates a killer, what makes your desire to have one a valid position? Does your simple sense of aesthetics trump public safety? How much more selfish could you get?

What about public safety?

That’s their problem.

 

[Crixus]

Maybe we can't see the forest for the trees.

Maybe one of the unfortunate reasons "assault style weapons" are used in many gun violence circumstances is the style. If video games and movies can be blamed for gun violence, why not the 'style' of weaponry? Are violent criminals drawn to the menacing look of these weapons more than the technical aspects of firing systems and round speed and lethality of sporting style weapons? Could similar cultural aspects attract those who watch violent movies and play violent video games to violent looking weapons?

Is it just cooler to carry a gun with a long magazine projecting from it? A gun that's all black and blinded up with military styling?

Gun lovers would agree that other sporting style weapons are just as, or more, deadly? Yet we don't see that many mass shootings committed with those sporting style weapons. If they are just as effective for self defense and a military style weapon, why have the military style weapon around?

As gun violence increased, could a corollary be seen in the increase of popularity of military style weapons, the "scary looking" guns?

I may be wrong, but I never heard this point of view proffered.

Why have the military stylist weapon around? Because I want to. That’s really more explanation then is needed.

If the style of the weapon excites and motivates a killer, what makes your desire to have one a valid position? Does your simple sense of aesthetics trump public safety? How much more selfish could you get?

No. Not really. Mostly because it’s a cheap ass vermin blaster that shoots garbage ammunition that will penetrate a hog or similar sized vermin from the back end to the front as well as both sides. It’s also real easy to fix if I break it. Matter of fact, the one I have now was sent to the bottom of the trinity for a day or two and still runs like a top. Honestly, I don’t even like to shoot the noisey piece of crap.

 

[Nosmo King]

Maybe we can't see the forest for the trees.

Maybe one of the unfortunate reasons "assault style weapons" are used in many gun violence circumstances is the style. If video games and movies can be blamed for gun violence, why not the 'style' of weaponry? Are violent criminals drawn to the menacing look of these weapons more than the technical aspects of firing systems and round speed and lethality of sporting style weapons? Could similar cultural aspects attract those who watch violent movies and play violent video games to violent looking weapons?

Is it just cooler to carry a gun with a long magazine projecting from it? A gun that's all black and blinded up with military styling?

Gun lovers would agree that other sporting style weapons are just as, or more, deadly? Yet we don't see that many mass shootings committed with those sporting style weapons. If they are just as effective for self defense and a military style weapon, why have the military style weapon around?

As gun violence increased, could a corollary be seen in the increase of popularity of military style weapons, the "scary looking" guns?

I may be wrong, but I never heard this point of view proffered.

Why have the military stylist weapon around? Because I want to. That’s really more explanation then is needed.

If the style of the weapon excites and motivates a killer, what makes your desire to have one a valid position? Does your simple sense of aesthetics trump public safety? How much more selfish could you get?

No. Not really. Mostly because it’s a cheap ass vermin blaster that shoots garbage ammunition that will penetrate a hog or similar sized vermin from the back end to the front as well as both sides. It’s also real easy to fix if I break it. Matter of fact, the one I have now was sent to the bottom of the trinity for a day or two and still runs like a top. Honestly, I don’t even like to shoot the noisey piece of crap.

Would it piss you off it it had a wooden stock, no pistol grip, no flash suppressor and a five round clip instead of a twenty round magazine?

 

[FA_Q2]

Maybe we can't see the forest for the trees.

Maybe one of the unfortunate reasons "assault style weapons" are used in many gun violence circumstances is the style. If video games and movies can be blamed for gun violence, why not the 'style' of weaponry? Are violent criminals drawn to the menacing look of these weapons more than the technical aspects of firing systems and round speed and lethality of sporting style weapons? Could similar cultural aspects attract those who watch violent movies and play violent video games to violent looking weapons?

Is it just cooler to carry a gun with a long magazine projecting from it? A gun that's all black and blinded up with military styling?

Gun lovers would agree that other sporting style weapons are just as, or more, deadly? Yet we don't see that many mass shootings committed with those sporting style weapons. If they are just as effective for self defense and a military style weapon, why have the military style weapon around?

