Is that directed at me? I've not claimed you need guns to fight guns (in the civilian context).
Today's mass shooting in the US
- Thread starter Rroff
- Start date
Is that directed at me? I've not claimed you need guns to fight guns (in the civilian context).
Simplistically less guns reduces the chances but if you look around the world it doesn't necessarily take that - Norway for instance has a pretty high level of gun ownership per capita it is at #8 in the world - though still around 1/3rd of the level of the US but less than 1/10th the number of gun related incidents and in recent years has fallen to very low levels. Gun ownership in this country is probably higher than most think and that includes ownership of AR-15s albeit in straight pull rather than semi-automatic yet gun related incidents (with legally owned firearms) are close to non-existent.
While I think banning bump stocks is more a token gesture to the baying crowd it makes sense because unrestricted access more easily facilitates mass causalities than if they were regulated that doesn't mean getting rid of them entirely.
"Assault rifles" aren't themselves the problem you think they are - most AR-15s owned in the US aren't really assault rifles either as they generally lack selective fire, etc. and in actual performance are largely the same as other intermediate calibre hunting rifles, etc.
Explosives are regulated not outright banned (actual regulations depend on country) you'll find plenty of people on YouTube legally using explosives often far more powerful than a hand grenade.
Big difference between firearms and explosives though is that there is far more potential for collateral damage from improper handling or accidents, etc. than a gun.
Someone more calculated would probably figure out how to do it with minimum chance of encountering an armed response before they'd carried out what they wanted - some of these deranged individuals can be high functioning.
Most people will only have access to semi-automatic AR-15s even in the US - in close quarters like the most likely scenarios in a school the difference is going to be a lot less than if they had some automated volume of fire. In the Florida shooting he was firing off ~15 rounds every 10 seconds of continuous shooting - with a bump stock that would have been more like 8 rounds per second or anything upto 15 a second with automatic fire.
Which also makes low tech attacks more viable.
Problem is even assuming he didn't freeze up, etc. he has no idea how many gunmen, what he is walking into, when backup might arrive, etc. its part of why the whole idea of arming teachers will accomplish very little.
True we have little idea what his thought process or circumstances were - few people react like their training the first time **** gets real though some degree of freezing up or indecision is normal. No one really knows how they will react until it happens.
Also will be the consideration - will you do more good protecting those that have made it outside near you until backup arrives or by going after the shooter, etc.
Some people run towards gunfire, others away when it comes to it regardless of training, etc.
Anyone know if he actually had no body armour? I'd have thought for a role like that he'd have at least had some level 3 plate available even if not wearing it all day long but then sometimes these roles seem to be prepared to fail from the start.
Related to that is why in studies only a select few (usually "cream of the crop" "special forces" types) armed "civilians" have successfully stopped a shooting because for instance they won't hesitate to use one person as a shield so as to save the greater number of lives in a scenario while most people won't do that and end up with everyone killed, etc. likewise a trained civilian/law enforcement person will be watching their background when shooting a crazed killer won't so automatically has the upper hand.
From what I can make out there was fairly sustained fire for the first 90 seconds or so with multiple instances where the shooter fired off approx. 15 rounds in 10 seconds between intervals - that is going to sound something like a war zone :s
That trick only really works like that with pistol calibres with bolts that work in a certain way (still a pretty nasty setup) - with something like the AR-15 you'd only get close to those speeds shooting from the hip with little useable accuracy and far less reliable if and when it works anything like automatic fire. A bump stock makes it far far easier to turn a semi automatic rifle into something approaching a proper assault rifle or machinegun with better reliability and control. At the end of the day if someone is determined I'm sure they can DIY their own system, etc. but as with everything why make it easy for them?
They have huge amounts of influence and a voting base with them that is why he is so cosy - he probably tells them one thing then another group the complete opposite as well.
Donald Trump Jr. is also a huge gun enthusiast and goes to most of the big gun shows.
Reading other threads elsewhere on this makes me worry for humanity - several people saying in all sincerity the US should make bullets cost 100s of $ because then the shooter would stop and think about the money they were wasting before killing anyone - how does that even remotely compute the financial cost is the least of their concerns when carrying out these acts.
A good number only have shotguns in their cars though a reasonable chance some had rifles - but we don't really know.
Bit poor that if there was like 4 of them there they didn't try to coordinate something as Dowie says most of it would have been close range unless the shooter broke from the school buildings onto sports fields or the streets - these kind of things are really messy though - there is a good video highlighting it of the Baltimore bus shooting incident and that is with them knowing where the shooter was and IIRC all the officers in that incident had previous experience of this kind of thing and one of them nearly bought it there though largely that was because she panicked.
EDIT: They were lucky in that case as well the shooter had bought rubbish guns and they kept jamming.
I think a lot of people are imagining at least semiconsciously AR-15s in actual assault rifle configuration rather than the semi-auto variants most commonly owned in the US - even at close range I wouldn't fancy going up against a burst or full automatic AR with just a pistol :s none the less unless your pistol has got something like .224 the AR has significantly better ability to penetrate cover you might use.
Bit poor that if there was like 4 of them there they didn't try to coordinate something as Dowie says most of it would have been close range unless the shooter broke from the school buildings onto sports fields or the streets - these kind of things are really messy though - there is a good video highlighting it of the Baltimore bus shooting incident and that is with them knowing where the shooter was and IIRC all the officers in that incident had previous experience of this kind of thing and one of them nearly bought it there though largely that was because she panicked.
EDIT: They were lucky in that case as well the shooter had bought rubbish guns and they kept jamming.
What inside those 600 yard wide classrooms and down those 600 yard corridors?
I think a lot of people are imagining at least semiconsciously AR-15s in actual assault rifle configuration rather than the semi-auto variants most commonly owned in the US - even at close range I wouldn't fancy going up against a burst or full automatic AR with just a pistol :s none the less unless your pistol has got something like .224 the AR has significantly better ability to penetrate cover you might use.
Last edited:
Maybe follow that up with something actually constructive and informative rather than just sniping and rubbishing people.
In a lot of these cases that won't really matter - unless presented with a direct target usually the police will mostly use cover and use suppressive fire to try and keep the perpetrator pinned down until SWAT or the likes turn up - if they do kill or disable them its usually because the shooter has panicked, made a mistake or broke cover for other reasons, etc. sometimes you will get individual officers more skilled or better equipped or just more Rambo, etc. who might take the fight to the shooter.
EDIT: Obviously this will depend a bit on the scenario and how imminent the danger to life is, etc.
Last edited:
While people are outraged by what he says though that is deflecting attention from the real issues of gun control, etc.