Crime and criminal activity and mass murder and DOMESTIC terrorism also cost society in America lots of MONEY.

Australia and other counties NOT led around by the nose by the NRA solved that very problem by making certain classes of firearms illegal. If DOMESTIC terrorism continues to increase as it has in the last 2 years the American people's need for less bloodshed will override the greed of the NRA.

There are several sources one can look at.
The federal government states 77.2% Public Mass Shootings: Database Amasses Details of a Half Century of U.S. Mass Shootings with Firearms, Generating Psychosocial Histories | National Institute of Justice


EveryTown is a gun control organization. They state 81% are with handguns.

https://hosting.photobucket.com/imag...720&fit=bounds

I do my best to be very realistic with my calculations and choose the lower number.

If that were true then no bad guys would be in prison and we would not need prisons.

Did we not have an earlier post that correctly stated that the mentally ill are more likely to be abused than to do the abuse?

Really
 

Then why did you? So you can feel good about yourself

First, it would be unconstitutional to tax a Right. Secondly, read up on the Stamp Act of 1765 for a little background on how the people react to unfair taxation. It was pivotal in leading up to 1776.

Maybe we should do a $25,000 tax on electric cars because lithium mining is terrible. Maybe we should do a $25,000 tax on wind turbines because lots of birds die from those.
Maybe we should do a $25,000 tax on solar panels because they are wreaking havoc now in landfills.

The one that the young boy in Uvalde used was marketed especially to young males. And there is BIG money for all the AR-15 style and AK-47 weapons' and accessories' advertisements because the profit margin is SO MUCH greater than for plain-Jane wooden-stock hunting rifles.

It seems when there is no substantive debate the response is It's not a real debate, It's a strawman, It's red herring.

Identifying the solution begins with people having knowledge on the topic at hand. Too many people have extremely emotional reactions to events they barely understand. To exacerbate the issue, they don't even try.

The Vegas shooting and Highland Park shooting are not average mass shootings. The Vegas shooting resulted in 473 casualties and the Highland shooting resulted in 55 casualties. The average mass shooting results in 10 casualties. The average mass shooting does not occur from a rooftop or the 32nd floor. The average mass shooting happens in a confined space with most mass shootings occurring in the home.

That is why 77% of mass shootings are done with a handgun. It doesn't make sense to use a semi-automatic rifle in a home, church, or nightclub. I would like to know how much planning goes into a mass murderer's intention. In my humble opinion the Greenwood Mall shooting was poorly planned. An AR-15 doesn't make sense in a mall, beginning with the food court. Let's look at the logistics. Let's assume he carried the AR under a trench coat and 10 mags loaded with 30 rounds each. That would give him 300 rounds with a total weight of 11 pounds for ammo and the rifle at 6.5 pounds for a total of nearly 18 pounds. That doesn't seem difficult other than being tricky to hide the AR.

A Glock 19 weighs 1.5 pounds. 9 magazines holding 33 rounds of 9mm weighs 8.25 pounds. That would be a total of 9.75 pounds, or roughly half the weight of an AR setup and easier to hide it all in a back pack. I would think this is all considered in the planning stage.

Approximately 6,000 people are murdered every year with a firearm. According to FBI of those 6,000 murders, 340 are done with rifles of ALL types. From 2007-2017, 173 people were killed by an AR style rifle. That is an average of 17.3 per year during that decade. The fact of the matter is AR style rifles are rarely used in murders of any kind.

Estimates are there are about 20 million AR's in the country, yet it is rare to be used in murder. The solution you are proposing is to deny millions of Americans their Constitutional right to own an AR while have a negligible effect on murders. That solution is not logical to me and unacceptable to law abiding citizens such as myself.

I do not believe most Police complain of being Outgunned. What do you think the bad guys have that the Police don't have?

Capitalism is based on supply and demand. Gun manufacturers are a business like any other seeking a reasonable profit. Where are you getting the "greed" comment from?

How much?

How exactly is that marketing done?

What is the profit margin on an AR or AK?

What is the profit margin on wooden stocked rifles?

If you are going to make such claims please back them up with facts and citations.

Yesterday, Jennifer Fernandez, 22 drove her car eastbound in the westbound lanes of I-90 and hit a van head-on containing a woman and five children. Everyone died at the scene.

Earlier this month 53 immigrants died in a semi-truck trailer in San Antonio.

The problem is these high capacity vehicles are killing a lot of people.

In 2021, 42, 915 people died in the US in vehicle crashes. Nobody needs a high capacity vehicle. You never hear of a motorcycle hitting another motorcycle head-on. You never hear of a motorcycle be responsible for mass killings. We can solve these mass killing events if everyone had a single occupant vehicle such as a motorcycle. Anyone below the age of 25 however should have a bicycle.

Isn’t that exactly what you’re doing showing your bias off of someone’s photo

I get your point and get his too.
His point is the media labels a shooting a mass murder of 4 or more whether it’s crimes of passion, family members, people they know versus someone intent to kill anybody within their site.
The media does this to scare the public to push the gun law agenda.
On the other hand you right killing 4 or more friend or stranger what does it matter that the are call the same thing.
It’s how you look at it.
I happen to agree with the OP, because I do think the media has an agenda.

