[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by zx10guy

On the bolded part, there's a guy named Lucas Botkin who founded T.Rex Arms. I watch the guy in amazement when he shoots. He has no military experience but shoots a ton. Even some former special ops guys has commented on how good he is and has made some of his techniques his own. They've even said when you shoot a ton you'll eventually get good all things being equal.

There is truth behind that. Even amongst seasoned shooters/trainers, techniques vary.

[paquet]

It’s unfortunate what happened - people died or got injured, for no fault of their own.
That the parent(s) of the shooter abetted his crime makes it worse - they knew, and could’ve stopped said individual, but they didn’t.

More gun laws would not have stopped this.

The issue is of mental health - and yes, I realize everyone sees that as a sound bite to shirk responsibility.

The issues in society today that are leading to tragedies such as this one, are:
- the role of media - be they violence in movies, games, etc - desensitizing us as a whole
- the role of media in creating role models in film, tv, etc where the creation of dangerous role models and behavior is being rewarded rather than condemned
- “social” media is just the newest form of this enablement upon impressionable minds - both sex and violence
- parental role models (or the lack thereof) due to the breakdown of family structure
- parents refusing to accept responsibility for their wards, trying to be friends instead of authority figures with a responsibility to raise a child in a stable, healthy environment (instead of parking them in front of a tv or a computer tablet)
- parents refusing to accept responsibility that their child may indeed have a mental disorder that needs treatment rather than just acceptance / twisting the world to accept what is a new normal. That’s just an injustice to normalcy.

Which brings me to my next 2 points of:
- stricter punishment (across all aspects - home, law)
- mental / psych facilities,
Both being necessary.

These may seem like harsh words to some of you.

So in closing, I will leave you with these 2 bits of data:
This desensitization and covert encouragement to kill or otherwise commit acts of violence are a technique that was successfully used by the US armed forces to increase the shooting rate (the number of soldiers who will fire their weapon upon an enemy in combat) from 15-20% in the Second World War to 95% in Vietnam.

The American Psychological Association’s commission on violence and youth concluded in 1993 that “there is absolutely no doubt that higher levels of viewing violence on television are correlated with increased acceptance of aggressive attitudes and increased aggressive behavior.”

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by packet

It’s unfortunate what happened - people died or got injured, for no fault of their own.
That the parent(s) of the shooter abetted his crime makes it worse - they knew, and could’ve stopped said individual, but they didn’t.

More gun laws would not have stopped this.

The issue is of mental health - and yes, I realize everyone sees that as a sound bite to shirk responsibility.

The issues in society today that are leading to tragedies such as this one, are:
- the role of media - be they violence in movies, games, etc - desensitizing us as a whole
- the role of media in creating role models in film, tv, etc where the creation of dangerous role models and behavior is being rewarded rather than condemned
- “social” media is just the newest form of this enablement upon impressionable minds - both sex and violence
- parental role models (or the lack thereof) due to the breakdown of family structure
- parents refusing to accept responsibility for their wards, trying to be friends instead of authority figures with a responsibility to raise a child in a stable, healthy environment (instead of parking them in front of a tv or a computer tablet)
- parents refusing to accept responsibility that their child may indeed have a mental disorder that needs treatment rather than just acceptance / twisting the world to accept what is a new normal. That’s just an injustice to normalcy.

Which brings me to my next 2 points of:
- stricter punishment (across all aspects - home, law)
- mental / psych facilities,
Both being necessary.

These may seem like harsh words to some of you.

So in closing, I will leave you with these 2 bits of data:
This desensitization and covert encouragement to kill or otherwise commit acts of violence are a technique that was successfully used by the US armed forces to increase the shooting rate (the number of soldiers who will fire their weapon upon an enemy in combat) from 15-20% in the Second World War to 95% in Vietnam.

The American Psychological Association’s commission on violence and youth concluded in 1993 that “there is absolutely no doubt that higher levels of viewing violence on television are correlated with increased acceptance of aggressive attitudes and increased aggressive behavior.”

All valid points. That's the discussion we should really be having because those are the underlying issues.

[DETRoadster]

Until we actually start giving a shit about the mental well-being of our citizens, this sort of tragedy will continue to happen.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by DETRoadster

Until we actually start giving a shit about the mental well-being of our citizens, this sort of tragedy will continue to happen.

My state gave up on the mental health of the citizens here the moment they closed a bunch of the state hospitals and limited funding. It's a lengthy timeline of things that occurred that got us to this point. It's out of control now.

