Texas Church Shooting
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-11-2017, 01:31 PM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(12-11-2017 05:01 AM)Deesse23 Wrote:  
(11-11-2017 11:04 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  Semi-automatic-only rifles like variants of the Colt AR-15 are not assault rifles; they do not have select-fire capabilities.

But with bump stocks they (virtually) have, correct?
Correct, though as I stated before historically fully automatic weapons even before their ban were rarely used in criminal activity. Semi-automatics can be modified in the manner the bump stock does with as little as an elastic band or placing your thumb in a loop, such as can be found on a pair of pants.

It is held that valour is the chiefest virtue and most dignifies the haver.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-11-2017, 02:32 PM (This post was last modified: 12-11-2017 02:38 PM by WhiskeyDebates.)
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(12-11-2017 11:22 AM)epronovost Wrote:  One your first point, the ban on bump stock would be necessary to avoid a loophole.
It wouldn't do that at all, you can make your own bump stock as I showed with an elastic band. Again go ahead and ban them, it will accomplish nothing other than allowing people to feel like they at least did something. You will still be able to circumvent that limit on full-auto fire, you have always been able to and despite that they have historically not been a statistically significant factor in gun violence, with the number of crimes perpetrated with such weapons can be counted on one hand.

(12-11-2017 11:22 AM)epronovost Wrote:  Its true that to my knowledge, such a accessory wasn't used in any other mass shooting.
Not just that accessory but any means by which you can modify a semi-automatic to replicate full auto fire. Banning bump stocks won't keep them out of the hands of people willing to use them int he commision of a crime, but even if it did, even if the Vagus shooter couldn't have gotten a bump stock he could have gotten an elastic band and done the exact same thing.

(12-11-2017 11:22 AM)epronovost Wrote:  The fact that the bump stock was mentionned as an important factor in the deadlyness of the Las Vegas mass shooting...
I'd argue it was the most deadly mass shooting in US history because he did an immense amount of pre-planning and fired from an elevated and secure position directly into a densely packed crowd. It was quite literally the equivalent shooting fish in a barrel and I don't think it would have been any less deadly had he been using semi-automatic fire and picking his targets deliberately. To be fair that's just my opinion though.

(12-11-2017 11:22 AM)epronovost Wrote:  lets me think that it will become more popular in mass shooting as awareness of such a device is popularised.
This is pure conjecture.

(12-11-2017 11:22 AM)epronovost Wrote:  Before this shooting, I was completly unaware that such an accessory even existed and I am pretty certain that a good number of Americans were in the same situation.
They were well known amongst gun owners, even here in Canada, as far as I can tell.

(12-11-2017 11:22 AM)epronovost Wrote:  It's the same thing for the makeshift bump stock made with elastic bands or other similar contraption. The general public lack of knowledge of those tricks and accessory certainly played a role in reducing the number of mass shooting commited with them as they are clearly efficient to kill or injuring a lot of people very quickly.
This is also pure conjecture. The ability to modify a semi-automatic to replicate full auto fire has been known by the majority of gun owners and the information has been on the internet and available with a simple google search for years.
I mean no offence when I say that I agree that the general public had a lack of knowledge on such workaround because the general public has a lack of knowledge of guns in general.

(12-11-2017 11:22 AM)epronovost Wrote:  One thing that is important to note with a ban on high capacity cartriges is that to be effective, like any other firearm related ban, the ban needs to be on the national level else it's still extremely easy for a person to get access to those weapons.
The ban was at the national level and had no discernable effect, and in fact homicides with those high capacity magazines has dropped significantly after the ban was lifted.

(12-11-2017 11:22 AM)epronovost Wrote:  Most weapons used in crimes in area with strong gun control are simply obtain in neighbouring States with laxer laws.
Source? The San Bernadino mass shooting perpetrators used weapons all legally purchased in the state of California for example.


(12-11-2017 11:22 AM)epronovost Wrote:  It's also important to note that a ban on high capacity cartrige isn't intented to reduce the overall number of murder, but the death tole of mass shootings, which requires a different approach to assess its success than the studyyou provided (local ban vs national ban, murder vs mass shootings).
Well for starters there is no evidence it would do anything to that effect, secondly, the ban was national (Federal Assult Weapons Ban of 1994), and a 10 round limit on magazines can be circumvented with ease in multiple ways which is one of many reasons they are not effective.

I haven't even brought up the fact you can 3D print a magazine with ease.

(12-11-2017 11:22 AM)epronovost Wrote:  I determined that high capacity cartriges pause a greater risk due to the fact that the use of these types of cartriges in mass shootings exceed the use of these cartriges in case of self defense or hunting.
Source?