The rifle is by far the superior tool as compared to a pistol for a demented mass murderer that has a well-planned strategy for his killing spree. The key superiority of a RIFLE is the distance. A minimally trained killer could easily shoot into a crowd like at a July 4th parade from a DISTANCE of 50 to 200 yards away. I don't know the exact distance that the Las Vegas shooter was killing people at, but I would guess an average of 75 yards. An AR-15 RIFLE and the rifle cartridge that it fires are designed to hit a target at 100 to 200 yards with much more accuracy and terminal velocity than a PISTOL. The cartridge design for a RIFLE is bigger than a PISTOL cartridge - thus allowing MORE powder and therefore more VELOCITY at the muzzle and downrange. The very aerodynamic bullet design of most rifles allows the bullet to travel through 200 or more yards of air resistance with a flatter trajectory and less energy loss than a typical PISTOL bullet design.

A pistol in contrast is designed for hitting targets under 50 yards by a shooter with limited training. The sight radius between the front sight of a PISTOL is much shorter than that of a RIFLE - Thus making the pistol inherently less accurate than a rifle. The pistol cartridge normally has less powder than a rifle cartridge. So, the muzzle velocity is less for the pistol. The pistol bullet is normally shorter, blunter, and less aerodynamically configured than a rifle bullet. This gives a PISTOL bullet a less flat trajectory and less velocity and energy at 100 yards than a RIFLE bullet

Overall a pistol is a short-range firearm compared to a rifle. That is why military snipers, obviously, use rifles and NOT pistols.

As to the last sentence..........US people may change their minds as to how MUCH gun regulation they will accept - IF these mass-murder events continue to increase. The past can be a good predictor or the future. And the PAST 2 years have had LARGE increases in mass murders. So, likely, the near future will be a DISASTER with respect to DOMESTIC terrorism. People will get "up in arms" about the situation (no pun intended).

I keep repeating that Australia and other countries have SOLVED their domestic terrorism PROBLEM. Why can't the US ? I would tend to believe it is because of NRA propaganda emanating from the high profits made by the gun manufacturers. Australia and New Zealand never let the NRA (or similar organization) get their propaganda-dripping hooks into their society.

Well, they have the element of surprise. That is the big thing. The Police are only reacting. The bad guys are initiating the TERROR. The Police in Uvalde were TERRORIZED. They were running backward in that hallway as if the devil incarnate was chasing them. They were AFRAID, Also, the terrorist COULD have silencers, bump-stops, and even 50 cal 2,000-yard sniper rifles, which are all LEGAL to possess. Police do NOT use those!

Gun deaths in Australia were already on the down trend before gun control. In America, most of our gun related deaths are due to inner city gang shootings.

A more up to date chart.

Attachment 94599

I explained that in an earlier post. Here goes again...........Prior to about 1970 all gun magazines were DEVOTED to big and small game hunting , trophy hunting, and sporting bird hunting, and guns and equipment. In the farming areas of ALL states there was a thing called the soil bank, where farmers were paid to NOT farm and plow their marginal areas. These were designed to prevent the good topsoil from blowing away, which had historically been a part (or maybe the main reason) for the Great Depression. These areas of a farm set aside for the Soil Bank provided GREAT cover for deer and game birds. During the 60s it was not unusual to see as many as 30 pheasants crossing a country road in Kansas or Nebraska. The daily limit for pheasant was 4 and many people had large freezers filled up with game birds.
.....Those were the days of the SMALL farms. Today the Soil Bank is gone (I think that the oil companies still get a gov. payment). And so are the small farmers, replaced by FACTORY farms, which plow right up to the property line of a road and overkill the land with phosphate fertilizer. So, there are less game birds and deer due to less cover. So, hunting license sales dropped and gun magazine sales dropped and also gun sales.

The gun manufacturers had lower total profits and some were in danger of bankruptcy. Some bright fellow in the gun makers marketing department said, "Let's turn all the hunters into solder-of-fortune wanna be's, so that we can sell them military look alike weapons". Basically, the gun marketing departments CREATED - through propaganda, video games, and paintball copetetions - a WHOLE NEW class of young GUN OWNERS. And the gun makers got themselves an extra profit benefit because they could charge more for the fully accessorized G.I JOE paraphernalia-laden military style firearm.

I would be glad to do that and also answer the prior post about what EXACTLY Mass murder costs US society - IF I worked for Forbes Magazine or the NY Times and I got paid at their rate AND had a staff to track down some statistics. But, since I am NOT employed as a professional writer. AND this is only a local forum, then I can only make statement of OPINION to the best of my meager ability.

Satire, Sheldon ?

In other words you just make stuff up. At least you admit it. But don’t expect anyone to take you seriously.

It was a ban against rifles that looked scary.

You do realize there are other weapons, other than Armorlite 15's that shoot one bullet per trigger pull. You do, don't you?

And your solution to making sure people who should not have firearms do not, is to take them away from people who should have them? Very interesting.

I am trying my best to be honest and sincere.

Maybe you are not telling lies, but I doubt it.

That VERY chart confirms what I have been saying. The gun death rate in the US is about 3 times what Australia's is. And Australia's rate DROPPED SIGNIFICANTLY after they did their buybacks of semi-auto rifles and allowed bolt actions. That's the way I read that chart !

It is not fair to ask a certain "type" of person to back up statements with facts. It is triggering. Next you will be asking for truth, which as we learned if we saw "What is a Woman", is a deeply transphobic, racist word; truth. While we are at it, why do you care so much about facts. That shows entitlement. Some (see the first sentence,) find facts to be terribly inconvenient to their point of view.

Honestly Jim, so far most of what I'm reading seems to be fantasy and conjecture based on no facts. Have you read the statistics and citations previously provided?

Let me recap and please correct me where I'm not correct.

We should ban all semi-automatic weapons. Why?
Because they hold large capacity magazines and shoot too fast. Why?
The NRA and greedy manufactures have caused young men fantasize and buy AR style rifles to commit mass murder. What proof do you have of that?
None.

Most mass murders are committed with a semi-automatic rifle. That's not true, most mass murders are committed with a pistol.
Most mass murderers really want to commit mass murders with semi-automatic AR styled rifles. What proof do you have of that?
None

We could stop mass murders if no more rifles were sold. There are already 6-20 million AR style rifles in circulation in America. How would banning new sales affect mass murders? I don't know..

But I know a lot of lives would be saved. How many lives would be saved if we ban sales of AR style rifles? I don't know. Lots

Mass murders cost society millions. Exactly how much? I don't know.

How does violating the rights of millions of law abiding citizens end mass murders and punish evil people? It wouldn't be a violation if the majority of people think we should ban all new sales of semi-automatic rifles. So, you would advocate for mob rule over Constitutional Rights? I don't know.

It's going to get a lot worse. What proof do you have of that? None.

****

Facts:
1. Gun rights people, gun control people, and the government all agree that mass murders are rarely committed with rifles of any kind and extremely rare with an AR style rifle.

2. Pistols are used in the majority of mass murders.

3. The majority of mass murders happen in the home, not public places and even more rare in schools.

4. Below is ten years of child homicide data. It is clear where children are dying.

2011, no mass shootings at schools
2012, 27 children killed is school mass shootings(including a univesity)
2013, no mass shootings at schools
2014, 5 children killed is school mass shootings
2015, 1,660 children died from domestic violence., 8 students from mass shooting at school
2016, 1730 children died from domestic violence, no mass shootings at schools
2017, 1710 children died from domestic violence, no mass shootings at schools
2018, 1780 children died from domestic violence, 22 students were killed
2019, 1840 children died from domestic violence, no mass shootings at schools
2020, 1,708 children died from domestic violence. no mass shootings at schools
2021, 4 students killed in mass shootings.
2022, 19 students killed in mass shootings.

We know who is being killed and we know who is doing the killing. Yet, the only focus is on the rarest of events with the rarest utilization of a particular firearm. Why is that?

Should mob rule override minority rights?

No, they should be taken away from people who shouldn't have them, but have them anyway. AND they should not be sold legally to anyone who shouldn't have them, going forward. The way to determine who should/shouldn't have them can BEGIN with a universal background check and testing to ensure that the gun buyer is qualified to have it. Mandatory safety and use courses at a certified shooting range.

I'm not in favor of a gun ban. Very interesting that you have decided that I am though.

You described what is already in place. I had to go through all that to get my license to carry and legally purchase my firearms. In addition, I have to renew my license every five years and go through the certification process all over again each time. The problem typically isn’t people who follow the law, it’s the others.

Given you’re past post I’d say you are bias. Nothing going change any bodies mind when already made up.

Winchester level action 44-40 made around 1875.

This isn't a national thing. Each state has its own rules and regulations regarding firearms. What you had to do, no one has to do in many other states. There are states that don't require licensing at all, and states that don't require any certification at all. There is no consistency from one state to the next. It's one of the top reasons (not the only top reason - just one of them) why Chicago is always such a mess. Yes they have strict gun laws. But those laws don't mean a damned thing when the states right next to the city's borders, Indiana and Wisconsin, don't have strict gun laws. It's a half hour over the border, buy a gun -legally- there, drive back to the neighborhood and pop a cap in your enemy's head. Easy peasy, and cheaper than buying black market goods in town.


There exists no universal background check nationwide. That is what millions of Americans are fighting to get. We don't want to take guns away from law-abiding citizens. We just want some nationwide measure of accountability, to minimize the number of people who "shouldn't" have guns, having them anyway.

I am glad I live in the United States and not Australia. I am also happy to be a Lifetime Member of the NRA. You will never find a better group of people than NRA members. You will also find great men and women at the various Villages shooting clubs.