As gun violence increased, could a corollary be seen in the increase of popularity of military style weapons, the "scary looking" guns?

I may be wrong, but I never heard this point of view proffered.

I see where you're comming from...but I would argue that the federal ban in 1994 is ...if not the cause...a significant contributing factor.

AR15's were a niche weapon owned by veterans and a limited number of firearm aficionados before the ban.

The ban made them the forbidden fruit.

And those lacking knowledge of firearms, ammunition and balistics assume the government wouldn't ban them simply based on cosmetic characteristic (which is exactly what they did). They assume (wrongly) that they are more dangerous/deadly/reliable than other weapons.

You know Cruz stopped shooting, not because he was stopped by an outside force...but because his rifle jammed. For the uninitiated, this means it either failed to eject a spent cartridge, failed to feed a round, double fed, failed to fire (dud), etc.

Happens all the time when dealing with large magazines...the larger the mag, the more likely a malfunction, because the spring is very, very tight on a full magazine...putting much more pressure on round one and two...and very loose at the end of the magazine.

In fact...one of the first things a new soldier is taught is the acronym SPORTS...when the weapon jams, Slap the magazine, Pull the charging handle, Observe the chamber, Release the charging handle, Tap the forward assist, Squeeze the trigger. It is so ingrained, it springs to mind instantly 20 years since I wore a uniform.

Had Cruz had a weapon he was more familiar with...or one that is more resistant to jamming (I have semi-auto pistols that have NEVER jammed through thousands of rounds)...the death toll could have been much higher. Especially in light of the fact the police were ordered not to enter the school.

Perhaps then if the high capacity magazines are both the least reliable way to shoot and the most aesthetically attractive way to misuse these guns, we could kill two birds (pardon the expression) with one stone and ban them.

Again your solution is to punish people who use the weapons properly and responsibly in the vain hope that it will somehow limit a nutjob from going on a spree.

And as usual any proposal by gun control people along these lines will contain a few extra "goodies" to further their desire for a gun free civilian populace.

Could not the same things be said about censoring violent movies and video games? Those are a donvienent whipping boy to blame gun violence. Is it the aesthetic value of military style weapons that makes them so attractive to nutjobs?

I understand and appreciate the argument that guns are fun and customizing guns makes them even more fun. But should they be styled in such a way to make them appear as military weapons or the toys used in games and movies?

Asking should they be styled this way utterly misses the entire problem and places the cart before the horse. The AR may APPEAL to those that want to perpetrate a mass shooting but its appeal factor is utterly irrelevant because it does not make executing that mass shooting more likely. If the only guns that were left were hot pink and covered in floral patterns that is not going to dissuade a mass murderer from going on a killing spree.

Yet again, you are asking a question to seek a specific outcome rather than actually asking that question with the intent of forming real debate or solutions.

 

[Rustic]

Maybe we can't see the forest for the trees.

Maybe one of the unfortunate reasons "assault style weapons" are used in many gun violence circumstances is the style. If video games and movies can be blamed for gun violence, why not the 'style' of weaponry? Are violent criminals drawn to the menacing look of these weapons more than the technical aspects of firing systems and round speed and lethality of sporting style weapons? Could similar cultural aspects attract those who watch violent movies and play violent video games to violent looking weapons?

Is it just cooler to carry a gun with a long magazine projecting from it? A gun that's all black and blinded up with military styling?

Gun lovers would agree that other sporting style weapons are just as, or more, deadly? Yet we don't see that many mass shootings committed with those sporting style weapons. If they are just as effective for self defense and a military style weapon, why have the military style weapon around?

As gun violence increased, could a corollary be seen in the increase of popularity of military style weapons, the "scary looking" guns?

I may be wrong, but I never heard this point of view proffered.

You are delusional, an ar15 is just a sporting rifle nothing more nothing less. Only fool like yourself thinks the firearm has anything to with criminal behavior, firearms have zero control over people. We have no criminal control in this country... and an open southern border

 

[Nosmo King]

Maybe we can't see the forest for the trees.