[zx10guy]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

My state gave up on the mental health of the citizens here the moment they closed a bunch of the state hospitals and limited funding. It's a lengthy timeline of things that occurred that got us to this point. It's out of control now.

It goes beyond that. The limited number of mental health practitioners. Practitioners that will even accept new patients. Then the cost/insurance aspect. If you're lucky enough to find a practitioner that will accept new patients and you have insurance, good luck getting the two to coincide.

The entire mental health system in this country is an utter mess.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by zx10guy

It goes beyond that. The limited number of mental health practitioners. Practitioners that will even accept new patients. Then the cost/insurance aspect. If you're lucky enough to find a practitioner that will accept new patients and you have insurance, good luck getting the two to coincide.

The entire mental health system in this country is an utter mess.

Agreed!

[Joe T]

Originally Posted by ryan stewart

Not all semi-automatic guns are the same and saying "a rifle is a rifle" is a straight-up lie. My Benelli holds seven and I have to push them in when its time to refill, same goes for most hunting rifles. .

but if you get 00 buck for your benelli. Those 7 rounds are 56 - 8.38mm projectiles in less than 5 seconds for an average shooter. Admittedly they don't have the distance, but from 15-30 yards ....

Originally Posted by ryan stewart

If youre needing 5, 30rd magazines for hunting youre a crap shot.

Please remember that when our founding fathers wrote the 2nd Amendment they didn't just come back from a hunting trip.

however, I've used 30 round mags of .223 for hunting plenty of times. Prairie dogs, ferral pigs, coyotes. Not all hunting is bambi at 50 yards from a tree stand

[540iSUP]

Originally Posted by ryan stewart

And if you're smart, even if you're armed, your first instinct should be flight. Most people don't know what a high-powered rifle is or what it does to the body. Despite being smaller bullets (.223/5.56) than, say, a pistol, youre looking at 3x the velocity. Kinetic energy is 1/2mv^2, so the amount of kinetic energy is an exponent and results in cavitation and, if that round hits a bone, its like a fragmentation grenade.

Pistols are scary and common but the lethality of a high-velocity rifle round is on another level.

Also, those bullets are called tumblers because they flip towards you, not spin like you would assume. This is what rips apart internal organs.

[540iSUP]

Originally Posted by CTinline-six

In my previous job I worked for a contracting company that managed the IT for several school districts. One of the schools we worked for, a high school, had a lawsuit from parents because a student (16 year old girl) held an ice pack too long on her leg and "burned" herself, claiming the nurse (one nurse for the whole school at that point) was not paying attention to her even though she gave instructions.


...the parents won.

That's malpractice on the Nurses end. Unfortunately the verdict was correct. It is ultimately on the Nurse to make sure her patient is safe.

[ryan stewart]

Originally Posted by Joe T

but if you get 00 buck for your benelli. Those 7 rounds are 56 - 8.38mm projectiles in less than 5 seconds for an average shooter. Admittedly they don't have the distance, but from 15-30 yards ....





Please remember that when our founding fathers wrote the 2nd Amendment they didn't just come back from a hunting trip.

however, I've used 30 round mags of .223 for hunting plenty of times. Prairie dogs, ferral pigs, coyotes. Not all hunting is bambi at 50 yards from a tree stand

a. So its the same but its not the same, gotcha. Its a dumb argument.

b. When they wrote that most were using smooth bore, muzzle loading guns (rifling was still an upgrade for most). And, again, can you even quote the WHOLE 2nd amendment? Because nobody ever wants to mention the first part, which is that guns were necessary because they didn't want a standing army and states were supposed to maintain militias, and now we have a standing army and there are no regulated state militias, so it seems the "everyone can have every gun ever made" is the only thing we took from that.

[ryan stewart]

Originally Posted by 540iSUP

Also, those bullets are called tumblers because they flip towards you, not spin like you would assume. This is what rips apart internal organs.

What the everloving hell are you talking about? 223 spins, all bullets out of a rifle spin. Do you supposed gun nuts even go within 10ft of guns?

[ryan stewart]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

There is no way to make it harder for criminals to obtain firearms. It's fallacious reasoning.....a pipe dream to sell to the masses who don't have any perspective. The only way to make such a claim even remotely possible is to rid this entire country of guns, and we know that will never happen.

So every other country has the same level of gun crime we do? Its just as rampant in Australia as here? Or Norway, where gun ownership is high?

