HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Don't let the NRA fool yo...

Mon Mar 26, 2018, 09:14 PM

Don't let the NRA fool you with their "facts"

The NRA wants to protect AR style semi-automatic rifles (referred to as assault rifles) from being banned. Therefore, they are quick to point out that most mass shootings in America have been carried out with handguns. Technically they are correct (if you go back far enough and ignore recent history). But, like most propaganda , the so called “truth” is often used to cover up the real truth. Next time one of your NRA friends claims you don't know the facts about guns, actually let them know the real facts.

Fact: Of the 10 deadliest mass shootings in US history, 5 involved an AR style semi-automatic rifle, 1 involved an Uzi, 1 involved a bolt action rifle, and only 3 involved handguns.

Fact: 50% of the 10 deadliest mass shootings in American history were committed with an AR. Handguns were used in only 30%.

Fact: Of the 10 deadliest mass shootings, 177 people were killed by an AR style weapon, 21 were killed involving an Uzi, 18 were killed by a bolt action rifle, and 51 were killed by handguns.

Fact: AR style weapons killed more than 3 times the number of people killed by handguns in the 10 most deadliest mass shootings in US history.

Fact: 6 of the 10 deadliest mass shootings occurred just within the last 10 years. 5 of them were committed with an AR style semi-automatic. Only 1 of them was committed with a handgun.


Let those roll around in their heads for awhile.


Sources:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/14/health/parkland-among-deadliest-mass-shootings-trnd/index.html

58 replies, 4192 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 58 replies Author Time Post
Reply Don't let the NRA fool you with their "facts" (Original post)
Ohioboy Mar 2018 OP
Hoyt Mar 2018 #1
Ohioboy Mar 2018 #4
dubyadiprecession Mar 2018 #7
yonder Mar 2018 #13
moondust Mar 2018 #14
Straw Man Mar 2018 #17
friendly_iconoclast Mar 2018 #24
Hoyt Mar 2018 #28
Straw Man Mar 2018 #35
EX500rider Mar 2018 #56
Hoyt Mar 2018 #57
friendly_iconoclast Apr 2018 #58
Straw Man Mar 2018 #34
stonecutter357 Mar 2018 #26
GP6971 Mar 2018 #2
Ohioboy Mar 2018 #3
GP6971 Mar 2018 #5
Hoyt Mar 2018 #6
GP6971 Mar 2018 #11
Wounded Bear Mar 2018 #8
Ohioboy Mar 2018 #9
aikoaiko Mar 2018 #10
Ohioboy Mar 2018 #12
aikoaiko Mar 2018 #15
spanone Mar 2018 #16
Straw Man Mar 2018 #18
Ohioboy Mar 2018 #19
Straw Man Mar 2018 #20
Ohioboy Mar 2018 #21
Straw Man Mar 2018 #22
Ohioboy Mar 2018 #23
Straw Man Mar 2018 #32
Ohioboy Mar 2018 #36
EL34x4 Mar 2018 #27
Ohioboy Mar 2018 #31
Straw Man Mar 2018 #37
Ohioboy Mar 2018 #38
Straw Man Mar 2018 #47
Ohioboy Mar 2018 #50
Straw Man Mar 2018 #52
shanny Mar 2018 #29
Straw Man Mar 2018 #33
Lee-Lee Mar 2018 #25
Ohioboy Mar 2018 #30
X_Digger Mar 2018 #39
Ohioboy Mar 2018 #40
X_Digger Mar 2018 #41
Ohioboy Mar 2018 #42
X_Digger Mar 2018 #43
Ohioboy Mar 2018 #44
X_Digger Mar 2018 #45
Ohioboy Mar 2018 #46
X_Digger Mar 2018 #53
Lee-Lee Mar 2018 #48
Ohioboy Mar 2018 #55
Ohioboy Mar 2018 #51
mnmoderatedem Mar 2018 #49
Straw Man Mar 2018 #54

Response to Ohioboy (Original post)

Mon Mar 26, 2018, 09:18 PM

1. Excellent. Plus, so-called "assault rifles" are used against society ways besides mass shootings.

These losers use them to intimidate --





And, go to any white wing gun site and just read the junk they post. You'll see talks of revolution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #1)

Mon Mar 26, 2018, 09:27 PM

4. Fools on parade

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #1)

Mon Mar 26, 2018, 09:48 PM

7. Sorry Fellas, The second amendment won't work for you in this century.

Taking up arms to defend yourself against a tyrannical government is futile.