(12-11-2017 11:22 AM)epronovost Wrote:  The ability to shoot continuously more than a few rounds is thus pretty useless. A few shots should be more than necessary to defend yourself.
Against a single attacker out in the open and then only maybe. It also doesn't matter what your opinion is of it (no offence intended) because the Supreme Court already ruled that limits on ammunition capacity are unconstitutional.

(12-11-2017 11:22 AM)epronovost Wrote:  I think that arguing for the need to shoot in rapid succession and without the need to reload more than 10 shots to defend one self makes me question the number of people who are determined and ready to risk their lives to see you dead or your accuracy.
Your opinion, which is what that is and which I respect, runs counter to common law and the Supreme Courts rulings on the matter.

(12-11-2017 11:22 AM)epronovost Wrote:  As for handguns, a buy back program isn't a confiscation per say since it's actually you are refunded for said property.
If it's mandatory than yes that is exactly what it is, a forced confiscation of private property and paying them for it doesn't change that. It also doesn't change the fact that people willing to kill dozens of people are likely not going to give up their guns.

(12-11-2017 11:22 AM)epronovost Wrote:  Its more akin to a recall of merchandise if said merchandise paused a security risk like a car with defective air bags or exploding telephone.
No it's really not.

(12-11-2017 11:22 AM)epronovost Wrote:  Its applicability in the US is bit irrelevent in my opinion.
Um...what? No the law and the rights of the people are not irrelevant. I have zero idea how you could honestly hold that opinion. Saying "here is what we can do" in a nation where those things can not actually lawfully be done is pointless, which is why I called it mental masturbation earlier.

(12-11-2017 11:22 AM)epronovost Wrote:  Sollution to gun violence are pretty well known.
Proposed solutions are, effective solutions are not because in the few instances that the proposed solutions have been implemented in any form have shown to have no significant impact.

(12-11-2017 11:22 AM)epronovost Wrote:  In my opinion, the US needs to start to operate those changes as the results are worth the work and the risks and I think a plurality of American are ready for them.
And it's the opinion of the law and of the Supreme court that you really can't. The conversation on guns has to change in a post District of Columbia v. Heller and it hasn't. Almost everything you have advocated for we already know will be shot down as unlawful and unconstitutional so if you want to effect actual change you have to do so within the bounds of the Constitution.

It is held that valour is the chiefest virtue and most dignifies the haver.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-11-2017, 02:33 PM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(12-11-2017 01:31 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  Correct, though as I stated before historically fully automatic weapons even before their ban were rarely used in criminal activity.

Afaik, the Tommy Gun, as depicted in famous gangster movies, was an automatic wepaon too. How widespread was it in fact, and not as suggested by those hollywod gangster movies? Are there any data on this? Is there any date on how things changed (if any at all) after automatic wepaons were banned?

Ceterum censeo, religionem delendam esse
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-11-2017, 02:50 PM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(12-11-2017 02:33 PM)Deesse23 Wrote:  
(12-11-2017 01:31 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  Correct, though as I stated before historically fully automatic weapons even before their ban were rarely used in criminal activity.

Afaik, the Tommy Gun, as depicted in famous gangster movies, was an automatic wepaon too. How widespread was it in fact, and not as suggested by those hollywod gangster movies? Are there any data on this? Is there any date on how things changed (if any at all) after automatic wepaons were banned?
[Image: 2%20Thompson%20ad%20sm.jpg]

The Feds responded to the Thompson with the Browning Automatic Rifle (B.A.R.) Better range but not so easily concealed.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-11-2017, 03:14 PM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(12-11-2017 02:33 PM)Deesse23 Wrote:  Afaik, the Tommy Gun, as depicted in famous gangster movies, was an automatic wepaon too.
That is correct, though like most of Hollywood it's been embellished.

(12-11-2017 02:33 PM)Deesse23 Wrote:  How widespread was it in fact, and not as suggested by those hollywod gangster movies? Are there any data on this?
It's really hard to find data on it, but if I had to say I'd say it was fairly common to own one at the time because they were fairly cheap and easy to get. The only real way of knowing how common they were in murders would be to combe through all the deaths of the era and from what little information I've seen handguns, shotguns, and non-firearm weapons still account for the vast majority of prohibition caused crime. I could dig deeper if you would like.

The biggest massacre by Tommy gun I can find (perhaps the most famous would be a better indicator having not combed every murder at the time) was the Saint Valentine's Day Massacre of 7 men. That said the conditions of that killing were such (unarmed men placed up against a wall) could have just as easily been done with pistols. There is almost no killing I can find by this particular weapon that couldn't have been done with a different weapon, though I'll admit that's largely conjecture on my part and we will never know for certain.

