Another Fucking Mass Shooting At US School

[Jarhyn]

It strikes me as removing all ID restrictions is an easy way to allow things like illegal immigrants to buy guns so that the conservatives can fill the news with violent illegal immigrants prior to an election cycle.

 

[Derec]

“It literally can pulverize bones, it can shatter your liver and it can provide this blast effect,” said Joseph Sakran, a gunshot survivor who advocates for gun violence prevention and a trauma surgeon at Johns Hopkins Hospital.

That is true for any .223 rifle. The bullet does not care if it is shot by one of these

, one of these

or one of these

It is unlikely that this murderer, regardless of his military background, could have killed five and gotten away with it with a handgun,

You mean the Atlanta shooter? He was in USCG, as electrician's mate. I doubt he got much shooting training. Handguns are perfectly fine for killing people. The big difference between the Cleveland, TX and Atlanta shooters is not the weapon, but that the former was unrushed and could execute his victims at his leisure, while Deion was shooting in a public space and thus did not do much aiming.
He has been apprehended by the way.

and almost certainly not if he had place all of his shots in identical locations on the victims. Lethality of an AR15 round is far greater than that of any handgun, RW extremists' dissent notwithstanding.

I am not a "RW extremist", and in fact am not on the right wing at all. Also, nobody is disputing that AR15 rounds are more lethal all things being equal. But handguns are plenty deadly themselves, and have advantages of their own - i.e. they are much lighter and much more wieldy than long guns.
That's why handguns are used in a lot more murders and other gun crimes compared to any rifles. We have been through this many times. You LW extremists just choose to ignore it time after time.

 

[Copernicus]

I am not a "RW extremist", and in fact am not on the right wing at all. Also, nobody is disputing that AR15 rounds are more lethal all things being equal. But handguns are plenty deadly themselves, and have advantages of their own - i.e. they are much lighter and much more wieldy than long guns.
That's why handguns are used in a lot more murders and other gun crimes compared to any rifles. We have been through this many times. You LW extremists just choose to ignore it time after time.

You do not dispute that AR15 rounds are more lethal, and that is just the point in favor of banning those weapons from public use. They are also designed to kill and wound more people quickly than the less lethal guns. I presume that you aren't disputing that fact either. What is your argument that it is essential to let the general public own the more deadly weapons? So far, you are just posting somewhat questionable charts to support the argument that other types of guns are used more often. That isn't an argument that the deadlier weapons ought to be made available for general public use. If deadliness shouldn't be a factor that is taken into account, then why not let people own automatic weapons, sawed-off shotguns, and any other features that are currently banned for reasons of public safety?

 

[lpetrich]

Hmmm. The Shooting Belt looks spookily like the Bible Belt.

So much for an armed society being a polite society.

Though if that was the case, Afghanistan would be Miss Manners Land, as would Somalia.

 

[Elixir]

That is true for any .223 rifle. The bullet does not care if it is shot by one of these

I don’t know if this is prevarication, mendacity or just ignorance.
AR15 muzzle velocity is 3200 fps, the bolt action Remington 223 is 2700 fps.
No, the bullet doesn’t “care” but the victims just might.
A practiced user could kill 4-5 people with a semi auto AR in the time it takes to operate the bolt once, but who cares about that?

 

[Elixir]

Hmmm. The Shooting Belt looks spookily like the Bible Belt.

So much for an armed society being a polite society.

Though if that was the case, Afghanistan would be Miss Manners Land, as would Somalia.

Of course Derec is all “what about la and ny???“ while neglecting the general congruity of the Bible Belt and the Shooting Belt. The link has a number of maps, but somehow the Bible Belt seems thick on all of them.

 

[Tigers!]

The scourge of school shooting continues. This time in Serbia.

 

[Derec]

A day after the Atlanta Midtown shooting, there is another mass shooting (by some definitions) in Georgia. This time in Moultrie, GA which is as rural as it sounds. Southern Georgia, not too far from Georgia-Florida line.

NEW DETAILS: 4 dead, including suspect, in Moultrie shootings, coroner says

Shot his mother, grandmother, a McDonalds worker and finally, himself. Should have reversed the order maybe.

