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

[Skull Pilot]

you mean for someone who doesn't know shit about firearms but thinks he has the tight to tell others what forearms they need or don't need.

The .223 is a higher velocity round sure but it is still a .22 caliber

Wow. I thought you actually knew something about the subject. Obviously you don't

Not only are .223s jacketed (ya know like a military round) they have far more propellant and are bigger. The average size of a .223 is 50gr. They can be bigger. The largest .22 long rifle is 40 gr. Longs and shorts are obviously smaller. Typically .22 LR is not jacketed...so has less penetration power.

.22 LR are "effective" to only 150 yds. the .223 is effective to 300 yards...a testament to its increased power

You really need to just stop talking

The reason is it is a FASTER round

Kinetic energy is greater the faster a round travels
an unjacketed round and a jacketed round traveling at the same velocity will do the same amount of damage to soft tissue

No, the jacketed will get a better penetration and hold the ballistics better making it able to make longer shots and do more damage with it's penetration. But in the 223s case, it's still a short ranged cartridge. And not even an average for the other high powered 22s.

and is more likely to pass through thereby wasting its kinetic energy which is why people use hollow points

Stop with the fake news and just sit down.

Go take your Alzheimer meds

 

[RealDave]

It's the classic camel's nose under the tent

So you ban the Ar 15 then the next school shooter uses a Mini 14 then you want to ban that gun so the Mini 14 gets banned and the next school shooter uses a different semiauto then you want to ban that because it was used in a school shooting etc etc etc

Wrong.

But your post does fail as a classic slippery slope fallacy.

In fact, in jurisdictions where AR platform rifles and carbines have been restricted, no efforts have been made to restrict compliant platforms such as the Mini 14 or SU 16.

YET

The focus right now is solely on the AR but when you idiots finally wise up and realize the AR is no different from any other semiauto then the push will be to ban those as well

That is the game plan.....that is why they focus so hard on the AR-15...if they can get that banned because they can get gullible people to think it is too dangerous...there is no reason to prevent them from banning all other semi automatic rifles, pistols, shotguns and revolvers.......

Ban assault typerifles & high capacity magazines. You need neither.

What anyone needs or doesn't need is not for you to decide
Never was
Never will be

So, legalize drunk driving because you drunks have to get home.

 

[RealDave]

am glad mass shooting idiots have not figured this out yet. With buckshot, one magizine could kill 50-100 people in a tight crowed.

We've had shotgun attacks in this country and they invariably lead to lower body counts.

We've SEEN what assault weapons can do to a crowd

Wrong....

Parkland....AR-15 18 murdered.

Crimea 2 weeks ago, 5 shot, pump action shotgun against college students.... 21 dead.

Virginia Tech, 2 pistols, 32 dead.

You left out Vegas, Sandy hook, and others.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Wrong.

But your post does fail as a classic slippery slope fallacy.

In fact, in jurisdictions where AR platform rifles and carbines have been restricted, no efforts have been made to restrict compliant platforms such as the Mini 14 or SU 16.

YET

The focus right now is solely on the AR but when you idiots finally wise up and realize the AR is no different from any other semiauto then the push will be to ban those as well

That is the game plan.....that is why they focus so hard on the AR-15...if they can get that banned because they can get gullible people to think it is too dangerous...there is no reason to prevent them from banning all other semi automatic rifles, pistols, shotguns and revolvers.......

Ban assault typerifles & high capacity magazines. You need neither.

What anyone needs or doesn't need is not for you to decide
Never was
Never will be

So, legalize drunk driving because you drunks have to get home.

Should we bring back prohibition so nobody drives home drunk?

 

[RealDave]

It's the classic camel's nose under the tent

So you ban the Ar 15 then the next school shooter uses a Mini 14 then you want to ban that gun so the Mini 14 gets banned and the next school shooter uses a different semiauto then you want to ban that because it was used in a school shooting etc etc etc

Wrong.

But your post does fail as a classic slippery slope fallacy.

In fact, in jurisdictions where AR platform rifles and carbines have been restricted, no efforts have been made to restrict compliant platforms such as the Mini 14 or SU 16.

YET

The focus right now is solely on the AR but when you idiots finally wise up and realize the AR is no different from any other semiauto then the push will be to ban those as well

That is the game plan.....that is why they focus so hard on the AR-15...if they can get that banned because they can get gullible people to think it is too dangerous...there is no reason to prevent them from banning all other semi automatic rifles, pistols, shotguns and revolvers.......

Ban assault typerifles & high capacity magazines. You need neither.

I need whatever I need.....

the AR-15 is not an Assault rifle, so it is okay...right? And again, you have seen the research, standard capacity magazines do not matter in a mass public shooting, yet you still want them banned....you are irrational...

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.

Jesus Fuck., Not this God damn shit again.