It's very interesting weapon historically as it's almost single-handedly responsible for the ban on fully automatic weapons in the US, almost entirely in response to its use by the gangsters of the time.

Saint Valentine's Day MassacreIs there any date on how things changed (if any at all) after automatic wepaons were banned?[/quote]
Not that I can find. It's also really hard to tell in general as the ban happened roughly a year after Prohibition ended and it was that, the end of Prohibition, that saw an end to the violence that had plagued America. I mean murder was banned so a ban on Tommy guns wouldn't have really done much to the people already dedicated to using them in crimes, the end of Prohibition largely saw an end in their use in crime.

As a contrast, there are about 200,000 fully automatic weapons in circulation today
and since the end of prohibition, and the ban, in 1934 the number of crimes committed with a fully auto firearm since is 3 two of which were done by police and the one by civilians ended with no fatalities.
It's important to remember that the number of people in "the mob" was statistically insignificant so the total number of deaths by these weapons would be a statistically insignificant in the total amount of gun deaths during those years, as far as I can tell at least so take it with a grain of salt.

It is held that valour is the chiefest virtue and most dignifies the haver.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-11-2017, 03:20 PM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
~1.75 million Thompsons built. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thompson_submachine_gun
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-11-2017, 03:24 PM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(12-11-2017 02:50 PM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  
(12-11-2017 02:33 PM)Deesse23 Wrote:  Afaik, the Tommy Gun, as depicted in famous gangster movies, was an automatic wepaon too. How widespread was it in fact, and not as suggested by those hollywod gangster movies? Are there any data on this? Is there any date on how things changed (if any at all) after automatic wepaons were banned?
[Image: 2%20Thompson%20ad%20sm.jpg]

The Feds responded to the Thompson with the Browning Automatic Rifle (B.A.R.) Better range but not so easily concealed.

Correct, though both saw use in WW2 as the Tompson due to its compact nature was the preferred weapon for trench clearing until the M1 Carbine started to jockey for that position. The interesting thing about the BAR is that it didn't even have the option of single fire which is a shame as it was incredibly accurate in single fire. A lot of soldiers actually took the heavy bipod off it and learned to fire it single shot or small bursts with better results than it's intended automatic fire, as it was reportedly as accurate as the Springfield rifle in single fired shots. A few even refused to give them up and use the M1 carbine despite it being much lighter and more manoeuvrable.

It is held that valour is the chiefest virtue and most dignifies the haver.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-11-2017, 03:28 PM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(12-11-2017 03:20 PM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  ~1.75 million Thompsons built. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thompson_submachine_gun

Aye, a lot of them obviously for the military and that includes all variants, the M1 and M1A1 variant couldn't even take the big drum mags you see in all the gangster movies/TV shows.

It is held that valour is the chiefest virtue and most dignifies the haver.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes WhiskeyDebates's post
12-11-2017, 03:37 PM (This post was last modified: 12-11-2017 03:50 PM by Thumpalumpacus.)
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(11-11-2017 07:28 AM)onlinebiker Wrote:  
(11-11-2017 07:07 AM)adey67 Wrote:  All I know is that with a downer on tobacco and now alcohol going to a party at Brian's wouldn't exactly be a blast. Rolleyes Laugh out load

The Donner Party might be more fun..

Consider

Well, it was an all-you-can-eat buffet ...

(11-11-2017 08:52 AM)yakherder Wrote:  
(11-11-2017 07:28 AM)onlinebiker Wrote:  The Donner Party might be more fun..

Consider

Only if you're hungry enough for a man sized meal.

Big Grin

"A sandwich is a sandwich, but a Manwich is a meal."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thumpalumpacus's post
12-11-2017, 04:19 PM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(12-11-2017 03:28 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(12-11-2017 03:20 PM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  ~1.75 million Thompsons built. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thompson_submachine_gun

Aye, a lot of them obviously for the military and that includes all variants, the M1 and M1A1 variant couldn't even take the big drum mags you see in all the gangster movies/TV shows.

I've owned the Auto Ordinance semi M-1 variant.

The 1927 Savage variant will take the stick or drum. It also has a top cock lever and finned barrel. The M1 variants have side cock and no fins.

Mine had the notch and peep rear sight. Notch for 100 yard, peep for 200. It would do very consistent 6 inch groups at 200 yards.

All variants are not classified as rifles but sub- rifles ( semi auto) or submachine guns ( full auto) as they chamber a pistol round raher than a rifle or intermediary caliber.

Fun to shoot, low recoil, relatively quiet. But a boat anchor to carry.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: