How to Stop Mass Shootings

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
A .223 is not in the same class as bazookas

Theme song

Me Little Armalite

youtube.com/watch?v=nHY14OVk7r0

AR 15 rifles are nice guns, but there are many others with different characteristics, that serve different functions better.

For example, the Herstal FN PS 90, has a 50 round magazine, with a unique feeding mechanism, a lighter smaller cartridge and bullet with nearly the performance of the .223 round. Because of the unique placement of the magazine, the operator can shoot from a totally prone position, because the magazine doesn't protrude from the bottom of the gun. It has even lower recoil, so that small people, including women can confidently place rounds on target. In addition, the company makes a handgun that shoots the same round.

Blaming the gun, any guns is patently stupid. Guns don't fire themselves, and criminals are not going to rush to surrender their guns when the government demands it. Banning certain guns only guarantees that the bad guys will be better armed than the good.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Yes, but one day an evil dictator will take over! Meanwhile, American citizens armed with assault rifles will easily beat the most powerful military force in the world, should an evil dictator take power in America.

It's a hoot that Finnigan didn't get your sarcasm.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
no

it is a fundamental right to be free. the right to life is a fundamental right. to pursuit happiness. and even these can be taken away if the individual is deemed unworthy by the society he lives in.

the right to have a gun must be earned. as is the right to drive a car.

I think you are mixing up right with privilege. The privilege to drive a car (i.e. drivers license) is not the same as the right to keep and bear arms.

Originally posted by MoneyManMike
I think you are mixing up right with privilege. The privilege to drive a car (i.e. drivers license) is not the same as the right to keep and bear arms.

The strange and funny (peculiar) thing is that a driver's license has become a near right. Nearly everyone is granted the privilege.

Originally posted by normbenign
I agree that mental health is the aspect that is most often overlooked, however as with other issues, it is a matter of trade offs.

First thing is that mentally ill is poorly defined. And not all "mentally ill" people are dangerous psychopaths.

Should it be a given that a person that has seen a psychiatrist to combat depression should be denied h ...[text shortened]... only when someone with a gun shows up. That's when the psycho shooter takes his own life.

I agree with you. I don't think someone's gun should be taken away from them simply because they are mentally ill, however it is defined. My point was that the legislature should focus on improving our mental health programs rather than focus on limiting healthy citizens' gun rights.

Originally posted by MoneyManMike
I agree with you. I don't think someone's gun should be taken away from them simply because they are mentally ill, however it is defined. My point was that the legislature should focus on improving our mental health programs rather than focus on limiting healthy citizens' gun rights.

Again, there is no solution, only trade offs. For a long time, our policy was to basically incarcerate the mentally ill, in institutions. Lot's of terrible injustices, including family members getting infirm or elderly people committed to get their money.

The arguments from the left were that civil liberties were being abused, and from the right that public money was being wasted. In most places, the early 90s had institutions closed down, and the population put on the streets. Most of these became "the homeless".

It appears from reviews of the mass shootings in the last decade, that almost all involved relatively young men, who had been diagnosed and prescribed drugs to stabilize their condition. This needs a hard look, to determine whether the drugs are being appropriately used and not overused. It is a particular sector of the mental health picture that needs review in regards to these shootings. The rest of the mental health system also needs attention, but the older group seems to be more likely to harm themselves than to go on a shooting spree.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
Murphy climbed a nearby tree, took careful aim at the extreme distance of 300 yards, and fired four times. The first shot was a close miss, the second grazed the General's horse, and with the third, Fraser tumbled from his horse, shot through the stomach. General Fraser died that night.


compare that with the rifles available for hunting nowadays, and t ...[text shortened]... de any sense with your wiki link. or maybe you attempted humor? either the case, i am confused.

300 yards is AR15 range.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
300 yards is AR15 range.

with better accuracy, better firing rate, much larger magazine size, and i suspect, easier reloading. better reliability

Originally posted by MoneyManMike
I think you are mixing up right with privilege. The privilege to drive a car (i.e. drivers license) is not the same as the right to keep and bear arms.

that is your opinion. one that is shared by some americans, but not by other free countries like the french, brittish, danes, germans, canadians etc.


everything that requires the user to prove he is proficient in it is a privilege to be earned, rather than automatically given.

you must be given freedom at birth. you must be given the right to live.

you must prove you can drive a car so as not to endanger others. that you are not blind, that you don't have a sudden urge to twitch, that you aren't narcoleptic, etc
you must prove you can be a lawyer before being a lawyer.
becoming a doctor takes about 10 years, specialists perhaps even more.

i don't see how americans have the audacity to claim that owning a deathstick, should be easier than driving a car.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
300 yards is AR15 range.

It will shoot that far, but that is outside its effective range.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
with better accuracy, better firing rate, much larger magazine size, and i suspect, easier reloading. better reliability

Than what? The M14 is better in all except in magazine size.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
that is your opinion. one that is shared by some americans, but not by other free countries like the french, brittish, danes, germans, canadians etc.


everything that requires the user to prove he is proficient in it is a privilege to be earned, rather than automatically given.

you must be given freedom at birth. you must be given the right to liv ...[text shortened]... ans have the audacity to claim that owning a deathstick, should be easier than driving a car.

You don't live here, and we who do value and respect our Constitution. We don't tell the Danes, French, British, Germans or Canadians how to run their countries.

Originally posted by MoneyManMike
While I agree with Mr. Noir that our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms shouldn't be taken away simply because of the wrongful acts of a few psychopaths, I disagree with his argument that conceal carry holders and media self-regulation can stop mass shooters. First, most mass shooters are suicidal maniacs who don't necessarily care about thei ppening, I think he can prevent some from happening by having strong mental health programs.

This will surprise no one...I'm a strong believer in concealed carry. And for one reason - so that rational people can stop irrational people and criminals.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
that is your opinion. one that is shared by some americans, but not by other free countries like the french, brittish, danes, germans, canadians etc.


everything that requires the user to prove he is proficient in it is a privilege to be earned, rather than automatically given.

you must be given freedom at birth. you must be given the right to liv ...[text shortened]... ans have the audacity to claim that owning a deathstick, should be easier than driving a car.

You know, even the Second Amendment itself describes it as a Right. And that Supreme Court case I cited to earlier ruled that it is an Individual Right. Do you have any authority that it is a privilege rather than a right?

Originally posted by whodey
None of these psychopaths will ever walk into a NRA convention and start shooting.

There's a Hollywood film there ....