We had an assault rifle ban it included guns like the AR-15
'
We all know what is being discussed,

Yet it neveer fails one of you assducks startes up with this shit.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Wrong.

But your post does fail as a classic slippery slope fallacy.

In fact, in jurisdictions where AR platform rifles and carbines have been restricted, no efforts have been made to restrict compliant platforms such as the Mini 14 or SU 16.

YET

The focus right now is solely on the AR but when you idiots finally wise up and realize the AR is no different from any other semiauto then the push will be to ban those as well

That is the game plan.....that is why they focus so hard on the AR-15...if they can get that banned because they can get gullible people to think it is too dangerous...there is no reason to prevent them from banning all other semi automatic rifles, pistols, shotguns and revolvers.......

Ban assault typerifles & high capacity magazines. You need neither.

What anyone needs or doesn't need is not for you to decide
Never was
Never will be

So, legalize drunk driving because you drunks have to get home.

Did making drunk driving illegal ever stop anyone from getting behind the wheel drunk?

No

You know what we did do though?

We made the PUNISHMENT for drunk driving 1000 times harsher than it used to be

 

[2aguy]

am glad mass shooting idiots have not figured this out yet. With buckshot, one magizine could kill 50-100 people in a tight crowed.

We've had shotgun attacks in this country and they invariably lead to lower body counts.

We've SEEN what assault weapons can do to a crowd

Wrong....

Parkland....AR-15 18 murdered.

Crimea 2 weeks ago, 5 shot, pump action shotgun against college students.... 21 dead.

Virginia Tech, 2 pistols, 32 dead.

You left out Vegas, Sandy hook, and others.

Sandy Hook....26, AR-15....... Virginia tech...32 with 2 pistols....

Keep in mind, the only reason the Sandy Hook shooting was so bad was he targeted a gun free zone, and he attacked 5 year olds...who couldn't run away, and who were completely helpless in front of him....and also, he could have killed just as many of those children with pistols, or a pump action shotgun.....he had 5 minutes to do his killing before the police arrived and then he committed suicide when he heard the sirens approaching, he didn't wait for the police to even get into the building.......the AR-15 was irrelevant to the murder.....

Vegas, 58, but he is the outlier in that he attacked a crowd of over 23,000 people from a concealed, and fortified position......

 

[Skull Pilot]

am glad mass shooting idiots have not figured this out yet. With buckshot, one magizine could kill 50-100 people in a tight crowed.

We've had shotgun attacks in this country and they invariably lead to lower body counts.

We've SEEN what assault weapons can do to a crowd

Wrong....

Parkland....AR-15 18 murdered.

Crimea 2 weeks ago, 5 shot, pump action shotgun against college students.... 21 dead.

Virginia Tech, 2 pistols, 32 dead.

You left out Vegas, Sandy hook, and others.

Sandy Hook....26, AR-15....... Virginia tech...32 with 2 pistols....

Keep in mind, the only reason the Sandy Hook shooting was so bad was he targeted a gun free zone, and he attacked 5 year olds...who couldn't run away, and who were completely helpless in front of him....and also, he could have killed just as many of those children with pistols..the AR-15 was irrelevant to the murder.....

Vegas, 58, but he is the outlier in that he attacked a crowd of over 23,000 people from a concealed, and fortified position......

and to think a steel door would have prevented that tragedy but we cant have our schools look like prisons can we?

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Follow along kiddies.

We're told that it's important to have an AR-15 because it is a good gun for shooting squirrels...

We're also told that it's not a good self defense weapon (there are many much better)...

And that the main reason for having one is a "defense against the government"...but that it's not a military grade weapon.

Of course defending oneself against an actual military with a weapon that is admittedly not military grade sounds silly but then the entire gun hugger argument is pretty fucking silly so....

Oh and no...the gun huggers have no solution to mass shootings or gun violence because ...they just don't see it as a problem

Someone else’s firearm ownership is none of your fucking business, and certainly none of the federal government business… That’s what we have learned kiddies

The only thing the government should do, is it should get involved in finding out how an idiot gets his hands on a gun to then go and kill people with it. If the findings show that leftist policies are the problem or leftist do gooder idiocy ignores the obvious, then it should work to shore up the dam as so it stops leaking or worse bust from time to time. This never involves the gun, but instead should involve the mental health status of the citizens.

Yep, People kill people not firearms

Yes, people kill people but firearms of today makes it more efficient.

No it doesn’t! Why aren’t there more occurrences then?

Dust off those unused brain cells and think about it.

 

[RealDave]

YET

The focus right now is solely on the AR but when you idiots finally wise up and realize the AR is no different from any other semiauto then the push will be to ban those as well

That is the game plan.....that is why they focus so hard on the AR-15...if they can get that banned because they can get gullible people to think it is too dangerous...there is no reason to prevent them from banning all other semi automatic rifles, pistols, shotguns and revolvers.......