Maybe one of the unfortunate reasons "assault style weapons" are used in many gun violence circumstances is the style. If video games and movies can be blamed for gun violence, why not the 'style' of weaponry? Are violent criminals drawn to the menacing look of these weapons more than the technical aspects of firing systems and round speed and lethality of sporting style weapons? Could similar cultural aspects attract those who watch violent movies and play violent video games to violent looking weapons?

Is it just cooler to carry a gun with a long magazine projecting from it? A gun that's all black and blinded up with military styling?

Gun lovers would agree that other sporting style weapons are just as, or more, deadly? Yet we don't see that many mass shootings committed with those sporting style weapons. If they are just as effective for self defense and a military style weapon, why have the military style weapon around?

As gun violence increased, could a corollary be seen in the increase of popularity of military style weapons, the "scary looking" guns?

I may be wrong, but I never heard this point of view proffered.

I see where you're comming from...but I would argue that the federal ban in 1994 is ...if not the cause...a significant contributing factor.

AR15's were a niche weapon owned by veterans and a limited number of firearm aficionados before the ban.

The ban made them the forbidden fruit.

And those lacking knowledge of firearms, ammunition and balistics assume the government wouldn't ban them simply based on cosmetic characteristic (which is exactly what they did). They assume (wrongly) that they are more dangerous/deadly/reliable than other weapons.

You know Cruz stopped shooting, not because he was stopped by an outside force...but because his rifle jammed. For the uninitiated, this means it either failed to eject a spent cartridge, failed to feed a round, double fed, failed to fire (dud), etc.

Happens all the time when dealing with large magazines...the larger the mag, the more likely a malfunction, because the spring is very, very tight on a full magazine...putting much more pressure on round one and two...and very loose at the end of the magazine.

In fact...one of the first things a new soldier is taught is the acronym SPORTS...when the weapon jams, Slap the magazine, Pull the charging handle, Observe the chamber, Release the charging handle, Tap the forward assist, Squeeze the trigger. It is so ingrained, it springs to mind instantly 20 years since I wore a uniform.

Had Cruz had a weapon he was more familiar with...or one that is more resistant to jamming (I have semi-auto pistols that have NEVER jammed through thousands of rounds)...the death toll could have been much higher. Especially in light of the fact the police were ordered not to enter the school.

Perhaps then if the high capacity magazines are both the least reliable way to shoot and the most aesthetically attractive way to misuse these guns, we could kill two birds (pardon the expression) with one stone and ban them.

Again your solution is to punish people who use the weapons properly and responsibly in the vain hope that it will somehow limit a nutjob from going on a spree.

And as usual any proposal by gun control people along these lines will contain a few extra "goodies" to further their desire for a gun free civilian populace.

Could not the same things be said about censoring violent movies and video games? Those are a donvienent whipping boy to blame gun violence. Is it the aesthetic value of military style weapons that makes them so attractive to nutjobs?

I understand and appreciate the argument that guns are fun and customizing guns makes them even more fun. But should they be styled in such a way to make them appear as military weapons or the toys used in games and movies?

Asking should they be styled this way utterly misses the entire problem and places the cart before the horse. The AR may APPEAL to those that want to perpetrate a mass shooting but its appeal factor is utterly irrelevant because it does not make executing that mass shooting more likely. If the only guns that were left were hot pink and covered in floral patterns that is not going to dissuade a mass murderer from going on a killing spree.

Yet again, you are asking a question to seek a specific outcome rather than actually asking that question with the intent of forming real debate or solutions.

Could you dismiss any and all potential effects from video games and movies? If the aesthetics of that media can be blamed, should it be that easy to dismiss a violent looking weapon?

 

[Rustic]

Maybe we can't see the forest for the trees.

Maybe one of the unfortunate reasons "assault style weapons" are used in many gun violence circumstances is the style. If video games and movies can be blamed for gun violence, why not the 'style' of weaponry? Are violent criminals drawn to the menacing look of these weapons more than the technical aspects of firing systems and round speed and lethality of sporting style weapons? Could similar cultural aspects attract those who watch violent movies and play violent video games to violent looking weapons?

Is it just cooler to carry a gun with a long magazine projecting from it? A gun that's all black and blinded up with military styling?

Gun lovers would agree that other sporting style weapons are just as, or more, deadly? Yet we don't see that many mass shootings committed with those sporting style weapons. If they are just as effective for self defense and a military style weapon, why have the military style weapon around?

As gun violence increased, could a corollary be seen in the increase of popularity of military style weapons, the "scary looking" guns?

I may be wrong, but I never heard this point of view proffered.

I see where you're comming from...but I would argue that the federal ban in 1994 is ...if not the cause...a significant contributing factor.

AR15's were a niche weapon owned by veterans and a limited number of firearm aficionados before the ban.

The ban made them the forbidden fruit.

And those lacking knowledge of firearms, ammunition and balistics assume the government wouldn't ban them simply based on cosmetic characteristic (which is exactly what they did). They assume (wrongly) that they are more dangerous/deadly/reliable than other weapons.

You know Cruz stopped shooting, not because he was stopped by an outside force...but because his rifle jammed. For the uninitiated, this means it either failed to eject a spent cartridge, failed to feed a round, double fed, failed to fire (dud), etc.

Happens all the time when dealing with large magazines...the larger the mag, the more likely a malfunction, because the spring is very, very tight on a full magazine...putting much more pressure on round one and two...and very loose at the end of the magazine.

In fact...one of the first things a new soldier is taught is the acronym SPORTS...when the weapon jams, Slap the magazine, Pull the charging handle, Observe the chamber, Release the charging handle, Tap the forward assist, Squeeze the trigger. It is so ingrained, it springs to mind instantly 20 years since I wore a uniform.

Had Cruz had a weapon he was more familiar with...or one that is more resistant to jamming (I have semi-auto pistols that have NEVER jammed through thousands of rounds)...the death toll could have been much higher. Especially in light of the fact the police were ordered not to enter the school.

Perhaps then if the high capacity magazines are both the least reliable way to shoot and the most aesthetically attractive way to misuse these guns, we could kill two birds (pardon the expression) with one stone and ban them.

Lol
You’re a fool, in the Middle East terrorists have access to. Everything, they much prefer bombs and vehicles.
Gun control has nothing to do guns... it’s always. Been about control. Wake the fuck up

 

[Nosmo King]

Maybe we can't see the forest for the trees.

Maybe one of the unfortunate reasons "assault style weapons" are used in many gun violence circumstances is the style. If video games and movies can be blamed for gun violence, why not the 'style' of weaponry? Are violent criminals drawn to the menacing look of these weapons more than the technical aspects of firing systems and round speed and lethality of sporting style weapons? Could similar cultural aspects attract those who watch violent movies and play violent video games to violent looking weapons?

Is it just cooler to carry a gun with a long magazine projecting from it? A gun that's all black and blinded up with military styling?

Gun lovers would agree that other sporting style weapons are just as, or more, deadly? Yet we don't see that many mass shootings committed with those sporting style weapons. If they are just as effective for self defense and a military style weapon, why have the military style weapon around?

As gun violence increased, could a corollary be seen in the increase of popularity of military style weapons, the "scary looking" guns?

I may be wrong, but I never heard this point of view proffered.

You are delusional, an ar15 is just a sporting rifle nothing more nothing less. Only fool like yourself thinks the firearm has anything to with criminal behavior, firearms have zero control over people. We have no criminal control in this country... and an open southern border

Do you place any blame for gun violence on media? Are violent video games and movies culpable?

If so, is it easy to excuse a gun that looks like the ones used in video games and violent movies?

 

[Rustic]

Maybe we can't see the forest for the trees.

Maybe one of the unfortunate reasons "assault style weapons" are used in many gun violence circumstances is the style. If video games and movies can be blamed for gun violence, why not the 'style' of weaponry? Are violent criminals drawn to the menacing look of these weapons more than the technical aspects of firing systems and round speed and lethality of sporting style weapons? Could similar cultural aspects attract those who watch violent movies and play violent video games to violent looking weapons?

Is it just cooler to carry a gun with a long magazine projecting from it? A gun that's all black and blinded up with military styling?

Gun lovers would agree that other sporting style weapons are just as, or more, deadly? Yet we don't see that many mass shootings committed with those sporting style weapons. If they are just as effective for self defense and a military style weapon, why have the military style weapon around?

