[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Sarah_W

50% of all firearms produced are semi-automatic. Bolt action, lever action, pump action, breach action

The first semi-automatic rifle was produced in 1885, first semi-automatic pistol was produced in 1892 and the first semi-automatic shotgun was produced in 1902. They've been around for over 125 years. All of a sudden anti-gun people who refuse to be educated on the subject make wild claims rooted in their imagination.

I'd be happy to meet you at the range and give you a free lesson.

In all 2 person interactions, there is an oscillation of time periods when one is the teacher and the other is the student.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Reiver

While it is true that Australians were forced to sell their now-illegal firearms back to the state in the aftermath of the Port Arthur massacre, the country does permit restricted private firearm sales. Evidence suggests that the number of firearms reported in Australia has in fact increased since 1996.

OK but so too has the population.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Sarah_W

50% of all firearms produced are semi-automatic. Bolt action, lever action, pump action, breach action

The first semi-automatic rifle was produced in 1885, first semi-automatic pistol was produced in 1892 and the first semi-automatic shotgun was produced in 1902. They've been around for over 125 years. All of a sudden anti-gun people who refuse to be educated on the subject make wild claims rooted in their imagination.

I'd be happy to meet you at the range and give you a free lesson.

I appreciate the invitation. Unfortunately, I am not of great physical health at the time being. If that improves, I would take you up on that offer and we could also do something really interesting like shoot at quail in the air with bows and special arrows. That beats punching holes in paper......in my opinion.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Sarah_W

Mass shootings are increasing because young men are seeking notoriety. It has nothing to do with the choice of firearm. The point is, it takes a mentally ill person to kill innocent people they don't know. A normal person does not do that, regardless how many firearms they own. We can stop mass shootings right now by banning gun ownership by males. Women don't do that.

According to the FBI the average home invasion is 3-5 armed individuals. If you are in a gun fight with bad people what type of weapon is a personal choice. For me, I prefer a semi-automatic pistol. One thing for certain. Nobody who has ever won a gun fight complained of having too much ammunition.

You can be certain of this. Criminals don't care how many laws you make nor how many guns you ban, they will still shoot you.

Armed law abiding citizens use their firearm 2.5 million times each year. It is estimated that between 50-75% of those interactions saved lives.

I would prefer a short-barreled shotgun for home defense. I don't have access to FBI statistics on home invasions, but I would think that it would usually be ONLY 1 or 2 home burglars. Maybe if they were burglarizing Mark Zuckerberg's house or some other 1 % er, then they might take a GANG of 5 co-crooks with them. Most crooks probably don't have 5 friends that they trust. Maybe some gang bangers could team up to do one house, but color me skeptical.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Sarah_W

The military chose the 5.56/.223 round to allow troops to carry more rounds into combat. The higher muzzle velocity of 3,250 feet per second created enough terminal force while maintaining lighter recoil for quicker follow up shots.

I would prefer a short-barreled shotgun for home defense. I don't have access to FBI statistics on home invasions, but I would think that it would usually be ONLY 1 or 2 home burglars. Maybe if they were burglarizing Mark Zuckerberg's house or some other 1 % er, then they might take a GANG of 5 co-crooks with them. Most crooks probably don't have 5 friends that they trust. Maybe some gang bangers could team up to do one house, but color me skeptical.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Sarah_W

The military chose the 5.56/.223 round to allow troops to carry more rounds into combat. The higher muzzle velocity of 3,250 feet per second created enough terminal force while maintaining lighter recoil for quicker follow up shots.

Agreed. That is pretty much what I said.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Sarah_W

That is a non-effective plan and would fail from the beginning.

A better plan is to secure our schools in a manner similar to a school in Indiana. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcpsnrxHdCc

This type of retrofit could happen nationwide over the course of summer break. Additionally, states should implement a program like Florida did. The guardian program can be found here: Coach Aaron Feis Guardian Program

How about volunteering to protect a school in your area?

Another option would be to arm every adult in the school with a non-lethal option such as the Byrna pepper gun. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5db0qRMJSfs

Incidentally, over 200 police departments are looking at the Byrna to replace tazers as their non-lethal option.

I stated that my plan was ONLY ideal and would not fly in the US. I agree with hardening schools. And I wonder if giving the teachers rubber bullet guns would be helpful? That is only a suggestion. Or even flare pistols which would be somewhat effective and VERY inexpensive. And more teachers would be inclined to carry non-lethal weapons.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Wyseguy

Originally Posted by jimjamuser View Post
Lighter recoil is an equally important reason for the military going to the 22 caliber cartridge. Teaching recruits to handle higher recoil cartridges would be more difficult and time-consuming.

I believe you are mistaken, but I am willing to research it. Are you sure you meant to say the military went to a 22 caliber cartridge?

The size of the inside of the barrel for the .223 caliber AR-15 military-style weapon is the same as the 22 caliber RIMFIRE cartridge that is generally used for "plinking" and shooting small pests. The .223 cartridge has room for much more powder and therefore more velocity. The bullet length and construction are different between the two as is the barrel twist and other factors.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Wyseguy

Interesting fact. More people are killed each year with hammers and with fists that all rifles combined. What do we do about that?


OK, anyone caught using their arms and fists to kill someone has their arms cut off and incinerated, then make them wear a t-shirt that says arms are meant for hugging.

More people may be killed in TOTAL every year with hammers. But, it is harder to kill 4 or more people at one time with a hammer than with a semi-auto rifle. People can be killed with cars or rocks or even electrocuted on purpose. Hammers and rocks can not be restricted by law, but semi-auto rifles that are preferred by mass murderers COULD BE restricted by law. A simple logical law would be that you must be age 21 or older to purchase a semi-auto rifle.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Normal

When we went to Barstow/Ft. Irwin to practice, some rifles had 22 adapters to save on ammunition costs. It wasn’t a caliber used for wartime. Basic training installations and academy programs almost always used 22s for practice.

