HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Adam Lanza Shot Victims a...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 03:49 PM

Adam Lanza Shot Victims at Close Range with Semi-Automatic Rifle

Source: ABC News

Multiple sources have told ABC News that Adam Lanza used a Bushmaster .223 semi-automatic rifle at close range to kill children and adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut on Friday.

Two handguns were also found at the scene, and a fourth weapon was found nearby. The weapons discovered at the school apparently belonged to a family member, possibly his mother, according to authorities.

Lanza, 20, forced his way into Sandy Hook on Friday morning and killed 20 children and six adults before committing suicide. He drove to the school after shooting his mother in the face at their home.

The weapons that police recovered from the scene included a Glock 9-mm handgun, a Sig Sauer 9-mm handgun and a Bushmaster rifle. Police also found .223 shell casings. Lanza was wearing a bullet-proof vest.

...



Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/connecticut-shooter-adam-lanza-mothers-guns/story?id=17984499



We need an AWB Ban NOW!

141 replies, 21160 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 141 replies Author Time Post
Reply Adam Lanza Shot Victims at Close Range with Semi-Automatic Rifle (Original post)
Junkdrawer Dec 2012 OP
HooptieWagon Dec 2012 #1
AldoLeopold Dec 2012 #3
backwoodsbob Dec 2012 #38
AldoLeopold Dec 2012 #40
leveymg Dec 2012 #126
UndahCovah Dec 2012 #42
AldoLeopold Dec 2012 #43
UndahCovah Dec 2012 #44
AldoLeopold Dec 2012 #45
UndahCovah Dec 2012 #48
Euphoria Dec 2012 #51
UndahCovah Dec 2012 #54
Rex Dec 2012 #141
xtraxritical Dec 2012 #67
TroglodyteScholar Dec 2012 #71
PA Democrat Dec 2012 #101
primavera Dec 2012 #130
slackmaster Dec 2012 #98
underpants Dec 2012 #5
HooptieWagon Dec 2012 #7
underpants Dec 2012 #13
NickB79 Dec 2012 #16
underpants Dec 2012 #31
slackmaster Dec 2012 #99
NickB79 Dec 2012 #122
UndahCovah Dec 2012 #46
Bandit Dec 2012 #93
UndahCovah Dec 2012 #94
krispos42 Dec 2012 #80
DLine Dec 2012 #106
RC Dec 2012 #8
Clames Dec 2012 #77
RC Dec 2012 #95
Clames Dec 2012 #102
askeptic Dec 2012 #129
muriel_volestrangler Dec 2012 #9
AldoLeopold Dec 2012 #11
XemaSab Dec 2012 #32
AldoLeopold Dec 2012 #35
DLine Dec 2012 #108
muriel_volestrangler Dec 2012 #109
primavera Dec 2012 #131
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #12
bossy22 Dec 2012 #14
intaglio Dec 2012 #21
NickB79 Dec 2012 #22
intaglio Dec 2012 #27
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #83
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #82
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #23
slackmaster Dec 2012 #100
HooptieWagon Dec 2012 #39
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #41
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #84
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #87
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #90
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #91
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #104
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #105
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #107
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #110
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #113
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #114
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #116
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #117
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #118
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #119
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #120
janx Dec 2012 #138
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #111
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #115
janx Dec 2012 #53
pasto76 Dec 2012 #15
NickB79 Dec 2012 #18
Dr_Scholl Dec 2012 #24
alcibiades_mystery Dec 2012 #25
bossy22 Dec 2012 #29
alcibiades_mystery Dec 2012 #30
bossy22 Dec 2012 #36
primavera Dec 2012 #70
bossy22 Dec 2012 #72
primavera Dec 2012 #75
bossy22 Dec 2012 #76
primavera Dec 2012 #81
TroglodyteScholar Dec 2012 #73
janx Dec 2012 #50
Clames Dec 2012 #79
janx Dec 2012 #137
Clames Dec 2012 #139
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #85
janx Dec 2012 #52
Starboard Tack Dec 2012 #55
Myrina Dec 2012 #56
bossy22 Dec 2012 #61
jpak Dec 2012 #57
bossy22 Dec 2012 #65
exboyfil Dec 2012 #88
intaglio Dec 2012 #127
HooptieWagon Dec 2012 #128
intaglio Dec 2012 #133
HooptieWagon Dec 2012 #134
intaglio Dec 2012 #135
HooptieWagon Dec 2012 #136
intaglio Dec 2012 #140
AldoLeopold Dec 2012 #2
Ash_F Dec 2012 #6
AldoLeopold Dec 2012 #10
Ash_F Dec 2012 #26
MFM008 Dec 2012 #4
pasto76 Dec 2012 #17
bossy22 Dec 2012 #19
Atypical Liberal Dec 2012 #20
geckosfeet Dec 2012 #28
renate Dec 2012 #34
janx Dec 2012 #49
muriel_volestrangler Dec 2012 #33
Berndbrett Dec 2012 #37
secondwind Dec 2012 #47
primavera Dec 2012 #132
workinclasszero Dec 2012 #58
bossy22 Dec 2012 #59
rhett o rick Dec 2012 #60
bossy22 Dec 2012 #63
workinclasszero Dec 2012 #62
bossy22 Dec 2012 #64
Dr_Scholl Dec 2012 #86
happyslug Dec 2012 #66
HooptieWagon Dec 2012 #74
John2 Dec 2012 #89
Amonester Dec 2012 #96
happyslug Dec 2012 #103
happyslug Dec 2012 #124
Doctor_J Dec 2012 #123
iandhr Dec 2012 #68
bossy22 Dec 2012 #69
krispos42 Dec 2012 #78
Throckmorton Dec 2012 #92
krispos42 Dec 2012 #97
mylegsareswollen Dec 2012 #112
Liberal_in_LA Dec 2012 #121
lovuian Dec 2012 #125

Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 04:00 PM

1. Thats a popular hunting rifle.

It is not a weapon capable of automatic fire. Neither it or the shooter's handguns would be affected by an assault weapon ban.
The facts are that while automatic weapons (actual assault weapons, as defined by function as opposed to style) are currently legal, they are still tightly regulated, quite expensive, hard to get, and are almost never used in a crime.

So, while you are free to call for an assault weapon ban; it would no more have prevented yesterday's tragedy than a Sharia Law ban would have prevented 9-11.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 04:03 PM

3. That's why I want a prohibition on all firearms in the United States

So your point is well taken. Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AldoLeopold (Reply #3)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 06:39 PM

38. and that would put repukes in charge for generations

I see your point...thanks but no thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Reply #38)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 06:52 PM

40. Erm...why?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Reply #38)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:40 PM

126. The vast majority of NRA members are GOOP, anyway.

Particularly the ones who are that attached to their guns that they would vote on that single issue. I'm afraid that argument doesn't fly when you take it apart.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AldoLeopold (Reply #3)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 07:06 PM

42. 2nd amendment

 

How do you propose to circumvent it? Look, you cannot criminalize 150million Americans who own guns. I support the constitution. All of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UndahCovah (Reply #42)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 07:12 PM

43. Yah sorry - by prohibiting all firearms I mean repealing the 2nd amendment

I agree - the law is the law, even though I don't think the law says what you think it means. Just to be safe though - repeal it. Or as Ripley says, nuke it from orbit - its the only way to be sure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AldoLeopold (Reply #43)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 07:30 PM

44. Which would take ratification from how many states?

 

Never mind that such a thing as the repeal of an amendment that is part of the bill of rights would never even reach the point of requiring ratification. Not going to happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UndahCovah (Reply #44)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 07:33 PM

45. Nice User Name

Why did you choose it? Just curious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AldoLeopold (Reply #45)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 07:38 PM

48. Childhood nickname

 

I wish I had used something else though. I've gotten untold grief from people assuming that I'm an 'undercover troll'. As if an actual troll would choose something so obvious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UndahCovah (Reply #48)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 08:22 PM

51. yeah, right

sarcasm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Euphoria (Reply #51)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 08:39 PM

54. Whatever

 

If an individual is so simple-minded as to think that a malicious intruder would use something so obvious...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UndahCovah (Reply #54)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:35 AM

141. Okay obvious troll

Don't you CC folks ever get tired of getting pwned?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UndahCovah (Reply #44)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 11:05 PM

67. No repeal, just a SCOTUS that interprets "a well regulated militia" properly. Duh.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xtraxritical (Reply #67)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 12:47 AM

71. ^^^This n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UndahCovah (Reply #42)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 11:36 AM

101. Do you think the founders envisioned 20 six and seven year-olds being slaughtered

with a weapon with a high capacity magazine when they wrote the second amendment?

Remember the original constitution also permitted slavery (Article 1 Section 9).

The problem is that thanks to the NRA and its supporters, that REASONABLE gun legislation cannot even be discussed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PA Democrat (Reply #101)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:29 PM

130. Funny, but gun nuts never seem to respond on that point - n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AldoLeopold (Reply #3)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 11:24 AM

98. No, you don't really want a prohibition on ALL firearms in the United States.

 

You want only government employees, i.e. police and military, to have firearms.

And armed police force would be essential to the process of disarming non-police, and to ensuring that the non-police population remains disarmed.

Your position is authoritarian.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 04:16 PM

5. People hunt with 5.56mm NATO rounds?

I am simply asking.

As I understood it when I was in the Army those rounds tumble so they would not be a good choice for hunting - I know hunting only from my inlaws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underpants (Reply #5)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 04:33 PM

7. The rifle was described as a .223

I'm not an expert, but I don't think it's the same as a NATO round. The Bushmaster rifle is made by Remington, if I recall correctly.
The "assault" style has no effect on how the weapon functions. It would work the same if made with a traditional wooden stock. My understanding is many hunters and target shooters prefer the modern stock because it is easier to adjust to owner's size, is more comfortable, more durable, and in some cases the owner simply likes the "look".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #7)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:06 PM

13. I asked this last night and got some good information - it is a NATO round

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underpants (Reply #5)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:15 PM

16. Yes, it is legal in some states for larger game

Minnesota just made it deer-legal a few years ago. They do make ammo specifically for hunting that uses heavier, soft-point rounds that hold together and mushroom instead of tumble and fragment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NickB79 (Reply #16)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 06:16 PM

31. Okay. Thanks that was why I was asking. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NickB79 (Reply #16)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 11:26 AM

99. I believe you mean SMALLER game

 

Definitely too small for elk no matter what kind of bullet you load it with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #99)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 08:08 PM

122. It's deer-legal here in MN

And we can grow some large deer up in the North Woods.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underpants (Reply #5)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 07:35 PM

46. Some people do

 

.30-30 is more common for deer and such, but people in general hunt with any caliber you could think of. .223 is not quite the same thing as 5.56, BTW.

If interested in knowing more about the differene, follow this link: http://www.thegunzone.com/556v223.html

Be warned, the article MAY POTENTIALLY have rightwing nuttery in it. I just googled and scanned it quick and it seems to explain the difference better than I could, but I didn't read it thoroughly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UndahCovah (Reply #46)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 09:40 AM

93. In many states 22 caliber guns are illegal for anything but small critters.

223 caliber is still a 22 caliber bullet and by the way it is exactly the same as a 5.56 millimeter which happens to be the NATO round as is the 7.62 millimeter or 308 caliber.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bandit (Reply #93)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 10:10 AM

94. .223 and 5.56

 

are different rounds. They can be used interchangably in some firearms, but there in a pressure difference in the chamber, which can destroy some guns.

And regardless of what the law is, plenty of rednecks just bang away at animals with whatever gun they happen to grab. Just like in Ireland, hunting with dogs is illegal but its become an epidemic problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underpants (Reply #5)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 02:16 AM

80. Yeah, for varmits

Well, the civilian equivalent, the .223 Remington.

In some states it's considered too small to be used on deer, but when it's used for hunting, it's generally for "varmits"... coyotes and smaller. Feral cats and dogs, groundhogs, woodchucks, racoons, possums, that sort of thing. A good rifle with a good shooter can hit woodchucks at 300 yards.

You can reasonably use it on deer if you keep the range short and use an appropriate hunting bullet. The ammo makers produce tons of different .223 Rem loadings. Most of them are intended either for plinking, target shooting, or hunting varmits, but there are heavier-built "medium" game bullets you can use on deer.


From what I read, in military usage, the non-expanding bullets tend to tumble when they hit flesh, but only if the bullet is within the first 150 or so yards of flight.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underpants (Reply #5)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 04:11 PM

106. 5.56 is too small for most game

Not saying you are doing this. But people need to stop judging rifles by how they look. This is a 7mag rifle with WAY more power than the rifle pictured in the OP. But because it doesn't look as fancy, it doesn't draw as much attention from people who may be anti-gun but not very knowledgeable about them.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 04:34 PM

8. Someone posted a video of a bushmaster with a slide stock that turned it into a fully automatic

 

weapon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RC (Reply #8)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 02:00 AM

77. Not fully automatic.

 

Slide stocks take advantage of bump-firing, basically pulling the trigger very quickly with minimal reset. Can be done without the stock. It's a stupid practice as civilian AR's for the most part do not have the military-grade parts for sustained firing like that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Clames (Reply #77)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 10:59 AM

95. It only has to work long enough to take out the next group gathering.

 

Slide stocks are another example of "If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck and looks like a duck..."



The duck test is a humorous term for a form of inductive reasoning. This is its usual expression:
"If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck."

The test implies that a person can identify an unknown subject by observing that subject's habitual characteristics. It is sometimes used to counter abstruse arguments that something is not what it appears to be.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RC (Reply #95)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 12:26 PM

102. Fact is they really don't work.

 

Given the fact they are terribly unreliable and frequently cause the rifle to jam with difficult to clear double feeds. Given the choice I'd rather face a shooter who has one of those things equipped as they'll be far less able to hit what they are aiming for and will probably jam the rifle before getting many shots off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Clames (Reply #102)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:11 PM

129. Having fired full-auto in the military at the range, Amen to that!

I never fired my rifle full auto after that (wasn't a ground-pounder so didn't carry a rifle often), but it is almost impossible to hit anything in auto as the recoil drive the rifle upward. And your ammo is gone in seconds...

looked to me like it would be a good way to get killed in the bush...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 04:41 PM

9. You could ban rifles that hold multiple rounds

That way, people could still hunt with single shot rifles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #9)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 04:58 PM

11. Well I'm against all hunting

But that would certainly be a better alternative to what we have now. It would probably make the past time itself a little less ridiculous and cruel in my eyes.

Why can't hunters just bow hunt? Too difficult? Harder to hit water fowl?

I know some bow hunters and they have some pretty nasty things to say about people who hunt in deer stands with rifles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AldoLeopold (Reply #11)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 06:18 PM

32. If you're concerned about cruelty

bow hunting often does not kill the animal right away. Learning how to follow a blood trail is part of bow hunting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to XemaSab (Reply #32)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 06:28 PM

35. You're right

I'm dumb. I should have researched that better instead of listening to these people down here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #9)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 04:17 PM

108. Not an option for those of us who spend any time in bear country.

Not that I would do this under anything other than a last resort. But if comes down to me and a bear, I do not want to have to load another round to put another one in him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DLine (Reply #108)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 04:34 PM

109. I will admit that self-defence against a bear is one time I can see multiple rounds are needed

and not something I has considered. A special licence for that would seem reasonable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #109)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:34 PM

131. Then again...

... one could just leave the bears alone and not invade their habitat, at which point it wouldn't be a problem. Don't we say that people have a right to use lethal force when defending their homes? It seems to me that a bear deserves the same consideration.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:00 PM

12. These "hunting" rifles are easily and often "converted" into fully automatic

http://www.democraticunderground.com/index.php

Sure, these conversions may be "illegal", but so is jaywalking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #12)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:09 PM

14. It's not easy at all

it requires a skilled gun smith to modify the reciever.

And its not like jaywalking- jaywalking doesnt get you 10 years in club fed

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bossy22 (Reply #14)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:28 PM

21. If you believe that you are deceived or deliberately deceiving

http://www.quarterbore.com/nfa/dias.html

The Drop In Auto Sear (DIAS) is a device that is adds an auto sear to an otherwise semi-automatic AR-15 so that when used with M-16 fire control parts including an M-16 carrier produces full auto fire. The DIAS is referred to as a "Drop In" as this piece can be added to an AR-15 without drilling a receiver for a traditional auto sear. Following is a photo of a registered Drop In Auto Sear (rDIAS) made by JCB and registered before 1986.


I hope my link vanishes but it also gives instructions on timing the sear.

Despite what you are told in the Gungeon it is not a complex or difficult job - just very illegal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to intaglio (Reply #21)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:32 PM

22. The DIAS is considered a machine gun in and of itself

Yes, a little hunk of metal is the machine gun. Note how they say it's a pre-1986 registered component? They also retail for approximately $8000 and up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NickB79 (Reply #22)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:45 PM

27. And did you look at how crudely machined it is?

don't you think that somebody with access to a simple vertical mill could not make it? It you don't then go on a Trade College course in machine tool use and learn how easy it is to produce high tolerance parts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to intaglio (Reply #27)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 02:49 AM

83. You could make a real deal M-16 in a middle school metal shop

if you really cared enough.

The DIAS only works on certain rifles produced before a certain year (latest made in 1986), per federal law, and enthusiastically enforced by the BATFE.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to intaglio (Reply #21)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 02:47 AM

82. For an AR 15 made prior to 1986, that MIGHT be possible, depending

on the manufacturer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bossy22 (Reply #14)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:33 PM

23. You are either willfully ignorant about these "conversion kits"

or you did not even bother to look at the video and links in my
OP (at the link provided).

Either way, you are on the wrong side of this issue IMHO, on
the wrong side of history, the side of death-dealing, destruction
and misery. Good luck with that..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #23)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 11:29 AM

100. How often are converted AR-15s used in crimes?

 

The answer is that it is extremely rare. About 10 years ago some Mexican drug cartel members were arrested for doing illegal conversions in Southern California.

The state and federal penalties for doing that are so severe that they deter people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #12)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 06:44 PM

39. The sale of the kits is also tightly regulated.

And it does take a high level of machinist skills to install them and make the gun function reliably. The penalty to doing the conversion for a non-permitted owner is so high, gunsmiths wouldn't take the chance. Loss of license, big fine, and jail time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #39)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 06:55 PM

41. Not according to this MEDIA MATTERS source

"Williamson's account is in fact a highly misleading characterization of the accessibility of fully automatic weapons. The reality is that semi-automatic rifles, such as AK-47s or AR-15s, are widely available and sold at gun shows from private sellers that do not run background checks. Further conversion kits that make these rifles indistinguishable from machine guns are also widely available at gun shows. "

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2011/06/07/the-truth-about-gun-shows-al-qaeda-and-automati/180357

Were you simply unaware of the gun show phenomenon? AKA a literal loose cannon, and a proverbial loophole the size of Texas.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #41)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 02:51 AM

84. You can't spit at a gun show without hitting at least 3 cops.

On duty, off duty, and retired. To say nothing of federal agents.

That source is full of shit on the auto conversion kits. 10 year minimum sentence.

(Not full of shit on the background check thing. That part is accurate.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #84)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 06:17 AM

87. I rest my case

yes, gun shows crawling with all manner of cops, yet still these little "kits" seem
to be getting sold to whoever wants them, just "under the table" (wink - wink, nod-nod).

And these are all the "good cops" ... you know, they would NEVER have any truck with playing
fast and loose with gun laws, and would go after the NRA itself, if it was guilty of breaking
any gun law.

Nothing to see here.

Fairy tales can be comforting, that is true.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #87)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 07:35 AM

90. No, they aren't.

Otherwise you could point to a slew of crimes committed with these supposedly converted weapons.


LAPD Detective Jimmy Trahin, testifying before the California State Assembly (Feb. 13,1989):

"over 4,000 guns that came into the custody of our unit last year, less than 120 would be classified as this military-type weapon. Of those, only ten or less than ten were actually illegally converted to fully-automatic machine gun stocks. Why? Because these military style assault weapons of today are not easily and readily convertible without extensive knowledge of modifications to the weapon and/or substitution of available parts. (source)
These military style assault weapons of today are not easily and readily convertible without extensive knowledge and modifications to the weapon and/or substitution of available parts.

Now, in my 12 years within the unit, considering the enormous amount of firearms that we have taken into custody, and that's over fifty-thousand, I would say, and these included ones from the hardcore gangs, and from the drug dealers, our unit has never, ever, had one AK-47 converted, one Ruger Mini-14 converted, an H&K 91, 93 never converted, an AR-180 never converted. So this media blitz of many of these assault weapons, or supposedly military style weapons are being converted to full automatic is not true.
"

FBI crime statistics with firearms usually denote if the weapon was fully automatic. Surely you can point to a whole bunch of them, right?

(you're falling for an urban legend)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #87)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 07:51 AM

91. By the way, I'll save you the effort of searching.

The only major crime committed with the mythical unicorn converted weapons you are describing, was the North Hollywood Shootout.

If these are as common as you say, surely you can point to ten or so similar crimes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #91)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 03:58 PM

104. IHOP in Carson City NV * Sept 2011 * 5 dead, 14 wounded using semi-auto converted to fully auto

"Furlong said many people initally questioned why someone didn’t try to stop the shooter. But witnesses and videos confirmed later that the attack happened so fast, no one could have, Fulong said.

Sencion moved fast and shot from the hip. His Norinco MAK90 assault rifle had been modified to fire as an automatic. Officials still don’t know who converted it into an illegal machine gun.

The shooting at the Carson City IHOP restaurant was the worst in that city’s history but was only one in a long list of recent mass shootings that have killed and injured hundreds across the country."
http://www.rgj.com/article/20120902/NEWS01/309020022/IHOP-shooting-one-year-later-85-seconds-changed-Carson-City

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #104)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 03:59 PM

105. There's one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #105)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 04:17 PM

107. Two counting No. Hollywood one you posted, and still counting. ~nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #107)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 04:42 PM

110. You are furthering a meme that these conversions are widely available.

"Further conversion kits that make these rifles indistinguishable from machine guns are also widely available at gun shows."

It's bullshit. You have two instances of them being used in crimes (one of them I supplied to you).

Since merely POSSESSING one, unassembled, is a 10 year felony, one might assume a correlation between people possessing them, and using them in crimes.

There is a dearth of people using them in crimes.

Remember, this is a hypothetical 'kit' of metal parts that, if you held it in your hand, could send you to federal prison for 10 years.


Where are these 'widely available' kits? Nowhere. They are not 'widely available' at gun shows, period. The process to modify a semi-auto, specifically one produced after 1986, is arduous and requires significant modification and NEW parts. (N Hollywood Shootout shooters made whole new parts.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #110)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 05:06 PM

113. "Fully legal bump-fire" * cheap and easy conversion * watch and learn

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #113)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 05:08 PM

114. Bump fire isn't fully auto, per the BATFE.

For obvious reasons. Try again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #114)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 05:13 PM

116. It is indistinguishable from full auto

if you had watched that video you would have seen it
illustrated in graphic full color. 2-3 round bursts so
fast they just sound like one long burst.

did you really watch that video?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #116)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 05:22 PM

117. I don't need to watch the video.

I'm familiar with the product, and I've read the BATFE's opinion on whether it is a conversion to full auto or not. It isn't.

I can bump fire with my hand. I don't, because you can't hit shit when you do it. THAT is why it isn't a conversion to full auto. It's hard enough to control a weapon in full auto, without holding it loosely in your hands so recoil can slam it back and forth.

It is not full auto. It's also highly stupid. The BATFE could make it illegal with the stroke of a pen, and they don't. Requires no legislative action at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #117)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 05:32 PM

118. I think this is where we agree to disagree.

have a nice life. We could keep doing this back & forth ad infinitum and
still not change each others thinking, so no hard feelings.. but I'm done.

I just hope we can put a stop this "mass shooting" madness somehow,
and as soon and effectively as possible.

Maybe we can agree on that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #118)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 05:46 PM

119. I agree.

Items I want to work on: Remove the Hughes Amendment, and extend the 1934 NFA to cover semi-auto rifles, and possibly handguns. This would be a game changer to keep guns out of bad actor's hands. MASSIVE change. Massive benefit. Reap enormous improvement.

There are other things. Gun owners have been asking for NICS to be made open/free access so private transfers could also perform background checks. We should do that. Or require all private transfer go through FFL's for background checks, and register them. That's cool. We can do that.


But on the bump fire, the BATFE bans stuff all the time. They confiscated a load of airsoft toys because they thought maybe parts of it could possibly be used in converting rifles to FA, so they took it all. They are the professionals, they are the experts, and they have no problem banning these things. They haven't banned that stock. So I consider that impartial recognition that it is a gimmick that doesn't really work, if your goal is to hit something.


We should probably focus on the best solution to cover the most problems. Registration is that piece. Things like bump fire are fringe issues that aren't really a problem, and will serve to fuel the hysterical opposition engine against ANY legislative action. That hysteria noise machine will be going full blast anyway, but the more silly the claims, the more likely we can overrule them.

Most americans will support registration. We can do this. I'm with you on that. I'd register mine in a heartbeat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #119)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 05:54 PM

120. +10 nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #113)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 05:47 PM

138. This should be a thread unto itself--

because it's fun to shoot up the woods.

Thanks for posting. It says a lot about our current culture.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #91)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 04:59 PM

111. Texas A&M * Aug. 2012 * 3 dead

"Various local media outlets reported that the shooter was firing an automatic weapon from a house."
http://www.tucsonnewsnow.com/story/19265000/at-least-1-person-killed-in-mass-shooting-near-texas-am

No explanation as to whether this was a full-on auto, or a conversion; so this is a maybe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #111)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 05:10 PM

115. Not a maybe.

Come back with actual ones. You have two, POSSIBLY a third. You contended these were widely available You haven't even scratched the surface of 'widely available.'


In FAIRNESS, if you want to find more hits on this sort of thing, tighten your search to border towns with Mexico. That is where you will find the most prevalent use of them. Problem is, they aren't made or installed here in the US. But that is generally where you will find illegally modified weapons in large numbers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #12)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 08:26 PM

53. They were originally fully automatic weapons, designed for the military.

They were modified for civilian use later by conversion into semi-automatic. My question is: how many rounds are we dealing with? How many rounds in the magazine at one time?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:14 PM

15. again, this is almost identical in form and function to what I carried in Iraq. It is an assault

weapon.

"automatic" weapons are part of our tool box. but in a a squad of 12, we had 2 automatic weapons, and 10 assault weapons. The backbone of our military is built on this very weapon.

And IIRC, the 90s AWB prohibited pistol grips. which unless this would have been grandfathered, would have made it hard to get. ie - enter the black market.

please feel free to contradict this combat veteran and soldier of 14 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pasto76 (Reply #15)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:20 PM

18. The AWB didn't outright ban pistol grips

Rather, it prohibited you from having more than a few features in combination. So, you could buy a brand-new AR-15 with a pistol grip off the store shelf, but it couldn't have a collapsible stock or flash hider. You could have a collapsible stock, but then you'd need a thumbhole grip stock instead.

I worked in a gun shop owned by a large hunting supply store chain in the Midwest during college, and we were selling AR-15's off the shelf while the AWB was in force. About the only thing that people bitched about was the lack of any magazines that held more than 10 rounds, but with the advent of the Internet those pre-ban 30-rd mags were easily found, as they were grandfathered in by the AWB.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NickB79 (Reply #18)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:34 PM

24. Well put.

 

The AWB was feel-good legislation. Nothing more, nothing less.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dr_Scholl (Reply #24)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:40 PM

25. Agreed...we need far more restrictive legislation than the AWB

The AWB was a joke. We need laws that actually restrict and punish.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #25)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:58 PM

29. No we don't

That's not the problem- you are falling for the old correlation=causation fallacy

The fact of the matter is if he had used those handguns instead of the Rifle the outcome would pretty much come out similar. VT massacre was committed using a Glock 9mm handgun.

If you want to look at something that is atleast related to the problem (though i'm not endorsing) is safe storage laws, upgrading the background check system to accept psychological history, and better mental health care system in this country. Atleast this options would better address and prevent such tragedies from happening.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bossy22 (Reply #29)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 06:12 PM

30. Oh

I'm all for stringent restrictions on handguns as well.

I'm not wrong. You are. The piled up bodies from the massacres we see under your favored system prove it. We're in a public health crisis like HIV/AIDS, and you're the guy who wants to keep the bath houses open for civil liberties. Your position has no future. Unfortunately, thousands will still have to die because of your position.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #30)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 06:31 PM

36. how can we see bodies under my system when it hasn't even been considered or implimented?

statistically we are not in a "crisis". I'm sorry, I don't through emotions into policy discourse. Mass shootings are still stastically rare.

Your positoin is the one that is actual DOA. My position atleasat has a chance of being taken seriously. You aren't going to get the massive shift in public feeling that you think you are. If you think that all of a sudden there is going to be this huge movement to remove the 2nd amendment from the constitution you are kidding yourself.

The same people that brought you the patriot act used the "tactics" you are using. in any gun control debate in this country there is goign to be discourse on civil liberties

What I discussed is atleast politcally attainable and it might have prevented this tragedy. If his mother's guns were locked up and NICS was aware of his mental condition, don't you think that might have had a chance to prevent this?

Sometimes big problems can be fixed with little solutions

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bossy22 (Reply #36)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 11:58 PM

70. Umm, 30,000 dead Americans each year by guns isn't a crisis?

Jeez, I'd hate to think what it would take to impress you that we were in a crisis.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to primavera (Reply #70)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 12:52 AM

72. I meant mass shootings

and where did you get 30,000 from? Last year there were 9,000 homicides committed with firearms of all types. If you are including suicides that is a whole "nother" issue. There is no causitive connection between suicides and gun ownership.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bossy22 (Reply #72)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 01:34 AM

75. According to CDC, 31,347 Americans died by guns in 2009...

... the most recent year for which they have figures, a figure consistent with the average of 32,000 annual gun fatalities that is the average over the last thirty years. Of those 31,347 deaths, 11,493 were homicides. 18,735 were suicides, true, but they're still dead by a bullet. But even setting aside the suicides who might or might not have found alternative ways of ending their own lives without guns, you're still left with a per capita gun death rate that is the highest of any developed nation in the world, somewhere between 15 and 20 times greater than the other developed nations, depending upon how you count. Compare our 11,493 gun homicides to the 18 total gun homicides in the UK for 2009, or the 11 in Japan, or the 14 in Sweden, or the 6 in Denmark, or the... well, you get the idea. Anyway you want to slice it, I'd call it a crisis, and anyone who thinks it's not pretty damned coldhearted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to primavera (Reply #75)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 01:49 AM

76. Per capita numbers are better to use

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bossy22 (Reply #76)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 02:19 AM

81. I understand

The image of 30,000 bullet-riddled corpses must be difficult for a gun advocate to digest. Better to reduce it to nice, sterile, statistical rates. As you wish. At 9 annual gun homicides per 100,000 population, the US has 3 times the per capita gun homicide rate of France, Austria, and Finland; 5 times the per capita rate for Israel, Norway, Greece, Sweden, Denmark; 7 times the rate of Italy, Iceland, Kuwait; 9 times the per capita rate of Germany, Australia, Ireland, India; 15 times the per capita rate of the Netherlands; 36 times the per capita rate of the UK; 130 times the per capita rate of Japan, need I go on?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to primavera (Reply #70)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 12:54 AM

73. Nah, just the cost of doing business.

Stop being so tender!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pasto76 (Reply #15)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 08:08 PM

50. Isn't this essentially an M16 (fully automatic) that was modified

to be semi auto--for civilians?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to janx (Reply #50)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 02:11 AM

79. Wrong.

 

The AR-15 came first, the military adopted it and modified it for their purpose. Simple Google search would tell you that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Clames (Reply #79)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 05:31 PM

137. A simple Google search:


It was marketed to the military as the M16. It was a firearm designed and marketed for the military.

"The AR-15 was first built by ArmaLite as a selective fire rifle for the United States armed forces. Because of financial problems, ArmaLite sold the AR-15 design to Colt. The select-fire AR-15 entered the US military system as the M16 rifle. Colt then marketed the Colt AR-15 as a semi-automatic version of the M16 rifle for civilian sales in 1963. Although the name "AR-15" remains a Colt registered trademark, variants of the firearm are independently made, modified and sold under various names by multiple manufacturers."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15#History

The reason I asked is that a U.S. military veteran DUer brought this up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to janx (Reply #137)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 11:25 PM

139. The AR-15 derived from the AR-10 which derived from a civilian survival rifle project...

 

...in which Eugene Stoner was brought in early to be the chief engineer. The AR-10's were submitted late during the Army's testing phase for replacement battle rifles (full power rifle cartridges rather than intermediate power cartridges that would be later chosen) but lost to the M14. The AR-10 continued development until the Army came back to lower powered assault rifles rather than battle rifles where the AR-15 was submitted based on improvements made after dealing with shortcomings from the AR-10 and survival rifle which never saw production.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pasto76 (Reply #15)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 03:02 AM

85. No you didn't.

You had an assault RIFLE. Didn't you pay attention in training?

A select fire weapon of intermediate caliber between a sub machine gun and a battle rifle.

You're also wrong about the stipulations of the expired federal assault weapons ban.

Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:Folding or telescoping stock
Pistol grip
Bayonet mount
Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
Grenade launcher (more precisely, a muzzle device that enables launching or firing rifle grenades, though this applies only to muzzle mounted grenade launchers and not those mounted externally).


TWO OR MORE features. So, you could have a detachable mag, and a pistol grip, with a fixed stock, welded flash suppressor, and no bayonet lug.

I believe you that you may be a combat veteran, but you have thoroughly proven you are no expert on this subject.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 08:23 PM

52. From my limited understanding, assault weapons are weapons initially designed for military use.

They can be automatic or semi-automatic, but they have large capacity magazines. How many rounds were in the one this crazy used?

I think part of the problem of "assault weapons" ban, etc. is in the definition of what constitutes an assault weapon. For instance, I had a semi-automatic .22 rifle back in the day that was not an assault weapon; if I remember correctly, it held 11 rounds max.

I don't think that's what we're dealing with here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 08:46 PM

55. That's why semi=autos need to be reclassified as assault weapons.

Most of us are aware of the difference and also the fact that semi-auto is much more deadly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 08:59 PM

56. A "hunting" rifle? For what, deer tar-tar? Squirrel ceviche?

Jesus, that would shred just about anything to moosh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Myrina (Reply #56)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 10:32 PM

61. actually you are somewhat correct

the .223 calibre is mainly considered a "varmint" calibre. That means it is good for small game hunting- such as woodchucks, squirrels, even coyotes. Some people advocate using it for deer as well but most believe it to be too weak to take down a deer (would require multiple shots and cause the animal suffering). A more common calibre for deer is usually closer to the .30 calibre range

In fact the U.S. military has also questioned the efficacy of the .223 as the main combatant weapon. Throughout Iraq and Afganistan soldiers had reported that it would take multiple shots just to take a single person down. thats why there is a great deal of research into a calibre that is between a .30 (it was too heavy for soliders to carry a battle required amount) and a .223

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #1)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 09:56 PM

57. No it is not - it's an assault rifle designed to kill humans

anyone that actually hunts knows the difference

yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #57)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 10:46 PM

65. so there is a difference between a 150 lb deer

and a 150 lb human when it comes to bullets and lethality?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bossy22 (Reply #65)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 07:08 AM

88. Distance

You usually don't get within five to ten feet of a deer to shoot it. With a quickly firing semiauto at ten feet versus a bolt action .30-06 - what do you think? It seems the .223 is perfectly capable of being lethal enough when it comes to humans - especially humans without body armor. Also you got 75 gr and 80 gr ammo (for killing deer).

