“What Percentage Of Murders Are Committed With An AR-15?”

[Pop23]

No cars, no death by MVAs. No knives, no death by knives. No bats, no death by bats. No dogs, no death by dogs ripping out guts.

We could do this bullshit all day.

No guns = intolerable assault on inalienable rights

He doesn't care about the loss of the life, just what tool was used in that loss.

Kind of sad that people like this actually exists.

Kind of ridiculous aren't you. You have to make up shit , because you have nothing else.

 

[jbander]

They designed different things in the AR 15 to increase it's ability to make hamburger. This gun was designed from the beginning as a military weapon , that worked on different aspects of its kill and wound ability out side the control of multiple arms treaties. It was never designed to be used by the public

Lol
...and AR15’s have never been used in any military theatre... ever
Because they are sporting rifles, nothing more nothing less. They do make for great varmit to large game rifles though.

There were 4000 AR-15s used in Vietnam in 1964 by the Air Force. In fact, the AF still had some in service as late at 1990. The AR-15 orginally was the AR-15 model 601. The 602 became the XM-16 and the 604 became the M-16A-1. When the full auto version of the M-16 was phased out along with it the full auto AR-15 was also phased out in 1990. The AR-15 Model 601 was upgraded to the 604 quickly and called a M-16. Unlike the semi auto AR-15, the AR-15 Model 601 used the same basic parts as the M-16A-1 and operated full Auto. Plus, the AR-15 was already being used world wide as early as 1959 in it's full auto version. Malaysia and other countries on a budget were using them. The AR-15 that you know today was introduced AFTER the introduction of the AR-15 Model 601 was discontinued for the Model 604 M-16. Welcome to the History of MY Military Career.

Now, I suggest you do a little research before you make another damned fool of yourself. I am having quite a laugh fest at your expense. And you say you are an arms dealer? Is there a hand attached to that arm you deal in?

Were they ever used in combat?

The air force increased that number by 45,000. It was the AR15 , it had no other name at the time. Changing the name doesn't make it a different gun. Changing the original design meant to make it a hamburger gun To make it more accurate of more of a hamburger gun , doesn't change a thing . It was designed from day one as a military weapon.

And exactly, whether military grade or not, are these guns used in homicides each year, and in these, how many would have been successful using a differrent type gun or other weapon?

Don't know , no one does but I know for the fact that it is the gun of choice for any serious mass murderer in public and in our schools. Its a hamburger gun and the fact that there is other hamburger guns out there, makes it no less of reason not to regulate this hamburger gun.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

No bicycles, no death by bicycles. No lawnmowers, no death by lawnmowers. No airplanes, no death by airplanes. No horses, no death by falling off horses or getting kicked to death by said horses.

On and on and on. The logic, or lack thereof, is amazing.

 

[jbander]

Bullshit. You watch too many cowboy movies. Once the projectile enters the body of a human being, it can hit an artery or not, it can hit a bone and create a number of secondary projectile which can nick an artery. I've read coroner reports, it appears once again you post opinions to defend your narrative. No one can control what the projectile does once it enters the body of the victim..

The target is not chosen by the gun.

It is the simplest concept yet you cannot seem to grasp the meaning

NOT , no guns, no death by guns and that fact alone makes any premise of the opposite mute.

A gun is not a prerequisite to a murder. Your answer is laughable,

The gun existing is definitely the key to death by guns. NO guns no death by guns.

A gun is not a prerequisite to a murder, so stating "No gun no death" is not a correct statement, and including the "by gun" is, an outrageously stupid comment. A death is a death no matter what tool.

Crazy, this gun expert thinks that if there is no gun , someone can still be killed by a gun.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Hamburger gun:

 

[Pop23]

Lol
...and AR15’s have never been used in any military theatre... ever
Because they are sporting rifles, nothing more nothing less. They do make for great varmit to large game rifles though.

There were 4000 AR-15s used in Vietnam in 1964 by the Air Force. In fact, the AF still had some in service as late at 1990. The AR-15 orginally was the AR-15 model 601. The 602 became the XM-16 and the 604 became the M-16A-1. When the full auto version of the M-16 was phased out along with it the full auto AR-15 was also phased out in 1990. The AR-15 Model 601 was upgraded to the 604 quickly and called a M-16. Unlike the semi auto AR-15, the AR-15 Model 601 used the same basic parts as the M-16A-1 and operated full Auto. Plus, the AR-15 was already being used world wide as early as 1959 in it's full auto version. Malaysia and other countries on a budget were using them. The AR-15 that you know today was introduced AFTER the introduction of the AR-15 Model 601 was discontinued for the Model 604 M-16. Welcome to the History of MY Military Career.

Now, I suggest you do a little research before you make another damned fool of yourself. I am having quite a laugh fest at your expense. And you say you are an arms dealer? Is there a hand attached to that arm you deal in?

