UJRefugees.net

Antknot wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 12:16 am

spudoc wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:27 pm

Antknot wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:19 pm

spudoc wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:01 pm

PimpDaddy wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 8:36 pm I find it silly people get all upset about 'assault weapons' but are OK with handguns, given the death toll as mentioned above.

I also find it silly when someone suggests to ban all semi-auto guns!!! but it is OK to keep handguns. Being the majority of handguns sold are in fact semi-automatic.

LOTS of people have uninformed opinions. It's too bad the loudest idiots get the most attention, and spread their lack of knowledge as fact.

You don't see a qualitative difference, especially in terms of lethality, between say an AR-15 and a Beretta 9 mm handgun?

There are a lot of factors affecting lethality.

Lethality greatly depends on shot placement. In untrained hands the longer sight radius of a rifle improves the odds of a shot hitting the target vs a hand gun. In trained hands a rifle increases the distance where a shot will hit the target. Comparing shots hitting the same spot then a shot in the head or heart pretty much kills you so no difference. The shot that Will show a difference is one not instantly lethal. The wound channel for the rifle with it's higher velocity most likely will be larger. However then bullet type comes into play.

A rifle is harder to conceal than a hand gun before it is brought into use. This allows the shooter to close distance. Thus improving the chance of a lethal shot.

So now lets compare apples to apples. Let's assume the weapon handler is untrained except for the basic functions of the weapon, such as pulling the trigger and reloading. Let's now assume untrained weapons handler wants to shoot up a supermarket. Which weapon is most likely to result in a higher casualty count? Clearly the rifle is the far more potent of the two.

Goalposts move from lethal to casualty.

spudoc wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:01 pm

PimpDaddy wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 8:36 pm I find it silly people get all upset about 'assault weapons' but are OK with handguns, given the death toll as mentioned above.

I also find it silly when someone suggests to ban all semi-auto guns!!! but it is OK to keep handguns. Being the majority of handguns sold are in fact semi-automatic.

LOTS of people have uninformed opinions. It's too bad the loudest idiots get the most attention, and spread their lack of knowledge as fact.

You don't see a qualitative difference, especially in terms of lethality, between say an AR-15 and a Beretta 9 mm handgun?

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 2:51 am Handguns are used in the majority of mass shootings, assault weapons are the used in the majority of the most deadly shootings. Almost as though handguns are more common and assault weapons are more deadly or something obvious like that isn't it.

VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 2:53 am

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 2:51 am Handguns are used in the majority of mass shootings, assault weapons are the used in the majority of the most deadly shootings. Almost as though handguns are more common and assault weapons are more deadly or something obvious like that isn't it.

You’re such a pointless, smarmy prick.

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 2:57 am

VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 2:53 am

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 2:51 am Handguns are used in the majority of mass shootings, assault weapons are the used in the majority of the most deadly shootings. Almost as though handguns are more common and assault weapons are more deadly or something obvious like that isn't it.

You’re such a pointless, smarmy prick.

What a great on topic answer as always. Run along.

VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 2:59 am

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 2:57 am

VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 2:53 am

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 2:51 am Handguns are used in the majority of mass shootings, assault weapons are the used in the majority of the most deadly shootings. Almost as though handguns are more common and assault weapons are more deadly or something obvious like that isn't it.

You’re such a pointless, smarmy prick.

What a great on topic answer as always. Run along.

Yeah. 4 am your time? And I should run along. I was raised with a pompous, snarky pseudo intellectual blowhard, so I am not impressed with your style. Because that’s all it is. Now go wake up “dot.”

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:09 am Oh noes, have I offended a curmudgeonly old fart who snipes at me on the internets? However will I live with myself.

Blast wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:11 am

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:09 am Oh noes, have I offended a curmudgeonly old fart who snipes at me on the internets? However will I live with myself.

Aren't you guys in the middle of a major stabathon problem? Are you doing knife buybacks yet?

PimpDaddy wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 12:35 pm This point was already made, so I am simply referring to reality, not the 'what if' scenarios. You can play the 'what if' game forever.

"the problem I have is that everyone wants to "take the assault rifles but not handguns" even though about 7000 people are killed every year from handguns and only about 400 from rifles. ALL rifles, not just scary looking assault rifles."

Now whittle that down to assault rifles only, the uproar in the country over that little figure seems moot. We have bigger fish to fry, IMO.

From the NY TImes years ago, Clinton's gun ban did, in fact, reduce the number of assault weapons recovered by local police, to 1 percent from roughly 2 percent. Yup. Only 2% of guns recovered are 'assault' style.

Still, the majority of Americans continued to support a ban on assault weapons.

One reason: The use of these weapons may be rare over all, but they’re used frequently in the gun violence that gets the most media coverage, mass shootings.

Cassandros wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 1:05 pm The media has made an emotional plea to ban 'assault' rifles.

Mass shooters get way more media attention than they deserve, and far too often if existing protocols were followed they would be stopped.

Don't let emotions manipulate you; if they take your rifles, you hand guns will be next. The goal is to get rid of the second amendment.

Biker wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 1:17 pm

Cassandros wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 1:05 pm The media has made an emotional plea to ban 'assault' rifles.

Mass shooters get way more media attention than they deserve, and far too often if existing protocols were followed they would be stopped.

Don't let emotions manipulate you; if they take your rifles, you hand guns will be next. The goal is to get rid of the second amendment.

Actually, only one type of mass shooter gets the attention. The majority of mass shooters are actually black men

necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 1:57 pm Y'all arguing while the brother of the victim hugged her and said he loved her and hopes for the best for her.

Flumper wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 8:02 pm

allwhitemeat wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 7:14 pm good to know AnalHamster is still the voice of logic and reason around here. I agree with your general synopsis on almost all points. At this point, our guns wont stop a modern military unless we all have tanks and anti-anthrax medications and reinforced bunkers. the only thing stopping the military from turning us into a pulp is the will of the soldiers to disobey an order like that and a lack of will to use nuclear arms against our own homeland. any soldier in this scenario though that disobeys an order to open fire on the America People would probably be the first shot by their CO, but the refusal of servicemen to murder American citizens is our only true defense at this point.

the problem I have is that everyone wants to "take the assault rifles but not handguns" even though about 7000 people are killed every year from handguns and only about 400 from rifles. ALL rifles, not just scary looking assault rifles. So, yeah, they will take the "assault rifles" and the stats wont really change. then they will take the "sniper rifles" (the rest of the rifles) and it still wont change. Then they come for their real goal, handguns.

pandoras box is open, the guns are here. Im not a small dude so I don't feel intimidated in my home or public. If I was one of my daughters, id be strapped everywhere I went. Everywhere. Its the only equalizer there is for small women in a violent mans world until guns become obsolete and we move on to directed energy weapons or something.

i am certainly no expert on this topic, but i think when you compare deaths by handguns to deaths by assault rifles to make the point of what most people get pissed off about when stories make the news, is really an attempt to spin the argument.

I don't know the statistics, but I don't disagree that more people are probably killed each year from hand guns than they are from assault rifles. But stop for just a moment and think about where those killings probably take place and who is killed. The hand gun killings aren't happening in churches and malls and concerts and schools, etc. I mean, yeah, you can probably find some isolated examples. The point that "most" people make is that they have a problem with assault rifles because of what they can be used for (and are used for at times). They don't like the "pew pew pew pew" guns being available to people to have.

And, no, i don't really think that most of those people have some over reaching goal to start with one gun and work their way to all guns.

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 2:51 am Handguns are used in the majority of mass shootings, assault weapons are the used in the majority of the most deadly shootings. Almost as though handguns are more common and assault weapons are more deadly or something obvious like that isn't it.

allwhitemeat wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 2:29 pm so much wrong, so little desire to debate with someone who starts with "I don't know the statistics". That would be a good place to start. handguns kill19 times the number of people that ALL rifles do, not including suicide. you would have to add about 22,000 more people to the handgun list if we included suicide but they are victims in the sense we are discussing here. the FBI stats don't break it down into which rifle type was actually used, just "rifles" so some of those 400 ar AR15, some are hunting rifles, some are black powder muzzle loaders. And handguns most certainly ARE a weapon of choice for most mass shooters, including the one that started the whole thing, Columbine. they each had a carbine rifle, sawed off shotgun and a 9mm handgun. granted, a rifle gives you larger range, capacity and accuracy but you lose maneuverability and the ability to fire from a confined space. but even knowing that, its STILL not the most commonly used weapon for a mass shooting (4 or more victims from a single event), handguns are. always have been.

Flumper wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:56 pm

allwhitemeat wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 2:29 pm so much wrong, so little desire to debate with someone who starts with "I don't know the statistics". That would be a good place to start. handguns kill19 times the number of people that ALL rifles do, not including suicide. you would have to add about 22,000 more people to the handgun list if we included suicide but they are victims in the sense we are discussing here. the FBI stats don't break it down into which rifle type was actually used, just "rifles" so some of those 400 ar AR15, some are hunting rifles, some are black powder muzzle loaders. And handguns most certainly ARE a weapon of choice for most mass shooters, including the one that started the whole thing, Columbine. they each had a carbine rifle, sawed off shotgun and a 9mm handgun. granted, a rifle gives you larger range, capacity and accuracy but you lose maneuverability and the ability to fire from a confined space. but even knowing that, its STILL not the most commonly used weapon for a mass shooting (4 or more victims from a single event), handguns are. always have been.

wow, they really beat the talking points into you guys, don't they.

If you are ever curious about where would be a good place to start when talking about the type of guns that are a problem, then look no further than a google search of the guns the dude in Las Vegas had in his hotel room. Go through the list of guns found in his hotel room:

Guns found inside Mandalay Bay rooms 32-135 and 32-134:

Colt M4 Carbine AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip and 100 round magazine. Front sight only.
Noveske N4 AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip and 40 round magazine. EOTech optic.
LWRC M61C AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip and 100 round magazine. No sights or optics.
POF USA P-308 AR-10 .308/7.62 with a bipod, scope and 25 round magazine
Christensen Arms CA-15 AR-15 .223 Wylde with a bump stock, vertical fore grip and 100 round magazine. No sights or optics.
POF USA P-15 P AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip and 100 round magazine. No sights or optics.
Colt Competition AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip and 100 round magazine. No sights or optics.
Smith & Wesson 342 AirLite .38 caliber revolver with 4 cartridges, 1 expended cartridge case.
LWRC M61C AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip and 100 round magazine. EOTech optic.
FNH FM15 AR-10 .308/7.62 with a bipod, scope and 25 round magazine.
Daniel Defense DD5V1 AR-10 .308/7.62 with a bipod, scope and 25 round magazine.
FNH FN15 AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip and 100 round magazine. EOTech optic.
POF USA P15 AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip and 100 round magazine. EOTech optic.
Colt M4 Carbine AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip and 100 round magazine.
Daniel Defense M4A1 AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip and 100 round magazine. EOTech optic.
LMT Def. 2000 AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip and 100 round magazine. No sights or optics.
Daniel Defense DDM4V11 AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip. No magazine. EOTech optic.
Sig Sauer SIG716 AR-10 .308/7.62 with a bipod, red dot optic and 25 round magazine.
Daniel Defense DD5V1 AR-10 .308/7.62 with a bipod and scope. No magazine.
FNH FN15 AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip and 100 round magazine. No sights or optics.
Ruger American .308 caliber bolt action rifle with scope.
LMT LM308MWS AR-10 .308/7.62 with a bipod and red dot scope. No magazine.
Ruger SR0762 AR-10 .308/7.62 with a bipod, scope and 25 round magazine.
LMT LM308MWS AR-10 with a bipod, scope and 25 round magazine.

Now, here is a list of guns that the Las Vegas shooter owned, but didn't bring with him to the mass shooting. These were found in his home:

Smith & Wesson SW99 9mm semi-automatic pistol.
Smith & Wesson M&P9 9mm semi-automatic pistol.
Glock 17 9mm semi-automatic pistol.
Mossberg 500 12 gauge pump action shotgun.
Sig Sauer 516 AR-15 .223/5.56 rifle with a bipod and scope.
Arma-Lite SPRM001 AR-15 .223/5.56 rifle with a bipod and scope.
Mossberg 590 12 gauge pump action shotgun.
LWRC M61C-IC-A5 AR-15 .223/5.56 rifle with a bipod and scope.
Mossberg 590 V0348193 12 gauge pump action shotgun.
Mossberg 930 12 semi-automatic gauge shotgun.
Arma-Lite SPRM001 AR-15 .223/5.56 rifle with a bipod and scope.
Sig Sauer 516 2AR-15 .223/5.56 rifle, with a bipod. No sights or optics.
Lantac LA-R15 Raven AR-15 .223 Wylde rifle with a bipod and scope.
Mossberg 590 12 gauge pump action shotgun.
Arsenal Saiga 12 AK-47 style semi-automatic 12 gauge shotgun.
Arsenal Saiga 12 AK-47 style semi-automatic 12 gauge shotgun.
Beretta 92F 9mm semi-automatic[b] pistol[/b].
FN 5.7 5.7mm semi-automatic pistol.
Smith & Wesson 340 .357 caliber revolver.
Beretta Pietro 92A1 9mm semi-automatic pistol.
Remington Arms 870 Tactical 12 gauge pump action shotgun.
Mossberg 590 12 gauge pump action [b]shotgun[/b].
Glock 17 Gen4 9mm semi-automatic pistol.
Smith & Wesson M&P9 9mm semi-automatic pistol.
Smith & Wesson M&P9 9mm semi-automatic pistol.

Now what can we deduce from the choices he made from the weapons that were available to him?

Biker wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 1:17 pm

Cassandros wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 1:05 pm The media has made an emotional plea to ban 'assault' rifles.

Mass shooters get way more media attention than they deserve, and far too often if existing protocols were followed they would be stopped.

Don't let emotions manipulate you; if they take your rifles, you hand guns will be next. The goal is to get rid of the second amendment.

Actually, only one type of mass shooter gets the attention. The majority of mass shooters are actually black men