True.
Seeing as it occurred in 1927, entirely understandable. We may rest with confidence that no AR-15s were involved.
Another example, because the AR-15 has a similar style to a 416, M4 or M16 used by the military, doesn’t make it exactly like a military grade weapon. It’s comparing a Military HMMV to a Civilian H2 Hummer.
“Oh noez, big scary looking gunz” is what seems to go through a persons head when they see these. When I see them, I see a nicely styled rifle, but really pathetic in terms of power and versatility, etc.
M14, Now that is a beast of a rifle, but it looks less ‘scary’ and more like a hunting weapon. It can do so much more damage, is much more versatile, yet it never gets picked on. Since the AR-15 is rarely used in shootings, I believe the media cherry picked [it] to scapegoat (due to volume of sales) and everybody believed it. sigh
Yes, people are uninformed and it makes it difficult to argue with them in a meaningful way. If they only knew what to ask for they’d have their demands shut down at lot more efficiently. 
I realise I’m a bit late to this thread, and I confess to not having read all 16 pages, but…
I’m a teacher in a school in the UK. We don’t have [school] shootings very often, but we nonetheless have ‘school lockdown’ practice once a term whereby an alarm sounds and we all lock our rooms and make the children hide out-of-sight/reach from doors and windows. How much use would that be against a crack team of child-killing assassins? Perhaps not much, but better than nothing. And, perhaps crucially, it is something that all staff are happy to do and does not require extensive training or risk-of-other-people-getting-hurt-by-mistake.
I presume that American schools have similar - or more extensive - drills?
There really is no limit for you, is there?
Why are dangerous and unnecessary weapons held sacred. If I want to build and launch a large scale model of a V-2 rocket I must go through training and get a license before I can purchase and store the engine. To purchase, transport and store black powder for Civil War re-enactments requires similar processes. But a kid can buy a potentially destructive weapon.
We must either reduce the number of weapons in our society or establish clear lines of responsibility for their manufacture and use - that are at least as rigorous as those for toy rockets and historic actors.
Crane
Yes. At least a couple of times now the school shooter has pulled the fire alarm, for which the typical reaction is to evacuate, which leaves the lockdown procedure in a bit of a mess.
If by “kid” you mean someone who is not an adult, they’re generally not allowed to purchase firearms.
We ignore fire alarms that go off during a lockdown, but of course the lockdown is only called when there’s evidence of trouble, and that’s probably not going to be until after the fire alarm is pulled. And lockdown is also of only limited effectiveness when the incident starts in the lunchroom, or in the halls between classes, when you have a lot of students in large, open spaces.
I demand my rights to personally own an ICBM!
The 2nd amendment clearly states that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed! Anything less than personal nuclear weapons is Tyranny! TYRANNY I tell you!
My SUV is a potentially dangerous device, so:
- I must register it with the state
- The SUV is appropriate to my daily use.
- The SUV displays a license number that can be automatically tracked by the police.
- The SUV has WiFi so it’s position can be automatically determined
- I am required to be licensed to operate the SUV
- Due to my age, I must report to the DMV annually and demonstrate my ability to operate the vehicle.
Since these activities are covered by settled law, I assume they do not violate my ‘rights’.
The same processes can be applied to weapons that are applied to automobiles, toys and re-enactors.
The solution is definitely not more guns.
Crane
I can’t recall if it was this thread or another thread, but someone mentioned you don’t need to do any of that if you want to keep the SUV on your property.
If I drive my hypothetical SUV on my property, am I allowed to use it to run down people on my property I feel are a threat? When I drive my hypothetical SUV, will pieces of it fly off my property and endanger others? If my hypothetical SUV is stolen off my property, what are the chances it will be used to deliberately run someone over?
Hard to be sure, since liberal weenies don’t know the difference between an actual SUV and a Nissan or even a Prius! This kind of ignorance leads them to blame so-called “SUVs” for any negative person/vehicle incident. Fake news!
Yes*, if a reasonable person would believe they were a threat and you can manage it, a vehicle is a decent makeshift weapon.
There’s some risk there: you could crash and send pieces flying, brakes could go out, etc.
I don’t know. Again, it’s possible. I"m not sure what “the chances” have to do with it.
*not applicable in some blue states that take a less-than-favorable view of self defense.
elucidator,
I am a liberal weenie and my Land Rover is a SUV.
Crane
HurricaneDitka,
Yes some of the Land Rovers on a ranch south of here are not licensed. When they go to Abq for maintenance they are transported on a flat bed truck, and the folks at Land Rover do not test drive them before they are picked up. The owner is still responsible for their operation.
So, what’s your point?
BTW: If someone steals your car and drives it through a toll booth, you will be billed because the car is your responsibility. If the car is used in a crime are you complicit? I am proposing that you are.
Crane
Thank you for sharing.
no hay de que