Another Fucking Mass Shooting At US School

[Derec]

You obviously don’t know any urban trauma docs, and you know jack shit about the differences in lethality or the extent of injury caused by various types of rounds and firearms.

Handguns account for a lot more homicides than rifles of any type. In fact, there are almost twice as many people killed using "hands, fists, feet etc." than with rifles.

Not to mention that you are still ignoring the fact that AR15s are not distinct from other .22 rifles, including hunting rifles.
Which makes sense. A rifle is designed for a longer range, which is why you need a faster bullet.

Since it is unlikely that you will talk to any such qualified individuals about it, you should at least read the article I linked for your benefit. Do that and get back to me.

How does that article change any of the facts I mentioned:
- a lot more people are killed with handguns than with rifles
- AR15s has the same fire power as other similar rifles

 

[Elixir]

There are plenty non-assaulty .22 hunting rifles.

If you’re hunting chipmunks that might be a good choice. Don’t try putting those shells in your AR though. (They’re .223, not .22 cal)

The bullet from an AR-15 passes through the body like a cigarette boat traveling at maximum speed through a tiny canal. The tissue next to the bullet is elastic—moving away from the bullet like waves of water displaced by the boat—and then returns and settles back. This process is called cavitation; it leaves the displaced tissue damaged or killed. The high-velocity bullet causes a swath of tissue damage that extends several inches from its path. It does not have to actually hit an artery to damage it and cause catastrophic bleeding. Exit wounds can be the size of an orange.

With an AR-15, the shooter does not have to be particularly accurate. The victim does not have to be unlucky. If a victim takes a direct hit to the liver from an AR-15, the damage is far graver than that of a simple handgun-shot injury. Handgun injuries to the liver are generally survivable unless the bullet hits the main blood supply to the liver. An AR-15 bullet wound to the middle of the liver would cause so much bleeding that the patient would likely never make it to the trauma center to receive our care.

 

[Elixir]

Yes, there are now .223 “hunting” rounds being sold. I think they should be banned. But if allowed, the civilian guns that use them should not be semi-auto.
223-caliber round wobbles or corkscrews in flight, making it far deadlier than the .30-caliber bullet it replaced. It ricochets and tears organs. It can enter the ankle and exit the shoulder, and leave an exit wound the size of an orange.

 

[Tigers!]

Yes, there are now .223 “hunting” rounds being sold. I think they should be banned. But if allowed, the civilian guns that use them should not be semi-auto.
223-caliber round wobbles or corkscrews in flight, making it far deadlier than the .30-caliber bullet it replaced. It ricochets and tears organs. It can enter the ankle and exit the shoulder, and leave an exit wound the size of an orange.

At first read why you you wish to sell or use such a bullet?

 

[Derec]

Cool, then what are your actual suggestions?

Control which people may have access to guns better, rather than trying to ban a specific type of gun for largely emotional reasons.

But please note: During the ban, kids deaths in mass shootings declined and increased again when the ban was repealed.

[citation needed]
Where did you get this claim from?
Note also that a lot of other things happen during a 10 year period. We cannot do a controlled study on this. Any change can be due to different factors, such as other policies (e.g. the now much maligned Crime Bill).

Besides, I posted this graph before:

It shows rifle homicides slowly decreasing with no difference in trend before 2004 vs. after.
Handgun homicides decreased sharply during the late 90s (and possibly early 90s but that's not on the graph) but handguns were not affected by the federal ban, so I do not see how those numbers could be due to the AW ban and not other factors, such as bringing them to heel.

 

[Tigers!]

I don’t think simply banning AR-15s alone will do a lot, to that I would agree. Which is why there needs to be a host of common sense gun regulations, which most people actually agree with. Except for Republican politicians who could make that actually happen.

I think demanding unreasonable gun restrictions actually makes passing non- sensible ones less likely.

Part of that could be the banning of classes of weapons defined by actual characteristics of the weapons and not looks or emotional attachments.

What characteristics would you ban?

FIFY

I am waiting for the day when you Yanks managed to pass a sensible gun law anywhere.

 

[Derec]

Which part WERE accomplished with Glock 19’s?

I said could be, not were. Look at Virginia Tech. Handguns are plenty deadly, no matter Elixir's x-rays.

But sure, ban those fuckers as well.

Sure I was talking about that—yes, banning classes of weapons for everybody. I don’t actually have a problem with banning handguns. Their only purpose is to kill people.

So in other words, you just want to ban guns. I am glad at your honesty, but do realize that it would be politically quite impossible to do that.

 

[Derec]

The psychology of wielding those types of weapons seems to be discounted quite a bit.

But the lawful owners of such guns also have a psychology. They buy them for a reason. If banning them will not have a measurable effect on homicide rates, then why restrict their freedoms?

And it doesn't take a genius to know the AR and its high velocity rounds are far more dangerous than a Glock.

Depends on what you mean by "dangerous". Rifles (not just "scary" looking AR15s) are more powerful. But handguns are quite deadly enough at close range, and their small size makes then much more maneuverable in close quarters.

 

[Derec]

I’m fairly certain Derec has never attained any proficiency with either a 19 or an AR. If he had, he’d know how expert you’d have to be to “accomplish” Uvalde, Sandy Hook or Parkland with a Glock.

I have shot them before, but I would not claim proficiency. But I guess you are some sort of expert marksman?
I do not think Seung-Hui Cho was any kind of firearms expert, and yet he killed 32 (+ himself) and wounded 17 with a Glock 19 and a Walther P22. So it is clearly doable to have a large body count with no rifles.

 

[Elixir]

Seung-Hui Cho

Are we supposed to forget all about being awash in machines designed to kill humans because Seung-Hui Cho killed a bunch of people with a pistol?
All your waddaboutisms don’t amount to shit, because they distract from rather than address the part of “the problem” that is under discussion.
You have yet to read the article I linked. But I’ll answer your question: NO. I am not (nor do I wish to be) an expert marksman. My perspective is formed from many years of professional relationships with Spec Ops operators (incl expert marksmen), State Department Op Med personnel, institutional victims of domestic terror such as Parkland survivors and the docs who treat the victims of those terrorists. (And yes, some training with ARs and Glocks).
I’m not talking about “most gun deaths”, I’m talking about some of the avoidable ones. I’m not talking about the 54% that are suicides, which can be even more easily accomplished with a pistol than with a long gun. Not talking about gangbangers killing off their known competition.
I’m talking about taking the ease out of mass murder, forcing the growing insane sector of American society to go through one more possibly minor inconvenience before gaining the ability to execute dozens or more strangers. Nobody needs AR15s or similar for any other purpose.

 

[Derec]

And your side just ignores the fact that guns are the leading cause of death of children in the US and shrug your shoulders,

Not shrug our shoulders. But at the same time we have to recognize that teenagers are different than small children, and thus different approaches are required. Specifically, gun homicides of teenagers are usually at the hands of other teenagers.
Another example in Atlanta. Note, this is a separate case from the 17th Street shooting.
Teens killed in shootout at southwest Atlanta apartment complex identified

Police believe some type of argument on social media escalated the incident to gunfire.
“One group of individuals came to the apartment with their guns, then the other group fired their weapons,” Deputy Chief Charles Hampton Jr. said. “Both parties had weapons.”

quibble about what is and is not considered a child

That is not a quibble, but an important distinction. Teenagers are often a menace.
8 teenage girls charged with second-degree murder in fatal stabbing of Toronto man

and act like it's no big deal. And you have a powerful lobby backed by Russia on your side so.......

Sigh. Not everything in the World is Russia's fault.

 

[Derec]

Yes, there are now .223 “hunting” rounds being sold. I think they should be banned. But if allowed, the civilian guns that use them should not be semi-auto.
223-caliber round wobbles or corkscrews in flight, making it far deadlier than the .30-caliber bullet it replaced.

So AK47s are fine then? They use the .30 or in metric ...

It ricochets and tears organs. It can enter the ankle and exit the shoulder, and leave an exit wound the size of an orange.

That's one hell of a shot!

 

[Derec]

Are we supposed to forget all about being awash in machines designed to kill humans because Seung-Hui Cho killed a bunch of people with a pistol?

A pistols are also "machines designed to kill humans". Even more so than rifles, as rifles are also useful for hunting, but handguns far less so. Handguns are really only used for gun crimes and for self-defense.

All your waddaboutisms don’t amount to shit, because they distract from rather than address the part of “the problem” that is under discussion.

And what is "the problem that is under discussion" in your opinion? Just so-called "assault rifles" so we can forget that far more gun crime is done using handguns?

You have yet to read the article I linked. But I’ll answer your question:

I have read it. But dead is dead. The Virginia Tech victims are no less dead because the shooter did not use an AR15.

, institutional victims of domestic terror such as Parkland survivors

What the hell is an "institutional victim"?

I’m not talking about “most gun deaths”, I’m talking about some of the avoidable ones.

No, you are talking about a small fraction of gun deaths. And I do not think they are easily avoidable, certainly not by banning AR15s.
Do you really think Nicolas Cruz or Salvador Ramos would have abandoned their plans just because they could not get their hands on an AR15?

