Miami school shooting
Discussion
frankenstein12 said:
No but then they are all legal and sane gun owners. How many guns in the UK are owned illegally?
Gun crime is on the increase in the UK. In fact crimes using most weapons are on the increase in the Uk and most of them are with illegal weaponry such as guns, Knives and acids.
Can you substantiate your claim that gun crime is increasing in the UK?Gun crime is on the increase in the UK. In fact crimes using most weapons are on the increase in the Uk and most of them are with illegal weaponry such as guns, Knives and acids.
red_slr said:
Without googling anyone care to guess how many of the 6,000 deaths, on average, are rifles and how many are pistols?
Not sure about deaths, but I read that of gun crimes about 5% involve rifles. Whether these just involved shooting at someone or includes things like not having the right permit I don't know.red_slr said:
What percentage though?
90%?There's no question in my mind that assault-style rifles are more deadly - owing to range, calibre, rate of fire, accuracy beyond immediate range and magazine capacity - but I assume more pistols are carried and generally accessible in the heat of the moment.
Depressingly I'm now doubting why you ask about 6000 deaths; whether that's deaths or deaths from mass shootings. Again, not googling.
Edited for spelling
six wheels said:
90%?
There's no question in my mind that assault-style rifles are more deadly - owing to range, calibre, rate of fire, accuracy beyond immediate range and magazine capacity - but I assume more pistols are carried and generally accessible in the heat of the moment.
Depressingly I'm now doubting why you ask about 6000 deaths; whether that's deaths or deaths from mass shootings. Again, not googling.
What do you mean by assault-style rifles though? There's no question in my mind that assault-style rifles are more deadly - owing to range, calibre, rate of fire, accuracy beyond immediate range and magazine capacity - but I assume more pistols are carried and generally accessible in the heat of the moment.
Depressingly I'm now doubting why you ask about 6000 deaths; whether that's deaths or deaths from mass shootings. Again, not googling.
Most semi automatic rifles have 10 round magazines and many pistols can hold more, though I'm not sure if these are legal in the US. In any case a semi automatic pistol has a similar rate of fire to a rifle. The main reason crooks prefer pistols is that they can get closer to the target with a pistol than with a rifle, making up for range and accuracy limitations.
Technically an assault rifle is fully automatic. AR-15s and the like are sometimes described as 'assault weapons', the definition of which includes being semi automatic and also having largely cosmetic features such as a pistol grip which has no bearing on how deadly they are.
frankenstein12 said:
Halmyre said:
frankenstein12 said:
Halmyre said:
frankenstein12 said:
Byker28i said:
frankenstein12 said:
Not perfect but a decent compromise to the idea of having either none or all which seems to be about the present mindset.
Quoted as seriously I cannot believe you wrote that. Go read this article
https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...land-should-...
You can disbelieve all you want. The reality FACT of the matter is you will not stop nutters gaining access to these types of weapons whether you restrict access or ban them. There are just too many of them in the US. There are something like 2 guns for every person in the US.
As such as much as it sucks the only realistic to try reduce death tolls in school shootings barring turning schools into fortressess/virtual prisons for students is to arm teachers.
Edited by frankenstein12 on Friday 23 February 17:17
k-fantasy of steely-eyed sharpshooters taking down the bad guy with precise and accurate shooting. Won't happen.My solutions. Ban semi-automatics. Limit the number of guns anyone is allowed to own. Sliding scale tax on ammunition purchase. Gun and ammunition purchase to be logged. Stricter controls on gun purchase - background checks, medical checks, cooling off period, etc.
Dr Jekyll said:
six wheels said:
90%?
There's no question in my mind that assault-style rifles are more deadly - owing to range, calibre, rate of fire, accuracy beyond immediate range and magazine capacity - but I assume more pistols are carried and generally accessible in the heat of the moment.
Depressingly I'm now doubting why you ask about 6000 deaths; whether that's deaths or deaths from mass shootings. Again, not googling.
What do you mean by assault-style rifles though? There's no question in my mind that assault-style rifles are more deadly - owing to range, calibre, rate of fire, accuracy beyond immediate range and magazine capacity - but I assume more pistols are carried and generally accessible in the heat of the moment.
Depressingly I'm now doubting why you ask about 6000 deaths; whether that's deaths or deaths from mass shootings. Again, not googling.
Most semi automatic rifles have 10 round magazines and many pistols can hold more, though I'm not sure if these are legal in the US. In any case a semi automatic pistol has a similar rate of fire to a rifle. The main reason crooks prefer pistols is that they can get closer to the target with a pistol than with a rifle, making up for range and accuracy limitations.
Technically an assault rifle is fully automatic. AR-15s and the like are sometimes described as 'assault weapons', the definition of which includes being semi automatic and also having largely cosmetic features such as a pistol grip which has no bearing on how deadly they are.
i think an assault-style rifle is anything with a shoulder stock, at least semi-auto, a magazine of more than 10 rounds and something accurate over immediate range (i guess that's over 5m ish). Some hunting rifles could fit into this categorization based on magazine capacity but in this context that doesn't matter. Nor does the grip type.
Yep, some pistols may work with a magazine larger than some rifle magazines.
I don't know about the rate of fire of pistols vs. rifles. As long as we're talking about semi rather than full auto i can well believe a similar rate of fire is possible (squeeze release repeat).
What I'd challenge - though I don't think you're suggesting anything here - is the accuracy of each when the shooter is putting out a high rate of fire. With a pistol i imagine those rounds would be going all over the place while the rifle - owing to the shoulder-stabilized firing position - would probably be more accurate.
I would also guess crooks prefer pistols but not (just?) because they can get closer, rather because pistols can be hidden while rifles cannot.
This thread isn't about crooks though.
Edited for spelling, again, and also to ask: what's the correct ratio?
Edited by six wheels on Friday 23 February 20:49
Ayahuasca said:
As regards the 'we cannot do anything to control guns because millions of them are in circulation' argument - why not just ban sales of ammunition. Gun owners will eventually run out of bullets and then their guns just become ornaments.
People have huge stockpiled of ammunition and often make their own anyhow. I bet there's enough ammunition out in USA to kill everyone on the planet Ructions said:
DurianIceCream said:
Ructions said:
I've been reading elsewhere that 3% of Americans own half the gun stock in the US.
About 1.5% of Brits own 100% of the UK guns. Owning lots of guns isn't a problem. Pointing them at people or thinking that guns solve your problems is the problem.
Ayahuasca said:
As regards the 'we cannot do anything to control guns because millions of them are in circulation' argument - why not just ban sales of ammunition. Gun owners will eventually run out of bullets and then their guns just become ornaments.
The second amendment protects the right to bear arms. Ammunition is an integral part of bearing arms, so the second amendment protects the right to obtain ammunition. DurianIceCream said:
The second amendment protects the right to bear arms. Ammunition is an integral part of bearing arms, so the second amendment protects the right to obtain ammunition.
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."What part of well regulated or militia was this 19 year old shooter involved in?
All proponents of guns in the US are very very quick to quote half of the amendment whist just as quick to wilfully ignore the other half.
RobDickinson said:
DurianIceCream said:
The second amendment protects the right to bear arms. Ammunition is an integral part of bearing arms, so the second amendment protects the right to obtain ammunition.
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."What part of well regulated or militia was this 19 year old shooter involved in?
All proponents of guns in the US are very very quick to quote half of the amendment whist just as quick to wilfully ignore the other half.
RobDickinson said:
DurianIceCream said:
The second amendment protects the right to bear arms. Ammunition is an integral part of bearing arms, so the second amendment protects the right to obtain ammunition.
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."What part of well regulated or militia was this 19 year old shooter involved in?
All proponents of guns in the US are very very quick to quote half of the amendment whist just as quick to wilfully ignore the other half.
To me it is saying the country needs a militia. May be the use of the word militia has changed, but I thought that meant a civilian force, not governmental. But it seems to me to be saying the militia should have the arms, was there a militia at the time that couldn't have arms?
I suppose the circumstances around why the amendment was ... well amended would help me too, but tbh too tired to google it now
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff