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

[beagle9]

These mass shootings virtually always involve high- capacity rapid-fire weapons.
There is absolutely no rational reason an ordinary citizen (that is, excluding law-enforcement and military), needs to have such a lethal weapon.
The only reason an ordinary citizen needs a gun is for hunting or target shooting, and the remote possibility that he might need to defend his home at some point.
If you own a gun, you have a responsibility to maintain it, and your competence in handling it. Target shooting is very educational, and hunting is a thrill. Get them both, and you'll have a ball, and, with luck no-one will be killed accidentally in the process.
But, if you need an AR15, you should get a LOT of education, before you go hunting!

you need to learn what a semiautomatic weapon is maybe then you will realize that it is nothing but a semiautomatic rifle just like any other that has been available to the public for over 100 years

He probably knows. The AR15 IS a rapid fire weapon. Even with just semi auto. It came into being as the AR-15 Model 601 and has seen a ton of battles in Combat. There is little difference between the AR-15 Model 760 and the AR-15 Model 601. That means that there is little difference between the modern AR-15 and it's clones and the M-4. It has features to help a scared shitless skinny young kid carry it for long periods of time and put a lot of lead into the enemy. The normal operation of the M-4 is semi auto and that means it's so close to the AR-15 model 760 there isn't enough to argue about. Yet, you do argue.

The first thing that we have to do to stop the mass shootings of today is to get rid of the AR Cult. And you demonstrate why each and every time you post.

Lol
You don’t solve anything by taking from law-abiding citizens, Who are you to say who owns what when it comes to small arms? fuck off

Reminder. We HAD a 10 year ban on sales of assault weapons and not only did the sky not fall but mass shootings declined...only to rise again after the ban was lifted

It's not a test of the gun, but rather a test of who is getting their mentally screwed up hands on them, and why they want them ??

Once people go stupid, then they look around for the most efficient way to hurt people. The sad thing about our free society, is that we have to live with these crazies being tolerated around us, even though we know there is something wrong or has gone wrong with them. Even worse, the law gets them on their radar, but liberal/leftist policies of inclusiveness, political correctness, tolerance, and diversity is misconstrued to mean tolerate anything and everything today. It has been a total failure of the Demon-crat's over these years, but they have developed a means to blame everything else except the real reasons we are getting what we are getting today.

Now the leftist will take this as an attack on them as a whole, when it is not an attack on them as a whole, but rather a realization that among all groups there are those who are bad, and if they are bad then call them out from among the group. This way people then see that the group is serious about not carrying the bad around with them or holding them up because of the sheer numbers game being played.

 

[Rustic]

You don't know what you are talking about, the majority of mass shootings are done with pistols......

If I took the total deaths from "Mass Shootings" by pistols for the last 10 years, all of them would not equal even one that an AR was used. Most "Mass Shootings" by a pistol deaths you can count on one hand. For most of the "Mass Shootings" where they used an AR you are going to have to count on both hands, both feet and drop your pants for the count and still not have enough.

MAss shooting account for 1% of all murders

Rifles of any kind are only used in 2% of all murders

the AR is used in less that 1% of all murders

you are barking up the wrong tree as usual

But we all know you don't give a shit about lowering the murder rate as much as you care about controlling others

If we can save even one life, it's worth it, nutcase.

No it's not beause it won't save any lives

You really think banning one rifle will stop mass shootings when all anyone has to do is use any other semiauto rifle that is not banned

I see. Had the Bump stock been comletely banned and manufacture prohibited much like the auto kits for the AR, how many people would stil be alive from the Vegas Shooting? I would say that if the bump stock wasn't there at all and fell under the 1934 Firearms act, there would have been at least 20 people that would not have died that day and scores of people that were wounded would not have been wounded. That is saving lives if you remove the tools like that.

Only a fool would think that guy would obey any frivolous gun control laws... Banning bump stocks would be a frivolous gun control law.

 

[Rustic]

Oh so now it simulates

Not what you said earlier you said a bump stock makes a semiauto an automatic weapon by definition

you were WRONG just admit it

By all definitions except yours, using a bump stock on an AR makes it a MG. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a friggin duck.

You mean the definition that is actually in the books and not one made up by a person of questionable mental faculties?

The definition of a MG is that it can rapid fire. Some idiot brings up the one shot per trigger pull crap. The body is limited to less than 120 trigger pulls per minute. But the Bump Stock allows many times that. If it quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, it's a friggin duck. If it can do rapid fire beyond the human capability them it's a friggin MG.

Most people can fire more than twice a second

MAybe you can't

Here is a good article on it. You will note that you are not taking into account that you can only fire a 30 round clip for about 10 seconds and then have to take time to drop the clip and slam in the new one.

https://www.quora.com/How-many-rounds-does-a-semi-automatic-rifle-fire-per-minute


The rate of fire number is fairly misleading. From an engineering perspective, yes, the rate of fire could be classed as 180 rounds per minute, or even higher. But just because that’s the rate, doesn’t mean that you can actually fire 180 rounds in a minute.

The rate of fire is going to be slowed by the fact that you have to do mag changes every 30 rounds or so, by the fact that your finger won’t be keeping up for that long, and probably even by heat in the rifle.

Realistically, an experienced shooter can probably fire 3 rounds a second, at least to start. But every 30 rounds (ten seconds) they need to stop and reload. That reload will take about five seconds, unless you are VERY fast. So that’s 30 rounds in 15 seconds (effective fire rate of 120 rounds per minute, not 180). Few people will retain that fire rate through the a full minute, probably slowing to closer to two rounds per second by the end. My guess is that an experienced shooter (though not a professional) is probably looking at around 90 rounds a minute of effective fire. You might be able to speed it up a bit if you sacrifice all accuracy and normal use of a firearm.

An inexperienced shooter is going to be even less.

Ar15’s will not stand up to any of those numbers… They’re just sporting rifles

 

[Skull Pilot]

then you should be happy mass shooters like the .223 since it wasn't designed to kill. Just think of the death toll if mass shooters used 6.8 or 7.62 rounds

and a .223 kills rabid skunks, raccoons and coyotes just fine thank you very much

School is in
Think about what you have just said. Let's look at the 6.8. It's about the same length but a bigger diameter in both bullet and cartridge. The cartridge is made up of a very light and strong composite. The weight is less than the 556 or 223 so you don't add weight. It's being designed for WAR just like the 556 was designed for war. It just does it a bit better at a longer range. So you don't give up the amount of ammo you can carry but have a more effective weapon of war.

They replaced the M-14 with the M-16 because the weight of the gun and the weight of the ammo. The M-14 was far superior in a firefight but you ran out of ammo too fast. The 7.62 or 308 is the far superior cartridge but it's heavy in comparison therefore you can't carry as many rounds. Plus, due to the power of the cartridge, the gun has to be larger and heavier. You wouldn't know this because you haven't spent 16 hours force marching from point A to B with 80lbs of other equipment on your back. Every ounce saved.......

Now, about the 223, most school shootings are done close up. The 223 will kill larger game (meaning us) easily at close range. And since you have so many rounds, don't worry about wasting it. Even if the aftermath looks like a battle zone, it's not. You have ammo to burn. Before you run out of ammo you will run out of time and you only have a few minutes to operate until the Cops take you out or you put the muzzle in your mouth. And most shooters are part of the AR Cult. No dues, no memberships just insanity. You are part of that AR Cult. the only difference is, you don't have the guts to go out and do a mass shooting yourself in the name of the Revolution. The only reason that Vegas Shooting had such a high body count at that range was he through hundreds of rounds out very fast. It's like throwing a bunch of rocks at a wall full of balloons. Some will hit and most will miss but if you throw enough, you can burst almost all the balloons. This is the method of the Full Auto M-16 or the AR-15 with a bump stock. This has been abandoned by even the Military. But it's not ineffective when you have a target rich environment like a theater, school or Club. The 223 does exactly what it was originally invented to do at that point.

You are part of a cult. And the way to stop mass shootings is to outlaw the cult. Maybe we should handle it like any other violent cult and just start arresting the cult leaders.

You don't know what you are talking about, the majority of mass shootings are done with pistols......

If I took the total deaths from "Mass Shootings" by pistols for the last 10 years, all of them would not equal even one that an AR was used. Most "Mass Shootings" by a pistol deaths you can count on one hand. For most of the "Mass Shootings" where they used an AR you are going to have to count on both hands, both feet and drop your pants for the count and still not have enough.

ARs are used in less than 1% firearm violence in this country... You need to realize there are much larger fish to fry.

Lets look at mass shootings. Bury this among all firearm violence is dishonest.

No conflating mass shootings into a major factor in the murder rate is dishonest

 

[evenflow1969]

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.

Their solution is “shut up and let it happen”

You don't need to shut up....

Well, in your case....you do.

Did you even bother to send any thoughts and prayers over this?

I was fourteen when the first weapon was aimed at me while I was unarmed. No shots were fired but I felt helpless in the moment. Any one that has been there would rather be able to return fire. I now cary a 45 and no one points a gun at me any more. No gun bans!

 

[Skull Pilot]

1. Promote two parent families.
2. Get more conservative judges on the bench so we could bring back being committed.
3. Allow God and religion back into mainstream American society.
4. Eliminate all gun-free zones outside of some government buildings.

That's your "solution" to gun violence?

Why not add "give everyone a puppy"?

If you want to reduce gun violence then you would be focused on where most of the gun violence actually occurs you are obsessing over the wrong thing

 

[Rustic]

You don't know what you are talking about, the majority of mass shootings are done with pistols......

If I took the total deaths from "Mass Shootings" by pistols for the last 10 years, all of them would not equal even one that an AR was used. Most "Mass Shootings" by a pistol deaths you can count on one hand. For most of the "Mass Shootings" where they used an AR you are going to have to count on both hands, both feet and drop your pants for the count and still not have enough.

MAss shooting account for 1% of all murders

Rifles of any kind are only used in 2% of all murders

the AR is used in less that 1% of all murders

you are barking up the wrong tree as usual

But we all know you don't give a shit about lowering the murder rate as much as you care about controlling others

If we can save even one life, it's worth it, nutcase.

No it's not beause it won't save any lives

You really think banning one rifle will stop mass shootings when all anyone has to do is use any other semiauto rifle that is not banned

I see. Had the Bump stock been comletely banned and manufacture prohibited much like the auto kits for the AR, how many people would stil be alive from the Vegas Shooting? I would say that if the bump stock wasn't there at all and fell under the 1934 Firearms act, there would have been at least 20 people that would not have died that day and scores of people that were wounded would not have been wounded. That is saving lives if you remove the tools like that.

Funny, I could not sell bump stocks up at all, before you guys lit your hair on fire about them, I had three or four on the shelf that were collecting dust for a couple three years… Now I can’t keep them in stock.

You anti-gun nutters are fucking morons...

 

[Skull Pilot]

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.

Oh, they do. Their solution is to arm everyone, because apparently this will somehow work. Yeah, more guns will mean more people die, which will then destroy humans in the US and when they're all dead, there won't be any gun crime.

No, just arm the good people as so they can then protect themselves from the bad people who are being created faster than a person can blink these days.

Now since you don't have any honest solutions on how to curb or stop so many bad idiots from getting on board the good people train, then just sit back and watch as the nation attempts to drain the swamp that has been created over time now.

And who are the "good people"?

Such a ridiculous concept.

The good people are the ones who would never commit a crime with a gun and that is 99.999% of all legal gun owners

 

[beagle9]

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.

Oh, they do. Their solution is to arm everyone, because apparently this will somehow work. Yeah, more guns will mean more people die, which will then destroy humans in the US and when they're all dead, there won't be any gun crime.

No, just arm the good people as so they can then protect themselves from the bad people who are being created faster than a person can blink these days.

Now since you don't have any honest solutions on how to curb or stop so many bad idiots from getting on board the good people train, then just sit back and watch as the nation attempts to drain the swamp that has been created over time now.

And who are the "good people"?

Such a ridiculous concept.

You asking such a ridiculous question is the ridiculous concept that's going on with the left these days.

 

[Rustic]

And even less of being a victim of a mass shooting. But you act like it's a daily thing in every state the way you're carrying on.

I listen to our police scanner all the time. I know what goes on here. Don't you tell me what my odds are of needing a firearm until you walked in my shoes.

Your ballet shoes I think I will pass on. But my size 11 combat boots says I have walked in some pretty big shoes. And I don't feel the need to be armed at all times. The closest thing to a threat I can see is one neighbor that is alt-right and worships Trump and Guns. For him, I have guns in case he goes off. But I don't carry one when I go outside. It's a hassle to work in the shop wearing one considering if you are smart, you will even take off your watch and rings. It's a hassle working on the truck with that thing hooking on everything. And when I need to get parts, it's a hassle to go inside and put the gun on, better to just go get the parts and be done with it.

I'll say this again. If you fear for you or your families safety where you live maybe you should move to an area that you won't feel the need to have that fear. Unless you are the one that everyone else fears then you should just eat the muzzle.

Well that's the success story of our nation: if things get too bad, just run away.

In the city, it takes money to move to a safer area; money many of us don't have. My sister and aunt recently sold their homes to move out, and now my mother is considering the same although even if she finds something, it will be so small for the money she will get from her home that she'll live the rest of her life in misery.

My aunt moved in with her daughter, and my sister makes nearly six figures a year. Even then, she is now complaining about her new mortgage since she didn't have one with her former home. Because it's a townhouse, she has to pay maintenance fees on top of it.

Point is you can't look at the entire country from your size 11 shoes. You have to understand that different environments require different levels of protection. You can't say "I don't need a gun for self-defense so nobody does!" That's just plain ignorance.

In many ways, thinking you have to be armed at all times IS a form of running away. If your neighborhood is unsafe and you feel you have to carry all the time then three things must happen

1. Help change the neighborhood through other methods than shooting anyone.

2. Move to a safer neighborhood. Why would you want to jepordize your family by staying in Syria? And that is one of the very few places on Earth I would suggest you go armed at all time. Otherwise, move your family to a safer home.

3. Leave it like it is and just stand vigil at all times. This is not a way to live life.

and it's not up to you tell tell anyone where they should live

mind your own fucking business

It IS my business when it affects the area I live in. And it DOES affect the area I live in. It becomes everyone's problem. You are acting like a little kid that throws himself down on the ground and misses while screaming, "You can't tell me what to do". Actually each and every state CAN tell you what to do.

The federal government pretty much disregards the 10th amendment now days

 

[Skull Pilot]

It didn't rise until after the Ferguson effect went into play. Every expert on the gun ban stated it didn't do a lick of good, or are you only trying to solve mass murders and to hell with the 99% of other murders?

If you're talking about the number of mass shootings before during and after the assault weapons ban...you're lying.

Mass shootings declined during the ban and increased after it ended.

and not all mass shootings are committed with rifles

 

[Rustic]

and you don't need a bump stock to bump fire

He could have done the same spray and pray with nothing but the belt loop on his jeans or even without that so what do we do ban belt loops now and make everyone wear suspenders?

All the more reason to ban semi-auto weapons

Just about every firearm is a semi automatic and one respect or another... dumbass

 

[sparky]

This mornings USMB contingent had me go off on a JFK venture.

Come to find out JFK was a huge militia advocate ,meaning citizen militia.

One wonders if he had his way, would we be a better saner gun culture ,than we are now?

~S~

 

[Rustic]

There is no 'solution' that keeps everyone happy

The gun huggers have ZERO solutions because they see no problem

This country has much bigger fish to fry, firearm violence is a non-issue.
Progressive controlled urban areas need to re-examine their priorities… That’s where most of the firearm violence is in this country

http://www.romans322.com/daily-death-rate-statistics.php

 

[RealDave]

School is in
Think about what you have just said. Let's look at the 6.8. It's about the same length but a bigger diameter in both bullet and cartridge. The cartridge is made up of a very light and strong composite. The weight is less than the 556 or 223 so you don't add weight. It's being designed for WAR just like the 556 was designed for war. It just does it a bit better at a longer range. So you don't give up the amount of ammo you can carry but have a more effective weapon of war.

They replaced the M-14 with the M-16 because the weight of the gun and the weight of the ammo. The M-14 was far superior in a firefight but you ran out of ammo too fast. The 7.62 or 308 is the far superior cartridge but it's heavy in comparison therefore you can't carry as many rounds. Plus, due to the power of the cartridge, the gun has to be larger and heavier. You wouldn't know this because you haven't spent 16 hours force marching from point A to B with 80lbs of other equipment on your back. Every ounce saved.......

Now, about the 223, most school shootings are done close up. The 223 will kill larger game (meaning us) easily at close range. And since you have so many rounds, don't worry about wasting it. Even if the aftermath looks like a battle zone, it's not. You have ammo to burn. Before you run out of ammo you will run out of time and you only have a few minutes to operate until the Cops take you out or you put the muzzle in your mouth. And most shooters are part of the AR Cult. No dues, no memberships just insanity. You are part of that AR Cult. the only difference is, you don't have the guts to go out and do a mass shooting yourself in the name of the Revolution. The only reason that Vegas Shooting had such a high body count at that range was he through hundreds of rounds out very fast. It's like throwing a bunch of rocks at a wall full of balloons. Some will hit and most will miss but if you throw enough, you can burst almost all the balloons. This is the method of the Full Auto M-16 or the AR-15 with a bump stock. This has been abandoned by even the Military. But it's not ineffective when you have a target rich environment like a theater, school or Club. The 223 does exactly what it was originally invented to do at that point.

You are part of a cult. And the way to stop mass shootings is to outlaw the cult. Maybe we should handle it like any other violent cult and just start arresting the cult leaders.

You don't know what you are talking about, the majority of mass shootings are done with pistols......

If I took the total deaths from "Mass Shootings" by pistols for the last 10 years, all of them would not equal even one that an AR was used. Most "Mass Shootings" by a pistol deaths you can count on one hand. For most of the "Mass Shootings" where they used an AR you are going to have to count on both hands, both feet and drop your pants for the count and still not have enough.

ARs are used in less than 1% firearm violence in this country... You need to realize there are much larger fish to fry.

Lets look at mass shootings. Bury this among all firearm violence is dishonest.

No conflating mass shootings into a major factor in the murder rate is dishonest

The advantage of tne AR15 is highlighted in mass shootings.where the semi-automatic aspect with larger magazines & accuracy creates a higher death toll.

When reducing these death tolls, the banning on these assault type rifles makes sense.

 

[Rustic]

If I took the total deaths from "Mass Shootings" by pistols for the last 10 years, all of them would not equal even one that an AR was used. Most "Mass Shootings" by a pistol deaths you can count on one hand. For most of the "Mass Shootings" where they used an AR you are going to have to count on both hands, both feet and drop your pants for the count and still not have enough.

MAss shooting account for 1% of all murders

Rifles of any kind are only used in 2% of all murders

the AR is used in less that 1% of all murders

you are barking up the wrong tree as usual

But we all know you don't give a shit about lowering the murder rate as much as you care about controlling others

If we can save even one life, it's worth it, nutcase.

No it's not beause it won't save any lives

You really think banning one rifle will stop mass shootings when all anyone has to do is use any other semiauto rifle that is not banned

I see. Had the Bump stock been comletely banned and manufacture prohibited much like the auto kits for the AR, how many people would stil be alive from the Vegas Shooting? I would say that if the bump stock wasn't there at all and fell under the 1934 Firearms act, there would have been at least 20 people that would not have died that day and scores of people that were wounded would not have been wounded. That is saving lives if you remove the tools like that.

There is no way to predict that because the bump stock overheated the guns and made them inoperable. They were not made for rapid fire.

Yep, ARs are just sporting rifles... Incapable of passing military muster

 

[sparky]

There is no 'solution' that keeps everyone happy

The gun huggers have ZERO solutions because they see no problem

This country is much bigger fish to fry, firearm violence is a non-issue.
Progressive controlled urban areas need to re-examine their priorities… That’s where most of the firearm violence is in this country

http://www.romans322.com/daily-death-rate-statistics.php

Spontaneous Combustion: 0

and to think i've wished Hillary burst into flames for decades ....~S~

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It didn't rise until after the Ferguson effect went into play. Every expert on the gun ban stated it didn't do a lick of good, or are you only trying to solve mass murders and to hell with the 99% of other murders?