Were they ever used in combat?

The air force increased that number by 45,000. It was the AR15 , it had no other name at the time. Changing the name doesn't make it a different gun. Changing the original design meant to make it a hamburger gun To make it more accurate of more of a hamburger gun , doesn't change a thing . It was designed from day one as a military weapon.

And exactly, whether military grade or not, are these guns used in homicides each year, and in these, how many would have been successful using a differrent type gun or other weapon?

Don't know , no one does but I know for the fact that it is the gun of choice for any serious mass murderer in public and in our schools. Its a hamburger gun and the fact that there is other hamburger guns out there, makes it no less of reason not to regulate this hamburger gun.

Good, we are getting somewhere. And is it the gun, or something else that makes, in many cases people who have never acted violently before, go shoot up a mass of people?

A guess is completely acceptable.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

The choices of irrational people are not relevant.

 

[Pop23]

The target is not chosen by the gun.

It is the simplest concept yet you cannot seem to grasp the meaning

NOT , no guns, no death by guns and that fact alone makes any premise of the opposite mute.

A gun is not a prerequisite to a murder. Your answer is laughable,

The gun existing is definitely the key to death by guns. NO guns no death by guns.

A gun is not a prerequisite to a murder, so stating "No gun no death" is not a correct statement, and including the "by gun" is, an outrageously stupid comment. A death is a death no matter what tool.

Crazy, this gun expert thinks that if there is no gun , someone can still be killed by a gun.

I of course, never made such a claim The claim that was made is that, according to you, is that having a gun makes murder possible. Of course, that is nonsense.

 

[Pop23]

The choices of irrational people are not relevant.

It is when something makes them irrational.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

It is when something makes them irrational.

If they happen to choose AR15s to conduct mass shootings, it should not be a basis for a gun ban. It is irrelevant.

 

[jbander]

NOT , no guns, no death by guns and that fact alone makes any premise of the opposite mute.

A gun is not a prerequisite to a murder. Your answer is laughable,

The gun existing is definitely the key to death by guns. NO guns no death by guns.

A gun is not a prerequisite to a murder, so stating "No gun no death" is not a correct statement, and including the "by gun" is, an outrageously stupid comment. A death is a death no matter what tool.

Crazy, this gun expert thinks that if there is no gun , someone can still be killed by a gun.

I of course, never made such a claim The claim that was made is that, according to you, is that having a gun makes murder possible. Of course, that is nonsense.

Bullshit , In no way did I suggest that it was the only way to kill someone. Again , your simply making shit up because you have nothing.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Bullshit , In no way did I suggest that it was the only way to kill someone. Again , your simply making shit up because you have nothing.

By suggesting no guns, no death by guns, you are suggesting that suddenly, the world would be happy rainbows and peace would flourish worldwide. You are advocating for a ban on a consumer product for safety reasons, but ignoring much more dangerous consumer products, suggesting that you give not one single fuck about safety.

No penises, no rape, right?

 

[Pop23]

It is when something makes them irrational.

If they happen to choose AR15s to conduct mass shootings, it should not be a basis for a gun ban. It is irrelevant.

I absolutely agree 100%. The gun bans themselves are irrational reactions, especially when we know what turns otherwise law abiding young people into psychopathic mass killers.

I think I've posted dozens of times about people that took these, went full psycho, and killed any number of people, sometimes with a gun, but surprisingly, a large number chose a car instead. In one case a teacher mowed down 8 kids, another a Mother used her car to drive down a freeway the wrong way and took out 7.

But the ones the press seems to report on the most are the school shootings. AND in almost each of these cases the student involved was on, or coming off a certain type of antidepressant.

So, I guess I could use jbanders postings as an example.

Take away SSRI's and you have no SSRI related murders.

Of course, as I've shown, SSRI murders are not limited by the tool. So take away the tool and the evidence is clear, they will just use another. A zero sum game that nobody wins.

 

[Wry Catcher]

He doesn't care about the loss of the life, just what tool was used in that loss.

Kind of sad that people like this actually exists.

It is evidence that many of these gun-grabbing fools only care about disarming the population for political reasons...namely, the communist revolution. It is the only possible rational purpose.

If you really believe this you are insane. If not and you posted it to get attention, I'll give you the same advice: You need to get psychiatric help.

 

[Skull Pilot]

You conclusion is ridiculous. A gun is also made to prevent people, persons (don't see a difference), or animals from being put to death.

No, the gun is made to kill. Period. It is not a utility which has any other purpose. It maybe used to protect someone, but the threat to kill is always there.

So its made to provide the threat of force. Just like any other weapon or just like anything else that can be used as a weapon


And a gun is designed to launch a projectile at a chosen target.

