Then YTF do you want them banned?
Of course they will continue to happen. Someone with a couple of 5-shot snubby revolvers can kill 10-20 people in seconds. Hell, a guy with a stockpile of loaded muskets could kill a bunch of people in a short period of time. It’s not the type of guns that are causing these travesties.
"I have no issue with a ban on sales… "- that means I am neither for it or against it. I am neutral.
But, for reasons totally unknown, the weapons of choice in mass shootings are not a couple of 5-shot snubby revolvers or a stockpile of loaded muskets.
Truly, it is a mystery.
Interestingly enough, guns aren’t even the most efficient way of committing mass slaughter. If someone coldly and dispassionately wanted to make the largest possible number of people dead, fragmenting bombs are deadlier. This was realized as far back as the anarchist movements of the nineteenth century, as well as by twentieth century terrorists. ISTM that rampage gunmen are either acting out psychosis or trying to play out a video game/action movie fantasy.
Except they will be if that is all that is available. All you want to do is change the tool used, not confront the root cause.
So called “assault weapons” depending on which firearms you put into that classification, only account for 1-3% of all firearm related homicides. You’re tilting windmills.
Which are factors that need to be addressed. Banning anything isn’t going to cure mass shootings but many can’t get that through their heads.
The Virginia Tech shooter killed 32 people and wounded 17 more using a Glock 19 compact and a .22 caliber Walther hanguns with 15 and 10 round magazines. The current “assault weapons” ban in Congress doesn’t touch either one of those.
I do? 'Cause I can’t remember ever taking a position on the subject here and in meat space I don’t know exactly where I stand on the issue.
I would love to point out the hypocrisy of the anti high capacity magazine ban side where they are an absolute necessity for the ““good guys with guns”” and banning them would be crippling their ability to defend themselves because mag changes are so difficult but also banning them would have no effect on the ““bad guys with guns”” because mag changes are so easy.
Guys, it’s the video games and heavy metal music that’re at fault.
I thought it was the comic books.
Seriously though, it has to be remembered that public shooting rampages are still extraordinarily rare statistically. But it feels like it’s everywhere and constantly because we’re a nation of 330 million people linked by instant media on an unprecedented scale. If gun massacres weren’t so intrinsically horrifying they’d be a trivial cause of death, somewhere down around how many people choke to death on hot dogs each year. Cultural influences, if they’re to blame at all, would seem to be a pretty weak cause.
Well, you are incorrect. Many such “mass shootings” as defined commonly are done with handguns etc. You are likely thinking only of the mass shootings that are well publicized.
There Have Been Over 470 Mass Shootings in the US in 2022 So Far
Mass shootings are defined as events where at least four people are shot, either injured or killed, not including the shooter, according to the Gun Violence Archive.
Of those 470, many are just gang shoot-outs, done with handguns. How many of those can you remember? I can think of two, and yes both “Assault weapons”.
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/resources/gun-facts-and-fiction/mass-shootings/
Depending how the MS data is sliced, events associated with domestic violence and criminal activity make up 80 to 88 percent of mass shooting incidents in the U.S. with four or more fatally injured victims (Krouse, William J. and Daniel J. Richardson, Mass Murder with Firearms: Incidents and Victims, 1999–2013, Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service, R44126, 2015.).
https://www.statista.com/statistics/476409/mass-shootings-in-the-us-by-weapon-types-used/
Handguns are the most common weapon type used in mass shootings in the United States, with a total of 147 different handguns being used in 99 incidents between 1982 and July 2022. These figures are calculated from a total of 132 reported cases over this period, meaning handguns are involved in about 75 percent of mass shootings.
Note that they used a much less liberal definition of mass shootings, with a “mere” 132 “mass shootings” over 30 years, much less than the often claimed 300+ per year.
So, no - “the weapons of choice in mass shootings” are not “assault weapons” at all.
So, are you claiming that many mass shootings are done with 5-shot snubby revolvers or a stockpile of loaded muskets?
Unless that’s your claim, in which case, I’d really like a cite for that, your “Well, you are incorrect.” is in fact, you being wildly incorrect.
Please point out where that was the claim that was made.
For some reason, in these discussions, it’s always the pro-gun advocates who focus on mass shootings, seemingly as an intentional effort to ignore the ~90% other shootings that the objects they advocate for more of cause.
Nope, ‘Glock 19 compact and a .22 caliber Walther handguns with 15 and 10 round magazines.’ One might start to think the number of pew pews between reloads actually matters to mass shooters.
I’d bet there aren’t any cap and ball pistol mass shootings in the last hundred years . . . and if someone does find one it in no way refutes the actual point.
Good thing I didn’t say “assault weapons” . . . at all.
Please do not try tell me you are trying “those are not my exact words, just what I was plainly implying”. .
Those are not even close to my exact words, just what you are plainly inferring.
Did you or did you not mean to imply that?
Because if that is not what you meant to imply, that “the weapons of choice in mass shootings” were assault weapons, then your post makes no sense.
Or did you just decide to stand on your exact words, and not at all what was implied when I posted solid cites?
Debate fairly.
I very clearly meant to clearly state,
But, for reasons totally unknown, the weapons of choice in mass shootings are not a couple of 5-shot snubby revolvers or a stockpile of loaded muskets.
Let me repeat the important part that seems to be escaping you, the weapons of choice in mass shootings are not a couple of 5-shot snubby revolvers or a stockpile of loaded muskets.
Which was very helpfully corroborated,
That is what you stated, however I inferred otherwise and I think that you meant to imply assault weapons. Indeed commonly on these boards people imply other than their exact words, but you do not. I think you are not debating fairly. Faced with irrefutable cites.
I am done with you.