The U.S.A. Mass Shootings Thread

[Gary C]

aeropilot said:

I wouldn't want to be in Alaska or somewhere like that where large Grizzly's or Polar Bear's are roaming about and only have access to a single shot bolt action rifle, especially if one was coming at you from close range, and you missed or didn't drop the bugger with that one shot.....

humm, you do have a point there.

[red_slr]

HM-2 said:

I'm ambivalent about the effectiveness of magazine size limits. Though I literally cannot think of a single civilian firearm use which is in anyway impeded by only having ten round magazines, .

Mini rifle. Would be pointless straight away with 10 round mags. Some details I carry 8 x 25 rnd mags and I burn through every single round too. If I could carry extra mags I would but 8 is about the most I can fit on my person and still be able to run, lie down, get round obstacles etc.

All my .223 mags that I use in Civilian Service Rifle comps are 25 round P mags, for the simple reason of I can rest the bottom of the mag on the ground when shooting!

[red_slr]

aeropilot said:

I wouldn't want to be in Alaska or somewhere like that where large Grizzly's or Polar Bear's are roaming about and only have access to a single shot bolt action rifle, especially if one was coming at you from close range, and you missed or didn't drop the bugger with that one shot.....

Or bobcats..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPwcnnb_SdY&t=...

[HM-2]

red_slr said:

People think that the AR15 is "based on the military version - the M16". ITS NOT!!

Its actually the other way round.

My understanding was that the AR-15 was initially designed, under that name by Armalite as a selective fire fully automatic 5.56mm downscaling of the AR-10 for military use.

The patents and trademarks were bought by Colt when Armalite got into financial difficulty, they them produced variants under a number of 6** three digit model codes, several of which were accepted into US military use including the M16.

Then in the 1970s Colt started reusing the AR-15 trademark for semi-automatic rifles derived from their 6** range for civilian use.

So the "AR-15" name predates the M16, but the term AR-15 used to refer to a semi-automatic civilian rifle doesn't.

Edited by HM-2 on Saturday 5th June 21:15

[aeropilot]

red_slr said:

aeropilot said:

I wouldn't want to be in Alaska or somewhere like that where large Grizzly's or Polar Bear's are roaming about and only have access to a single shot bolt action rifle, especially if one was coming at you from close range, and you missed or didn't drop the bugger with that one shot.....

Or bobcats..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPwcnnb_SdY&t=...

When I visit my best mate and his wife who live in California's central valley, we often take a trip up into the mountains to visit his inlaws, who live not far from Yosemite Park, and my mate's FiL keeps a loaded .44mag Winchester underlever up on a shelf about the front door, as they often get mountain lions on their property.....and they don't exactly live out in the wilderness hundreds of miles off grid.

[RUNAMOK]

There are lots of differences between the Ruger Mini14 and an AR15 variant which gives the latter enhanced lethality. Which is why these rifles and similar are used by western militaries. Light weight, reduced recoil, larger capacity magazines, pistol grip making it easier to wield and reload, easier magazine release, adjustable stock, rails to carry different accessories, etc etc. It isn't that people don't like the 'way the look'. They look that way for a reason, to make them more effective at their job, which for these rifles is killing soldiers in dynamic situations. While the rifles are similar in many respects, it is totally rational to be more accepting of one than the other (which isn't to say either are necessary in normal societies..!)

[NMNeil]

aeropilot said:

When I visit my best mate and his wife who live in California's central valley, we often take a trip up into the mountains to visit his inlaws, who live not far from Yosemite Park, and my mate's FiL keeps a loaded .44mag Winchester underlever up on a shelf about the front door, as they often get mountain lions on their property.....and they don't exactly live out in the wilderness hundreds of miles off grid.

Same here, but it's coyotes and dogs we shoot. I find that a shotgun loaded with 00 buckshot does the job better than a rifle.

[jimmyjimjim]

red_slr said:

The reason for the AR being so popular is cost. Simple as that. Rifles, ammo, mods, mags etc. All cheap and easy to get.