Whether or not a gun kills is for the person firing it to decide

Bullshit. You watch too many cowboy movies. Once the projectile enters the body of a human being, it can hit an artery or not, it can hit a bone and create a number of secondary projectile which can nick an artery. I've read coroner reports, it appears once again you post opinions to defend your narrative. No one can control what the projectile does once it enters the body of the victim..

The target is not chosen by the gun.

It is the simplest concept yet you cannot seem to grasp the meaning

NOT , no guns, no death by guns and that fact alone makes any premise of the opposite mute.

Why is it you people think getting killed by a gun is worse than getting killed in any of a million other ways?

 

[Pop23]

A gun is not a prerequisite to a murder. Your answer is laughable,

The gun existing is definitely the key to death by guns. NO guns no death by guns.

A gun is not a prerequisite to a murder, so stating "No gun no death" is not a correct statement, and including the "by gun" is, an outrageously stupid comment. A death is a death no matter what tool.

Crazy, this gun expert thinks that if there is no gun , someone can still be killed by a gun.

I of course, never made such a claim The claim that was made is that, according to you, is that having a gun makes murder possible. Of course, that is nonsense.

Bullshit , In no way did I suggest that it was the only way to kill someone. Again , your simply making shit up because you have nothing.

 

[Skull Pilot]

No, the gun is made to kill. Period. It is not a utility which has any other purpose. It maybe used to protect someone, but the threat to kill is always there.

So its made to provide the threat of force. Just like any other weapon or just like anything else that can be used as a weapon


And a gun is designed to launch a projectile at a chosen target.

Whether or not a gun kills is for the person firing it to decide

Bullshit. You watch too many cowboy movies. Once the projectile enters the body of a human being, it can hit an artery or not, it can hit a bone and create a number of secondary projectile which can nick an artery. I've read coroner reports, it appears once again you post opinions to defend your narrative. No one can control what the projectile does once it enters the body of the victim..

They designed different things in the AR 15 to increase it's ability to make hamburger. This gun was designed from the beginning as a military weapon , that worked on different aspects of its kill and wound ability out side the control of multiple arms treaties. It was never designed to be used by the public

There is absolutely no difference between the AR 15 and any other semiautomatic rifle of the same caliber

None. Zero. Zip. Nada.

Well that just shows how little you know about guns, that and Bullet designed for this gun, makes it as hamburger making as possible at the balance between hamburger making and accuracy. No clue, this gun was designed from day one as a military weapon and was never designed for the general population. You people can't bullshit your way through this.

Bullshit.

My Mini 14 shoots the exact same round as an AR 15 the round does not perform differently in the two rifles

 

[Skull Pilot]

Hamburger gun:

These morons call an AR 15 a military weapon but they don't care that I have an actual military weapon, a Remington 870 pump action shotgun

 

[Wry Catcher]

Bullshit. You watch too many cowboy movies. Once the projectile enters the body of a human being, it can hit an artery or not, it can hit a bone and create a number of secondary projectile which can nick an artery. I've read coroner reports, it appears once again you post opinions to defend your narrative. No one can control what the projectile does once it enters the body of the victim..

The target is not chosen by the gun.

It is the simplest concept yet you cannot seem to grasp the meaning

NOT , no guns, no death by guns and that fact alone makes any premise of the opposite mute.

A gun is not a prerequisite to a murder. Your answer is laughable,

The gun existing is definitely the key to death by guns. NO guns no death by guns.

A gun is not a prerequisite to a murder, so stating "No gun no death" is not a correct statement, and including the "by gun" is, an outrageously stupid comment. A death is a death no matter what tool.

Bullshit ^^^. The first clause ("A gun is not a prerequisite to a murder") is correct. The rest (a death is a death no matter what tool) is absurd.

Death by a heart attack can be (for example) a genetic deficiency, the use of Tobacco, fast food, drug abuse, etc. Not only is your post absurd and ridiculous, it is also a logical fallacy.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The target is not chosen by the gun.

It is the simplest concept yet you cannot seem to grasp the meaning

NOT , no guns, no death by guns and that fact alone makes any premise of the opposite mute.

A gun is not a prerequisite to a murder. Your answer is laughable,

The gun existing is definitely the key to death by guns. NO guns no death by guns.

A gun is not a prerequisite to a murder, so stating "No gun no death" is not a correct statement, and including the "by gun" is, an outrageously stupid comment. A death is a death no matter what tool.

Bullshit ^^^. The first clause ("A gun is not a prerequisite to a murder") is correct. The rest (a death is a death no matter what tool) is absurd.

Death by a heart attack can be (for example) a genetic deficiency, the use of Tobacco, fast food, drug abuse, etc. Not only is your post absurd and ridiculous, it is also a logical fallacy.

What tool is used to give a person a heart attack?

There is a difference between dying and getting killed

The point that sailed right over your head is that it doesn't matter if you get killed by a gun or by any of another million ways

Dead is dead

You people think that getting killed by a gun is somehow worse than getting killed in any other way