As gun violence increased, could a corollary be seen in the increase of popularity of military style weapons, the "scary looking" guns?

I may be wrong, but I never heard this point of view proffered.

Maybe one of the unfortunate reasons "assault style weapons" are used in many gun violence circumstances is the style.

nope it is because it has been highly over rated by anti gun nutz

the ar is really nothing more then a sooped up 22

sure it can pump out the rounds but then again any semi auto can

most of my rifles are far more deadly then the ar

You're missing the point. If non military style guns are just as, if not more effective, why are the ARs so prevalent?

There are millions of ARs legally owned. In this. Country. A fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a percent of them are used in violent crime.

 

[Nosmo King]

Maybe we can't see the forest for the trees.

Maybe one of the unfortunate reasons "assault style weapons" are used in many gun violence circumstances is the style. If video games and movies can be blamed for gun violence, why not the 'style' of weaponry? Are violent criminals drawn to the menacing look of these weapons more than the technical aspects of firing systems and round speed and lethality of sporting style weapons? Could similar cultural aspects attract those who watch violent movies and play violent video games to violent looking weapons?

Is it just cooler to carry a gun with a long magazine projecting from it? A gun that's all black and blinded up with military styling?

Gun lovers would agree that other sporting style weapons are just as, or more, deadly? Yet we don't see that many mass shootings committed with those sporting style weapons. If they are just as effective for self defense and a military style weapon, why have the military style weapon around?

As gun violence increased, could a corollary be seen in the increase of popularity of military style weapons, the "scary looking" guns?

I may be wrong, but I never heard this point of view proffered.

I see where you're comming from...but I would argue that the federal ban in 1994 is ...if not the cause...a significant contributing factor.

AR15's were a niche weapon owned by veterans and a limited number of firearm aficionados before the ban.

The ban made them the forbidden fruit.

And those lacking knowledge of firearms, ammunition and balistics assume the government wouldn't ban them simply based on cosmetic characteristic (which is exactly what they did). They assume (wrongly) that they are more dangerous/deadly/reliable than other weapons.

You know Cruz stopped shooting, not because he was stopped by an outside force...but because his rifle jammed. For the uninitiated, this means it either failed to eject a spent cartridge, failed to feed a round, double fed, failed to fire (dud), etc.

Happens all the time when dealing with large magazines...the larger the mag, the more likely a malfunction, because the spring is very, very tight on a full magazine...putting much more pressure on round one and two...and very loose at the end of the magazine.

In fact...one of the first things a new soldier is taught is the acronym SPORTS...when the weapon jams, Slap the magazine, Pull the charging handle, Observe the chamber, Release the charging handle, Tap the forward assist, Squeeze the trigger. It is so ingrained, it springs to mind instantly 20 years since I wore a uniform.

Had Cruz had a weapon he was more familiar with...or one that is more resistant to jamming (I have semi-auto pistols that have NEVER jammed through thousands of rounds)...the death toll could have been much higher. Especially in light of the fact the police were ordered not to enter the school.

Perhaps then if the high capacity magazines are both the least reliable way to shoot and the most aesthetically attractive way to misuse these guns, we could kill two birds (pardon the expression) with one stone and ban them.

Lol
You’re a fool, in the Middle East terrorists have access to. Everything, they much prefer bombs and vehicles.
Gun control has nothing to do guns... it’s always. Been about control. Wake the fuck up

You might have a point in there somewhere, once we parse your post and sort out the syntax.

But we're not talking about terrorists today. We're talking about lunatics and their attraction to guns.

 

[Rustic]

Maybe we can't see the forest for the trees.

Maybe one of the unfortunate reasons "assault style weapons" are used in many gun violence circumstances is the style. If video games and movies can be blamed for gun violence, why not the 'style' of weaponry? Are violent criminals drawn to the menacing look of these weapons more than the technical aspects of firing systems and round speed and lethality of sporting style weapons? Could similar cultural aspects attract those who watch violent movies and play violent video games to violent looking weapons?

Is it just cooler to carry a gun with a long magazine projecting from it? A gun that's all black and blinded up with military styling?

