Dark Knight in Aurora Colorado

[RSorak 71Westy]

So Colin Do you think all semi automatic weapons should be banned? Whats the difference between an assault rifle and a semi auto hunting rifle? I say there is no effective difference.

[Bleyseng]

Very basic difference is that an assault rifle is capable of both semi-automatic and full automatic fire with one pull of the trigger. A rifle only fires once each time the trigger is pulled.
The ammunition is important too. Assault rifles use a smaller and less-powerful ammo than rifles, but with less range. The result is that more ammo can be carried because of the reduced weight. For sniping at long ranges, the rifle is still #1, but the assault rifle has replaced it for short and intermediate ranges.

In reality, assault rifle is a misnomer as it connects an action with a weapon. Any assault involving a rifle by definition means one is using an assault rifle. The M-1 Garrand rifle was a semi-automatic rifle used by American infantry throuought World War II for example. They certainly made assaults with this rifle. The same is true for the British Lee-Enfield 303 and Mauser bolt action rifles of the Commonwealth and German armies, respectively.

One needs to understand that the term assault rifle has different meanings depending on the context, particularly in the US. The term "assault rifle" likely originated with the German Army which fielded a fully automatic rifle in World War II named the Sturmgewehr. Translated, this means literally "storm gun" or "storm rifle"; storm here being used as in storming the enemy. However, no other army has ever used the term "assault rifle" to describe weapons used by soldiers. The US Army and Marine Corps for example have always referred to rifles, including the fully-automatic M-16 and M4, as simply "rifles" or "weapons".

Size of bullet doesn't define "assault rifle" either. The M-16 and M4 indeed fire a relatively small bullet, the 5.56 mmX45mm NATO round which weighs just 62 grains, although the cartridge is fairly large. On the other hand, the most widely produced fully automatic rifle in the world, the Kalashnikov AK-47, fires a bullet weighing 123 grains.

Really, "assault rifle" is a term used principally in the US and outside the military to define just about any type of rifle that is semi- or fully-automatic. Those new to the US should understand that the term is generally used by the media and anti-gun advocates. And, again, beyond this there is no weapon or ballistically defined "assault

Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Difference_be ... z22K3yrOes

[Velokid1]

Bombshell piece here, in my opinion.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012 ... z22MCGNBjj

[Amskeptic]

Bombshell piece here, in my opinion.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012 ... z22MCGNBjj

Solidly constructed. I miss the time I once thought we were a rational society.
Colin

[Bleyseng]

When was that? The only time I can recall would be the JFK years..at least then the country had a feeling of hope.

[Hippie]

Gun laws will not stop poorly or unmedicated sick people.

I truly hope this case brings to light our need for mental health understanding. This young man was well educated in the field and maybe can shed some information about how much is needed.

Im pleased that some of the poor family members have said that they do not want the death penalty---thats a start to being cival.

OK, I said I was done adding to this thread, but I have to say this is a wise perspective. =D>

[Amskeptic]

Gun laws will not stop poorly or unmedicated sick people.

I truly hope this case brings to light our need for mental health understanding. This young man was well educated in the field and maybe can shed some information about how much is needed.

Im pleased that some of the poor family members have said that they do not want the death penalty---thats a start to being cival.

Hello Elwood,
I thought about that, and poorly or unmedicated sick people will be more likely to shut down their effort to cause mayhem if they have to:
a) interact with let's say gun training professionals
b) interact with licensing personnel and have to wait for OK
c) purchase supplies only in person

It is interaction that helps rope us in together. Buying thousands of rounds in front of a computer screen is the height of alienation, and they can keep working their anti-social rage.

It is WAITING that makes many people lose their focus. You know it! I do not think we would have as many domestic assault homocides if there were not so many guns so readily available.