Ban assault typerifles & high capacity magazines. You need neither.

What anyone needs or doesn't need is not for you to decide
Never was
Never will be

So, legalize drunk driving because you drunks have to get home.

Should we bring back prohibition so nobody drives home drunk?

We should stop all gun toters & give them mental exams & throw them in jail if they fail the exam.

Drunk driving is illegal so those doing it can be stopped before the kill someone.

So, in the same light, we should stop toters & demand they take a test to show that are not mentally unfit to own a gun.

Sounds like a plan.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Someone else’s firearm ownership is none of your fucking business, and certainly none of the federal government business… That’s what we have learned kiddies

The only thing the government should do, is it should get involved in finding out how an idiot gets his hands on a gun to then go and kill people with it. If the findings show that leftist policies are the problem or leftist do gooder idiocy ignores the obvious, then it should work to shore up the dam as so it stops leaking or worse bust from time to time. This never involves the gun, but instead should involve the mental health status of the citizens.

Yep, People kill people not firearms

Yes, people kill people but firearms of today makes it more efficient.

No it doesn’t! Why aren’t there more occurrences then?

Dust off those unused brain cells and think about it.

Better unused than shriveled up like yours

 

[Skull Pilot]

That is the game plan.....that is why they focus so hard on the AR-15...if they can get that banned because they can get gullible people to think it is too dangerous...there is no reason to prevent them from banning all other semi automatic rifles, pistols, shotguns and revolvers.......

Ban assault typerifles & high capacity magazines. You need neither.

What anyone needs or doesn't need is not for you to decide
Never was
Never will be

So, legalize drunk driving because you drunks have to get home.

Should we bring back prohibition so nobody drives home drunk?

We should stop all gun toters & give them mental exams & throw them in jail if they fail the exam.

Drunk driving is illegal so those doing it can be stopped before the kill someone.

So, in the same light, we should stop toters & demand they take a test to show that are not mentally unfit to own a gun.

Sounds like a plan.

We should do the same for people who want kids because parents kill their own kids more often than mass shooters do

A parent killing a child happens more often than we think - CNN

 

[Daryl Hunt]

am glad mass shooting idiots have not figured this out yet. With buckshot, one magizine could kill 50-100 people in a tight crowed.

We've had shotgun attacks in this country and they invariably lead to lower body counts.

We've SEEN what assault weapons can do to a crowd

Wrong....

Parkland....AR-15 18 murdered.

Crimea 2 weeks ago, 5 shot, pump action shotgun against college students.... 21 dead.

Virginia Tech, 2 pistols, 32 dead.

You left out Vegas, Sandy hook, and others.

Sandy Hook....26, AR-15....... Virginia tech...32 with 2 pistols....

Keep in mind, the only reason the Sandy Hook shooting was so bad was he targeted a gun free zone, and he attacked 5 year olds...who couldn't run away, and who were completely helpless in front of him....and also, he could have killed just as many of those children with pistols..the AR-15 was irrelevant to the murder.....

Vegas, 58, but he is the outlier in that he attacked a crowd of over 23,000 people from a concealed, and fortified position......

and to think a steel door would have prevented that tragedy but we cant have our schools look like prisons can we?

Many of the schools have lockdown areas where the only way in or out is through metal reinforced doors. You don't need to have those doors everywhere, only the choak centers. The last time I was in a school, not long ago, you couldn't tell it could do a lockdown but it can.

 

[Skull Pilot]

We've had shotgun attacks in this country and they invariably lead to lower body counts.

We've SEEN what assault weapons can do to a crowd

Wrong....

Parkland....AR-15 18 murdered.

Crimea 2 weeks ago, 5 shot, pump action shotgun against college students.... 21 dead.

Virginia Tech, 2 pistols, 32 dead.

You left out Vegas, Sandy hook, and others.

Sandy Hook....26, AR-15....... Virginia tech...32 with 2 pistols....

Keep in mind, the only reason the Sandy Hook shooting was so bad was he targeted a gun free zone, and he attacked 5 year olds...who couldn't run away, and who were completely helpless in front of him....and also, he could have killed just as many of those children with pistols..the AR-15 was irrelevant to the murder.....

Vegas, 58, but he is the outlier in that he attacked a crowd of over 23,000 people from a concealed, and fortified position......

and to think a steel door would have prevented that tragedy but we cant have our schools look like prisons can we?

Many of the schools have lockdown areas where the only way in or out is through metal reinforced doors. You don't need to have those doors everywhere, only the choak centers. The last time I was in a school, not long ago, you couldn't tell it could do a lockdown but it can.

Sandy Hook didn't

Try to keep up

 

[2aguy]

Wrong.

But your post does fail as a classic slippery slope fallacy.

In fact, in jurisdictions where AR platform rifles and carbines have been restricted, no efforts have been made to restrict compliant platforms such as the Mini 14 or SU 16.

YET

The focus right now is solely on the AR but when you idiots finally wise up and realize the AR is no different from any other semiauto then the push will be to ban those as well

That is the game plan.....that is why they focus so hard on the AR-15...if they can get that banned because they can get gullible people to think it is too dangerous...there is no reason to prevent them from banning all other semi automatic rifles, pistols, shotguns and revolvers.......

Ban assault typerifles & high capacity magazines. You need neither.

I need whatever I need.....

the AR-15 is not an Assault rifle, so it is okay...right? And again, you have seen the research, standard capacity magazines do not matter in a mass public shooting, yet you still want them banned....you are irrational...

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.

Jesus Fuck., Not this God damn shit again.

We had an assault rifle ban it included guns like the AR-15
'
We all know what is being discussed,

Yet it neveer fails one of you assducks startes up with this shit.

Shit stain, the AR-15 is not an assault weapon.....it is a civilian semi automatic rifle, no different from any other civilian rifle...

And by the way, dumb ass....it is protected by the Constitution, specifically by name.....so deal with that, dumb ass...

 

[Rustic]

am glad mass shooting idiots have not figured this out yet. With buckshot, one magizine could kill 50-100 people in a tight crowed.

We've had shotgun attacks in this country and they invariably lead to lower body counts.

We've SEEN what assault weapons can do to a crowd

Wrong....

Parkland....AR-15 18 murdered.

Crimea 2 weeks ago, 5 shot, pump action shotgun against college students.... 21 dead.

Virginia Tech, 2 pistols, 32 dead.

You left out Vegas, Sandy hook, and others.

ARs are just sporting rifles

 

[Daryl Hunt]

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.

one shot per trigger pull is not rapid fire

There you go again. One shot per trigger pull. A non bump stock AR-15 might have trouble making 120 rounds a minute. But with a bump stock, it does many times that amount. That means that it IS a MG. You can keep going on like this but you are just digging yourself deeper.

A bump stock does NOT make it a machine gun, you are entirely incorrect. You are the one digging a hole

It enables the AR to do exactly like the old AR-15 Model 601 (M-16A-1) does. It makes it more deadly than a current M-16 with the 3 shot burst. If it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, it's a duck.

 

[2aguy]

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.

one shot per trigger pull is not rapid fire

There you go again. One shot per trigger pull. A non bump stock AR-15 might have trouble making 120 rounds a minute. But with a bump stock, it does many times that amount. That means that it IS a MG. You can keep going on like this but you are just digging yourself deeper.

A bump stock does NOT make it a machine gun, you are entirely incorrect. You are the one digging a hole

It enables the AR to do exactly like the old AR-15 Model 601 (M-16A-1) does. It makes it more deadly than a current M-16 with the 3 shot burst. If it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, it's a duck.

No, it doesn't.......you have no idea what you are talking about....

 

[Rustic]

Wrong.

But your post does fail as a classic slippery slope fallacy.

In fact, in jurisdictions where AR platform rifles and carbines have been restricted, no efforts have been made to restrict compliant platforms such as the Mini 14 or SU 16.

YET

The focus right now is solely on the AR but when you idiots finally wise up and realize the AR is no different from any other semiauto then the push will be to ban those as well

That is the game plan.....that is why they focus so hard on the AR-15...if they can get that banned because they can get gullible people to think it is too dangerous...there is no reason to prevent them from banning all other semi automatic rifles, pistols, shotguns and revolvers.......

Ban assault typerifles & high capacity magazines. You need neither.

I need whatever I need.....

the AR-15 is not an Assault rifle, so it is okay...right? And again, you have seen the research, standard capacity magazines do not matter in a mass public shooting, yet you still want them banned....you are irrational...

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.

Jesus Fuck., Not this God damn shit again.

We had an assault rifle ban it included guns like the AR-15
'
We all know what is being discussed,

Yet it neveer fails one of you assducks startes up with this shit.

ARs are just sporting rifles

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The point that flew right over your blunt little head is that a person hell bent on killing people doesn't need a rifle and if you ban one weapon then that person who is hell bent on murder will simply use a different weapon

And you keep pretending that all weapons are equal.

They aren't

A baseball bat is a weapon...but much less lethal than a machine gun. No?

A shot gun is lethal...but far less lethal than a semi-auto magazine fed assault weapon

A truck with a snow plow is a weapon too.

and arguably as deadly as a firearm.

you're to thick to realize banning one rifle will not stop one murder

Sit down. I don't take questions from Fake News.

Once again you feeble minded old coot there was nothing in the exchange you just quoted that was directed to you so I wasn't asking you anything

Then I suggest you stop spreading "Fake News".