If you're talking about the number of mass shootings before during and after the assault weapons ban...you're lying.

Mass shootings declined during the ban and increased after it ended.

So your claim here is that assault weapons make people want to kill as many people as possible; that without assault weapons, these people would just forget about their desire and lead productive lives?

How does an object have so much power? I never seen an inanimate object have the ability to turn normal everyday people into mass murderers. That's like saying your corner beverage store is responsible for making you an alcoholic.

Before and after the weapons ban, gun violence and all violence collectively went down until the Ferguson Effect--mass murders aside.

 

[Rustic]

then you should be happy mass shooters like the .223 since it wasn't designed to kill. Just think of the death toll if mass shooters used 6.8 or 7.62 rounds

and a .223 kills rabid skunks, raccoons and coyotes just fine thank you very much

School is in
Think about what you have just said. Let's look at the 6.8. It's about the same length but a bigger diameter in both bullet and cartridge. The cartridge is made up of a very light and strong composite. The weight is less than the 556 or 223 so you don't add weight. It's being designed for WAR just like the 556 was designed for war. It just does it a bit better at a longer range. So you don't give up the amount of ammo you can carry but have a more effective weapon of war.

They replaced the M-14 with the M-16 because the weight of the gun and the weight of the ammo. The M-14 was far superior in a firefight but you ran out of ammo too fast. The 7.62 or 308 is the far superior cartridge but it's heavy in comparison therefore you can't carry as many rounds. Plus, due to the power of the cartridge, the gun has to be larger and heavier. You wouldn't know this because you haven't spent 16 hours force marching from point A to B with 80lbs of other equipment on your back. Every ounce saved.......

Now, about the 223, most school shootings are done close up. The 223 will kill larger game (meaning us) easily at close range. And since you have so many rounds, don't worry about wasting it. Even if the aftermath looks like a battle zone, it's not. You have ammo to burn. Before you run out of ammo you will run out of time and you only have a few minutes to operate until the Cops take you out or you put the muzzle in your mouth. And most shooters are part of the AR Cult. No dues, no memberships just insanity. You are part of that AR Cult. the only difference is, you don't have the guts to go out and do a mass shooting yourself in the name of the Revolution. The only reason that Vegas Shooting had such a high body count at that range was he through hundreds of rounds out very fast. It's like throwing a bunch of rocks at a wall full of balloons. Some will hit and most will miss but if you throw enough, you can burst almost all the balloons. This is the method of the Full Auto M-16 or the AR-15 with a bump stock. This has been abandoned by even the Military. But it's not ineffective when you have a target rich environment like a theater, school or Club. The 223 does exactly what it was originally invented to do at that point.

You are part of a cult. And the way to stop mass shootings is to outlaw the cult. Maybe we should handle it like any other violent cult and just start arresting the cult leaders.

You don't know what you are talking about, the majority of mass shootings are done with pistols......

If I took the total deaths from "Mass Shootings" by pistols for the last 10 years, all of them would not equal even one that an AR was used. Most "Mass Shootings" by a pistol deaths you can count on one hand. For most of the "Mass Shootings" where they used an AR you are going to have to count on both hands, both feet and drop your pants for the count and still not have enough.

ARs are used in less than 1% firearm violence in this country... You need to realize there are much larger fish to fry.

Lets look at mass shootings. Bury this among all firearm violence is dishonest.

It’s a non-issue, progressives are putting a Band-Aid on a broken arm thinking that will fix the problem. Firearms have never been the problem… We have no criminal control...

 

[RealDave]

It didn't rise until after the Ferguson effect went into play. Every expert on the gun ban stated it didn't do a lick of good, or are you only trying to solve mass murders and to hell with the 99% of other murders?

If you're talking about the number of mass shootings before during and after the assault weapons ban...you're lying.

Mass shootings declined during the ban and increased after it ended.

and not all mass shootings are committed with rifles

So