MaxPC wrote: ↑Tue Mar 28, 2023 6:08 am
Regardless of all the speculation and politicization, three 9-year-old children and three adults are not coming home. Before making this a political issue, we need to remember that there are grieving families whose lives will never be the same again.
Yet this issue is already being politicised by those who are in favour of outlawing guns. Strangely they are silent about other aspects of this story incident which seem far more relevant.
I agree that caring for grieving families should come first. But I see no problem in seeing this as a motivation to create policies that reduce the number of mass shootings in the future. Most of us in favor of gun control are not wanting to outlaw all guns, just these rapid-fire large-capacity semi-automatic weapons.
In Australia they said the same thing, but eventually completely banned private gun ownership outside of very narrow range sporting exemptions and have also banned using firearms for self defence.
Meanwhile, criminals are well armed - they seem to still get guns somehow - and lawful citizens are left defenceless. The gun control crowd has not created any trust with the people who want to be able to protect themselves and their families.
Josh, what other things can we learn from this event that "seem far more relevant"? If the shooter had been taking testosterone that might be one, but I don't think that's a common factor in mass murder attempts.
It also hasn’t been common - until now - for people to be taking toxic combinations of the wrong sex’s hormones. It’s very similar in results to steroid abuse.
Banning guns won’t change anything either - people can and do kill with knives and bombs.
motor vehicles are used to mow down pedestrians, also used as bombs on wheels, in addition to use for individual suicides/homicides.
True. As a society we regulate car use as a privilege that can be lost. We rebuild intersections walkways to protect pedestrians, we put up low walls and traffic bollards, we restrict where and when one can drive, how fast ect... we have created vast networks of police, architects, engineers and inspectors to regulate safe driving.
motor vehicles are used to mow down pedestrians, also used as bombs on wheels, in addition to use for individual suicides/homicides.
True. As a society we regulate car use as a privilege that can be lost. We rebuild intersections walkways to protect pedestrians, we put up low walls and traffic bollards, we restrict where and when one can drive, how fast ect... we have created vast networks of police, architects, engineers and inspectors to regulate safe driving.
True for firearms, as well. You weren’t suggesting otherwise?
1. Which is easier to get in this country, a gun license or a driver's license?
2. Which is tracked more closely, car ownership/registration or gun ownership/registration?
3. Which is easier for the authorities to suspend. A driver's license or gun license?
4. Which is easier for authorities to seize? a car or a gun?
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
For those who wonder why people want stronger restrictions on one of the most popular mass shooting weapons (AR-15), here’s an article that the Washington a post published yesterday morning, before the shooting happened. It is a little disturbing but is a great explanation of how the AR-15 does much more damage than most other weapons. It rips apart the body.
Sliceitup wrote: ↑Tue Mar 28, 2023 10:15 am
For those who wonder why people want stronger restrictions on one of the most popular mass shooting weapons (AR-15), here’s an article that the Washington a post published yesterday morning, before the shooting happened. It is a little disturbing but is a great explanation of how the AR-15 does much more damage than most other weapons. It rips apart the body.
This article displays a severe ignorance of firearms and is written from a political perspective.
A typical hunting rifle like a .30-06 is much more lethal than an AR-15 which is typically shooting .223 or 5.56. Of course, this article fails to mention that.
Thankfully, mass shooters aren’t yet picking up common hunting rifles, but if they did, they would cause as much damage to a human as they can to a deer 300 yards away.
Ken wrote: ↑Tue Mar 28, 2023 10:12 am
Four questions for the guns = cars crowd here.
1. Which is easier to get in this country, a gun license or a driver's license?
2. Which is tracked more closely, car ownership/registration or gun ownership/registration?
3. Which is easier for the authorities to suspend. A driver's license or gun license?
4. Which is easier for authorities to seize? a car or a gun?
Cars kill more people (particularly young people) than guns. Perhaps we should regulate cars more like guns, then.
Sliceitup wrote: ↑Tue Mar 28, 2023 10:15 am
For those who wonder why people want stronger restrictions on one of the most popular mass shooting weapons (AR-15), here’s an article that the Washington a post published yesterday morning, before the shooting happened. It is a little disturbing but is a great explanation of how the AR-15 does much more damage than most other weapons. It rips apart the body.
This article displays a severe ignorance of firearms and is written from a political perspective.
A typical hunting rifle like a .30-06 is much more lethal than an AR-15 which is typically shooting .223 or 5.56. Of course, this article fails to mention that.
Thankfully, mass shooters aren’t yet picking up common hunting rifles, but if they did, they would cause as much damage to a human as they can to a deer 300 yards away.
So is it fair to say that the article did an accurate assessment on the weapons that are typically used by mass shooters?
Sliceitup wrote: ↑Tue Mar 28, 2023 10:15 am
For those who wonder why people want stronger restrictions on one of the most popular mass shooting weapons (AR-15), here’s an article that the Washington a post published yesterday morning, before the shooting happened. It is a little disturbing but is a great explanation of how the AR-15 does much more damage than most other weapons. It rips apart the body.
We already know all about how a high caliber bullet works, how they tumble, how they mushroom, the shock waves creating tissue damage.
Now lets see the good ol'WaPo do a interactive graphic showing how a body is blown apart via abortion.
Of course it would warrant the same faux pious disclosure they have here, being: "Editor’s note: We are publishing these 3D animations to show the destructive power of the AR-15. The images may disturb some people."
It's all politics. There is no real worry about images disturbing people. If so, they wouldn't show this either. They would be quick to lambast anyone doing the same graphic with abortion.