I’d almost think you guys were joking, but then I realize a lot of you have zero exposure to firearms. Of course a .22 can stop crimes, and so can brandishing an empty gun or realistic toy, and these are all cool when they happen. But none of those are ideal defensive weapons.
(emphasis mine)
Fuckin’ A! Sounds like a wonderful idea. “If you can’t hit a fucking barn door, use a high-cap semi-auto and just spray the damn neighborhood”.
:smack: Count me as one of those who’d run like hell if old Granny (ETA: or anyone else, for that matter) started waving a 33-round Glock 18 around :eek:
Quite, but the pocket Cobalt Thorium G bombs are still in production, so we’ll have to make do, God wot?
We drew the conclusion that you’re ignorant, yes.
If your point is that small pistols are not ideal defensive weapons, perhaps you should stop posting links to stories of people defending themselves with small pistols. Just a suggestion.
In other stupid gun news, old guy snaps and shoots asshole neighbors. Clearly the answer is to ban large-capacity dogs.
You could shoot a guy six times with a .22, and he could beat you to death with a bar stool while he bled to death. 
So, the only thing that stops a bad guy with a bar stool is a good guy with a bar stool…
Slate and @GunDeaths have been trying to document all the gun deaths since Newtown since it appears that that information is not really kept by any group or entity.
Yesterday, the number was 1,619.
Yes, but the bar stool ban…
Well you could just let Granny get murdered. You could up her hit percentage considerably if you gave her a long gun, like a shotgun or AR15. They are a lot easier to aim than a pistol. Glock 18s are hard to control and already illegal.
I’m just posting links with people defending themselves with firearms, whether they be ideal firearms for the purpose is a different matter. Less than ideal firearms are a lot better than no firearms when someone is coming after you. You knew that didn’t you?
How many of those were killed with “assault weapons?” How does that number compare to the number of gun related deaths we had when the “assault weapon” ban was in effect?
A claymore would add some emphasis to “Get off my lawn!”
Why, would that make those deaths any less stupid?
I think this was my first example, where a lady used a shotgun to kill the rapist that was coming after her for the 2nd time. It’s just easier to hit with a long gun.
I’m sure some are stupid, but if few or none were committed with an “assault weapon” it will make the new proposed “assault weapon” ban just as stupid as the old one.
I dunno, but it appears that the mass shootings have increased sine the assault weapon ban ended. Could you research that real quick?
If you can’t answer maybe give your best guess? Out of 1619 how many of those deaths were due to “assault weapons?”
Sure there were 20 children mowed down just before Christmas but it doesn’t look like anybody’s been killed by an assault weapon in a whole month and a half since then. Another victory for the NRA.
At least 26, most of those were 6-year-olds.
Oh, sorry. “6-year-olds.” Forgot the scare quotes.
You have asserted that the previous assault weapons ban was completely ineffective because it was easily circumvented. So what will a comparison of rates then and now tell us?