The lethality of the gun speaks for itself - 26 people with very few wounded.

Pictures of deer brought down with a .223. it seems to do the job.

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1252771_Deer_VS_223_Season_3_Graphic_Pics_Updated_pic_of_recovered_bullet_and_vids.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:19 PM

127. Is a weapon capable of firing 30 shots in 10 seconds

for hunting? What is it for hunting? Humans?

This weapon killed 26 humans in a lot less than 10 minutes. It is known that this apology for a human questioned teachers and had to search for victims. These humans were hit by no fewer than three and as many as 11 rounds so say a mean as 5 per teacher or pupil; that is 130 rounds. It is reported that this murderer entered the school by firing through a glass panel. I suspect there may be shots that missed. So at least 5 of the 30 round magazines his mother stupidly bought were used.

Take your apologist garbage elsewhere.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to intaglio (Reply #127)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:54 PM

128. WTF? No it can't fire 30 shots in 10 seconds, don't be silly.

It fires one bullet each time the trigger is pulled. Even taking just the roughest aim, you could only fire a bullet every one to two seconds. More careful aim takes longer. Firing at a quicker rate, such as the YouTube watched " bumpfire", is wildly inaccurate...maybe only one bullet in the magazine would get even near a target, let alone hit it. There is a reason why the military has a three-round fire select on their automatic weapons- flinging lots of lead in the air is pretty useless and wasteful of ammunition. It looks good for Hollywood movies is all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #128)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:48 PM

133. 3 rounds per second ...

not difficult, the weapon is constructed to fire much faster

Place a stitch counter in your hand and click it as fast as you can over a timed 10 seconds. Yes, I know that the weight of the pull is greater with a gun but the distance over which your finger works is longer on the counter. You'll easily get over 40 clicks.

Or could also go down to a range and do 3 rapid trigger pulls, don't expect accuracy at first. Then build up; 6, 10, 20. Yes, you are spraying and praying but it can be done.

Now go away and do the experiment

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to intaglio (Reply #133)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:28 PM

134. With the weight of the trigger and dealing with the recoil,

I don't think three rounds per second is possible under ordinary circumstances. And while there are reports of the son going to gun range with his mother, no-one at the range recalled him ever shooting when interviewed by police. So the guy was a novice by any reasonable definition. Even a novice could fire 150-200 rounds in 5 minutes or so he was shooting (including changing magazines), and be accurate at near point-blank range.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #134)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 02:33 AM

135. I said go away and do the experiment to the original respondant

Try it yourself. The stitch counter is just to demonstrate that the finger can squeeze as fast as required. The part with the gun is to show that all else is a matter of hand strength and conditioning to recoil.

What I am not saying is that the killer fired that fast, just that weapons of that type can fire very rapidly compared to a bolt action weapon. This ability together with the 30 round magazine and his choice of victim facilitated the killer's extraordinary "competence" in slaughter (27 dead but only 2 wounded).

My OP in this thread was in response to the stupid assertion about "hunting" because this type of weapon is NOT designed for hunting game, it is designed for hunting humans. A game hunter does not require a weapon of this sort; a bolt action with a 5 round mag is plenty for deer and coyote, for birds and squirrels a 12 gauge side-by-side is plenty.

Given this last do you honestly think that the vile perpetrator of this massacre could have killed with such efficiency in such a short period of time with a 5 round bolt action .223? And a response to this question would be appreciated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to intaglio (Reply #135)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:10 PM

136. Uh, I have fired a semi-automatic rifle.

An average person cannot fire 3 rounds a second until the magazine is empty by normal trigger operation.
I have heard of the "bump-fire" method, but haven't seen it done. There is also quick-fire artists who can empty, reload, and empty old-fashioned style revolvers in just a few seconds. In both cases, it takes a great deal of practice, and accuracy is of no concern. I don't think those are the type of situation we are dealing with in mass-shootings.

All indications are that these mass shooters aren't long-time gun owners, nor do they have years of regular practice at a range. They all appear to have a deteriorating mental state, but because they have no prior record they are able to easily acquire guns, because mental health database is poor. In most cases, the shooter has no intention of surviving the attack. In that sense, they are like suicide terrorists, though the motive is personal rather than political or religious. Like terrorists, they will use whatever weapons they can acquire, that will cause the greatest deaths. We can ban guns, but would they not then use IEDs, car-bombs, poison gas, or some other means?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #136)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:27 AM

140. Restricting the argument

An average person cannot fire 3 round
and ignoring my statement
Try it yourself. The stitch counter is just to demonstrate that the finger can squeeze as fast as required. The part with the gun is to show that all else is a matter of hand strength and conditioning to recoil.

Because for you to admit what I say is right weakens the gun industry pabulum you constantly regurgitate.

I have heard of the "bump-fire" method, but haven't seen it done
Ever looked on You Tube? There are even ATF approved mods for AR style rifles that are, essentially, bump fire; there was one posted on this site recently that "boasted" 10 rounds per second and fully controllable

There is also quick-fire artists who can empty, reload, and empty old-fashioned style revolvers in just a few seconds.
I believe you will find that these "quick fire artists" are operating in very limited conditions, do not aim and that over, say, 3 reloads they still average only one round per second.
I don't think those are the type of situation we are dealing with in mass-shootings.
I didn't say it was
What I am not saying is that the killer fired that fast, just that weapons of that type can fire very rapidly compared to a bolt action weapon. This ability together with the 30 round magazine and his choice of victim facilitated the killer's extraordinary "competence" in slaughter (27 dead but only 2 wounded).


All indications are that these mass shooters aren't long-time gun owners, nor do they have years of regular practice at a range.
Firstly why are you using the words "long term"? It smells like another gun industry approved grammatical niggle. Young shooters are hardly likely to be "long term" owners or practicioners because of their age. The murderer at Sandy Hook was not a "long term" gun owner - except he had long term access to these weapons and certainly did not have what you would term "years of regular practise". This sort of sophistry is typical of the talking points used to distract from the need for gun control.

They all appear to have a deteriorating mental state
Captain Obvious is obvious, or do you think normal humans go round shooting kids?

but because they have no prior record they are able to easily acquire guns, because mental health database is poor
Yet you do not see this as an argument for proper training, assessment and licensing - r-i-i-ght. Your idea is that the mental health records of all persons seeking to be gun owners be examined by your local Walmart gun sales person. Do you think the medical records of all women who want to use birth control should also be examined by the pharmacist?

