What is the republican solution to ending mass shootings? Why don’t they ever offer solutions?

[2aguy]

You sir, are a liar. In fact, the FIRST school mass shooting happened during the assault weapons ban.

You "sir" are a moron and a liar.

List of school shootings in the United States - Wikipedia

There were numerous mass school shootings prior to that and we were NOT just limiting the discussion to mass "school" shootings in any event.

Go away

You stupid buffoon, you specifically said MASS shooting. You then post an extensive list of "school" shootings going back to 1840 which were almost completely made up of individual events to buttress your "mass shooting" claim. So, you've shown yourself to be a liar, a fool and unworthy of attention. Feel free to go pound sand for you have no credibility.

Buh-bye

Did they include the indian massacres of school students too?

List of school massacres by death toll - Wikipedia

Bath, U.S., (1927) school.... 44 dead, dynamite, bolt action rifle.

Virginia Tech.... 32 dead.... pistols.

Sandy Hook.... 26 dead... AR-15

Crimea school shooting.... 20 dead... pump action shotgun.

Parkland shooting.... 17 dead.... AR-15 rifle.


Dunblane, Scotland, school shooting.... 17....pistols.

Erfut, Germany school shooting.... 16... pistol.

Winnedan, Germany..... 15.... pistol

Umpquaa college shooting..... 9....pistols, had rifle, didn't use it.

Santa Fe, Texas....10.... shotgun and revolver

Kauhajoki, Finland... 10.... pistol and molotov cocktails

Cologne, Germany (1964)... 10....homemade flame thrower, lance, mace(bludgeon)

Enoch, U.S (1764)..... 10... Tomahawks and mauls....

Yan Yenming, China.... 9.... knife

Nanping, China.... 8.... knife

Red Lake, U.S...... 9.... pistol, shotgun

Osaka, Japan.... 8.... kitchen knife

Jokela, Finland... 8.... pistol...

Oikos univeristy, California.... 7... pistol

Anne Anne, China.... 6.... knives and chisels...

Northern Illinois University.... 5... pistols and shotgun

Santa Monica.... 5.... AR-15...

Bremen, Germany.... 4.... 6-10 hand guns...

La Loche, Canada.... 4.... shotgun

 

[2aguy]

Or you could do away with magazine fed semi -auto weapons...making the carnage in these cases so much less

Moron..... a shooter in Crimea used a 5 shot, pump action shotgun to murder 21 college students....if you can use your fingers and toes you will find that 21 is more than 18, Parkland, or 11, the recent nighclub shooting......

Magazines have nothing to do with deaths in a mass shooting, it is the gun free zone and groups of unarmed people that allow the shooter to kill with nothing to stop him...

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research

Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages by Gary Kleck :: SSRN

Do bans on large-capacity magazines (LCMs) for semiautomatic firearms have significant potential for reducing the number of deaths and injuries in mass shootings?

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

-----


SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research

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.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Or you could do away with magazine fed semi -auto weapons...making the carnage in these cases so much less

So instead of 25 people killed, you'd be happy with 23?

Only a leftist would call that success.

 

[Lesh]

Or you could do away with magazine fed semi -auto weapons...making the carnage in these cases so much less

Moron..... a shooter in Crimea used a 5 shot, pump action shotgun to murder 21 college students....if you can use your fingers and toes you will find that 21 is more than 18, Parkland, or 11, the recent nighclub shooting......

Magazines have nothing to do with deaths in a mass shooting, it is the gun free zone and groups of unarmed people that allow the shooter to kill with nothing to stop him...

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research

Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages by Gary Kleck :: SSRN

Do bans on large-capacity magazines (LCMs) for semiautomatic firearms have significant potential for reducing the number of deaths and injuries in mass shootings?

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

-----


SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research

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.

Yea...douchebag (since we're going full tourettes) there HAVE been instances where shotguns have produced some significant carnage. But in almost all cases where shotguns are used the carnage is less than that produced by semi-auto magazine fed weapons.

And yea...easy reloading DOES increase lethality...duh

 

[2aguy]

Or you could do away with magazine fed semi -auto weapons...making the carnage in these cases so much less

Moron..... a shooter in Crimea used a 5 shot, pump action shotgun to murder 21 college students....if you can use your fingers and toes you will find that 21 is more than 18, Parkland, or 11, the recent nighclub shooting......

Magazines have nothing to do with deaths in a mass shooting, it is the gun free zone and groups of unarmed people that allow the shooter to kill with nothing to stop him...

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research

Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages by Gary Kleck :: SSRN

Do bans on large-capacity magazines (LCMs) for semiautomatic firearms have significant potential for reducing the number of deaths and injuries in mass shootings?

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

-----


SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research

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.

Yea...douchebag (since we're going full tourettes) there HAVE been instances where shotguns have produced some significant carnage. But in almost all cases where shotguns are used the carnage is less than that produced by semi-auto magazine fed weapons.

And yea...easy reloading DOES increase lethality...duh

Here...since you obviously ignored the actual research into magazine capacity and mass public shootings, I will post it again....if you read it, you will see that you don't know what you are talking about....

Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages by Gary Kleck :: SSRN

Do bans on large-capacity magazines (LCMs) for semiautomatic firearms have significant potential for reducing the number of deaths and injuries in mass shootings?

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

-----


SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research

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.

 

[MisterBeale]

Okay, so any level gun control is bad which is of course retarded on its own, but the right can’t even think of any alternatives to curbing gun violence. Saying “no” to everything accomplishes absolutely nothing. It’s astounding we are still at square one.

Get rid of the FBI and CIA so they can no longer use PRISM, DARPA and MK-ULTRA to coordinate brainwashing stool pigeon time bombs with pre-made press propaganda blitzes that make you push for the globalist agenda.

 

[deanrd]

Sometimes you need to go no further than the obvious.

And the obvious is that if Republicans have any solutions at all, they are bad ones.

 

[Billy000]

Okay, so any level gun control is bad which is of course retarded on its own, but the right can’t even think of any alternatives to curbing gun violence. Saying “no” to everything accomplishes absolutely nothing. It’s astounding we are still at square one.

Get rid of the FBI and CIA so they can no longer use PRISM, DARPA and MK-ULTRA to coordinate brainwashing stool pigeon time bombs with pre-made press propaganda blitzes that make you push for the globalist agenda.

Huh?

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

Gun Control Myths
1) criminals will turn in their guns
2) terrorist will turn in their guns
3) mass shooters will turn in their guns
4) innocent people will turn in their guns
5) confiscating guns will be easy

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Sometimes you need to go no further than the obvious.

And the obvious is that if Republicans have any solutions at all, they are bad ones.

So what good ones did the Democrats ever come up with? Assault weapons ban? Oh yes, we had that already. It was a total failure. Any other good ideas?

 

[Daryl Hunt]

We have some control over the Mass shootings. While we can't stop them, we can make them more difficult to commit and take away some of the tools used. But most of all, we can end the Cult of the Well Dressed Mass Shooter.

So you are saying that while more gun control is not a solution to gun violence it is a satisfying political gesture.

No, you are saying that. Once again, you are trying to tell me what I should think. We have all but ended the Cult of the Well Dressed Mass Killer here. But it took 3 of them to do it. At some point the public has to say, "Enough". So we adopted common sense run regulations AND educated our Cops, Schools and General Public on how to recognize the shooter before they get to the gate, how to identify and stop them at the gate and how to protect the students through one way doors made of steel and emergency procedures. What's the worth of trying when you can't even get within 1000 feet of the front gate and if you do, you get bagged at the gate. And if you get beyond that, there are no targets to shoot. Our Schools are some of the safest places in the world yet they are primarily Gun Free Zones with the exception of a handful of armed and well trained Security Guards.

Now, what are YOU going to suggest for the other Mass Shootings. And I don't mean the up to 13 killed. I mean people going for a new body count record.

The subject was gun violence, and while it is possible to fortify certain discrete areas to make them safe, this idea has little to no relevance to the topic of gun violence in America.

1. Make it difficult to get your weapon to a target rich environment. Meaning, Schools and Theaters and such using various methods that DO work and are being implemented across the United States. We can't stop the criminal drive bys or the angry birds through these methods but a least we can keep the body count down.

2. Do something about the Cult that worships the AR. We started doing that in 2013 and that Cult is all but broken up. In the stores, AR-15s line the shelves and the only use they have is to collect dust. This was accomplished a little by laws but mostly by the community just getting fed up. If you go out and go on about how wonderful your AR is and what a great hunting rifle it is, chances are, you are going to be sitting alone after the first sentence. You say how great your AR is and almost everyone else will come up with their own idea to do the same job and all but you will agree that the weapons they suggest are much better. Most gun owners don't and won't own an AR since there are better alternatives for the same money. Just get rid of the Cult status. The AR won't go away but after it clutters up the store's shelves so long, they are going to start dropping the price. Right now, I can get a MP-15 SW for 399. It retails for 599, I believe. It's normally sold in gun shops for 499. Even at 399 it just gathers dust.

3. Educate the Public on what to look for, how to act, when to call the cops, etc.. Believe it or not, this is the most important one. It doesn't take another gun to stop a shooter, it takes a community.

The OP was talking about Mass Shootings, not individual murders or accidental discharges. You want to strawman away from that. Notice what I keep saying. I don't say we need more gun laws. But most of it is done through community and cop education. This also reduces the individual murders and accidental discharges. I do push what I call "Common Sense Gun Regulations". I see them work every day when mixed with the 3 points I already made. It stopped a shooter headed for a school outside the gate already here. And what was he packing? Guess.

So let's stay on point here. It makes a safer community and a happier community. If it isn't safe where you are maybe you should take these ideas to the next Council Meetings and form a panel to do them. If that isn't possible maybe you should just move. If you don't want this, stay where you are we may find that you are not as safe a person as we want in our community.

Moron..... the AR-15 is no different from any other semi automatic rifle......

in fact, a shooter in Crimea two weeks ago murdered 21 college students using a 5 shot, pump action shotgun...it isn't the gun, you doofus, it is the target, a gun free zone filled with unarmed victims....21 is more than 11 that the recent Nightclub shooter killed with a pistol. The worst school shooting was Virginia tech, you doofus and he killed 32 with a pistol.

Just how many times are you going to keep bringing up the same BS. VT was the first. No one was prepared for something like that. Due to the sound proofing of the buildings, the shooter moved from building to building and the students were not prepared for the unthinkable. Since then, the Schools (or the smart ones) have all gone to various preparations to at lease either slow the shooter down or not allow him any targets. The dumb ones are too busy screaming "More Guns" and the Southern Schools are still the most susceptible to mass shooting. But I have a feeling after the Florida shooting and the Texas shooting most of the preventions will be adopted if they haven't already. That means, if you want a high body count you had better bring something other than what was used at VT. It took us 3 mass shootings to adapt what we have now and it works. Bringing up VT is a strawman.

Then there is Crimea. Crimea is a war zone. You just as well use Syria or Yemen for the example. While we are not having any real racially triggered mass shootings (just nut cases for the most part save the husband and wife team) these places are having a war between religions. It's like the Baptists going after the Catholics and Methodist because they are not exactly the same faith. Oh, wait, that used to be Ireland when IT was a war zone. Crimea is NOT the US. I know you would like to have a shooting war against all those that think slightly different than you do but the US really frowns on that behavior and almost all religions would take exception to that behavior, not to mention the Police. This one is a very stupid Strawman.

As for the AR-15 being only a hunting rifle or sporting rifle, it makes a damned fine weapon of war which is exactly what it owes it's heritage to. Just because you can shoot varmints with it doesn't mean it's the best varmint rifle. I prefer a Model 70 shooting a 243 myself. As more than one person pointed out, if you show up to a serious varmint hunt with the AR as your only rifle you are going to get laughed at.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Gun Control Myths
1) criminals will turn in their guns
2) terrorist will turn in their guns
3) mass shooters will turn in their guns
4) innocent people will turn in their guns
5) confiscating guns will be easy

And since when have I EVER made any of these claims. You are just making shit up again.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Sometimes you need to go no further than the obvious.

And the obvious is that if Republicans have any solutions at all, they are bad ones.

So what good ones did the Democrats ever come up with? Assault weapons ban? Oh yes, we had that already. It was a total failure. Any other good ideas?

Actually, it was VERY affective. But the NRA waited until 1998 when the ban ran out and spent millions promoting the AR and it's clones. They promoted fear and helped to create the Cult of the AR God. We are past that now. No one is afraid like the NRA and your bunch tries even today to make them. As it stands now, in the gun shops, the AR types are lining the shelves and just gathering dust. There are no new buyers. The Buyers that would buy an AR already bought them. You are just trying to continue a PR that even the NRA gave up on.

Around here, we stopped the AR Cult religion since it's really stupid. But if you want to pray to your "God" go ahead, I won't stop you. Hell, you can pray to a ham sandwich for all I care.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

You sir, are a liar. In fact, the FIRST school mass shooting happened during the assault weapons ban.

You "sir" are a moron and a liar.

List of school shootings in the United States - Wikipedia

There were numerous mass school shootings prior to that and we were NOT just limiting the discussion to mass "school" shootings in any event.

Go away

You stupid buffoon, you specifically said MASS shooting. You then post an extensive list of "school" shootings going back to 1840 which were almost completely made up of individual events to buttress your "mass shooting" claim. So, you've shown yourself to be a liar, a fool and unworthy of attention. Feel free to go pound sand for you have no credibility.

Buh-bye

Did they include the indian massacres of school students too?

List of school massacres by death toll - Wikipedia

Bath, U.S., (1927) school.... 44 dead, dynamite, bolt action rifle.

Virginia Tech.... 32 dead.... pistols.

Sandy Hook.... 26 dead... AR-15

Crimea school shooting.... 20 dead... pump action shotgun.

Parkland shooting.... 17 dead.... AR-15 rifle.


Dunblane, Scotland, school shooting.... 17....pistols.

Erfut, Germany school shooting.... 16... pistol.

Winnedan, Germany..... 15.... pistol

Umpquaa college shooting..... 9....pistols, had rifle, didn't use it.

Santa Fe, Texas....10.... shotgun and revolver

Kauhajoki, Finland... 10.... pistol and molotov cocktails

Cologne, Germany (1964)... 10....homemade flame thrower, lance, mace(bludgeon)

Enoch, U.S (1764)..... 10... Tomahawks and mauls....

Yan Yenming, China.... 9.... knife

Nanping, China.... 8.... knife

Red Lake, U.S...... 9.... pistol, shotgun

Osaka, Japan.... 8.... kitchen knife

Jokela, Finland... 8.... pistol...

Oikos univeristy, California.... 7... pistol

Anne Anne, China.... 6.... knives and chisels...

Northern Illinois University.... 5... pistols and shotgun

Santa Monica.... 5.... AR-15...

Bremen, Germany.... 4.... 6-10 hand guns...

La Loche, Canada.... 4.... shotgun

You still don't see the corrolation there. Most were low body counts using anything other than the AR. You can't count VT since it was the first and the schools were the least prepared. The fact remains is, if you want to go for the record, you need the AR and lots of ammo. Since the schools no longer cooperate with the shooter, nor does the other venues, you need to be almost herculean to get the record which stands at 57 body count.

You left out the schools in Afghanistan and Syria who actually hold the highest body counts. Nice picking and choosing and full of strawmen.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Sometimes you need to go no further than the obvious.

And the obvious is that if Republicans have any solutions at all, they are bad ones.

So what good ones did the Democrats ever come up with? Assault weapons ban? Oh yes, we had that already. It was a total failure. Any other good ideas?

Actually, it was VERY affective. But the NRA waited until 1998 when the ban ran out and spent millions promoting the AR and it's clones. They promoted fear and helped to create the Cult of the AR God. We are past that now. No one is afraid like the NRA and your bunch tries even today to make them. As it stands now, in the gun shops, the AR types are lining the shelves and just gathering dust. There are no new buyers. The Buyers that would buy an AR already bought them. You are just trying to continue a PR that even the NRA gave up on.

Around here, we stopped the AR Cult religion since it's really stupid. But if you want to pray to your "God" go ahead, I won't stop you. Hell, you can pray to a ham sandwich for all I care.

Ban on assault weapons didn’t reduce violence

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Republicans don't have solutions for anything.

Unless the question is how they can help needy billionaires and corporations.

We had a solution for Hillary Clinton.

Suck on it.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Sometimes you need to go no further than the obvious.

And the obvious is that if Republicans have any solutions at all, they are bad ones.

So what good ones did the Democrats ever come up with? Assault weapons ban? Oh yes, we had that already. It was a total failure. Any other good ideas?

Actually, it was VERY affective. But the NRA waited until 1998 when the ban ran out and spent millions promoting the AR and it's clones. They promoted fear and helped to create the Cult of the AR God. We are past that now. No one is afraid like the NRA and your bunch tries even today to make them. As it stands now, in the gun shops, the AR types are lining the shelves and just gathering dust. There are no new buyers. The Buyers that would buy an AR already bought them. You are just trying to continue a PR that even the NRA gave up on.

Around here, we stopped the AR Cult religion since it's really stupid. But if you want to pray to your "God" go ahead, I won't stop you. Hell, you can pray to a ham sandwich for all I care.

Ban on assault weapons didn’t reduce violence

No, but it kept the body count down. Not to worry, the low body count was made up for after 1998

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Sometimes you need to go no further than the obvious.

And the obvious is that if Republicans have any solutions at all, they are bad ones.

So what good ones did the Democrats ever come up with? Assault weapons ban? Oh yes, we had that already. It was a total failure. Any other good ideas?

Actually, it was VERY affective. But the NRA waited until 1998 when the ban ran out and spent millions promoting the AR and it's clones. They promoted fear and helped to create the Cult of the AR God. We are past that now. No one is afraid like the NRA and your bunch tries even today to make them. As it stands now, in the gun shops, the AR types are lining the shelves and just gathering dust. There are no new buyers. The Buyers that would buy an AR already bought them. You are just trying to continue a PR that even the NRA gave up on.

Around here, we stopped the AR Cult religion since it's really stupid. But if you want to pray to your "God" go ahead, I won't stop you. Hell, you can pray to a ham sandwich for all I care.

Ban on assault weapons didn’t reduce violence

No, but it kept the body count down. Not to worry, the low body count was made up for after 1998

No, it had nothing to do with it. Violent (and gun) crime has been on the decrease since the early 90's. After the ban was not renewed, it continued in that direction. It wasn't until the Ferguson Effect kicked in that it increased again.

Between fading memories and a great economy, it's back on the decline. If you're looking for a true measure, gun crimes decreased as more and more states adopted CCW programs and laws supporting the victims instead of the criminals. Just because mass murders seem to be more frequent doesn't mean something is wrong with gun laws. It means we are not detecting kooks early enough or doing anything about it.

If you really want to see a decrease in murders overall, what we need is public executions for murderers. We need to fast-track the appeals process so it doesn't take 14 years to carry out the death penalty. Three months, all appeals should be exhausted.

That would cut down our murder rate by at least half, and you don't have to trample on others constitutional rights to do so.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Sometimes you need to go no further than the obvious.

And the obvious is that if Republicans have any solutions at all, they are bad ones.

So what good ones did the Democrats ever come up with? Assault weapons ban? Oh yes, we had that already. It was a total failure. Any other good ideas?

Actually, it was VERY affective. But the NRA waited until 1998 when the ban ran out and spent millions promoting the AR and it's clones. They promoted fear and helped to create the Cult of the AR God. We are past that now. No one is afraid like the NRA and your bunch tries even today to make them. As it stands now, in the gun shops, the AR types are lining the shelves and just gathering dust. There are no new buyers. The Buyers that would buy an AR already bought them. You are just trying to continue a PR that even the NRA gave up on.

Around here, we stopped the AR Cult religion since it's really stupid. But if you want to pray to your "God" go ahead, I won't stop you. Hell, you can pray to a ham sandwich for all I care.

Ban on assault weapons didn’t reduce violence

No, but it kept the body count down. Not to worry, the low body count was made up for after 1998

No, it had nothing to do with it. Violent (and gun) crime has been on the decrease since the early 90's. After the ban was not renewed, it continued in that direction. It wasn't until the Ferguson Effect kicked in that it increased again.

Between fading memories and a great economy, it's back on the decline. If you're looking for a true measure, gun crimes decreased as more and more states adopted CCW programs and laws supporting the victims instead of the criminals. Just because mass murders seem to be more frequent doesn't mean something is wrong with gun laws. It means we are not detecting kooks early enough or doing anything about it.

If you really want to see a decrease in murders overall, what we need is public executions for murderers. We need to fast-track the appeals process so it doesn't take 14 years to carry out the death penalty. Three months, all appeals should be exhausted.

That would cut down our murder rate by at least half, and you don't have to trample on others constitutional rights to do so.

Yours keeps bringing up the 2nd amendment and then misquoting it. Actually, outside of the higher classes of weapons, the Federal Government (as in Congress) has completely stayed out of this mess as they should. But the States have a huge latitude in what they can do and can't do. And if the State does it (outside of the Heller Case for Handguns) then it's constitutional.

 

[Markle]

Your friends must be pretty bad marksmen...and trying to call a revolver a semi-auto is pretty lame. What is the cocking action and more importantly I was talking about MAGAZINE fed semi-autos. Neither that nor the shotgun are that genius

Still waiting for your definition of an assault weapon.

How is calling a revolver a semi-automatic weapon lame?

What is your point about a shotgun?

You've proven your ignorance of weapons. Why not quit while you're behind?

Abraham Lincoln
“It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt.”