It would only be nice for the government to provide you with an opposing front line to yours, for a firefight, but it doesn't have to.

Incoming missiles can be launched from several miles away, and will turn you all into cooked hamburger and your AR's into fragments.

-In reply to the people marching in the photo-

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dubyadiprecession (Reply #7)

Mon Mar 26, 2018, 10:49 PM

13. good point

another thing I keep thinking about is the beer-drinking, tobacco smoking, outta shape and overweight, dress-up-in-camo/body-armor weekend warrior and their pals WOULD NOT stand a chance against a formally trained, motivated and professional fighting force. Not-A-Chance. There's a big difference between the Bubba's who work at WalMart and people who's job is being soldiers. Or marines. Or the local swat team.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #1)

Mon Mar 26, 2018, 10:58 PM

14. PAY ATTENTION TO ME, DAMMIT!

OVER HERE! WATCH OUT CUZ I CAN KILL YOU WITH THIS THING! ONE LITTLE SQUEEZE OF MY FINGER AND YOU'RE DEAD! DEAD!!!! BETTER PAY ATTENTION TO ME JUST IN CASE SUMTHIN HAPPENS! SHOW ME THE RESPECT I DESERVE BUT NEVER GET! LOOK AT ME, DAMMIT!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 27, 2018, 01:36 AM

17. You really do love that picture, don't you Hoyt?

How many times have you posted it now? Surely you can find some other fat rednecks to make fun of.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Straw Man (Reply #17)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 06:54 PM

24. Hoyt has quite the collection of racially segregated photos of gun owners...

...and apparently believes his personal editorial choices actually prove something about other people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #24)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 07:15 PM

28. Represents majority of gun owners, and for some reason you guys seem OK with it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #28)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 08:41 PM

35. Have you any factual basis for that claim?

We'll wait.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #28)

Sat Mar 31, 2018, 02:24 PM

56. "Represents majority of gun owners" Really?

In 2017, about 42 percent of U.S. households had at least one gun in possession.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EX500rider (Reply #56)

Sat Mar 31, 2018, 07:13 PM

57. First, percentage of people who own a gun is a better measure, and it's

much lower than that. Second, the vast majority of gun owners, and especially those vocal about it, are GOPers.

Even if you find a Democrat who promotes guns, they are tolerant of their fellow gun humpers, even those that March in hatred.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #57)

Wed Apr 11, 2018, 02:10 PM

58. Your claims are merely 'proof by assertion', or argumentum ad nauseum

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertion

Proof by assertion, sometimes informally referred to as proof by repeated assertion, is an informal fallacy in which a proposition is repeatedly restated regardless of contradiction.[1] Sometimes, this may be repeated until challenges dry up, at which point it is asserted as fact due to its not being contradicted (argumentum ad nauseam).[2] In other cases, its repetition may be cited as evidence of its truth, in a variant of the appeal to authority or appeal to belief fallacies.[3]

This fallacy is sometimes used as a form of rhetoric by politicians, or during a debate as a filibuster. In its extreme form, it can also be a form of brainwashing.[1] Modern politics contains many examples of proofs by assertion. This practice can be observed in the use of political slogans, and the distribution of "talking points", which are collections of short phrases that are issued to members of modern political parties for recitation to achieve maximum message repetition. The technique is also sometimes used in advertising.[4]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #24)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 08:40 PM

34. Quite the collection?

Then why does he keep showing the same one?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #1)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 07:09 PM

26. +1000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioboy (Original post)

Mon Mar 26, 2018, 09:24 PM

2. Well....I don't have any

friends that are NRA members.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GP6971 (Reply #2)

Mon Mar 26, 2018, 09:26 PM

3. Lucky you

Knowledge is still power though, just in case you meet one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioboy (Reply #3)

Mon Mar 26, 2018, 09:30 PM

5. I agree

and many thanks for your OP!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GP6971 (Reply #2)