In most cases, the shooter has no intention of surviving the attack
I'd say you were claiming telepathic powers - except that this statement is just another talking point marketed by the gun manufacturers.

In that sense, they are like suicide terrorists, though the motive is personal rather than political or religious
Evidence based or just your unsupported opinion? The fact that terrorists operate from a supportive environment of other terrorists who assist in the production of their preferred method of slaughter has not even entered your head.

Like terrorists, they will use whatever weapons they can acquire, that will cause the greatest deaths. We can ban guns, but would they not then use IEDs, car-bombs, poison gas, or some other means?
In general, no. People with these mental issues do not plan long term. A few might try to use a car to run into a crowd but that is a damn sight more difficult than shooting a gun

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 04:00 PM

2. And where did he get the vest I wonder?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AldoLeopold (Reply #2)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 04:31 PM

6. You can get them online. Even ebay.

This is so sad. I can picture it now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ash_F (Reply #6)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 04:45 PM

10. Yes, true

but where did he get this vest I wonder. I hope we find out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AldoLeopold (Reply #10)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:42 PM

26. I'm sure we will.

To my knowledge there are no regulations for body armor, which is why you can get it from places like ebay.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 04:04 PM

4. i wouldnt even say that name.

giving him the notority he craved. the bastard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:16 PM

17. I invite all of you to google "automatic assault weapon videos". You will find dozens

of videos of illegally modified AR weapons firing automatically. I sent emails to ATF about them I invite you to do the same.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pasto76 (Reply #17)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:25 PM

19. are you sure its not "bump firing" videos

bump firing is a technique to get a semi-auto to seem like its shooting as fast as an auto. The technicalities are quite simple- its essentially just "pulling the trigger" faster. Instead of relying on coordinated muscle concentric contraction you utilize coordinated muscle eccentric contraction (lengthing of the muscle against resistance) against the recoil of the gun

its perfectly legal and is not a firearm modification

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pasto76 (Reply #17)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:25 PM

20. Yeah, no.

 

While you are googling, google that California police veteran who said in decades of police work he had never encountered a convereted-to-fully-automatic weapon.

Getting excited about machine guns is a red herring in this issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:45 PM

28. Note that he was not old enough to legally firearms in the state. I wonder if he use his

brothers ID to buy ammunition, and that's why the id was found on his body.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geckosfeet (Reply #28)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 06:19 PM

34. very good point

That makes a lot of sense--at least, it explains why (if the brothers haven't seen each other in 2 years) he would have taken/stolen it back then, long before he planned any of this. (That is, he probably didn't use Ryan's ID solely in order to complicate the investigation, implicate him, etc.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geckosfeet (Reply #28)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 08:02 PM

49. I wondered the same thing.

He had it for some reason.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 06:19 PM

33. Kick (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 06:34 PM

37. i am so sad

i can not believe to this, i mean why why why, i cry, this is so awesome!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 07:36 PM

47. "A WELL-REGULATED MILITIA".... key words being WELL-REGULATED... we need



to use these words to hack away at this problem.. there are 800 -- count them -- 800 GUN DEALERS IN PHOENIX AREA ALONE.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to secondwind (Reply #47)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:40 PM

132. Then we need to hack away at Mad Dog Scalia

Unfortunately, he and the rest of the Fascist Five on the Court ruled that the framers were simply smoking crack when they included that whole "well regulated militia" bit and really didn't mean a word of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 09:57 PM

58. Military assault weapons are designed to

kill people. No other reason. Not hunting, not home protection, nothing but killing as many people as possible in a short time.

Just made to KILL AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE, as fast as possible!

And the scumbag had a bulletproof vest on as well so he could last even longer at the slaughter of the innocents!!

Yep that damn .223 did what it was designed to do now didn't it?!

What kind of fucking insane society allows battlefield weapons of mass destruction to be easily bought by any damn nutcase walkin down the street!?

What could possibly go wrong?????

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to workinclasszero (Reply #58)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 10:19 PM

59. then why area people okay with the police having them?

Do the police have a need to kill large numbers of people on a regular basis?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bossy22 (Reply #59)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 10:27 PM

60. I am not at all in favor of the police having these guns. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #60)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 10:35 PM

63. I actually am in favor of their use

Though i do have a problem with the militarization of police.

the AR-15 is a good carbine platform for police use. It's very accurate, easy to maintain, and reliable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bossy22 (Reply #59)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 10:35 PM

62. I'm not ok with that

The militarization of our police forces is a threat to our freedom. Look at what they did to Occupy protesters last year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to workinclasszero (Reply #62)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 10:38 PM

64. then what would they use for a rifle calibre carbine?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to workinclasszero (Reply #58)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 04:49 AM

86. Bullshit.

 

So called "assault weapons" are some of the most popular firearms for recreation, competitive shooting, and hunting. Yet they're the least used guns in crime.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 10:48 PM

66. How come no one ever brings up Mental health care?

In many ways the problem is NOT gun control or lack of gun control, but Mental health care.

Mental Health Care has been underfunded for decades, if the family would have been able to get adequate care for the shooter BEFORE this incident, this whole problem would have been avoided. His mother would have known what programs available for her child (the shooter) and determined none were available UNLESS she paid, more then she could afford. That is the situation with Mental Heath Care in the US today.

In School, his teachers would have seen the problems, but could not do anything for there was no place to send him due to the lack of funding for Mental Health care.

Thus he was on his own for Mental Health Care, which he could not get. Left alone, as an American Individualist, he sought his own Solution to his problem and we see the results.

We need additional finding for Mental Health Care, but it is the one thing the NRA will NOT support for the simple reason the NRA is tied in with the extreme Right Wing and its support for low taxes for the rich. Mental Health Care cost money, and thus NOT an option for the right wing. The Extreme Right Wing prefer Gun Control or no Control Control (The Extreme Economic Right Wing do not really care which) over increase taxes on the the Rich (Which the extreme Right Wing do care about).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to happyslug (Reply #66)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 01:05 AM

74. Both mother and father were financially well off,

So it doesn't appear money was preventing shooter from getting mental help. And apparently family was aware of his mental condition. I have no idea why he wasn't getting professional diagnosis and treatment. Maybe he refused to go?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #74)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 07:17 AM

89. I think

 

this was a tragedy after thinking about it more. His family was very wealthy and they found that wealth in the corporate world which most of us don't come to grips of the pressures within it. I think everyone was a victim, and I know some might criticize me, but after thinking things through, even his family, which includes Adam.

This kid was twenty years old and something went wrong in his life. He appears to have led a reclusive life, where the pressures were placed on him and success was expected. His mother was probably very demanding and appeared to protect her son and wanted him to succeed in that corporate world of success also. She was very demanding of how he did in school also.

I think the pressure might have gotten to the kid and he just snapped into his own World. I read that he enjoyed playing video games and imagined blowing everything up. He was very quiet and didn't talk to anybody or made friends like ordinary kids. His mother and father had also divorced after many years.

Looking at the sequences of this young man's final day, He apparently had a devastating confrontation with his mother, which probably made this kid go over the edge. His mother appeared to be very demanding of him. The first killing took place in the home, where she was found shot in the face. The kid apparently dressed himself in Black and gather the guns, which his mother loved. He then chose a school with a staff of all women. He forced his way in that school and shot most of the staff, including the children he found. When the rampage ended, then turn the gun on himself, and it was over for Adam Lanza. This was a heinous crime done by Adam, but in retrospect, it was a failure of society for this young man, which affected everyone. Mow everybody sees Adam as a monster.

The first breakdown was with the family including his mother,father, brother, and those that came into contact with him. That was probably what made him reclusive, the probably didn't refuse to seek help, but apparently there were signs, but nobody didn't want to get involved with the kid. Another factor could also be, his immediate family were too involved with their own successes or niches. This is just a perspective, that might be from Adam's view. And I'm just trying to be open and not see him as some kinda monster. I've also decided to step back and see the mother as maybe loving her children too much and didn't reach outside of her wealthy circle of friends for more help. she seemed to have problems with her own views of the World.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to John2 (Reply #89)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 11:12 AM

96. Good post. Re: "it was a failure of society for this young man"

I would add: and then it was a failure of his family as the lack of money appeared not to be a problem for them to buy many guns, but no mental help (?)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #74)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 03:56 PM

103. Mental health Care is EXTREMELY Expensive

Thus it can bankrupt anyone, unless you are a multi-millionaire. You are looking at having to deal with someone with at least a Master Degree on a weekly basis (Doctors are seen about once every three months). Most health insurance limits how many time you can see a doctor, to keep costs down, you can seek additional sessions if you are willing to pay, $25-50 an hour, $500 to $1000 a month (have to include the cost for Psychiatrist to over view the people actually dealing with the patient).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #74)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 04:46 PM

124. The issue is rarely the wealth of the Parents, it is the lack of adequate Mental Health Care:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2248983/Connecticut-school-shooting-Adam-Lanzas-survivalist-mother-obsessed-guns.html

CBS report a friend said the mother was NOT a survivalist:
http://connecticut.cbslocal.com/2012/12/17/friend-guns-a-hobby-for-lanzas-mother/

Another CBS report says she was:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57559546/in-divorce-mom-had-authority-over-conn-shooter/

That this is more a mental health crisis:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100194499/connecticut-school-shootings-its-not-just-guns-americas-attitude-to-mental-health-needs-changing-too/

A few weeks ago, Michael pulled a knife and threatened to kill me and then himself after I asked him to return his overdue library books. His 7- and 9-year-old siblings knew the safety plan—they ran to the car and locked the doors before I even asked them to. I managed to get the knife from Michael, then methodically collected all the sharp objects in the house into a single Tupperware container that now travels with me. Through it all, he continued to scream insults at me and threaten to kill or hurt me.....

I am sharing this story because I am Adam Lanza's mother. I am Dylan Klebold's and Eric Harris's mother. I am Jason Holmes's mother. I am Jared Loughner's mother. I am Seung-Hui Cho's mother. And these boys—and their mothers—need help. In the wake of another horrific national tragedy, it's easy to talk about guns. But it's time to talk about mental illness......

When I asked my son's social worker about my options, he said that the only thing I could do was to get Michael charged with a crime. "If he's back in the system, they'll create a paper trail," he said. "That's the only way you're ever going to get anything done. No one will pay attention to you unless you've got charges."


For the complete article:
http://gawker.com/5968818/i-am-adam-lanzas-mother

http://thebluereview.org/i-am-adam-lanzas-mother/

http://sarahkendzior.com/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to happyslug (Reply #66)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 08:21 PM

123. No one ever brings up Mental Health Care???

back to RKBA with this horse shit

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 11:27 PM

68. We are incapable of having a rational conversation on guns.

The NRA will go off the Obama is going for our guns and then congress will get a flood of emails and then they will fall in line. There is no one who will stand up to the gun lobby.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iandhr (Reply #68)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 11:34 PM

69. don't just blame the NRA

the gun control movement misleads and plays on peoples emotions as well

IF you want a rational conversation, it will have to be a product of both sides

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 02:06 AM

78. If the rifle was bought in Connecticut in the last 18 years...

...it was not an assault weapon.

Connecticut has had state ban that mirrors the now-expired federal ban. All "assault weapons" had to be registered with the state within a year of the law passing, (a certain date in 1994) and I believe you can't sell a registered assault weapon to anybody else in the state if you decide to get rid of it.

It may have been a semi-auto rifle that uses the AR-15 operating system, but it did not have enough features to be classified as an "assault weapon".

The rifle pictured is one, per Connecticut law, because it is a semi-automatic rifle with a detachable magazine and pistol grip, AND also has a telescoping stock and a flash hider.

If the rifle's stock was fixed, or if the flash hider gets removed, the rifle pictured is no longer an assault weapon. Same as if you replaced the pistol grip and buttstock with a conventional straight grip: no longer an assault weapon.



This is why such bans don't work. Arbitrary and ineffective.

You could argue for the banning of semiautomatic long guns, which certainly removed both the arbitrariness and the ineffectiveness of the Clinton-era ban.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #78)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 08:55 AM

92. Simple

Ban the sale of any newly manufactured semi-automatic, lever action or pump long gun which contains a detachable magazine (rim fire and center fire).

Limit installed, non-detachable magazine capacity, on all newly manufactured long guns to no more than 9 rounds, including the chambered round. Make modification of any weapon to accept a detachable magazine, or magazine extension a 25 year to life federal offense.

Ban the sale or transfer of existing center fire semi-auto, lever action or pump long guns containing detachable magazines to non-FFL holders. Make the regulation of the above legacy weapon's storage, access and use subject to the same restrictions are full-auto weapons for those FFL holders choosing to purchase them.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Throckmorton (Reply #92)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 11:22 AM

97. Ever hear of the "bullet button"?

By replacing the finger-actuated magazine release with one that requires a "tool", such as a bullet point or a pen point, you can make your AR-15 have a non-detachable magazine.

Of course, some magazine-release tools are made from a strong magnet, so they stick on the magazine release...




And this doesn't affect handguns at all.



We're focusing entirely on changing every single gun in the country to try to prevent a mass shooting, and ignoring the 40 or so people murdered daily, day in and day out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Sun Dec 16, 2012, 07:42 PM

121. that's a serious looking gun

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:26 PM

125. Logo of Bushmaster rifle is a Red Serpent


I was wondering when I was researching the Bushmaster .223 assault rifle
I found



The Adaptive Combat Rifle (ACR) is the production name for an updated version of the Masada Adaptive Combat Weapon System. It is a tactical rifle platform designed by Magpul Industries of Erie, Colorado. In late January 2008, Bushmaster entered into a licensing agreement with Magpul whereby Bushmaster would take over production, future development, and sales of the Masada
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptive_Combat_Rifle

The original Magpul Masada design represented a combination of several recent rifle designs, incorporating what was considered by its designers to be the best features of each in a single, lightweight, modular rifle platform.

In January 2008, the design of the Magpul Masada was licensed to Bushmaster Firearms International and the production version of the Masada became known as the Bushmaster ACR.

So my question is for people in the military
is the Bushmaster ....a Magpul MASADA under the name Bushmaster

because that is what wikipedia talks about

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread