Is the news media biased, or just stupid on firearms?

[TerryMathews]

Look here, idiot...you can make all the fallcies you want, that is not illegal.
But you are borderline illegal stupid if you think people are going to fall for fallacy after fallacy.

It's a simple question. Will you ever answer it?

 

[Lonbjerg]

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-t...n-NW-Houston-bow-and-arrow-attack-1994098.php

http://1withabullet.wordpress.com/2...permit-holder-helped-subdue-giffords-shooter/

http://elkodaily.com/articles/2008/05/26/news/breaking_news/breaking1.txt

Once, twice, three times an idiot.

Thanks for playing.

Edit: to answer your question, more than you have.

LOL
Are you being intellectual dishonest now...or are you more daft than a wet brick?
You really, hoenstly think those cases are a "amtch" to the batman-shooting?!
(If yes, seek help.)


I don't believe your claim, since I have fired just about anything from a 9mm pistol round to 120mm HEAT & SABOT rounds.

It's a simple question. Will you ever answer it?

Have you stopped beating your wife?
It's a simpel question.

 

[monovillage]

I see...the education system IS broken in the US 😉

I'm calling you a liar.

http://denmark.dk/

 

[Lonbjerg]

I'm calling you a liar.

http://denmark.dk/

If that rock you boat...*shrugs*
Perhaps you should read more than headlines....because your post out of sync with reality.


And this is funny.
Notice all the red herrings.

First I am called a liar...for staitng my military service....some kids don't deal with facts very well.
The I disprove arguments based on suck ass Hollywoood movies...to only go down the rod of moving the goalposts...

Are all pro-gunners so dishonest and lame teens? 🙂

 

[Pia]

Same here.
Was in the Danish Army, served twice in former yugoslavia (a country where guns were littered all over...being a MAJOR factor in conflict) and in my experience most peoplethat advocates free guns are pussies that only have shot a dummy tragets and never taken incomming fire...but oh they have balls on the internet, when defendin their right to be scared little people in need of guns....

Just to put the above in perspective, the civil war there ended in 1995. DANBT entered the area in 1999, four years after the war was over, and never suffered a single combat casualty. Sitting in a cozy military camp within a peaceful country sure makes you qualified to talk about conflict, unlike those internet tough guys.

A friend of mine worked in Montenegro, Kosovo and Bosnia from 1994 to 2006 in civilian clothes, often traveling across the place unarmed and unescorted. I travelled there for a week's vacation around 2000.

 

[xj0hnx]

First I am called a liar...for staitng my military service....some kids don't deal with facts very well.

Being a gate guard in Kosovo doesn't make you an expert on anything, except how to guard a gate. Being in the military doesn't make you an expert on what's going to happen to someone when they get shot.

The I disprove arguments based on suck ass Hollywoood movies...to only go down the rod of moving the goalposts...

Are all pro-gunners so dishonest and lame teens? 🙂

You didn't disprove anything, you made a blanket statement and then tried to pretend it applies to everything.

 

[TerryMathews]

LOL
Are you being intellectual dishonest now...or are you more daft than a wet brick?
You really, hoenstly think those cases are a "amtch" to the batman-shooting?!
(If yes, seek help.)


I don't believe your claim, since I have fired just about anything from a 9mm pistol round to 120mm HEAT & SABOT rounds.



Have you stopped beating your wife?
It's a simpel question.

I never started (beating my wife). Care to give me any tips?

See douche, that is what an answer looks like.

To your other point, how does pulling a trigger make you an expert? Does driving a lot of cars make you an expert on cars? More so than someone who works on them or builds them?

Have you ever considered that there might be people on here with actual firearms licensees? Perhaps not even just owners licensees but dealers or builders?

Finally, you asked for duration situations where a CCW permit holder stopped a rampage. This post is the first where you've said they have to be identical to the Aurora shooting. Who's moving the goal post now?

I'm still waiting on my answer whether you think all body armor is the same or not. You keep evading, funnily enough.

 

[Darwin333]

I think you should admit however that more guns firing in a smoke filled dimly lit theater filled with panicked people has a high probability of additional casualties. As I said earlier it's clearly impossible to know what would have happened with more shooters in there, but that environment seems pretty uniquely unfavorable to a gunfight from a civilian casualty perspective.

I agree. I carry daily and its hard to imagine a worse scenario for me to pull my weapon. With that said, it wouldn't have taken more than a few seconds to realize that he intended on shooting everyone he could so I hope that if I had an opportunity I would have at least tried. The reality is that none of us have any clue how we would react in such a situation and the possibilities are endless. Are my kids with me? Shooting at him obviously makes me his top priority, am I willing to make myself the biggest target in the theater with my kids sitting next to me? Or am I more concerned that he will shoot my kids if I don't do anything? How close you are, people in between you, visibility, etc....

I can monday morning QB it and think of all sorts of scenarios in which a patron with a gun could have severely minimized the dead and wounded. I can also think of all sorts of scenarios in which he would most likely shoot an innocent victim.

I am not arguing that it would have been smart or a good thing, I am simply pointing out the absurdity of the argument that bullets don't hurt if your wearing a vest and this schmuck would have been completely unfazed had he taken a few rounds to the chest.

 

[micrometers]

I agree. I carry daily and its hard to imagine a worse scenario for me to pull my weapon. With that said, it wouldn't have taken more than a few seconds to realize that he intended on shooting everyone he could so I hope that if I had an opportunity I would have at least tried. The reality is that none of us have any clue how we would react in such a situation and the possibilities are endless. Are my kids with me? Shooting at him obviously makes me his top priority, am I willing to make myself the biggest target in the theater with my kids sitting next to me? Or am I more concerned that he will shoot my kids if I don't do anything? How close you are, people in between you, visibility, etc....

I can monday morning QB it and think of all sorts of scenarios in which a patron with a gun could have severely minimized the dead and wounded. I can also think of all sorts of scenarios in which he would most likely shoot an innocent victim.

I am not arguing that it would have been smart or a good thing, I am simply pointing out the absurdity of the argument that bullets don't hurt if your wearing a vest and this schmuck would have been completely unfazed had he taken a few rounds to the chest.

Objectively speaking, you have to realize that the preferable solution is firearm restrictions, not meeting fire with fire.

 

[Darwin333]

Because I did ask for in this very thread for exsmapels of how a civilian stop a mass shooting....nothing came up! 🙂

Its funny that you ask that since most of the mass shootings in the US have happened in "gun free" zones. From what I have heard the company that owns the Aurora theater has a no firearm policy posted at the entrance as well.

 

[corwin]

Objectively speaking, you have to realize that the preferable solution is firearm restrictions, not meeting fire with fire.

Those restrictions are 100% effective at keeping law abiding citizens from having a firearm and 0% at keeping criminals from having them...it's a worn out tired argument with no basis in reality

 

[etrigan420]

I agree. I carry daily and its hard to imagine a worse scenario for me to pull my weapon. With that said, it wouldn't have taken more than a few seconds to realize that he intended on shooting everyone he could so I hope that if I had an opportunity I would have at least tried. The reality is that none of us have any clue how we would react in such a situation and the possibilities are endless. Are my kids with me? Shooting at him obviously makes me his top priority, am I willing to make myself the biggest target in the theater with my kids sitting next to me? Or am I more concerned that he will shoot my kids if I don't do anything? How close you are, people in between you, visibility, etc....

I can monday morning QB it and think of all sorts of scenarios in which a patron with a gun could have severely minimized the dead and wounded. I can also think of all sorts of scenarios in which he would most likely shoot an innocent victim.

I am not arguing that it would have been smart or a good thing, I am simply pointing out the absurdity of the argument that bullets don't hurt if your wearing a vest and this schmuck would have been completely unfazed had he taken a few rounds to the chest.

Well stated.

 

[micrometers]

Those restrictions are 100% effective at keeping law abiding citizens from having a firearm and 0% at keeping criminals from having them...it's a worn out tired argument with no basis in reality

No, you're just repeating NRA "common wisdom".

It's typical knee-jerk response

if the AR15 were illegal across the board, if multiple gun purchases could be tracked by the NSA similar to how the NSA data-mines for patterns that terrorists take, that could have prevented this from happening.

 

[Darwin333]

Now you are just grapsing for straws...but what can you do when americans are spoon-feed false physics from Hollywoood.

Does your educational system not work, since you seem oblivous to facts?

Grasping for straws???? You are the one that is talking about "physics" and "kinetic energy" yet you continue to claim said kinetic energy either magically disappears after hitting a metal plate intended to stop the bullet OR said kinetic energy just doesn't hurt when it gets transferred from the metal plate to the body.

Plenty of examples have been posted of injuries sustained from being shot with a bullet proof vest that you conveniently ignore, along with the physics that you keep spouting.

I also see that you ignored my previous post, so I will ask again, what would you say to testing out your theory with you wearing brand new body armor and me using my "peashooter"?

PS: Could you please explain exactly which facts I am oblivious to?

 

[Munky]

Google WWIII...it's not rocket science...

Google "self defence", we're not talking about international warfare.

 

[Darwin333]

No, you're just repeating NRA "common wisdom".

It's typical knee-jerk response

if the AR15 were illegal across the board, if multiple gun purchases could be tracked by the NSA similar to how the NSA data-mines for patterns that terrorists take, that could have prevented this from happening.

As I have said before, he could have done far worse damage with 4 9+1 shot semi-auto shotguns and his pistol. 40 rounds of either buckshot or slugs would have left a lot more dead and he could have got the shots off just as quick since his AR jammed due to the aftermarket drum that a lot of people on the left want to ban.

Lets take it a step further and assume the drum mags had been banned and he was stuck using 30 round or 20 round mags, do you know how quickly you can swap mags if you practice a bit? He would have gotten far more shots of with the AR had he not used the drum.

Or even worse, he brings his homemade bombs into the theater and makes it go boom. Or a few cans of gas that block the exits with fire. Or any number of things....

Batshit crazy people do batshit crazy shit, if he couldn't have done it with an AR or any gun for that matter he would still have done it.

 

[xj0hnx]

No, you're just repeating NRA "common wisdom".

It's typical knee-jerk response

Wrong again. It is a 100% true fact.

if the AR15 were illegal across the board, if multiple gun purchases could be tracked by the NSA similar to how the NSA data-mines for patterns that terrorists take, that could have prevented this from happening.

It would not prevent anything at all, and your statement is 100% contradicted by reality. Something being illegal does not make it inaccessible, just ask the cartels and their 1000 metric tons of illegal cocaine.

 

[micrometers]

As I have said before, he could have done far worse damage with 4 9+1 shot semi-auto shotguns and his pistol. 40 rounds of either buckshot or slugs would have left a lot more dead and he could have got the shots off just as quick since his AR jammed due to the aftermarket drum that a lot of people on the left want to ban.

Lets take it a step further and assume the drum mags had been banned and he was stuck using 30 round or 20 round mags, do you know how quickly you can swap mags if you practice a bit? He would have gotten far more shots of with the AR had he not used the drum.

Or even worse, he brings his homemade bombs into the theater and makes it go boom. Or a few cans of gas that block the exits with fire. Or any number of things....

Batshit crazy people do batshit crazy shit, if he couldn't have done it with an AR or any gun for that matter he would still have done it.

but he didn't, now did he? You have to address what he did, at the very least. For instance, it's unlikely that 9/11 will be repeated. It is unlikely that OK City bombing will be repeated. But we still have safeguards after those events at flight schools and fertilizer sales. We still have the TSA searching people every day.

Given all of that, I see no reason for guns to be sacred and off-limits.

 

[micrometers]

Wrong again. It is a 100% true fact.



It would not prevent anything at all, and your statement is 100% contradicted by reality. Something being illegal does not make it inaccessible, just ask the cartels and their 1000 metric tons of illegal cocaine.

Says you. Again, knee jerk NRA without thought.

 

[micrometers]

As I have said before, he could have done far worse damage with 4 9+1 shot semi-auto shotguns and his pistol. 40 rounds of either buckshot or slugs would have left a lot more dead and he could have got the shots off just as quick since his AR jammed due to the aftermarket drum that a lot of people on the left want to ban.

Lets take it a step further and assume the drum mags had been banned and he was stuck using 30 round or 20 round mags, do you know how quickly you can swap mags if you practice a bit? He would have gotten far more shots of with the AR had he not used the drum.

Or even worse, he brings his homemade bombs into the theater and makes it go boom. Or a few cans of gas that block the exits with fire. Or any number of things....

Batshit crazy people do batshit crazy shit, if he couldn't have done it with an AR or any gun for that matter he would still have done it.

We don't know how many shots in it jammed at. Jamming at 10 shots is different from jamming at 80 shots.

Every mass shooter has chosen large capacity weapons for a reason. Nidal Hasan is a good example. He went into the gun store specifically looking for the largest capacity handgun he could buy.

 

[xj0hnx]

Says you. Again, knee jerk NRA without thought.

Dipshit, it has nothing to do with the NRA, and you look like more of a dumbass every time you parrot that stupidity. Everything you have said is directly refuted by reality. If laws did what you imply, there would be no criminals, but the fact is that just because something is illegal does not make it disappear.

 

[mect]

IF anyone is interested in the REAL bullet physics (not E=mc² bullshite that shows you don't know what you post) this is how you calculate those types of energies:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muzzle_energy

Force is essentially irrelevant. That is the point of body armor. The body armor does nothing to change the force of the bullet, and the force of the bullet doesn't really matter. Pressure is the important property (yes, related to force, but you can have extremely high pressures even for relatively small forces). Body armor works by spreading out the force, effectively decreasing the pressure. You have two extreme options (with obvious grades in between) for body armor. You can have body armor that is extremely inflexible and will spread the force out over an extremely large area, creating low pressures. This type of armor is extremely cumbersome however because it doesn't flex. On the other extreme, you have armor that essentially just doesn't let the bullet penetrate the skin. In this case, your body is still exposed to very large pressures, and any bullet shot will hurt like a bitch. This type of body armor is much more convenient, but its going to hurt more.

 

[corwin]

We don't know how many shots in it jammed at. Jamming at 10 shots is different from jamming at 80 shots.

Every mass shooter has chosen large capacity weapons for a reason. Nidal Hasan is a good example. He went into the gun store specifically looking for the largest capacity handgun he could buy.

Once again, you're so full of bullshit I can smell it from here...

Guns aren’t even the most lethal mass murder weapon. According to data compiled by Grant Duwe of the Minnesota Department of Corrections, guns killed an average of 4.92 victims per mass murder in the United States during the 20th century, just edging out knives, blunt objects, and bare hands, which killed 4.52 people per incident. Fire killed 6.82 people per mass murder, while explosives far outpaced the other options at 20.82. Of the 25 deadliest mass murders in the 20th century, only 52 percent involved guns.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2012/07/aurora_shooting_how_did_people_commit_mass_murder_before_automatic_weapons_.html

 

[mect]

Says you. Again, knee jerk NRA without thought.

How is this a knee jerk NRA response. I would say the war on drugs provides significant evidence that making items illegal that are relatively easy for an everyday person to produce is highly ineffective. Do you have any data that would support the idea that banning these types of items is effective at keeping them away from criminals?

 

[micrometers]

Once again, you're so full of bullshit I can smell it from here...



http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2012/07/aurora_shooting_how_did_people_commit_mass_murder_before_automatic_weapons_.html

"only" 52 percent.

lol.