New Mass Shooting in USA...Watch it leave news cycle..in a hurry

Originally posted by thecurious1: ↑

1."You don't seem to think that the state being armed dramatically more than citizens is a problem."

Why are you making stuff up ? When did I say that ? You asked a question and I gave a clear answer.

"Would you support the military and police also being disarmed?" - Nope.

2. "Focus on the social problem causing the symptom of "mass shootings"" - Agreed.

Why not outline your plan instead of diverting to rental vans, truck, aerosols, cigarettes.....?

3. Banning AR-15s would not make "functionally zero real difference to the number of people murdered". That's your opinion.

4. ~~"then it follows that most guns used in mass shootings are also not legal guns. I thought that was really obvious, but, there you go."~~

Wrong. The posted graphic proves the opposite.

5. "Most mass killings are close range events, a rifle is a disadvantage."

The killers don't share your opinion.

"What makes the AR-15 style rifle the weapon of choice for mass shooters?"

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ar-15-mass-shootings-60-minutes-2022-05-29/

6. Your copy/paste details from the supplied article about AR15s are just padding.

7. "If they'd been using a more user friendly and reliable weapon they may have been more effective"

See point 5 above and the fatality list below.

"People who commit mass shootings with AR's are generally not "gun people" " That's merely your unsupported opinion.

"You clearly have exactly zero firearms knowledge".

Wrong. I served 5 years in the Reserves, doing a qualifying range shoot each year. Top scored with a GPMG one year.

Clearly I can post no proof of that statement but then again, you can't post any proof of your knowledge or proficiency either.

"San Diego shooters AR jammed" - after killing 1 and injuring 3.
"Parkland shooters AR jammed" - after killing 17 and injuring 17.
"NZ shooters AR jammed" - after killing 51 and injuring 40.

Expand

>Wrong. The posted graphic proves the opposite.
Missed this one.

Your graphic shows 137 total mass shootings over 40 years.

That's not even 20% of what GVA reports for just 2022. You just proved that cherry picking data sets can sometimes give you the result you want.

And again, you're trying to make an argument based on a tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny fraction of actual gun violence.
Change the laws and there will be an average of 3.5 less mass shootings per year.

Based on statistas methodology, https://www.statista.com/statistics/811504/mass-shooting-victims-in-the-united-states-by-fatalities-and-injuries/
there were 1095 mass shooting victims over the last 40 years. So, let's just make the entirely inaccurate assumption that all of these people were killed with "Military style assault rifles".

Let's also be super fair to the data set and only consider the last 10 years. 635 deaths, an average of 63.5 per year..

Even if we totally stop "mass shootings" by "banning ARs", that is only 0.36% of all firearms deaths.
In 2022 the number of mass shooting deaths was 74, so, 0.4% of all firearms deaths.

You're going to have to do better than that. Mass shootings are bad, yes, but you don't make laws that will affect at least 40% of the US population - (and frankly, will increase gun violence see : Mexico ) based on 0.4% of incidents.