Its probably just because our cops are worthless then, right? They dont enforce the ones on the books now...

[ryan stewart]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

If you can obtain a CCW where you live, I would advise you to do it. It is better to have a firearm and not need it than the converse. I don't even walk to the mailbox without a pistol with me. I deal with the craziness so much on a weekly basis that I would be doing myself a huge disservice by failing to prepare. I do not want to get caught with my pants down………so to speak.

Wow, no wonder you are emotional about the subject, to be soo terrified you cant walk to the mailbox without a gun. It scares me youre a cop, no wonder you guys shoot women in nightgowns for knocking on your windows.

Also, Ive literally called bullshit on many of your points you have failed to refute, literally the closest you got outside of an emotional argument is ONE GUY who is good at shooting without structured training (which I suspect he had structured training). In the aggregate its still moronic to compare your average fuckwit to a a soldier who has had military training in an organized setting on how to operate a gun safely. There is a reason its national fucking news with some soldier gets shot in a training accident and not when some idiot shoots himself (unless its funny and it ends up on tosh).

Im still waiting for that "most americans arent for UBCs" claim you made. Just more facile arguments based on the feels.

[540iSUP]

Originally Posted by ryan stewart

What the everloving hell are you talking about? 223 spins, all bullets out of a rifle spin. Do you supposed gun nuts even go within 10ft of guns?

Gun nut? I'm not a gun nut at all. I'm just repeating info I learned while handling the AR-15 during my time in the military. I also volunteered for Airport Duty after the 9/11 attacks and was trained how to properly use the AR-15 around a civilian population.

What I mean by tumble is that the bullet tumbles or kart wheels inside of your body. Like a helicopter blade or like spinning a bottle.

Edit: Dude, after reading most of you're replies I think you're mistaking me for someone who thinks everyone needs a high powered rifle. I do not own a gun, nor am I interested in owning one. I know the disadvantage this puts me in, but I'm really not worried about it.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by 540iSUP

What I mean by tumble is that the bullet tumbles or kart wheels inside of your body. Like a helicopter blade or like spinning a bottle.

Here's a video that visually explains what you meant (…@ 2:55). I'm not a fan of the Washington Post, but what is being explained is truth.

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

ANY semi-automatic firearm can be fed a significant number of rounds. A semi-automatic rifle is a semi-automatic rifle. It doesn't matter if it's an AR-15, a mini 30, an M1 Garand, etc. Any rifle round is going to tear apart a human body. Why the arbitrary age limit?!? So a person can become a cop or join the military and serve this country at 18 years of age (…or by today's standard, are mature enough to choose their gender at 7 years of age), but they need to be 25 to own a firearm? Your argument is completely disingenuous when handguns are used to commit the vast majority of murders. Mass shootings using rifles is an extremely low percentage of the killings that occur.

I'll be the first one to admit that an AR-15 style rifle is pretty bad ass looking and I appreciate how modular the rifle is. However, there really is no viable argument for why a rifle like this should be so readily available to the general public. It really is a rifle designed for the purpose of killing/injuring large numbers of people quickly and effectively. It's terrible for home defense or hunting.

And admit it, many people that buy these rifles have a "want to play soldier" complex. They're not buying M1s or other semi-auto rifles and modding them. They're buying AR style rifles like they see the military carrying and what they see in the movies and video games they play.

There is no denying that AR-15 style rifles are the #1 rifle of choice in mass shootings in the US since becoming readily available in the mid-2000s. Starting in around 2010ish, mass shootings took off with the AR-15 being the "gun". Please show me data in the past ~10-15 years showing mass shooters using any other style of semi-automatic rifle/pistol with such regularity and with such a high body count.

I'm not saying to take them away, but WAY more needs to be done if you want to be eligible to buy one. And yeah, other high-power rifles that have potential for multi-round mag capacity and are semi-automatic should also be placed in the same bucket. Rules, laws, regulations, etc. should always be up for debate, revision, revocation, etc. and I would think that any responsible gun advocate would be supportive of this.

Lastly, anyone that helps someone buy one of these rifles and was knowingly aware of concerns regarding that person should be very concerned about criminal charges and civil lawsuits. Even if the dad of the Highland Park shooter isn't found guilty of some level of criminal liability, he will certainly be found guilty of some level of civil liability in lawsuits brought against him by the victim's families. His financial well being is done for. The same scenario can be said for someone that doesn't lock up their guns and one of your family commits a crime, accidently shoots a friend, etc.

[KevinC]

Highly relevant here.....

https://amidwesterndoctor.substack.c...rk-has-finally

[rwheels]

Originally Posted by packet

ItÂ’s unfortunate what happened - people died or got injured, for no fault of their own.
That the parent(s) of the shooter abetted his crime makes it worse - they knew, and couldÂ’ve stopped said individual, but they didnÂ’t.

More gun laws would not have stopped this.

The issue is of mental health - and yes, I realize everyone sees that as a sound bite to shirk responsibility.

The issues in society today that are leading to tragedies such as this one, are:
- the role of media - be they violence in movies, games, etc - desensitizing us as a whole
- the role of media in creating role models in film, tv, etc where the creation of dangerous role models and behavior is being rewarded rather than condemned
- “social” media is just the newest form of this enablement upon impressionable minds - both sex and violence
- parental role models (or the lack thereof) due to the breakdown of family structure
- parents refusing to accept responsibility for their wards, trying to be friends instead of authority figures with a responsibility to raise a child in a stable, healthy environment (instead of parking them in front of a tv or a computer tablet)
- parents refusing to accept responsibility that their child may indeed have a mental disorder that needs treatment rather than just acceptance / twisting the world to accept what is a new normal. ThatÂ’s just an injustice to normalcy.

Which brings me to my next 2 points of:
- stricter punishment (across all aspects - home, law)
- mental / psych facilities,
Both being necessary.

These may seem like harsh words to some of you.

So in closing, I will leave you with these 2 bits of data:
This desensitization and covert encouragement to kill or otherwise commit acts of violence are a technique that was successfully used by the US armed forces to increase the shooting rate (the number of soldiers who will fire their weapon upon an enemy in combat) from 15-20% in the Second World War to 95% in Vietnam.

The American Psychological Association’s commission on violence and youth concluded in 1993 that “there is absolutely no doubt that higher levels of viewing violence on television are correlated with increased acceptance of aggressive attitudes and increased aggressive behavior.”

While your points sound great, they left out something very crucial, stated later. It is so easy to blame others, and not look in the mirror. Considering that we, as Americans, do not live on an island, many of the points you stated, occur in other countries, yet they do not have the murder issues we have. When our "American" values accept that we can slaughter children, but we will not change our views, then the problem is with us. We, as Americans, are the mental ones. How many more innocents (especially children) will we allow to suffer from mass shootings, before any of us are willing to actually change our own values? In the Uvalde shooting, we read of a mother who went in to the school and pulled out her own child, and a few others, at great danger to her own life. Why? Because she valued the life of that child much more than her own, just as most any parent would. Unfortunately, the very walls that used to protect us, have now imprisoned us.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by XutvJet

It's terrible for home defense or hunting.


There is no denying that AR-15 style rifles are the #1 rifle of choice in mass shootings in the US since becoming readily available in the mid-2000s.

You're entitled to your opinion(s), but I need to refute two specific statements and affirm the facts…..


….people have been using the AR for hunting since its inception (…not that the 2nd Amendment has anything to do with hunting, nor requires it as justification). It is a great tool for hunting and depending on configuration, a great tool for home defense as well……especially against multiple intruders.

….the AR became readily available to the public in the early 1950's. It was available for nearly 40 years before mass shootings became a thing, so it wasn't the rifle that changed……it was the people…


…..which circles us back to society, mental health, etc.

[unluky]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

You're entitled to your opinion(s), but I need to refute two specific statements and affirm the facts…..


….people have been using the AR for hunting since its exception (…not that the 2nd Amendment has anything to do with hunting, nor requires it as justification). It is a great tool for hunting and depending on configuration, a great tool for home defense as well……especially against multiple intruders.

….the AR became readily available to the public in the early 1950's. It was available for nearly 40 years before mass shootings became a thing, so it wasn't the rifle that changed……is was the people…


…..which circles us back to society, mental health, etc.

LOL a LOT of horribly wrong firearms "facts" in here Sedan - you keep correcting them but they don't wanna hear it. This is why we don't like people who have no clue about firearms making firearms laws.

"ugg, gun black, black bad, gun bad, ban gun."

Keep up the good fight!

[Torgus]

I need to buy an AR before there is a ban is all I am hearing.

Also, the more you learn about the family there were red alerts all over the place. Such a shame this could have been avoided.