quiotu: I still haven't seen a very valid argument about why a ban on assault weapons would be so bad. Not all guns, just stuff like the AR-15 this guy was using.

Defintionally, that's hard.

That gun is like so many other magazine fed, semi-automatic hunting rifles firing .223 Remington civilian round.

What exactly made that particular model gun more deadly? Nothing. How do write legislation that works?

Oh, it LOOKS like a military weapon?

From the wiki article-

Assault Rifle-
-It must be an individual weapon with provision to fire from the shoulder (i.e. a buttstock);
-It must be capable of selective fire; (fire modes including single shot, or multiple or full auto fire)
-It must have an intermediate-power cartridge: more power than a pistol but less than a standard rifle or battle rifle;
-Its ammunition must be supplied from a detachable magazine rather than a feed-belt.
-And it should at least have a firing range of 300 meters (1000 feet)

Assault Weapon- It defined the rifle type of assault weapon as a semiautomatic firearm with the ability to accept a detachable magazine containing more than 10 rounds, and two or more of the following:

-Folding or telescoping stock
-Primary pistol grip
-Forward grip
-Threaded barrel (for a muzzle brake or a suppressor, commonly called a silencer)
-Barrel shroud

These are AESTHETIC things that don't make a weapon more deadly, they just make it look 'scarier'.

Did you know rifles used in the Winter Olympics qualify as assault weapons?


I am not saying no regulation, rather I am asking that we sponsor legislation that makes rational sense and isn't motivated by fear.

One last point about the specific weapon, the M&P15 and other AR-15 style weapons. The M&P15 is designed as a tactical weapon. That means its intended to be used against people. Let's not be blind to that point. But I know many property owners in the wake of Katrina were very happy to have tactical rifles in their possession to defend their property.

As stable as out society is, there are place and points in time where the police can't help you, and if you are facing large numbers of hostiles, this weapon is for that.

Muta: When is the gun community going to do something to prevent people like Holmes from killing innocent people?

Just as soon as we get a clear shot.

ourbigdumbmouth: Isn't it a little disrespectful to the legal process and to the victims to call this guy Sideshow Bob?

No. Everyone is dehumanizing an individual who shouldn't be considered human.

Frank N Stein: With the limited firearms knowledge displayed by the gun grabbers that want to legislate restrictive laws on the issue, I'm reminded of the "series of tubes" Internet comment.

Dimensio: Is such a distinction necessary? Obviously, the objectionable element is the firearm; had mass homicides been committed with other implements, they would have been acceptable.

You don't think motive matters?

I do.

Legalize and decriminalize and you remove the motive for gang shootings.

If you address the motive- poverty, desperation, drugs- you reduce crime. Most crime is an economic activity.

Mass shootings like Aurora are not.

The problem is, I don't think you can ever stop an intelligent, committed crazy person from doing harm.

We haven't stopped serial killers, arsonist, pedophiles or rapist, but they don't need a particular product to commit their insanity. Take away one tool, they will use another.

griffer: And as long as this is a ballistics primer, you should know that fully automatic fire, even from a shoulder fired rifle, is not accurate.

To the point where some modern automatic rifles have a 3-round burst setting.

sirgrim: vegasj: actually CNN...

[a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net image 850x544]

You don't know the difference between thousand and thousands do you?



/better?

first, this is how you do the joker:



And for the rest of you that responded to my post. Did you not notice I put "if he thought about harming himself then It's going to hurt his Joker defense??". Because every last one of you said "he didn't use the bombs because he would get hurt.

As for those that told me about the stereo, thanks

pacified: Is there any problem that can't be solved with a gun?

The Riemann Hypothesis?

ourbigdumbmouth: Isn't it a little disrespectful to the legal process and to the victims to call this guy Sideshow Bob?

I do know it's farking retarded.