have you ever needed a semi automatic rifle, with a clip in excess of 30 rounds? (1 Viewer)

TheIronSheik said:

You're all over the place, friend.  Can you please explain what exactly you want?  You said you know people can modify their guns, but let's ban that, too.  What?  That is illegal.  That's the point I'm trying to make with you.  Just because you ban something doesn't mean it stops it.  

Click to expand...

Daywalker said:

I think the best way to put is that I would want guns that you have to load one bullet at a time.  Can hold up to 6 bullets max.  When you run out of bullets you have to insert them one by one.  No clips or magazines.

Point being to slow down mass shooters.  More opportunity to stop them.

If you think guns laws are meaningless and dont reduce body count then their is no point for further debate.

Click to expand...

KCitons said:

A revolver fits your description for handguns. A tube fed semi automatic fits your description for a rifle. 

So, you don't have an issue with firing rate. Since you state that it's loading time and magazine capacity that are the concern. 

I will again point out that 2/3rds of the gun deaths in this country is due to suicide. I don't know of many suicide victims that shoot themselves multiple times. Usually, it's one round. 

But, if you're wanting to reduce body count as a result of mass shootings. Then your ideas may very well work. I would agree to these if you were willing to impose very severe penalties for anyone caught in possession of a weapon that does not fit your description. I will not comply while criminals continue to break the laws with minimal repercussions. 

Click to expand...

Statorama said:

You're dancing around a great point.  Most regular/hardworking/non-violent people know to stay out of the "bad" neighborhoods, since violence is rampant and unchecked there.  It's when someone invades a "good" neighborhood (or an otherwise previously believed "safe" space) that people freak out at the randomness of it ("dang, I did everything I could to be away from the war zone, yet the war zone found me").  I know what neighborhoods in Chicago not to wander around in.  There are neighborhoods that I drive through in Milwaukee that I pray that I don't break down in.  If I start strutting around those neighborhoods like I own the place (unarmed) I'm going to get what I deserve.  If 20 people get shot in Chicago, it's a one line sentence on the news.  But if a nice lady in Naperville gets shot on her way to bingo, we get interviews with the neighbors and a comment from the cops.  Long story short, people have written off the expectation of human decency within inner cities, so it's not shocking or disturbing when reports of senseless violence come out of there.  

It's kind of like when you go to an all-inclusive resort.  A mass shooting there would be weird since there's an underlying expectation of safety.  You figure they've paid off the gangs to not shoot up the tourists and it's baked into the price.  But if you wander off the resort without an escort, you have to kind of acknowledge that there's a likelihood you might get your head chopped off.

Click to expand...

TheIronSheik said:

Most gun deaths are caused by people who have prior convictions.  What if we made a law that said anyone convicted of a gun violence crime gets locked away for life?

That would probably lower the homicide rate by 75%.

Click to expand...

TheIronSheik said:

Most gun deaths are caused by people who have prior convictions.  What if we made a law that said anyone convicted of a gun violence crime gets locked away for life?

That would probably lower the homicide rate by 75%.

Click to expand...

KarmaPolice said:

Prior gun convictions?

 I think most that are worried about clip size and assault rifles are mainly worried about mass shootings, and the stat i had in the other thread from the FBI had mass shooters having a conviction as an adult 35% of the time, and that didn't even specify gun/violent conviction.  

Click to expand...

TheIronSheik said:

This is crazy.  I just heard the Philly shooter from yesterday was a felon who was banned from owning a gun.  WTH?  How is that possible?

Click to expand...

TheIronSheik said:

Why are you only worried about mass shooters?  Mass shooters account for probably less than .001% of gun violence.  Shouldn't we be worried about ALL gun violence?

Click to expand...

KarmaPolice said:

I didn't say I was just worried about mass shootings.  Just saying that the tone of this thread is talking about clip size and assault weapons, so to me that means mass shootings. 

Click to expand...

TheIronSheik said:

But what I'm saying is that everyone wants to push solutions that will only stop less than 1% of all homicides.  My solution would put an end to 75%.  

Click to expand...

Chaos Commish said:

I'm pretty sure the most recent study (2017 was the last year with complete data) the number was 4%. And what are you talking about to end 75%. I feel like I have followed this close enought but I missed that.

Click to expand...

TheIronSheik said:

There is no way in hell that 4% of homicides are done by mass murders.  Unless they are accounting for incidents where a "mass murder" is just something where someone kills more than 3 people, like in a drug deal gone wrong.  Considering we usually have one of these a year, I'd put the number around 50 people.  And that's super high.  There are 20,000 homicides a year in the US.  

The 75% number is not an actual number.  I never claimed it to be.  I simply said that if we gave people a life sentence for committing a violent crime with a gun, we could dramatically lower the homicide rate, since a large number of people who are arrested on these charges have prior gun charges.

Click to expand...

TheIronSheik said:

But what I'm saying is that everyone wants to push solutions that will only stop less than 1% of all homicides.  My solution would put an end to 75%.  

Click to expand...

KarmaPolice said:

In the 1980s, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) defined mass murderer as someone who “kills four or more people in a single incident (not including himself), typically in a single location” (Krouse and Richardson, 2015).

This is the typical definition I see used when I read an article, but sometimes it's 3.  So yes, it would include gang violence and other things.  

Click to expand...

TheIronSheik said:

I get what you're saying, GB.  But this is another one of those cases where some people use certain terms to inflate their argument.  Not saying you or anyone here, really.  But when we think of a mass shooting nowadays, we tend to think of a guy walking into an open area or business and randomly spraying bullets at innocent people for effect.  So if someone says that 4% of homicides are mass shootings, a large portion of the general public thinks that 4% of homicides are done by a crazy guy spraying bullets into an innocent crowd.  

Again, I think terminology can be manipulated in these arguments.  

But either way, I want to stop ALL gun violence.  So what I'm saying is, if you get busted committing a violent crime with a gun, you get life in prison or death.  I don't care if you're 7 or 107.  There are no mulligans.  Use a gun to commit a crime, you go to jail forever.  

Click to expand...

abbottjamesr said:

I did some digging into how many people have been killed in the US with Semi-automatic rifles capable of accepting 30 round magazines.  I only included events on the mass shootings list between 1982 to present.  I figured if less than 5 people were involved then a handgun would have been as effective likely.

Data is from here: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data/

I can figure out how to past in a table so I will attempt to describe the data as best I can.  

- total of 33 events involved "assault" style rifles.
      - Total of 389 fatalities
      - Total of 987 Injured
      - Total of 1376 shot
- The last 10 years seem to be the worst of the data set.
        - 295 fatalities
        - 866 injured
        - 1161 shot
- should be noted that the Las Vegas shooting in 2017 is a major outlier in terms of number of people involved.
        - 58 fatalities
        - 546 injured
        - 604 shot

I am all for limiting access to guns to help reduce gun violence in America, however it doesn't seem like semi-automatic rifles and/or large capacity magazines are a priority.

Click to expand...

TheFanatic said:

They are when the media leads the herd around by their noses and makes it seem like this is the ultimate crisis that needs to be addressed and will solve all the issues in terms of gun violence.

Click to expand...

parrot said:

Dang, we have another mass killing.  All those poor defenseless strawmen.   :(

Click to expand...

TheFanatic said:

 Strawmen, my ###. Quick, the herd is heading that way, you better catch up!

Click to expand...

The weekend that two mass shootings happened on the same day, more people died in Chicago to gun violence.

Click to expand...

parrot said:

"this is the ultimate crisis"

"and will solve all the issues in terms of gun violence."

Those are strawmen.  Literally NO ONE thinks this.  So make real arguments or get your bull#### called out.  

Also, stop lying.  31 people died in those two shootings.  7 people died from gun violence in Chicago that weekend.  

"7 people died and 52 were wounded due to gun violence in Chicago this weekend"

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/05/us/chicago-weekend-violence-numbers/index.html

Click to expand...

[icon] said:

Solid price on M855 5.56 Green Tip Federal Lake City Ammo: 1000rds for for $289. 

M855 Green Tip is what you're looking for for long term storage and penetration of light/moderate body armor.  

Click to expand...

abbottjamesr said:

I did some digging into how many people have been killed in the US with Semi-automatic rifles capable of accepting 30 round magazines.  I only included events on the mass shootings list between 1982 to present.  I figured if less than 5 people were involved then a handgun would have been as effective likely.

Data is from here: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data/

I can figure out how to past in a table so I will attempt to describe the data as best I can.  

- total of 33 events involved "assault" style rifles.
      - Total of 389 fatalities
      - Total of 987 Injured
      - Total of 1376 shot
- The last 10 years seem to be the worst of the data set.
        - 295 fatalities
        - 866 injured
        - 1161 shot
- should be noted that the Las Vegas shooting in 2017 is a major outlier in terms of number of people involved.
        - 58 fatalities
        - 546 injured
        - 604 shot

I am all for limiting access to guns to help reduce gun violence in America, however it doesn't seem like semi-automatic rifles and/or large capacity magazines are a priority.

Click to expand...

TheFanatic said:

Uh, yeah, pretty much everyone thinks this is the solution. And that is blatantly obvious because nobody is focusing on suicide, gang violence, or pistol deaths in general. They only care about the sensational mass shootings and must stop them at all costs by banning the tool, and not worrying about the wielder of the tool. 

And you are right. I read somewhere that there were more fatalities that weekend in Chicago. I either misread it or it was false, and since I can't find the article, I can't confirm either way. That's my bad. And if you research this a little bit, the numbers are anywhere from 7 dead and 52 shot to 13 dead and 72 shot. That's pretty horrific considering it's practically every weekend, particularly in the warmer months. But where is the coverage?

Last year something like 373 people died from mass shootings. This year, 294 people have been shot and killed in Chicago and it's not even September. But what is covered 95% of the time in terms of gun violence? The 373 deaths are covered over and over and over and over yet the 34,000 gun deaths in 2017, including 22,000 suicides are practically ignored. Yeah, we better go get that AR15. That will solve all the problems. 

Click to expand...

Terminalxylem said:

While I’m not convinced banning assault style rifles will do much, these stats aren’t particularly useful without the denominator for each type of firearm. In other words, you need to know how many times the gun in question was used in a shooting relative to the total number in circulation. I’m too lazy to look at the numbers, but how many high capacity semi/auto rifles are out there compared to handguns?

Click to expand...

Terminalxylem said:

I think suicide is the big opportunity for gun control. 

Click to expand...

[icon] said:

Yes. 

When people are in such a mental state where they want to take their own life, I think it’s critically important to focus on removing one of the many tools they can use to do so, rather than focusing on treatment. 

This logic is infallible. Keep up the good work in here. :  

Click to expand...

Deciding whether to own a gun entails balancing potential benefits and risks. One of the risks for which the empirical evidence is strongest,1 and the risk whose death toll is greatest, is that of completed suicide.

In 2005, the most recent year for which mortality data are available, suicide was the second-leading cause of death among Americans 40 years of age or younger. Among Americans of all ages, more than half of all suicides are gun suicides. In 2005, an average of 46 Americans per day committed suicide with a firearm, accounting for 53% of all completed suicides. Gun suicide during this period accounted for 40% more deaths than gun homicide.

Why might the availability of firearms increase the risk of suicide in the United States? First, many suicidal acts — one third to four fifths of all suicide attempts, according to studies — are impulsive. Among people who made near-lethal suicide attempts, for example, 24% took less than 5 minutes between the decision to kill themselves and the actual attempt, and 70% took less than 1 hour.2

Second, many suicidal crises are self-limiting. Such crises are often caused by an immediate stressor, such as the breakup of a romantic relationship, the loss of a job, or a run-in with police. As the acute phase of the crisis passes, so does the urge to attempt suicide. The temporary nature and fleeting sway of many suicidal crises is evident in the fact that more than 90% of people who survive a suicide attempt, including attempts that were expected to be lethal (such as shooting oneself in the head or jumping in front of a train), do not go on to die by suicide. Indeed, recognizing the self-limiting nature of suicidal crises, penal and psychiatric institutions restrict access to lethal means for persons identified as potentially suicidal.

Third, guns are common in the United States (more than one third of U.S. households contain a firearm) and are lethal. A suicide attempt with a firearm rarely affords a second chance. Attempts involving drugs or cutting, which account for more than 90% of all suicidal acts, prove fatal far less often.

The empirical evidence linking suicide risk in the United States to the presence of firearms in the home is compelling.3 There are at least a dozen U.S. case–control studies in the peer-reviewed literature, all of which have found that a gun in the home is associated with an increased risk of suicide. The increase in risk is large, typically 2 to 10 times that in homes without guns, depending on the sample population (e.g., adolescents vs. older adults) and on the way in which the firearms were stored. The association between guns in the home and the risk of suicide is due entirely to a large increase in the risk of suicide by firearm that is not counterbalanced by a reduced risk of nonfirearm suicide. Moreover, the increased risk of suicide is not explained by increased psychopathologic characteristics, suicidal ideation, or suicide attempts among members of gun-owning households.

Three additional findings from the case–control studies are worth noting. The higher risk of suicide in homes with firearms applies not only to the gun owner but also to the gun owner's spouse and children. The presence of a gun in the home, no matter how the gun is stored, is a risk factor for completed suicide. And there is a hierarchy of suicide risk consistent with a dose–response relationship. How household guns are stored matters especially for young people — for example, one study found that adolescent suicide was four times as likely in homes with a loaded, unlocked firearm as in homes where guns were stored unloaded and locked.

Many ecologic studies covering multiple regions, states, or cities in the United States have also shown a strong association between rates of household gun ownership and rates of completed suicide — attributable, as found in the case–control studies, to the strong association between gun prevalence and gun suicide, without a counterbalancing association between gun-ownership levels and rates of nongun suicide. We recently examined the relationship between rates of household gun ownership and suicide in each of the 50 states for the period between 2000 and 2002.4 We used data on gun ownership from a large telephone survey (of more than 200,000 respondents) and controlled for rates of poverty, urbanization, unemployment, mental illness, and drug and alcohol dependence and abuse. Among men, among women, and in every age group (including children), states with higher rates of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm suicide and overall suicides. There was no association between firearm-ownership rates and nonfirearm suicides. To illustrate the main findings, we presented data for the 15 states with the highest levels of household gun ownership matched with the six states with the lowest levels (using only six so that the populations in both groups of states would be approximately equal). In the table, the findings are updated for 2001 through 2005.

Click to expand...

[icon] said:

There is no such thing as a high capacity semi-auto rifle 

Click to expand...

Terminalxylem said:

Also, did you miss the back slash in my post? 

Click to expand...

KCitons said:

"I don't know what it's called. But, ban it!!"

Click to expand...

[icon] said:

My apologies

There is no such thing as a high-capacity semi/auto rifle. 

Better?   

Click to expand...

KCitons said:

"I don't know what it's called. But, ban it!!"

Click to expand...

TheFanatic said:

I don't need to know what it is exactly. I just need it banned. 

Click to expand...

[icon] said:

My apologies

There is no such thing as a high-capacity semi/auto rifle. 

Better?   

Click to expand...

Terminalxylem said:

Notice I never said I believed in banning any firearms. I was replying somebody else’s post.

Or keep on high-fiving each other when a gun isn’t identified to your liking, as per the usual in these fruitless “discussions”.

Click to expand...

TheFanatic said:

It's not about liking and not liking. It's about getting the terminology correct. We aren't going to enact a banning of the bad, bad thingies. Is it too much to ask that people know what they are talking about when it comes to such drastic and sweeping debates and calls to action? I guess so. 

Click to expand...

TheFanatic said:

95% of all coverage of gun violence by the major news outlets is of mass killings which account for less than 1% of all gun deaths. The weekend that two mass shootings happened on the same day, more people died in Chicago to gun violence. Did you see the evening news from any major network in Chicago that weekend? Did each one have multiple reporters in both El Paso and Dayton? Strawmen, my ###. Quick, the herd is heading that way, you better catch up!

Click to expand...

Terminalxylem said:

Again, I’m not advocating banning anything. But does high capacity/semi automatic rifle not make sense? In simple terms, a firearm which readily holds and/or fires a bunch of bullets quickly? While I’m sure that can apply to a lot of guns in the hands of a skilled marksman, I think the intent is to limit access to guns any Joe Shooter can use to kill many people rapidly.

Click to expand...

KCitons said:

High capacity is a descriptor for the magazine. Which is a separate part of the gun or may not even be a part of a gun at all. We haven't really landed on what constitutes high capacity? For the purpose of this thread, is it 30 rounds? Does that mean 25 is not high capacity? There's a lot of room between 6 and 30. Others wouldn't even call a standard 30 round magazine for an AR15 as high capacity. For that, you would need to look at the 50 or 100 round magazines. 

Semi auto is a descriptor for the action. It only determines how a spent cartridge is removed from the chamber and a new, live round loaded. This operates regardless to the number of rounds in the magazine. You could have 2 rounds fired semi automatically. As others have pointed out, with a little practice, a person could fire a lever action and pump action just as fast as a semi automatic weapon. A bolt action would probably be the most difficult to replicate speed. 

Click to expand...

Terminalxylem said:

So maybe magazine size is most important, though I suspect the functionality of assault style rifles makes them better for killing a lot of stuff than their non-assault counterparts.

Click to expand...

Dr. Dan said:

What makes a rifle defined as an "assault weapon" has nothing to do with its ability to fire rounds rapidly. 

A carrying handle on top so you can carry it easier

A pistol grip for a comfortable grip

A detachable magazine (doesnt matter if it carries 3 rounds or 300), a detachable magazine is all.

A barrel shroud to allow the user to hold the barrel without getting burned

A collapsible stock for it to fit inside a case better 

Do any of those things aid in killing things? Sure they might looks scarey but banning weapons with some or all of these features doesn't change anything. Many hunting rifles would qualify if they had a pistol grip or a custom collapsible stock. 

To put this into perspective, a semiautomatric .22 long rifle could have a 5 round detachable magazine, pistol grip, custom telescoping stock, wood barrel shroud and it would be classified as an assault rifle. 

Click to expand...

Daywalker said:

I like how the discussion has basically been ground down to it's impossible to narrow down which guns should be legal.

Yes I know you can modify ur gun to do xyz.  Lets ban that too.

Click to expand...

Statorama said:

Let's back this up a little.  First, we should make murder illegal so people won't do it.

Click to expand...

TheFanatic said:

Uh, yeah, pretty much everyone thinks this is the solution. And that is blatantly obvious because nobody is focusing on suicide, gang violence, or pistol deaths in general. They only care about the sensational mass shootings and must stop them at all costs by banning the tool, and not worrying about the wielder of the tool. 

And you are right. I read somewhere that there were more fatalities that weekend in Chicago. I either misread it or it was false, and since I can't find the article, I can't confirm either way. That's my bad. And if you research this a little bit, the numbers are anywhere from 7 dead and 52 shot to 13 dead and 72 shot. That's pretty horrific considering it's practically every weekend, particularly in the warmer months. But where is the coverage?

Last year something like 373 people died from mass shootings. This year, 294 people have been shot and killed in Chicago and it's not even September. But what is covered 95% of the time in terms of gun violence? The 373 deaths are covered over and over and over and over yet the 34,000 gun deaths in 2017, including 22,000 suicides are practically ignored. Yeah, we better go get that AR15. That will solve all the problems. 

Click to expand...

Dr. Dan said:

What makes a rifle defined as an "assault weapon" has nothing to do with its ability to fire rounds rapidly.

A carrying handle on top so you can carry it easier

A pistol grip for a comfortable grip

A detachable magazine (doesnt matter if it carries 3 rounds or 300), a detachable magazine is all.

A barrel shroud to allow the user to hold the barrel without getting burned

A collapsible stock for it to fit inside a case better 

Do any of those things aid in killing things? Sure they might looks scarey but banning weapons with some or all of these features doesn't change anything. Many hunting rifles would qualify if they had a pistol grip or a custom collapsible stock. 

To put this into perspective, a semiautomatric .22 long rifle could have a 5 round detachable magazine, pistol grip, custom telescoping stock, wood barrel shroud and it would be classified as an assault rifle. 

Click to expand...