Mon Mar 26, 2018, 09:43 PM

6. Lots of gunners support NRA efforts, but are too cheap to pay dues.

Last edited Mon Mar 26, 2018, 10:16 PM - Edit history (1)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #6)

Mon Mar 26, 2018, 10:40 PM

11. Agree

2 of them live in my neighborhood...both are retired military. Not sure if they own any weapons...but they sure like citing the 2A.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioboy (Original post)

Mon Mar 26, 2018, 09:49 PM

8. Three kinds of lies...

Lies, damned lies, and statistics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Lies, damned lies, and statistics" is a phrase describing the persuasive power of numbers, particularly the use of statistics to bolster weak arguments. It is also sometimes colloquially used to doubt statistics used to prove an opponent's point.

The term was popularised in United States by Mark Twain (among others), who attributed it to the British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." However, the phrase is not found in any of Disraeli's works and the earliest known appearances were years after his death. Several other people have been listed as originators of the quote, and it is often erroneously attributed to Twain himself.[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lies,_damned_lies,_and_statistics

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Wounded Bear (Reply #8)

Mon Mar 26, 2018, 09:54 PM

9. Twain has always been a favorite of mine.

Thanks

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioboy (Original post)

Mon Mar 26, 2018, 10:27 PM

10. Point of clarification. The James Oliver Huberty uzi was a semi-auto carbine.


Which makes it more like an AR rifle than a shotgun or handgun.

It most definitely wasn't a machine gun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #10)

Mon Mar 26, 2018, 10:41 PM

12. Thanks for the clarification

When I hear Uzi I think of the automatic kind, sorry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioboy (Reply #12)

Mon Mar 26, 2018, 11:15 PM

15. Not a problem. I'm here to help.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioboy (Original post)

Mon Mar 26, 2018, 11:40 PM

16. i guess they just prefer AR15's when they're shooting children...fuck the nra

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioboy (Original post)

Tue Mar 27, 2018, 01:38 AM

18. Here's another fact:

If you add up all the death tolls of the 10 deadliest mass shootings, the total is only 1/25th of the number killed by handguns in a single year.

Let THAT roll around in your head for a while.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Straw Man (Reply #18)

Tue Mar 27, 2018, 08:37 PM

19. So what you are saying is...

it took only 10 mass shootings to reach 1/25th of the number killed by handguns in a year? That sounds like more proof that AR style semi- autos can kill at a faster rate than handguns.

I will roll THAT around, thanks

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioboy (Reply #19)

Wed Mar 28, 2018, 12:45 AM

20. Nothing of the kind.

So what you are saying is...

it took only 10 mass shootings to reach 1/25th of the number killed by handguns in a year? That sounds like more proof that AR style semi- autos can kill at a faster rate than handguns.

Those ten mass shootings occurred over a span of 52 years, from 1966 to 2018. So we could just as easily say that handguns kill 25 times more people in a single year than AR-style rifles killed in 52 years. That wouldn't be accurate either, since some of these mass shootings were not done with AR-style rifles, but I think you can see the point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Straw Man (Reply #20)

Wed Mar 28, 2018, 06:05 PM

21. With all due respect, you are missing the point: 5 of the 10 used ARs within the last 7 years!

Mass shootings have suddenly increased in death toll and there is very strong evidence that the AR is the reason. Something is wrong when, in just 7 years, the AR suddenly becomes responsible for 50% of the top 10 deadliest mass shootings in US history! That should be a red flag to even the NRA. But, instead of having that discussion they want to distract us from the AR to handgun facts. Handguns are not ARs! They are two different types of weapons. Furthermore, all semi-autos are not the same either.

Would the guy that shot up the concert in Vegas have been able to do all he did with a handgun? The honest answer is "NO". I would further argue that he would not have been able to bump-fire a semi-auto hunting rifle like an AR either.

The AR style semi-automatic needs our attention, and if the NRA is serious about gun safety they should be leading the way instead of talking about handguns. I don't think it's too much to ask that the NRA at least acknowledge the evidence that ARs seem to be increasing death tolls in mass shootings.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioboy (Reply #21)

Wed Mar 28, 2018, 09:36 PM

22. Which is not the same point you made in the last post, or the one before that.

I have a question for you: How many people can a homicidally insane person kill with a pump-action shotgun and a shoulder-bag full of buckshot shells? Answer: I don't know, but if you succeed in banning ARs, we're going to find out.