This, nothing more. I was quite interested in getting a Mini-14. Then realized an AR-15 was about 1/4 of the price and arguably nicer. The same goes for the AK - a decent one is three times as expensive as an AR-15. M1A, an M14 clone - 3 times the price of an AR. Garand? A bit over twice. THe AR-15 is cheap, reliable, ergonomic. Why look further?

There's 2 types of shootings in the US - unplanned, where someone flips out for whatever reason, and starts using whatever they've got to hand. Usually a pistol, which is why they're responsible for ~80% of gun deaths. And also a huge part of why I dislike open or concealed carry - if you're carrying it, you're more likely to use it, than if you've got to go back home and get it out of the safe, cooling off on the drive.

Then there's planned, where they decide to go and take out as many as they can. They have the time to get something better than a pistol, so they go and buy something better. For the most part, that's going to be a decent AR platform rifle. If those were banned, it would be a Mini14, AK or whatever. Perhaps a few pistols with extended mags, who knows. The AR is just the low hanging fruit. Banning them would have no effect on shootings.

[Gary C]

jimmyjimjim said:

The AR is just the low hanging fruit. Banning them would have no effect on shootings.

So ban all auto, semi-auto and hand guns then

jimmyjimjim said:

if you're carrying it, you're more likely to use it, than if you've got to go back home and get it out of the safe, cooling off on the drive.

Its a hell of a state when anyone even thinks that shooting someone is an answer, such that you rely on a cooling off to prevent it !

[jimmyjimjim]

Gary C said:

jimmyjimjim said:

The AR is just the low hanging fruit. Banning them would have no effect on shootings.

So ban all auto, semi-auto and hand guns then

jimmyjimjim said:

if you're carrying it, you're more likely to use it, than if you've got to go back home and get it out of the safe, cooling off on the drive.

Its a hell of a state when anyone even thinks that shooting someone is an answer, such that you rely on a cooling off to prevent it !

Good luck with that ban. See plenty of earlier discussion regarding that. Also, auto is already banned.

As above, I really don't like open or concealed carry. I think it lends itself to hot tempered morons shooting people - and there's plenty of evidence to support that; if you look at the last few shootings, it's easy to distinguish the 'planned' from the 'unplanned' shootings. I do think that banning any form of carry would be sensible - Texas's move is not a good one.

Edited by jimmyjimjim on Sunday 6th June 05:21

[HM-2]

jimmyjimjim said:

if you look at the last few shootings, it's easy to distinguish the 'planned' from the 'unplanned' shootings.

I don't think there's a binary choice between "planned" and "unplanned" shooters in quite the way you describe. I would agree that the majority of typical shootings are not directly planned though they usually can be predicted as they're the culmination of a pattern of violence, usually against a spouse or other known person.

A large proportion of spree and mass shootings are premeditated but the degree of actual preplanning can vary hugely. Loading your car with guns and driving down to an ex-employer is not really indicative of planning, but building a load of IEDs to take with you probably is.

I'm also not really sure I agree with the notion that even planned shooters will necessarily go out and source a particular firearm for their spree. Whilst it does happen, the majority of mass shootings involve weapons that are already owned by the perpetrator.

Edited by HM-2 on Sunday 6th June 07:44

[MKnight702]

RUNAMOK said:

There are lots of differences between the Ruger Mini14 and an AR15 variant which gives the latter enhanced lethality. Which is why these rifles and similar are used by western militaries. Light weight, reduced recoil, larger capacity magazines, pistol grip making it easier to wield and reload, easier magazine release, adjustable stock, rails to carry different accessories, etc etc. It isn't that people don't like the 'way the look'. They look that way for a reason, to make them more effective at their job, which for these rifles is killing soldiers in dynamic situations. While the rifles are similar in many respects, it is totally rational to be more accepting of one than the other (which isn't to say either are necessary in normal societies..!)

The highlighted is just plain wrong. The AR-15 is a semi automatic civilian firearm and has always been such. No army in the world uses the AR-15 so it was not designed to be used by soldiers to kill soldiers, this is I think, the problem. People mistake the AR-15 for an assault rifle because it looks similar to one, but it is not, and has never been an assault rifle. And no, the AR does not stand for Assault Rifle, it stands for Armalite Rifle the original designer/manufacturer.

As for your so called "enhanced lethality" here is a Mini 14 in a different stock, with all the so called features you mentioned, yet again, none of the anti gun movement are calling for an outright ban on the Mini 14.




The AR platform is one of the most popular rifles and it is relatively cheap to purchase so it isn't really that surprising to see that it is used in more shootings, this is not an issue with the rifle but it is more the fault of the mass availability of the AR and its cost, there are many, many different manufacturers producing their own AR-15 rifles, it is the Hot Hatch of the firearms world.

Just banning the AR-15 is like trying to ban all hot hatches because they are the most popular car for joy riding.

[rscott]

MKnight702 said:

RUNAMOK said:

There are lots of differences between the Ruger Mini14 and an AR15 variant which gives the latter enhanced lethality. Which is why these rifles and similar are used by western militaries. Light weight, reduced recoil, larger capacity magazines, pistol grip making it easier to wield and reload, easier magazine release, adjustable stock, rails to carry different accessories, etc etc. It isn't that people don't like the 'way the look'. They look that way for a reason, to make them more effective at their job, which for these rifles is killing soldiers in dynamic situations. While the rifles are similar in many respects, it is totally rational to be more accepting of one than the other (which isn't to say either are necessary in normal societies..!)

The highlighted is just plain wrong. The AR-15 is a semi automatic civilian firearm and has always been such. No army in the world uses the AR-15 so it was not designed to be used by soldiers to kill soldiers, this is I think, the problem. People mistake the AR-15 for an assault rifle because it looks similar to one, but it is not, and has never been an assault rifle. And no, the AR does not stand for Assault Rifle, it stands for Armalite Rifle the original designer/manufacturer.

As for your so called "enhanced lethality" here is a Mini 14 in a different stock, with all the so called features you mentioned, yet again, none of the anti gun movement are calling for an outright ban on the Mini 14.




The AR platform is one of the most popular rifles and it is relatively cheap to purchase so it isn't really that surprising to see that it is used in more shootings, this is not an issue with the rifle but it is more the fault of the mass availability of the AR and its cost, there are many, many different manufacturers producing their own AR-15 rifles, it is the Hot Hatch of the firearms world.

Just banning the AR-15 is like trying to ban all hot hatches because they are the most popular car for joy riding.

Interesting article here giving what seems like a well reasoned view why the AR15 and similar are so popular, compared to other weapons with similar lethality - https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/...


Looking at https://grabagun.com , seems the AR15 and variants are considerably cheaper than the Mini14, which probably contributes to it's popularity.

All available on "Shoot Now, Pay Later" too!

[aeropilot]

jimmyjimjim said:

red_slr said:

The reason for the AR being so popular is cost. Simple as that. Rifles, ammo, mods, mags etc. All cheap and easy to get.

This, nothing more. I was quite interested in getting a Mini-14. Then realized an AR-15 was about 1/4 of the price and arguably nicer. The same goes for the AK - a decent one is three times as expensive as an AR-15. M1A, an M14 clone - 3 times the price of an AR. Garand? A bit over twice. THe AR-15 is cheap, reliable, ergonomic. Why look further?

Pretty much.
They don't hold any interest for me, but I understand why they are so popular, the cheapness and modular configurability, as well as home grown in the USA, makes them the only option for most people to consider.
I'd a have Garand and a M1 Carbine though.....because of the history, and in the case of the Garand, the 'ping'

[HM-2]

MKnight702 said:

The AR-15 is a semi automatic civilian firearm and has always been such.

Well actually the original AR-15 was a fully automatic military assault rifle but yes, post Colt acquiring the patents AR-15 has exclusively referred to semi-automatic civilian rifles.

