An 'Assault Weapon' Ban Won't Stop Mass Shootings

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
Politicians, activists, and journalists who have decided to blame mass shootings on "assault weapons" either do not acknowledge these facts or wave them away. "While semi-automatic handguns still account for the vast majority of weapons used in mass shootings across the United States," says The Miami Herald, "semi-automatic rifles are increasingly common weapons of choice." How can certain kinds of guns be "weapons of choice" when other guns are chosen much more often?

It is true that the guns Feinstein wants to ban show up more frequently in the modern mass shootings with the highest death tolls. But two points should be kept in mind when considering those attacks.

First, it is clearly possible to carry out attacks similar to yesterday's, which killed 17 people, without using "assault weapons." Nine of the mass shootings with the 20 highest death tolls involved handguns or long guns that are not covered by Feinstein's bill. That includes the third deadliest mass shooting, which killed 32 people at Virginia Tech in 2007, as well as two other attacks that killed 17 or more people.

Second, the fact that the perpetrators of the deadliest mass shootings tend to favor "assault weapons" does not mean that choice makes the attacks deadlier than they otherwise would be. That proposition seems pretty doubtful in light of the "assault weapon" definitions used by legislators, which are based on appearance rather than lethality.


An 'Assault Weapon' Ban Won't Stop Mass Shootings
Congress can't "stop the killing...by changing the law."
 

littlelady

God bless the USA
Exactly. The leap frogs act like they have a magic wand to stop killing by gun. Well, they don’t. Anyone that wants to enter their/that fantasy land is free to do so. After all, America is a free country; at least for now.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
While Great Mills was not an example of a mass shooting, it did illustrate one thing that's been repeated so often it ought to be understood as self-evident - to stop a man with a gun, you need another man with a gun. A trained person with a gun ended that tragic incident in minutes.

Instead of yet ANOTHER round of endless means of restricting access to guns, why can't we have an actual policeman who does one duty cycle at a high school?
We have a handful of high schools in the county? Have a cop assigned a shift for six hours. How hard can that be?
Or hire one ex-cop or trained military to a shift at the school. It doesn't even need to be full-time.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
.... it did illustrate one thing that's been repeated so often it ought to be understood as self-evident - to stop a man with a gun, you need another man with a gun.

:nono:

Ol' Sappy says Parkland is a perfect example of why they doesn't work

ofc my response is the Parkland SRO was a pussy to afraid to do his job
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
:nono:

Ol' Sappy says Parkland is a perfect example of why they doesn't work

ofc my response is the Parkland SRO was a pussy to afraid to do his job

Yes: He is going to have a hard time sleeping and living with himself for a long long time.
There is a guy that will have PTSD.
 
Top