Yes there are adapters that allow you to shoot a 22 rimfire in a AR-15 style rifle. It is possible to shoot a 30 cal M-1 carbine cartridge in a 30-06 rifle........or even smaller pistol cartridges.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Wyseguy

I'm sorry to question you but I just do not see that as being true. Of course if you gave my Mother in Law an AR15, and I had a pump action shotgun there is a CHANCE I could fire more quickly. In the hands of shooters with similar skills I do not see a pump action ever being as fast (and definitely not as accurate) as a semi auto.

You have a right to question that. It was a pretty startling opinion that I have about that. Your left hand on the pump can apply more force and speed than the blowback of the gasses used in many semi-autos like the AK-47. The gases have a long path to travel. Some semi-autos are recoil operated so they would be faster than the gas blowback system. A luger is a recoil reload system using a toggle bolt system. Ever notice how slow the toggle moves? A pump shotgun could certainly reload faster than that system.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Normal

We are certainly fortunate that many mass shooters don’t use shotguns. They are much more devastating in certain situations. Imagine if a pump with extenders was used in Uvalde. There would have been a lot more victims than we had for sure.

I agree and have also stated that a short barrel shotgun would be the best home defense system. Also, the shot would be less likely to penetrate walls and injure someone unintentionally.

[Sarah_W]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Australia did NOT disarm its citizens. And I would NOT recommend that for America.

Australia DID melt down its semi-auto rifles which were causing its mass murders to increase. After Australia did that, mass murders went to zero.

That is what I am saying and it is a historic lesson that America should be aware of (most aren't) and seek to emulate. The US has an INCREASING mass murder PROBLEM and the Australian example is a SOLUTION.

This mass murder PROBLEM likely will increase more and could come to TV Land, which has some soft targets like big churches and the squares. At least I have proposed a SOLUTION to this problem. It may not be a perfect solution because it would change the status quo and the hooks in America by the gun lobby. I am not for gun confiscation in America or for taking away the means to prevent government tyranny. I am for sporting rifles that could be used in the RARE case of an American government going crazy ballistic against its citizens. These AR-15-type weapons and Russian Ak-47-type rifles are just OVERKILL for US civilian use and are the weapons of choice for mass murderers. I am saying that there should be a BALANCE between what the NRA wants to see a US citizen and the wanton, INCREASING mass murders of children and adults that we ARE experiencing and that we WILL be experiencing. BALANCE is everything!
As far as Australia and COVID go.......I don't live in Australia, so I am not expert enough on the Australian medical system and the severity of its Covid outbreak to say whether they did the wrong thing or the right thing in THEIR case. I just applaud their SOLUTION to their mass murder problem and I WISH that America could follow their example!

Yes, Australia did in fact disarm their citizens by taking away their arms by decree and force of law. Disarming its citizens to a certain point is disarming nonetheless.

Australias gun law (NFA) went into affect in 1996 after the Port Arthur massacre. The US and Australia both define a mass shooting as 5 or more dead or injured. Since 1997, Australia has 17 mass killing events. Your claim of zero is false.

What you wish for is not a solution at all. Removing all semi-automatic rifles will not stop mass killings. Your proposal is to punish law abiding citizens while ignoring those with evil in their heart. Your proposal does not affect the bad guy but adversely affects the good guy. One man with a semi-automatic pistol stopped a mass shooter at the mall in Indiana. When the average response time for law enforcement is 10 minutes, can we estimate how many people would have died that day waiting for the Police? Jonathan Sapirman exited the mens bathroom and began shooting people in the food court. It took 15 seconds for a good citizen with a handgun to stop that threat. Sapirman killed 3 people and injured 2 while firing 24 rounds. When he was killed he had over 100 rounds on him. If Elisha Dicken had not killed Sapirman so quickly we can deduce that with the first magazine there were 5 casualties. He still had four more magazines. There would have likely been 20 more casualties and at the same rate in stead of 3 dead and 2 injured, the total would have been 15 dead and 10 injured. We can safely credit Dicken with saving 12 lives or more.

At this point I have to assume you did not go to any of the links I previously provided including the two videos. The two solutions I have proposed would virtually eliminate school mass shootings.

I agree with you that mass shootings will likely increase. That is because our Federal, State and Local governments have created the conditions. Along with the media, they have created the motive. Notoriety. This is a real world video game and these young men are vying for the high score. To stop mass shootings/killings we have to remove the motive. Their name should not be known. We have to stop glorifying these killings by adding another name to the list of famous killers. The lockdowns forced kids to stay home for nearly two years. What did they do for boredom and inability to be with their peers and to touch their peers?

Perhaps we need copy cat good samaritans? Millions of law abiding responsible gun owning Americans armed and trained to stop the bad guy in 15 seconds.

[Sarah_W]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

In all 2 person interactions, there is an oscillation of time periods when one is the teacher and the other is the student.

That sounds reasonable. Let's go to the range so you can teach me something.

[Sarah_W]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

More people may be killed in TOTAL every year with hammers. But, it is harder to kill 4 or more people at one time with a hammer than with a semi-auto rifle. People can be killed with cars or rocks or even electrocuted on purpose. Hammers and rocks can not be restricted by law, but semi-auto rifles that are preferred by mass murderers COULD BE restricted by law. A simple logical law would be that you must be age 21 or older to purchase a semi-auto rifle.

Not true, Jim. The weapon of choice for mass murderers is a handgun, not a rifle. That is very easily verified with a little Google search.

Ramos had 77 minutes alone with two classrooms of children. He could have killed just as many by strangling them with his bare hands.

Remove motive and opportunity and so many lives would be spared.