Kentavious White, 26, is accused of killing his 50-year-old mother and 74-year-old grandmother at neighboring homes on 6th Street, Brock said. The suspect is believed to have lived at his mother’s home.
Soon after, the man allegedly traveled about a mile to a McDonald’s on 1st Avenue and fatally shot a 41-year-old assistant manager before turning the gun on himself shortly before 6 a.m. The manager was identified as Amia Smith by the GBI.
According to the state agency, surveillance footage showed that White arrived at the restaurant and got Smith, who is his manager, to come to the door before fatally shooting her. He then walked into the eatery and shot himself, the GBI added.

"His manager"? Did he work at that McD?

 

[Derec]

I don’t know if this is prevarication, mendacity or just ignorance.

All three, probably. And they are all on your side of the keyboard.

AR15 muzzle velocity is 3200 fps, the bolt action Remington 223 is 2700 fps.

There is no single muzzle velocity for either. It varies by barrel length and the manufacturer of the cartridge used.

A practiced user could kill 4-5 people with a semi auto AR in the time it takes to operate the bolt once, but who cares about that?

Yes, semiautos can shoot faster than bolt action (although a "practiced used" can shoot a bolt action fast). But there are non-assaulty semi-auto .223s like the Ruger Mini-14.

My point was about the description of what .223 munition does. I was just pointing out that this munition, with all its destructive power, is used in different rifles, including rifles not targeted for bans by Democrats. Same goes for 30-30 (similar to 7.62x39 used in AK-47s) and .308 Winchester (similar to 7.62x51 used in M60 machine guns).

 

[Derec]

Of course Derec is all “what about la and ny???“

Of course I am. Those cities have a dense concentration of dots on the map Politesse posted.

while neglecting the general congruity of the Bible Belt and the Shooting Belt.

I think the congruity with the Black Belt is more salient, given the very disparate homicide rates by race.

Yes this (and other) charts focus on victims, not perpetrators, but vast majority of homicides are intraracial regardless of race.
That also explains shooting concentrations in NYC, LA, DC, Bawlmer etc.

The link has a number of maps, but somehow the Bible Belt seems thick on all of them.

As do the major cities you want to ignore for some reason.

 

[Derec]

You do not dispute that AR15 rounds are more lethal, and that is just the point in favor of banning those weapons from public use.

I said .223 rounds are more lethal than say 9x19 Parabellum. But many rifles shoot the .223 or similar. Same goes for 30-30 and .308 Winchester cartridges. Those are bigger, but also very fast and powerful. And they are used in many different rifles.

And the fact remains that vast majority of gun crime is committed with handguns. More homicides are committed using "hands, fists and feet" than with rifles of any description.

They are also designed to kill and wound more people quickly than the less lethal guns.

I would not describe say 9mm handguns as "less lethal". That designation applies to tasers and such.

I presume that you aren't disputing that fact either. What is your argument that it is essential to let the general public own the more deadly weapons?

I think in order to ban something, there should be a sufficient reason. Given how rarely (by comparison) AR-15s and similar rifles are used to kill people, I do not think such sufficient reason is given. The Dems pushing for these bans are operating on emotion, not reason, and are squandering political capital in the process. Political capital that should be used to push measures that actually may accomplish something. I am not against strengthening gun laws. I am against kneejerk banning of certain guns based on how they make some people feel .

So far, you are just posting somewhat questionable charts to support the argument that other types of guns are used more often.

You have not given me any real reason to question these charts. Neither have you offered any data disputing them.
The data for homicides in general comes from FBI. I know this is not mass shooting specific, but dead is dead, and there are multiple competing definitions of "mass shooting" anyway, so that designation is less useful than you might think.
Expanded Homicide Data Table 8
Rifles of any kind (of which so-called "assault weapons" are but a subset) kill fewer people than are killed with "personal weapons" i.e. hands, fists and feet. So, are they really so dangerous they must be banned?

That isn't an argument that the deadlier weapons ought to be made available for general public use. If deadliness shouldn't be a factor that is taken into account, then why not let people own automatic weapons, sawed-off shotguns, and any other features that are currently banned for reasons of public safety?

Automatic weapons are not banned per se, just .
Mechanically, and ballistically, there is not much difference between a scary "assault weapon" and a friendly semi-auto hunting rifle with a wood stock that fires the same or similar cartridge. The only reason the Dems want to ban the former is how it makes them feel.

 

[Derec]

Good point. That is likely part of the reason that so many gun lovers prefer to own this weapon rather than those that look like genuine hunting rifles and maybe don't fit high capacity magazines.