I think there is a path back to sanity that includes much stricter regulations of products that kill people.
The gun-nut crazies don't get that . . .
Colin

[hambone]

Gun/temple each moment allows us to make this decision as we hurtle onward.
If X% of each life is lived in "sin", then how to quantify the "total"?
There must be each pole represented in this dualistic universe we inhabit. Each caress must be met elsewhere with a slap. Dark/light, each utterly dependent.

[vdubyah73]

gotta have the class 3 license in order to own, buy or sell anything more than semi automatic. thats the one ya gotta jump through hoops for.

[Lanval]

I think there is a path back to sanity that includes much stricter regulations of products that kill people.

Colin

There were a total 31,224 firearm-related deaths in 2007
There were a total 41,059 automobile caused deaths in 2007

Why are you bitching about access to guns and not cars? Don't give me the bullshit about percentage of users; deaths are deaths. Cars are more dangerous than guns, period. Outlaw those and THEN talk about guns.

For that matter, why not do something about In N Out Burger; here's the list of causes of death for the US; note that the number one cause of death is PREVENTABLE.

Number of deaths for leading causes of death
Heart disease: 599,413
Cancer: 567,628
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 137,353
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 128,842
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 118,021
Alzheimer's disease: 79,003
Diabetes: 68,705
Influenza and Pneumonia: 53,692
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 48,935
Intentional self-harm (suicide): 36,909

But the truth is, Colin, you lack intellectual honesty. You're willing to ban guns because you don't value guns; if it was something you DO value, like cars, or being able to park/sleep/work wherever you want, you insist it's a right that shouldn't be violated. Freedom/democracy is about compromise; just because you don't think it's valuable/important/etc. you want ban it. Your desire to control guns has NOTHING to do with danger (otherwise you'd be trying to ban cars (which caused 31,000 deaths last year) or fast food, or any number of other things) and everything to do with violating the rights of others that you DON'T AGREE TO, even as they agree to allow you freedoms those gun-owners find irritating, dangerous or socially destructive.

Democracy is a messy business, and "Hell," as Sartre said, "is other people."

ML

[vdubyah73]

chinese teen kils 8 wounds 5 in news today. guess they need knife control in china.

[Amskeptic]

But the truth is, Colin, you lack intellectual honesty. You're willing to ban guns because you don't value guns; if it was something you DO value, like cars, or being able to park/sleep/work wherever you want, you insist it's a right that shouldn't be violated.

You know what? This is on the edge of stepping over the line. We are having a conversation. I am not your personal punching bag in the realm of "intellectual honesty".

I never said "ban guns". I said can we please license and regulate the simple guns for self-protection. I agree with many who think we should ban the automatic weaponry that has precious little rationale.

You assume out of thin air that I "insist" on the right to park sleep (work??wtf??) wherever I want? Since when? I have never pushed back against those who have pointed out my trespassing or not being allowed to park in a mall lot or whatever.
You assume that I don't want to strictly regulate the use of automobiles? Really, Mike? Is that what you have heard? What the hell ... you did not hear me rant about that teenager who almost killed me? or the anger I feel towards drunk driver deaths? or lousy driver's education, or bad highway engineering?

But most of all, your reduction of my argument to self-centered values is total insulting fucking horseshit. And killing other people is a whole nuther order of amplitude than killing yourself with
Heart disease Cancer Chronic lower respiratory diseases Stroke Accidents (unintentional injuries) Alzheimer's disease Diabetes Influenza and Pneumonia Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis.

Are you trying to obfuscate the argument with distracting numbers and charts about almost irrelevant statistics? Death is death? Killing people! is different than dying! Dying at the hands of a gun-shooting nutjob is different than dying in a hospital or a car crash where the other driver is hopefully not trying to kill you and twelve other people. Cars generally add to our commerce, and we TRY to make them safer every day. We do control and regulate what cars you can buy and operate. The NRA is a whole lot different than a NHTSA. The NHTSA is not lobbying for steel spikes on the hoods of cars to kill more pedestrians more effectively.
Intellectual dishonesty?
How about a difference of opinion?
Colin
(p.s. an idiot teenager with a convertible Mitsubishi just hit a bicyclist in the parking lot here at Starbucks, but don't mind me and my value of cars, I wouldn't want to regulate idiots who drive?)

[Lanval]

I don't agree that numbers are meant to "obfuscate" anything; on the contrary, they make the real issue clear.

For example:

"The majority of gun-related deaths in the United States are suicides, with 17,352 (55.6%) of the total 31,224 firearm-related deaths in 2007 due to suicide, while 12,632 (40.5%) were homicide deaths." (wikipedia, citing the National Center for Health Statistics)

In other words, more than 50% of gun deaths are self-inflicted, like those who choose to eat themselves to death.

Of the 40% which were murders, what percent do you suppose were perpetrated with an assault weapon? Probably at or near zero. There was, however, a very serious mass killing that year: In 2007 the second worst mass-murder on a campus in the US was committed using guns; the Virginia Tech massacre. The killer used two semi-automatic pistols.

Simply put, an assault weapons ban will not be effective. If anything, we ought to ban all guns (which will reduce gun deaths to the largish number of criminal homicides committed by people who don't give a damn about laws). As Elwood has pointed out, though, that's not going to solve the underlying problem ~ our society's inability to deal effectively and humanely with people who have severe mental issues is the real problem.

Lest I should cross that line to which I am perilously close, I hereby ban myself.

ML

[Bleyseng]

Gun laws will not stop poorly or unmedicated sick people.

I truly hope this case brings to light our need for mental health understanding. This young man was well educated in the field and maybe can shed some information about how much is needed.

Im pleased that some of the poor family members have said that they do not want the death penalty---thats a start to being cival.

Hello Elwood,
I thought about that, and poorly or unmedicated sick people will be more likely to shut down their effort to cause mayhem if they have to:
a) interact with let's say gun training professionals
b) interact with licensing personnel and have to wait for OK
c) purchase supplies only in person

It is interaction that helps rope us in together. Buying thousands of rounds in front of a computer screen is the height of alienation, and they can keep working their anti-social rage.

It is WAITING that makes many people lose their focus. You know it! I do not think we would have as many domestic assault homocides if there were not so many guns so readily available.

I think there is a path back to sanity that includes much stricter regulations of products that kill people.
The gun-nut crazies don't get that . . .
Colin

Hopefully, Congress will address and ban the buying of ammo online and tighten the gun laws.

After that, more regulations on products that kill people would be sane, maybe even clean up our food production chain to make it healthy and safe.

[RussellK]

You can ban every gun in the US and it won't stop a loony from carnage. That clown in Colorado had a license to drive. He could have just as easily mowed down the line in front of the theatre than shoot them. I'm not saying there shouldn't be regulations I just don't believe they will thwart a determined lunatic.

There are a lot of people who seem to believe there is no reason to own an assault rifle. I'm in that camp. I've been told they are a gas to shoot if shooting is your thing. Large capacity clips allow you to pump projectile into a target at an alarming rate. For some shooters its an adrenaline rush. Not my thing but I don't see a reason to own a Cobra to get to the grocery store either. Just because it trips your trigger and not mine doesn't mean it lacks value and is right for me to take it away from you.

What I'd like is for gun owners to have to register, pass competency tests, be required to understand how to handle their guns and be required to store guns and ammo safely. I went to school with a kid who shot his cousin in the head. An accident from a so called empty gun. Two lives wrecked. This week a Mother being treated for depression killed her two children and then turned a gun on herself. A few years ago a family aquaintance shot his finger off cleaning a supposed empty hand gun. Fortunately it was only his finger and not a neighbor in an adjoining apartment. About a month ago a six year old found a loaded revolver and killed his little brother. His uncle was devastated and cried on TV that he didn't think the little guy would be able to reach the gun. I bet we all know stories like this. We might not be able to do much about lunatics, but we can sure as heck do something about these kind of deaths. Mandatory training and registration for gun ownership. No bans. Just some applied common sense.