I really don't lilke the word "assault" rifle, that is a loaded word used to create the illusion that a certain gun is more deadly than another, which I will explain is not true in a bit.
If you see someone charging with a baseball bat or a knife at you, you still have a chance to run and survive. Not so when he has an assault rifle or semi-automatic pistol with big magazine.
Sure, a gun has range, so does a bow and arrow, that doesn't correlate to how deadly the weapon or projectile is, nor does the rate of fire.
I'm not and expert but I believe a certain type bullet does lot more inner damage than a knife for example.
This is where you would be wrong, a knife wound actually does more damage in the regard that more internal bleeding takes place and the time it takes to heal is much longer. It is actually very difficult to close up a knife wound. You get stabbed once in the chest and it is life threatening. You get shot with a gun, the round is X-rayed, they find if it needs to be removed, if not, they stitch up the bullet hole and possibly inside if you tore any major organs and leave you to heal. Also bullets that go all the way through you do less tissue damage than the ones that stop inside. Fun fact, the .223 round, the round used in M16s has a flaw where it doesn't disintegrate into the target and most times travels through, not doing as much damage as intended.
Even a shotgun and a normal rifle are a lot less effective because of the limited capacity, which are used for hunting/shooting most of the time btw.
This is how I know that you have no clue what you are talking about, but I will fill everyone in here. There is no difference from a "normal rifle" and an "assault rifle". Most hunting rifles have magazines, which large capacity magazines are readily available. Unless that hunting rifle is a bolt action, it is a semi automatic, which to translate means, a standard hunting rifle has the SAME shooting capability and rate as a "military assault rifle" as a lot of you claim them as. Simply put they are semi automatic rifles, that operate no differently than any other semi automatic rifle, including ones used for hunting. The only reason "assault riffles" are under siege is because they look scary and are used by the military, which are not by any means an indicator of deadliness at all.
Yes, really. A semi-automatic pistol or assault rifle gives them more gourage, a feel of superiority and it will boost their ego. Their whole assault is most likely based on the fact that they have several high caliber rapid fire guns at their possession and it's the final straw that draws them to do it.
Well the most common "assault rifles" used are low caliber so...high caliber rifles tend to be only bolt action except for a few semi automatic .50 caliber rifles but they weigh almost 30 lbs and have so much recoil that the average person has to have the gun on the ground with the bipod to even shoot it. And no semi automatic rifles don't have a high rate of fire, sure they can fire quick, but if you knew how hard you have to squeeze the trigger and keep in mind you have to engage it and fully let it go before you can shoot another round. And most gun noobs that perform mass shootings aren't very quick with their trigger finger, meaning, while they don't have to recharge the gun every time, they aren't just fucking spraying machine gun Rambo style.
I'm sure people felt the same way about slavery back then like you feel about having guns now. No slavery=only in a fairy land, they thought. Maybe we just need to wait the old redneck rampage generation to die away so we can start making changes. We finally got rid of the lead gasoline after a long time, why not guns too.
Human rights and slavery isn't even remotely the same as the right to defend yourself, jesus fuck me christ.
I'd really like to see Mutant or anyone else answer Glenn's (Dawkins') question. EVIDENCE.
Evidence? The only true evidence that has come from gun studies is that houses with guns are 3 times more likely to have a homicide and 5 times more likely to have gun related suicides. The same studies brought forth that people in the age range of 13-29 are 35 times more likely to be in a gun related violent crime than in any other country. While that points the the fact that these crimes can be related to the availability of guns, what isn't clear is how the dynamic of being around guns affected this age range, I would though put money on the fact that the ones more likely to do something of such violence had no formal training on how to use and respect guns. But still the findings for the most part have been inconclusive.
The only other thing worth noting is that the Brady Law, which required background checks did nothing to lower crime rates, it did however drop suicides by senior citizens by 6%. Also in Florida where they have the right to carry law, there was not an increase of gun related violence but it also did not drop the overall crime rate like it was expected to.
Other than that, there haven't been any conclusive data proving anything. Nothing that more guns and less restrictions brings crime down.
For the most part all findings and statistics have been inconclusive if not sort of point to the idea that gun laws and the availability of guns really does not effect gun related crime or any crime for that matter. So evidence, other than America having about double the murder rate than the EU countries, bascially doesn't exist. The only evidence that I have is that ever law abiding citizen has the right to defend themselves and their families.
Ahahahaha it get's better every minute. I present you, the NRAs great plan for more security:
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/12/21/us/connecticut-school-shooting/index.html
I can't even begin to express how incredibly fucking stupid those fucktards are who call themselves "NRA". Use your fucking brain for a second.
At the same time,
some idiot kills three people and injures three armed, trained troopers who try to stop him. Now think of highly intelligent NRA plans and tell me how exactly will some retard with a weapon (who else would try to get such a job), or a 80-years old ex-cop / veteran be able to stop someone on a rampage when three troopers hardly can? FUCK. So much retards in one fucking place. All the studies, all the statistics, all the fucking real world proof object the "more guns = more safety" argument, but I guess you can't except some people to use their fucking brain.
I give up, they're beyond fucking rescue. Hand out free assault rifles for everyone, at least that will safe the rest of the planet the pain to watch how fucking stupid this is, and the overpopulation problem might just be gone.. at least for one continent.
You have your head so far up your ass its not even remotely funny. I will provide a little interesting story however. When I was in school, the school district had one armed police officer at every school, high school, middle school, elementary school, during the first hour where everyone shows up and the last hour where ever yon leaves, they would have multiple officers, sometimes upwards to five or six. Yes they were armed with loaded handguns, pepper spray, night stick/baton and tazers with loaded shotguns waiting in the car and sometimes even k-9 units. Where those cops there to arrest and harass students? No, they were there to keep intruders off the property that hadn't been given clearance by the main office. For the most part, we the students never noticed the cops, they stood out in front at the gates and in the office, they didn't even go so far to stop students who were leaving campus to ditch class. No one though ever dared to intrude on campus though, and my 6 years at that district never saw or heard an intruder code. The criminals were smart, the sex offenders would go down the street trying to kidnap girls or expose themselves, the gun violence of gangs from other schools always just outside the school, everyone around was too smart about doing something stupid anywhere near any of those schools.
So yea armed police is actually a smart thing, oh and the school did have a no guns policy, but cops were allowed in with their guns, school administration and district administration had no issues with that and for good reason, nothing bad ever happened there.
I was also in a school that was in gang territory many many years back, and they had multiple school security on bikes, bright yellow shirts with security written on them and pepper spray. They were involved in all the riots that took place which I witnessed more than once. When you have students that are willing to throw punches and even knives at teachers and security, they need to make sure they have something to fight back with. Pepper spray to someone coming at you with a knife will stop them real quick. Right after I left that Jr. High, a kid was stabbed with a pencil in a fight. Around their the thugs liked using whatever sharp objects they could stab people with over guns, hell I had even been threatened to be stabbed with a scalpel. Without metal detectors at schools you have no clue which kid is going to pull out which weapon, or what intruder is going to come in to sexually assault or murder just for the fuck of it.