Gun lovers would agree that other sporting style weapons are just as, or more, deadly? Yet we don't see that many mass shootings committed with those sporting style weapons. If they are just as effective for self defense and a military style weapon, why have the military style weapon around?

As gun violence increased, could a corollary be seen in the increase of popularity of military style weapons, the "scary looking" guns?

I may be wrong, but I never heard this point of view proffered.

You are delusional, an ar15 is just a sporting rifle nothing more nothing less. Only fool like yourself thinks the firearm has anything to with criminal behavior, firearms have zero control over people. We have no criminal control in this country... and an open southern border

Do you place any blame for gun violence on media? Are violent video games and movies culpable?

If so, is it easy to excuse a gun that looks like the ones used in video games and violent movies?

No, Firearms have no control over people

 

[Nosmo King]

Maybe we can't see the forest for the trees.

Maybe one of the unfortunate reasons "assault style weapons" are used in many gun violence circumstances is the style. If video games and movies can be blamed for gun violence, why not the 'style' of weaponry? Are violent criminals drawn to the menacing look of these weapons more than the technical aspects of firing systems and round speed and lethality of sporting style weapons? Could similar cultural aspects attract those who watch violent movies and play violent video games to violent looking weapons?

Is it just cooler to carry a gun with a long magazine projecting from it? A gun that's all black and blinded up with military styling?

Gun lovers would agree that other sporting style weapons are just as, or more, deadly? Yet we don't see that many mass shootings committed with those sporting style weapons. If they are just as effective for self defense and a military style weapon, why have the military style weapon around?

As gun violence increased, could a corollary be seen in the increase of popularity of military style weapons, the "scary looking" guns?

I may be wrong, but I never heard this point of view proffered.

Maybe one of the unfortunate reasons "assault style weapons" are used in many gun violence circumstances is the style.

nope it is because it has been highly over rated by anti gun nutz

the ar is really nothing more then a sooped up 22

sure it can pump out the rounds but then again any semi auto can

most of my rifles are far more deadly then the ar

You're missing the point. If non military style guns are just as, if not more effective, why are the ARs so prevalent?

There are millions of ARs legally owned. In this. Country. A fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a percent of them are used in violent crime.

So you're comfortable with gun massacres because that's just the cost of douybusiness.

Say that out loud in Parkland, Las Vegas, Newtown and Sutherland Springs.

 

[Nosmo King]

Maybe we can't see the forest for the trees.

Maybe one of the unfortunate reasons "assault style weapons" are used in many gun violence circumstances is the style. If video games and movies can be blamed for gun violence, why not the 'style' of weaponry? Are violent criminals drawn to the menacing look of these weapons more than the technical aspects of firing systems and round speed and lethality of sporting style weapons? Could similar cultural aspects attract those who watch violent movies and play violent video games to violent looking weapons?

Is it just cooler to carry a gun with a long magazine projecting from it? A gun that's all black and blinded up with military styling?

Gun lovers would agree that other sporting style weapons are just as, or more, deadly? Yet we don't see that many mass shootings committed with those sporting style weapons. If they are just as effective for self defense and a military style weapon, why have the military style weapon around?

As gun violence increased, could a corollary be seen in the increase of popularity of military style weapons, the "scary looking" guns?

I may be wrong, but I never heard this point of view proffered.

You are delusional, an ar15 is just a sporting rifle nothing more nothing less. Only fool like yourself thinks the firearm has anything to with criminal behavior, firearms have zero control over people. We have no criminal control in this country... and an open southern border

Do you place any blame for gun violence on media? Are violent video games and movies culpable?

If so, is it easy to excuse a gun that looks like the ones used in video games and violent movies?

No, Firearms have no control over people

Do movies and video games?

 

[Rustic]

Maybe we can't see the forest for the trees.

Maybe one of the unfortunate reasons "assault style weapons" are used in many gun violence circumstances is the style. If video games and movies can be blamed for gun violence, why not the 'style' of weaponry? Are violent criminals drawn to the menacing look of these weapons more than the technical aspects of firing systems and round speed and lethality of sporting style weapons? Could similar cultural aspects attract those who watch violent movies and play violent video games to violent looking weapons?

Is it just cooler to carry a gun with a long magazine projecting from it? A gun that's all black and blinded up with military styling?

Gun lovers would agree that other sporting style weapons are just as, or more, deadly? Yet we don't see that many mass shootings committed with those sporting style weapons. If they are just as effective for self defense and a military style weapon, why have the military style weapon around?

As gun violence increased, could a corollary be seen in the increase of popularity of military style weapons, the "scary looking" guns?

I may be wrong, but I never heard this point of view proffered.

I see where you're comming from...but I would argue that the federal ban in 1994 is ...if not the cause...a significant contributing factor.

AR15's were a niche weapon owned by veterans and a limited number of firearm aficionados before the ban.

The ban made them the forbidden fruit.

And those lacking knowledge of firearms, ammunition and balistics assume the government wouldn't ban them simply based on cosmetic characteristic (which is exactly what they did). They assume (wrongly) that they are more dangerous/deadly/reliable than other weapons.

You know Cruz stopped shooting, not because he was stopped by an outside force...but because his rifle jammed. For the uninitiated, this means it either failed to eject a spent cartridge, failed to feed a round, double fed, failed to fire (dud), etc.

Happens all the time when dealing with large magazines...the larger the mag, the more likely a malfunction, because the spring is very, very tight on a full magazine...putting much more pressure on round one and two...and very loose at the end of the magazine.

In fact...one of the first things a new soldier is taught is the acronym SPORTS...when the weapon jams, Slap the magazine, Pull the charging handle, Observe the chamber, Release the charging handle, Tap the forward assist, Squeeze the trigger. It is so ingrained, it springs to mind instantly 20 years since I wore a uniform.

Had Cruz had a weapon he was more familiar with...or one that is more resistant to jamming (I have semi-auto pistols that have NEVER jammed through thousands of rounds)...the death toll could have been much higher. Especially in light of the fact the police were ordered not to enter the school.

Perhaps then if the high capacity magazines are both the least reliable way to shoot and the most aesthetically attractive way to misuse these guns, we could kill two birds (pardon the expression) with one stone and ban them.

Lol
You’re a fool, in the Middle East terrorists have access to. Everything, they much prefer bombs and vehicles.
Gun control has nothing to do guns... it’s always. Been about control. Wake the fuck up

You might have a point in there somewhere, once we parse your post and sort out the syntax.

But we're not talking about terrorists today. We're talking about lunatics and their attraction to guns.

Firearms have nothing to do with it, if there wasn’t firearms they would just use something else. Evil is evil and is not caused by inanimate objects...

 

[Rustic]

Maybe we can't see the forest for the trees.

Maybe one of the unfortunate reasons "assault style weapons" are used in many gun violence circumstances is the style. If video games and movies can be blamed for gun violence, why not the 'style' of weaponry? Are violent criminals drawn to the menacing look of these weapons more than the technical aspects of firing systems and round speed and lethality of sporting style weapons? Could similar cultural aspects attract those who watch violent movies and play violent video games to violent looking weapons?

Is it just cooler to carry a gun with a long magazine projecting from it? A gun that's all black and blinded up with military styling?

Gun lovers would agree that other sporting style weapons are just as, or more, deadly? Yet we don't see that many mass shootings committed with those sporting style weapons. If they are just as effective for self defense and a military style weapon, why have the military style weapon around?

As gun violence increased, could a corollary be seen in the increase of popularity of military style weapons, the "scary looking" guns?

I may be wrong, but I never heard this point of view proffered.

Maybe one of the unfortunate reasons "assault style weapons" are used in many gun violence circumstances is the style.

nope it is because it has been highly over rated by anti gun nutz

the ar is really nothing more then a sooped up 22

sure it can pump out the rounds but then again any semi auto can

most of my rifles are far more deadly then the ar

You're missing the point. If non military style guns are just as, if not more effective, why are the ARs so prevalent?

There are millions of ARs legally owned. In this. Country. A fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a percent of them are used in violent crime.

So you're comfortable with gun massacres because that's just the cost of douybusiness.

Say that out loud in Parkland, Las Vegas, Newtown and Sutherland Springs.

The firearms have nothing to do with those, blame the people that do the crime not the firearm that has no control over people