To address your last point first, you can fit a high capacity magazine to a handgun as well. I can actually see some utility in banning very high capacity mags.

As to why many gun enthusiasts like AR-15s, it's probably the same reason so many gun grabbers want to ban them - their look and feel.

According to the NRA, the AR-15 is the popular type of rifle for gun owners now. Unfortunately, it has become a prestige as a status symbol.

Yes, it has become the Ford F150 of firearms. How many people driving them are hauling stuff on a regular basis? I'd say superfluous trucks are more harmful than superfluous AR15s because of poor fuel economy and climate change vs. the low number of homicides committed with AR15s (and those could have been done with a Glock or such).

They could use such a weapon, if attacked by government forces, but it can also be used for hunting. Very versatile and lightweight.

Not as lightweight as a handgun to be fair. Government forces, lmao. But I am sure there are some such nutjobs - on right and the left.

Rubbish. Nobody is arguing against deporting gun-toting illegals, except maybe the gun-loving libertarians in GOP cuckoo land.

There are many on the Left preaching the gospel of "no human is illegal" and "abolish ICE". Including in the Congress.

They could see a need for someone to practice shooting an assault weapon at all hours and disturbing his immigrant neighbors.

Serious question: how would this be different if he was shooting a handgun (like Thurman Blevins) or a non-assaulty rifle?

The police could have made the effort to check the guy's background. Did he have a right to own that gun? Even in Texas, there are some people who cannot legally own guns.

They definitely should have.

Maybe you can write the guy and tell him that. I'm sure he'll have lots of time to read your letters while sitting in a jail cell.

I
I am pretty sure he knows that.

You are still wrong about trusting those pie charts from the pro-gun propaganda site to inform you about types of guns used in mass shootings.

Why? Do you have any real reason to dispute their data? Do you have any other data to offer or do you think your feelings about AR15 enough to carry the argument?

A classic example of using statistics to lie.

On the contrary, it is the gun grabbers who use statistics to lie.

They mixed years when the gun ban was in effect against years after it had expired.

They used a long time period, and why not? The assault ban was not very effective anyway.
Studies Find No Evidence That Assault Weapon Bans Reduce Homicide Rates

I agree that we need immigration reform, and some moderate Republicans have favored that in the past, notably GW Bush.

W was too permissive toward illegals.

As for what "gun control" should focus on, the answer is in the name. It is about gun control, not people control.

Then it's a misnomer. We should focus on people.

I'm not sure what you could possibly have in mind for detecting "bad people" and preventing them from legally owning guns. It makes more sense to control access to ammunition and weapons, since there is no obvious way to detect mass murderers before they buy their weapons.

Unless you want to ban all firearms, people can just use a different one if they cannot get access to the one they really wanted due to your ban.

Asylum seekers have nothing to do with this issue. Let's not get into a derail over red herrings.

You were the one who mentioned so-called "asylum seekers" in the post I was replying to. Maybe you should report yourself for derailing.

 

[Derec]

Yes, there are weapons other than an AK 15 with which he could have murdered 5 people. No, he could not have done it with 'any weapon.'

It is obvious from context that I meant firearms here. Kinda difficult to shoot a paring knife into the air.

For instance, if he had had a switchblade, it is most likely that he would have been overpowered before he was able to murder 5 people.

True.

Suppose he had a twelve gage shot gun: It is not likely he could have murdered so many people so quickly.

12 gauge shotguns are very effective at short range. And they do have several shots. This model of pump action shotgun has a 7 shell capacity.

The fact that he had a semi-automatic weapon allowed him to murder 5 people with great speed, sufficient to allow him to escape after he had killed them.

"Semi-automatic weapon" includes things like semi-auto handguns. Not even California is trying to ban these. DC tried but were rebuked by SCOTUS even before Trump put his justices on the court.

And I'm also pretty sure that the brave, brave police would have shown up in time to capture him before he murdered all 5 of them if he had been armed with say, a paring knife.

On the pro side for knives, they are silent, and if you tie your victims down first, you can take your sweet time. Why would police be showing up if you are making no noise?

 

[Derec]

I can only tell you what is in the AP report I quoted. They claim to have recovered the gun he used. Maybe they had good reasons that didn't require a ballistics test.

They also said that they found several guns on the premises, which made me wonder.

Who cares? Oh, wait. You do. Because you are pursuing a different hobby horse--your anxiety over the fact that people want assault weapons and large ammunition clips banned. Sorry that it turned out to be just another mass murderer armed with an AR-15.

The media certainly care. They emphasize the weapon used in this case. But not in the Atlanta case. That creates a false sense of prevalence of AR15s in these types of crimes.

Maybe we'll finally get a mass murder story someday where the killer uses a six-gun and manages to reload it really, really quickly.

Not necessarily a six gun, but vast majority of murderers, including most mass shooters, prefer handguns.

Exactly what I said. You get upset because of all these mass murderers using AR-15s,

No, I am upset at the propaganda. Propaganda that you seem to have fallen prey to, since it is not true that "all these mass murderers using AR-15s".

and you personally don't think it is going to help to keep those types of weapons out of the hands of mass murderers, even though they are designed for military, rather than civilian, use.

Most civilian firearms are versions of guns designed for military use. AR15 is a civilian rifle, not different than say a Ruger Mini14 rifle.

A large number of Americans, including Republicans, believe that bans on assault weapons and accessories that convert guns into assault weapons, whether rifles or handguns, should be banned.

I doubt that this is as popular as you think. But to the extent that it is, it is just the testament of the ignorance of guns by the general public. And our lawmakers, like the dingbat Sheila Jackson Lee who infamously confused the semi-auto AR15 with bolt-action .50 cal AR50.

That is what makes sense, if you have any interest in keeping gun out of the "wrong hands". The only "right hands" for such weapons are those specially trained to participate in battles against large numbers of enemies, not ordinary civilians.

There is a difference between military assault rifles (with selective fire) and semi-auto civilian rifles.

Oh, gosh. Pro-gun propaganda that focuses on statistics between 1998 and 2019, when the assault weapon ban ended after 2004 and sales started ramping up again. I'll have to retract my statement now, won't I?

Unless you can show me some data to the contrary, yes. So far you have given me no data, no facts, just feelings.

They ought not to tell people such things, even if they are true, right?

As long as they also identify the weapon in the much more common cases where the gun is a Glock 19 or another handgun.

You accuse others of being obsessed, but look at you.

I am not the one trying to ban a class of firearms for no good reason and based solely on how they make me feel.

 

[bilby]

I was just pointing out that this munition, with all its destructive power, is used in different rifles, including rifles not targeted for bans by Democrats.

You're right, the bans should be targeted more broadly. Thank you for pointing that out.

But politics is the art of the possible.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I can only tell you what is in the AP report I quoted. They claim to have recovered the gun he used. Maybe they had good reasons that didn't require a ballistics test.

They also said that they found several guns on the premises, which made me wonder.

Who cares? Oh, wait. You do. Because you are pursuing a different hobby horse--your anxiety over the fact that people want assault weapons and large ammunition clips banned. Sorry that it turned out to be just another mass murderer armed with an AR-15.

The media certainly care. They emphasize the weapon used in this case. But not in the Atlanta case. That creates a false sense of prevalence of AR15s in these types of crimes.

Maybe we'll finally get a mass murder story someday where the killer uses a six-gun and manages to reload it really, really quickly.

Not necessarily a six gun, but vast majority of murderers, including most mass shooters, prefer handguns.

Exactly what I said. You get upset because of all these mass murderers using AR-15s,

No, I am upset at the propaganda. Propaganda that you seem to have fallen prey to, since it is not true that "all these mass murderers using AR-15s".

and you personally don't think it is going to help to keep those types of weapons out of the hands of mass murderers, even though they are designed for military, rather than civilian, use.

Most civilian firearms are versions of guns designed for military use. AR15 is a civilian rifle, not different than say a Ruger Mini14 rifle.

A large number of Americans, including Republicans, believe that bans on assault weapons and accessories that convert guns into assault weapons, whether rifles or handguns, should be banned.

I doubt that this is as popular as you think. But to the extent that it is, it is just the testament of the ignorance of guns by the general public. And our lawmakers, like the dingbat Sheila Jackson Lee who infamously confused the semi-auto AR15 with bolt-action .50 cal AR50.

That is what makes sense, if you have any interest in keeping gun out of the "wrong hands". The only "right hands" for such weapons are those specially trained to participate in battles against large numbers of enemies, not ordinary civilians.

There is a difference between military assault rifles (with selective fire) and semi-auto civilian rifles.

Oh, gosh. Pro-gun propaganda that focuses on statistics between 1998 and 2019, when the assault weapon ban ended after 2004 and sales started ramping up again. I'll have to retract my statement now, won't I?