ARs are scary, so they're the low-hanging fruit. Remove them and there will be another weapon of choice. Death tolls may be slightly reduced, or maybe not.

As I said before, the single largest mass killing in the US was accomplished with a can of gasoline. The single largest school killing was done with dynamite. The human mind is endlessly creative. The fixation on weaponry is a foolish red herring and/or an excuse for increasing restriction of rights.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Straw Man (Reply #22)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 05:39 PM

23. I get it that you don't want to ban ARs. That's fine.

But, can you at least acknowledge the fact that death tolls in mass shootings have increased with the use of ARs.
Pointing at other weapons and possible scenarios makes it sound as though you are trying to ignore a provable fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioboy (Reply #23)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 08:38 PM

32. Not even remotely "provable."

Pointing at other weapons and possible scenarios makes it sound as though you are trying to ignore a provable fact.

Yes, rate of fire increases lethality of the incident, all other things being equal. But all other things are never equal. Skill and preparation of the shooter, physical layout of the crime scene, presence or absence of armed security, and many other factors are involved.

So what's your goal? A massive disruption of American society for the purpose of a possible slight reduction in the death toll of bizarre incidents that are an extreme outlier in the American crime portfolio?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Straw Man (Reply #32)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 08:46 PM

36. I would like to see these weapons treated a little stricter than others.

The fact that they can be modified to become automatic is one of the main reasons. I'm not saying ban them totally, but don't always compare them to other guns when they are very much different. I would just settle for banning bump stocks at this point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Straw Man (Reply #22)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 07:11 PM

27. Remove AR-15s? They aren't going anywhere.

 

Ban them tomorrow and only the slimmest percentage would get turned it. There's millions of them and now you can make them on a 3D printer.

We need to figure out how to keep them out of the hands of people like Nikolas Cruz but we're never going to rid ourselves of them. The AR-15 variant is the most popular rifle in America.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EL34x4 (Reply #27)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 08:29 PM

31. I understand that. And, yes you are right.

I have never actually called for a ban on them. I just want some truth to be acknowledged so as to have an honest discussion. Comparing ARs to handguns and even other semi-automatics ends up being a pivot and not an honest comparison. ARs are a different animal. What can be done about them? Should we raise the age? Should make a longer waiting period? Should we ban bump stocks? To my mind those are the questions, not false comparisons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioboy (Reply #31)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 08:50 PM

37. Here's where you're wrong.

ARs are a different animal.

No, actually they're not a "different animal" from any semi-auto rifle with a detachable magazine. Their popularity in mass killings is just indicative of their popularity in the nation as a whole. Many other weapons could be as lethal, and would be used if you succeeded in getting the AR banned or at least heavily restricted.

Do you support a ban on all semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines? If not, then the extreme focus on the AR looks like the result of ignorance. If so, that same focus looks like the result of disingenuous deception. See the problem?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Straw Man (Reply #37)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 08:55 PM

38. Not all semi-autos are made to accept bump stocks, right?

That alone is a difference. I've shot .30/06 semi-automatic rifles that you would have a hard time bump firing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioboy (Reply #38)

Fri Mar 30, 2018, 12:57 AM

47. It's the other way around.

You could make a bump-stock to fit any rifle. They're mostly made for ARs and AKs because those are so common -- it's the old economies-of-scale thing. And of course it's easier to control a bump stock if you have a pistol grip, but a pistol grip isn't absolutely essential.

You do realize that it's possible to bump-fire without a bump stock, right? Bump-firing predates the existence of bump stocks. Do a little YouTube searching and you can find people bump-firing Mini-14s and even Garands: so .30-06 can certainly be bump-fired, although the Garand's 8-round magazine makes for very short bursts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Straw Man (Reply #47)

Fri Mar 30, 2018, 03:11 PM

50. But isn't it easier to put a bump stock on a rifle where you can remove the original stock?

Most guns I know of have wooden stocks, and you don't just remove and change stocks easily.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioboy (Reply #50)

Fri Mar 30, 2018, 05:02 PM

52. It totally depends on the construction of the stock.

Last edited Sat Mar 31, 2018, 12:47 AM - Edit history (1)

A lot of wooden stocks incorporate the forearm too, but can be changed pretty easily: remove one or two bolts and the barreled action can be removed from the stock and placed in a new one.