I’m talking about taking the ease out of mass murder, forcing the growing insane sector of American society to go through one more possibly minor inconvenience before gaining the ability to execute dozens or more strangers. Nobody needs AR15s or similar for any other purpose.

I am not opposed to stricter background checks and licensing. I am opposed to blanket bans on certain firearms.
"Nobody needs" many things strictly speaking. That is not a sufficient reason to ban all those things.

 

[Toni]

And your side just ignores the fact that guns are the leading cause of death of children in the US and shrug your shoulders,

Not shrug our shoulders. But at the same time we have to recognize that teenagers are different than small children, and thus different approaches are required. Specifically, gun homicides of teenagers are usually at the hands of other teenagers.
Another example in Atlanta. Note, this is a separate case from the 17th Street shooting.
Teens killed in shootout at southwest Atlanta apartment complex identified

Police believe some type of argument on social media escalated the incident to gunfire.
“One group of individuals came to the apartment with their guns, then the other group fired their weapons,” Deputy Chief Charles Hampton Jr. said. “Both parties had weapons.”

quibble about what is and is not considered a child

That is not a quibble, but an important distinction. Teenagers are often a menace.
8 teenage girls charged with second-degree murder in fatal stabbing of Toronto man

and act like it's no big deal. And you have a powerful lobby backed by Russia on your side so.......

Sigh. Not everything in the World is Russia's fault.

Most people who die at the hands of guns know the person who kills them. Including 2 year olds.

No, not everything is Russia's fault but nonetheless, Russia has funded the NRA for some time now.

 

[Toni]

Which part WERE accomplished with Glock 19’s?

I said could be, not were. Look at Virginia Tech. Handguns are plenty deadly, no matter Elixir's x-rays.

But sure, ban those fuckers as well.

Sure I was talking about that—yes, banning classes of weapons for everybody. I don’t actually have a problem with banning handguns. Their only purpose is to kill people.

So in other words, you just want to ban guns. I am glad at your honesty, but do realize that it would be politically quite impossible to do that.

I do want to severely limit firearms. I can see no legitimate use for handguns, aside from killing people. I see the necessity and utility of owning firearms suitable for hunting birds, game, and vermin as well as for some dangerous animals which are a threat to human beings. No, I'm not including other human beings. Many law enforcement agencies across the world carry out their duties quite well without routinely carrying firearms. We're not so special that we could not do the same.

 

[Toni]

Cool, then what are your actual suggestions?

Control which people may have access to guns better, rather than trying to ban a specific type of gun for largely emotional reasons.

But please note: During the ban, kids deaths in mass shootings declined and increased again when the ban was repealed.

[citation needed]
Where did you get this claim from?
Note also that a lot of other things happen during a 10 year period. We cannot do a controlled study on this. Any change can be due to different factors, such as other policies (e.g. the now much maligned Crime Bill).

Besides, I posted this graph before:

It shows rifle homicides slowly decreasing with no difference in trend before 2004 vs. after.
Handgun homicides decreased sharply during the late 90s (and possibly early 90s but that's not on the graph) but handguns were not affected by the federal ban, so I do not see how those numbers could be due to the AW ban and not other factors, such as bringing them to heel.

Handguns were not banned in 1994. Assault rifles were.

 

[Derec]

Handguns were not banned in 1994. Assault rifles were.

Exactly. And yet rifle homicides do not seem to have down substantially before 2004 - no more than in the period after 2004.
Which means the ban was useless.

 

[bilby]

I disagree they should be banned outright.

With whom is this disagreement?

Certainly not me.

"Banned outright" is a fringe idea, FAR more popular with the NRA and other gun nuts than with the people who are in favour of gun control.

It's a strawman.

 

[Derec]

I do want to severely limit firearms. I can see no legitimate use for handguns, aside from killing people.

Self-defense would be one.

No, I'm not including other human beings.

No?

Many law enforcement agencies across the world carry out their duties quite well without routinely carrying firearms. We're not so special that we could not do the same.

What is many? I know Brits don't. What others?
And US has the 2nd Amendment, so there are a lot more firearms about. Disarming police would be a death sentence to many cops. Not that the woke left would lose a wink of sleep over that.

 

[bilby]

A pistols are also "machines designed to kill humans". Even more so than rifles, as rifles are also useful for hunting, but handguns far less so. Handguns are really only used for gun crimes and for self-defense.

It's OK, you've convinced me. Handguns should be severely restricted, with few licences issued for them, and those limited to people who can show a genuine purpose for them that doesn't entail shooting at human beings.

"Self-defence" is a dumb and dangerous "reason" to own a firearm. Guns are not defensive weapons.

The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is 20mm of Kevlar.