Unless you can show me some data to the contrary, yes. So far you have given me no data, no facts, just feelings.

They ought not to tell people such things, even if they are true, right?

As long as they also identify the weapon in the much more common cases where the gun is a Glock 19 or another handgun.

You accuse others of being obsessed, but look at you.

I am not the one trying to ban a class of firearms for no good reason and based solely on how they make me feel.

I'm going to use large font print type to make certain the point is clear Derec.

• We want to reduce the number of ALL gun related deaths (suicide, murder, etc...).
  
  • This includes inner city murders too.
    
    • There are hundreds (thousands?) of organizations and groups dedicated to trying to reduce inner city violence. Have been for decades.
• However, we have given up on any hope regarding restrictions to handgun ownership regarding competency, criminal background, etc...
  
  • The backlash regarding any reasonable limits on firearm ownership makes the above completely and utterly impossible
  • Additionally, NRA resistance to firearm regulations has helped expand the access (legal and illegal) to firearms in America, making it easy for guns to cross state lines.
• We focus on the "assault rifle" because it is the only weapon that there is a remote chance of regulating, but even there it is clearly apparent (after Sandy Hook), that nothing will be done.

 

[Elixir]

There is no single muzzle velocity for either.

Nice try.
That is why I specified the two rifles you depicted.

 

[Elixir]

All three, probably. And they are all on your side of the keyboard.

Great Derec, just flicking great.
“I know you are but what is am I!”
The very pinnacle of your idiotic, ignorant RW argument.
Seeya ‘round the nested quotes.

 

[Toni]

I can only tell you what is in the AP report I quoted. They claim to have recovered the gun he used. Maybe they had good reasons that didn't require a ballistics test.

They also said that they found several guns on the premises, which made me wonder.

Who cares? Oh, wait. You do. Because you are pursuing a different hobby horse--your anxiety over the fact that people want assault weapons and large ammunition clips banned. Sorry that it turned out to be just another mass murderer armed with an AR-15.

The media certainly care. They emphasize the weapon used in this case. But not in the Atlanta case. That creates a false sense of prevalence of AR15s in these types of crimes.

Maybe we'll finally get a mass murder story someday where the killer uses a six-gun and manages to reload it really, really quickly.

Not necessarily a six gun, but vast majority of murderers, including most mass shooters, prefer handguns.

Exactly what I said. You get upset because of all these mass murderers using AR-15s,

No, I am upset at the propaganda. Propaganda that you seem to have fallen prey to, since it is not true that "all these mass murderers using AR-15s".

and you personally don't think it is going to help to keep those types of weapons out of the hands of mass murderers, even though they are designed for military, rather than civilian, use.

Most civilian firearms are versions of guns designed for military use. AR15 is a civilian rifle, not different than say a Ruger Mini14 rifle.

A large number of Americans, including Republicans, believe that bans on assault weapons and accessories that convert guns into assault weapons, whether rifles or handguns, should be banned.

I doubt that this is as popular as you think. But to the extent that it is, it is just the testament of the ignorance of guns by the general public. And our lawmakers, like the dingbat Sheila Jackson Lee who infamously confused the semi-auto AR15 with bolt-action .50 cal AR50.

That is what makes sense, if you have any interest in keeping gun out of the "wrong hands". The only "right hands" for such weapons are those specially trained to participate in battles against large numbers of enemies, not ordinary civilians.

There is a difference between military assault rifles (with selective fire) and semi-auto civilian rifles.

Oh, gosh. Pro-gun propaganda that focuses on statistics between 1998 and 2019, when the assault weapon ban ended after 2004 and sales started ramping up again. I'll have to retract my statement now, won't I?

Unless you can show me some data to the contrary, yes. So far you have given me no data, no facts, just feelings.

They ought not to tell people such things, even if they are true, right?

As long as they also identify the weapon in the much more common cases where the gun is a Glock 19 or another handgun.

You accuse others of being obsessed, but look at you.

I am not the one trying to ban a class of firearms for no good reason and based solely on how they make me feel.

From my POV, your pro-assault rifle posts are pretty heavy on the feels. And heavy on the quotes of some black person who committed a crime.

 

[Rhea]

Given how rarely (by comparison) AR-15s and similar rifles are used to kill people, I do not think such sufficient reason is given.

Let’s look at dead people per gun manufactured, by gun type.