What are you advocating? A ban on modular firearm designs?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Straw Man (Reply #18)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 07:43 PM

29. OK.

 

Ban hand guns too. Thanks!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shanny (Reply #29)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 08:39 PM

33. Hmm ...

Ban hand guns too. Thanks!

Pretty sure the Heller decision takes that off the table. You're welcome!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioboy (Original post)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 07:02 PM

25. Correlation does not equal causation

 

That the killers used AR style rifles boils down to little other than the fact that it’s a very popular rifle and one of the most common models sold in that period.

If you could invent a time machine and go back and kill the inverter of the AR and it never was invented you would just see the same people would have been there and still would have wanted to kill others and would have just picked up a different rifle to the same end result.

You’ve come up with a very weak argument by picking a small sample size and then declaring that 5 rifles being used out of several million that exist somehow is an indictment against the style of rifle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lee-Lee (Reply #25)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 08:13 PM

30. My argument is based on facts and numbers.

The AR is designed to kill more quickly and more accurately. It is designed to accept devices like bump stocks that can turn it into an automatic weapon. Which weapon would you want to take into combat, an AR or a Glock pistol? If you know anything about firearms, you know the answer.

Ever see someone bump fire an AR? Watch this video and tell me that's something other common guns can do. Keep in mind also that automatic weapons are illegal, but not ARs with bump stocks.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioboy (Reply #30)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 09:47 PM

39. "designed to accept devices like bump stocks" -- is putting the cart before the horse.

Wow, those designers were psychics, they designed for something that didn't even exist yet!

No, had the AR not been invented, you'd see a similar accessory for a different rifle. There's nothing inherent in an AR that makes a bump stock more possible.

I don't think you realize how accessories are made / designed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to X_Digger (Reply #39)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 10:05 PM

40. They are designed for accessories, whether those accessories came later or not.

You know what I meant. It's a platform. Have you ever seen a bump stock made to work on a wooden stock?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioboy (Reply #40)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 10:16 PM

41. All rifles are designed for accessories. A ruger 10/22 has a ton of accessories for it- it's popular

You want a bump stock for a wooden stock? How about a shoestring..



Technically, *that* is a machinegun.

Designers create accessories for rifles that are popular. As the most popular rifle, of course the AR has more accessories.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to X_Digger (Reply #41)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 10:25 PM

42. Well guess what, my finger is an accessory too then, since I've bump fired with just that before.

Also, people use rubber bands and all sorts of stuff, makeshift stuff that if you work at it long enough gives a result. You know as well as I do that Ruger isn't designed as a platform for a string. This is what I mean about pivoting the discussion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioboy (Reply #42)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 10:40 PM

43. A ruger 10/22 is a "platform" as much as an AR is. Meaning, there are lots of accessories.

You can 'build' one up, from just a receiver in 100's of different ways. Folding stocks, collapsing stocks, thumbhole stocks. Foregrips, rails, accessories that fit on rails, lights, tons of different sights, tons of scopes and scope rings. Different bolts, precision triggers, precision competition stocks. Bull barrels, long-range barrels, match barrels, bipods, tripods, slings, three-point harnesses.. and that's without opening one of the sites dedicated to customizing the 10/22.

Why? Because it's popular.

Fucking duh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to X_Digger (Reply #43)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 10:46 PM

44. Yeah, and a string. You forgot to mention that string in your list.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioboy (Reply #44)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 10:49 PM

45. What a compelling argument you make.

Care to continue with something substantive?

Or do you concede that the reason you see accessories for rifles like the AR-15 or 10/22 is because they're popular, not because of some inherent psychic design characteristic?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to X_Digger (Reply #45)

Thu Mar 29, 2018, 11:05 PM

46. Why are you doing this?

Yes, ARs are popular. What does that have to do with the fact that you can put a damn bump stock on it and turn it into a machine gun?
You're all hung up on some horse- before- the- cart thing. I know you're smart enough to know what I meant. What do you think about banning bump stocks? I'd like to know more about what you think about that, instead of arguing over the exact way I said something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioboy (Reply #46)

Fri Mar 30, 2018, 05:40 PM

53. I'm trying to get you to put the cart before the horse because the reverse doesn't make sense.

Accessories are made for popular firearms.

To claim some kind of intent otherwise, is to grant psychic powers to designers.

There are bump stocks for other, also popular rifles. There's even a similar device for the 10/22.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioboy (Reply #30)

Fri Mar 30, 2018, 06:48 AM

48. Your argument is based upon a cherry picked numbers

 

As for your “facts”, they are not facts at all but mostly made up nonsense.

“Designed to kill more quickly and more accurately”. Was it? Is that in the design specs?

In fact it wasn’t. It was designed primarily to be lighter than the rifles it’s as engineered to replace. And accuracy in fact was secondary to weight in the design, it could have been more accurate. They went to a smaller bullet that isn’t as powerful as what was in earlier designs to be lighter and they went to a thinner barrel that is less accurate to be lighter.

That statement is in fact crap. It’s not based on the historical record of what it was designed for.

But it’s a common claim from the people who don’t know what they are talking about.

“Designed to accept accessories like a bump stock”. Is also not true. I’ll assume once again your just grossly ignorant on the subject and it’s not that you lie intentionally.

The commercially sold stock was invented about 50 years after the AR-15 came on the market. Unless there was a time machine it was not designed with bump stocks in mind. And they are not designed to accept them, rather it was that the commerciall makers designed bump stock was intended for use on the most common rifle.

And yes, you can in fact make a bump stock for pretty much any semi-automotiv rifle. Your notion that it can’t be done on anything else is wrong just as the rest of your post. All a bump stock is, at its simplest, is a spring loaded stock. They can be made from PVC pipe and a spring from the hardware store. You can put them on an AR-15 or a Mini-14 or a 75 year old M-1 Carbine. But of course bump stocks also make the rifle very inaccurate as it fires, something you leave out.

As for what would I carry in combat? If the choice was only between a Glock and AR-15 that depends. Is this indoors or out? Lots of times when I was a Sheriffs Deputy if we were gonna go into a hostile situation where firearms were needed if it was indoors my AR stayed in the trunk and I indeed did have my Glock. Outdoors the AR. It’s actually a far more complicated question than you present it as.

In conclusion- your entire post was a bunch of ill informed crap and drivel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lee-Lee (Reply #48)

Sat Mar 31, 2018, 02:12 PM

55. Substitute the word "capable" for the word "designed" in those statements.

I'm sorry I used words that made my point unclear. Put in the word "capable" , or "capable of" where you see the word "designed" and that should clear up what I was trying to say. Thank you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lee-Lee (Reply #25)

Fri Mar 30, 2018, 04:56 PM

51. Wait a minute...

You’ve come up with a very weak argument by picking a small sample size


I'm talking about the 10 most deadly mass shootings in American History. How is that a small sample size? I'm sure you realize they got the 10 most by comparing all mass shootings in American history, right? What more do you want?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioboy (Original post)

Fri Mar 30, 2018, 06:57 AM

49. and yet

I have yet to see ONE situation where an AR-15 assault was used in any sort of practical way, in a self defense manner where an ordinary hand gun would have not only have sufficed, but been far more practical. Anyone sleep with an AR-15 under their pillow?

And by contrast, the list of tragedies involving AR-15 assault rifles keeps growing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mnmoderatedem (Reply #49)

Sat Mar 31, 2018, 12:55 AM

54. And yet again ...

I have yet to see ONE situation where an AR-15 assault was used in any sort of practical way, in a self defense manner where an ordinary hand gun would have not only have sufficed, but been far more practical.

Here's one:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/oklahoma-man-uses-ar-15-kill-three-teen-home-intruders-n739541

Would an "ordinary hand gun" have sufficed? Who knows? Would it have been "more practical"? I don't see how it possibly could have been. One against three is not good odds, and a handgun is not as effective as a rifle.

What is an "ordinary hand gun" anyway?

Anyone sleep with an AR-15 under their pillow?

Are you advocating sleeping with a handgun under one's pillow? Foolish and dangerous.

And by contrast, the list of tragedies involving AR-15 assault rifles keeps growing.

Unlike the list of tragedies with handguns?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread