Reply With Quote
Needs
You're hanging yourself now. Now someone needs a gun.
Eventually
So you don't trust your party to make effective changes and instead rely on evolution.
Needs
You're hanging yourself now. Now someone needs a gun.
It’s a well funded machine and god knows we worship the almighty dollar.Eventually
So you don't trust your party to make effective changes and instead rely on evolution.
I largely agree with your analysis on placebo legislation but completely disagree with your all or nothing approach. Semi autos are the goal, but you’ve got to start solving the problem somewhere. Start with the AR15, then the semi auto rifle, move onto the semi auto handgun.
Slowly strip you of your “rights”. Btw - who grants those rights and who enforces those rights?
Not a need but a personal decision and that is enshrined in law. If SR21 thinks he needs one…Needs
You're hanging yourself now. Now someone needs a gun.
Will that blow the lungs right out of the body or will it stick in the lung?
It’ll stick you in nube. Sit in the corner while the adults are talking about the technicalities of guns.
Oh that's a good gun then. Not a battlefield weapon like them 9mm ones. They blow the lung right out of the body.
SR21 if you get a 38 special remember the trick to shooting them is to hold on loosely but don't let go
I was around the first time they were talking about banning "assault rifles". A friend and I with the help of the US government built and sold about 30 AR15s. After Vietnam the US government destroyed hundreds of thousands of them by cutting the lower receiver (the registered part of the gun with the serial number) and sold everything else as scrap. (upper receiver, including bolt, barrel, stock etc. ) we could buy an aftermarket lower receiver for $80 and a complete puts kit of US surplus parts for $120. Then spend 20 minutes assembling them and immediately sell them for $700. Funny thing was those surplus kits still had the "full auto" bolt and all you had to do to convert them to full auto was add an auto sear that you could buy for $20 if you wanted to. Anyway, we made several thousand dollars of easy money because of the scare.
The assault rifles ban was pretty much a joke. It described details like pistol grip, barrel shroud, threaded barrel, etc. The importers just switched from AKs to SKSs with magazine conversions that effectively did the exact same thing without meeting the assault rifles description.
And rightfully so... Btw your tagline is dumb as just like you Bouts.
So why did he number of mass gun killings go down during the ban then up after?
did they? Your claim.
A 2019 study out of New York University’s School of Medicine found that mass shooting deaths involving assault weapons fell slightly in the decade of the federal assault weapon ban, and then rose dramatically in the decade that followed....
In a 2004 study commissioned by the U.S. Justice Department, researcher Christopher Koper wrote, "The ban’s exemption of millions of pre-ban assault weapons and large capacity magazines ensured that the effects of the law would occur only gradually."
....The point was the 1994 law was hardly an on-off switch for these firearms and magazines. As long as that hardware remained in circulation, people who wanted to use these weapons in a mass shooting would have some opportunity to acquire them....
....In raw numbers, they found that mass shooting deaths fell during the years of the ban, and rose afterwards. DiMaggio shared his data. Deaths more than tripled in the decade after the ban ended.
The decline of 15 deaths between the decade before the ban and the decade during it is modest, but there is a clear and dramatic rise after the ban expired.
The death toll from mass shootings went from an average of 4.8 per year during the ban years to an average of 23.8 per year in the decade afterwards....
https://www.statesman.com/story/news...ed/9941501002/
Feel free to post your numbers, but perhaps it was just a little more difficult for non-gun nut potential murderers to get those kinds of guns during the ban. It sure was easier afterwards when the numbers mysteriously tripled.
But it was probably that rap music and Grand Theft Auto.
So they took two ten year periods before ban/after ban and the difference was 15 deaths? Is that really statistically significant? Even if it was, the casual cause/effect is simply inferred with no way to prove if it was or wasn't the difference.The decline of 15 deaths between the decade before the ban and the decade during it is modest, but there is a clear and dramatic rise after the ban expired.
did you read anything I posted? I'll repeat for you:
In a 2004 study commissioned by the U.S. Justice Department, researcher Christopher Koper wrote, "The ban’s exemption of millions of pre-ban assault weapons and large capacity magazines ensured that the effects of the law would occur only gradually."
....The point was the 1994 law was hardly an on-off switch for these firearms and magazines. As long as that hardware remained in circulation, people who wanted to use these weapons in a mass shooting would have some opportunity to acquire them....
Why did the shootings triple after the ban was ended?perhaps it was just a little more difficult for non-gun nut potential murderers to get those kinds of guns during the ban.
Let's have your opinion.
I mean your argument here is "Maybe something was starting to work in the past, so let's definitely never try anything like it again!"
You always on my opinion but I think these mentally disturbed males do it as a (and I agree it's irrational) means of being "famous" since they have somehow come to the decision that their lives are hopeless and taking down a school, etc. will allow them to suicide by cop while being front page news. I have always advocated not publishing the shooters name and just call them a "mentally disturbed individual".
In a 2004 study commissioned by the U.S. Justice Department, researcher Christopher Koper wrote, "The ban’s exemption of millions of pre-ban assault weapons and large capacity magazines ensured that the effects of the law would occur only gradually."
....The point was the 1994 law was hardly an on-off switch for these firearms and magazines. As long as that hardware remained in circulation, people who wanted to use these weapons in a mass shooting would have some opportunity to acquire them....
Why did the shootings triple after the ban was ended?
Let's have your opinion.
That doesn't really explain the tripling of shootings after the end of the ban.
Cable news and USA Today had already been around for over two decades by the end of the ban -- well established during the time of the modest decrease.
Why did the shootings increase that much after the ban ended?
I think it's cascading copy cat events. There are a lot of sick heads out there.
What happened to keep the events from cascading during the ban?
You are asking my opinion? The assault weapon ban was from 1994 to 2004. there were no smart phones or social media in that time frame. If you want a cause and effect I think there is a case to be made that the mass shootings have increased at the same rate as the availability of social media.
Hai guyz what the ar in ar15 mean? A salt rifle rite?
AR was short for Armalite. The origonal design was by Armalite.
So far---so good.
Though I feel a trap, it's too good to be true. The RINO's could be playing possum, like rats, massing for a sneak attack.
I got my fingers, my toes & my eyes crossed for good luck.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