MKnight702 said:

No army in the world uses the AR-15

I think I'm correct in saying there are several armed forces who use semi-automatic-only "AR-15 style" rifles in certain roles. In fact, the US did (or do) themselves- the Mk12 Special Purpose Rifle is essentially an accurised civilian AR-15 semi-automatic-only rifle built up as a designated marksman's rifle.

MKnight702 said:

so it was not designed to be used by soldiers to kill soldiers, this is I think, the problem.

This is where I start to disagree fundamentally. A lot is made of the lack of automatic fire in semi-automatic rifles and how this differentiates them from military weapons but the overwhelming majority of soldiers engaging the enemy with standard service weapons intentionally use semi-automatic fire- around 97%, in fact.

What's the fundamental difference between an AR-15 and an M16 on semi-auto, as most typically used? Not a lot really. Barrel twist rates are about the only main difference I can think of to promote tumbling in military FMJ rounds, but that's not really an issue for civilian shooters as they can use hollow point ammunition which has much higher lethality. In fact you could make a pretty compelling argument that civilian AR-15s are demonstrably more lethal against squishy human targets than the military weapons from which they are derived.

MKnight702 said:

People mistake the AR-15 for an assault rifle because it looks similar to one

Not similar to, essentially identical. Externally the visual differences between a civilian market AR-15 and military M16s and M4s are pretty much nonexistent. Most of the physical differences are within the receiver.

Outwardly you have what? A slightly different firing mode selector switch. Depending on jurisdiction, possibly no threaded barrel. Er...and that's really it. You can even get the sub-10" barrel versions for civilian use thanks to some of them being technically classified as "pistols".

MKnight702 said:

As for your so called "enhanced lethality" here is a Mini 14 in a different stock, with all the so called features you mentioned, yet again, none of the anti gun movement are calling for an outright ban on the Mini 14.

Isn't that a Mini-14GB/RU-556, which is a selective fire government sales only version? Or is it an aftermarket folding stock conversion?

MKnight702 said:

The AR platform is one of the most popular rifles and it is relatively cheap to purchase so it isn't really that surprising to see that it is used in more shootings

I think you overstate its popularity. There are about 390 million legal firearms in circulation in the US. About 10 million of these are thought to be AR-15 style rifles- or about 2.5%. However approximately 50% of spree/mass shooting incidents in the US since 2000 that have seen 10 or more fatalities have involved an AR-15 style rifle.

[NMNeil]

The AR-15 platform is so popular because you can buy a receiver and all the other parts individually and assemble your own custom rifle.
https://www.midwayusa.com/rifle-parts/br?cid=23854
The only part that needs to go through the ATF background check is the receiver, but under our laws you can still buy an 80% complete blank and make your own receiver with no ATF approval, as long as it's only for your own personal use. You just have to finish the machining yourself.
https://www.80percentarms.com/80-lowers/

[Brother D]

Mass shooting this morning

https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2021/06/06/shooting-c...

We're up to a hundred people shot in Chicago in the month of June and it's not even been a full week yet!

[NMNeil]

Brother D said:

Mass shooting this morning

https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2021/06/06/shooting-c...

We're up to a hundred people shot in Chicago in the month of June and it's not even been a full week yet!

It's a rough area obviously.
https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2021/06/06/chicago-do...

[HM-2]

NMNeil said:

but under our laws you can still buy an 80% complete blank and make your own receiver with no ATF approval, as long as it's only for your own personal use. You just have to finish the machining yourself.
https://www.80percentarms.com/80-lowers/

I referenced this obliquely on a previous page but it still absolutely boggles my mind that the only thing preventing a convicted felon from circumventing the entire federal background check process to acquire an AR-15 is access to a pillar drill and a $30 jig you can buy on eBay.

Then again, criminals could just buy one from private individuals without having to undergo any kind of checks, I suppose.

[dvs_dave]

NMNeil said:

Brother D said:

Mass shooting this morning

https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2021/06/06/shooting-c...

We're up to a hundred people shot in Chicago in the month of June and it's not even been a full week yet!

It's a rough area obviously.
https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2021/06/06/chicago-do...

I wonder what the perps have in common every.single.time?