A shotgun with a five shell capacity of buckshot would be a much better option at stopping the assailant in your scenario and would also be much less likely to cause collateral damage to surrounding houses.
I don't disagree with much of your post. My only point is that these poor bastards made decisions -- or failed to make decisions, however you want to look at it -- in the heat of the moment, under incredibly stressful conditions, and millions of keyboard warriors are out there discussing their cowardice. The public truly won't need to beat these guys up because they'll probably be doing it to themselves for the rest of their lives, not to mention dealing with the PTSD from witnessing that many mutilated child bodies. This was a lose/lose situation all the way around. It absolutely could have been handled better. No question. But I'm not going to criticize men under that kind of stress and danger without having been there myself. The blame falls at the feet of the murderous bastard that killed these children. Additionally, my heart goes out to that teacher that propped the door open. The guilt she is going to have to live with is unimaginable and I would guess neverending.
Popular usage of something is a horrible justification for banning it. That's why the conversation always ends up with confiscation.
The average age of the shooter in the thirteen worst school shootings was eighteen. That is also a fact.
I know the majority of shooters were 18. Already mentioned that as being an interesting thing about these shootings. Perhaps we need to dig into why.
I dont understand why popular usage in heinous crimes is not justification for banning but o well.
This is the post I was responding to above. You decided you meant "cities" in Red States, which is fine and all - except that those cities (New Orleans and St. Louis, among others) are situated in states where it's a munitions free-for-all. We could continue to go back and forth. You will say it's Dim politics - Blue and Red - I will come back and point out that cities (blue and red) are prone to have concentrated poverty, gang activity, etc. that drives murder and firearm fatality rates. Also, these mass events are happening by and large in suburban districts.
I don't want people to shoot 1 bullet at anyone other than for self-defense.
me too but unfortunately that is not the world we live in. But for now, 1 at a time is a safer option in my opinion.
Much of the kinetic energy you refer to is due to the barrel length and not the cartridge itself. A 10mm handgun round out of a 16” barrel has similar energy.
Fully auto weapons are legal and accessible if you have enough money. Wealthy people own many of them. So is your argument that those with money and privilege are more responsible than the rest of us?
absolutely not. Are they legal to buy? I am not in the market so i don't know. If they are legal, they should not be in my opinion.
As long and I pay for a $200 tax stamp from the government I can legally buy one this afternoon. Will have to wait for the paperwork to come back but it’s that simple. People do it everyday. I know people who legally own them. I even shoot some on a regular basis. They are a ton of fun, you should give it a try.
Except for that one victim.
i am sure it is but guns just aren't my thing . Plenty of other interests. Raising 2 kids, when i have free time there is other stuff i would rather do. I don't hold it against people that enjoy guns, just not my thing.
Sorry, I didn’t make my point clear. They are legal, but they are more highly regulated than a semi-auto AR15.
Of course you could point out in these ‘high crime’ inner cities that everyone has guns, which is why gun violence is higher, but the solution, according to some, is more guns to protect themselves from guns…This is the post I was responding to above. You decided you meant "cities" in Red States, which is fine and all - except that those cities (New Orleans and St. Louis, among others) are situated in states where it's a munitions free-for-all. We could continue to go back and forth. You will say it's Dim politics - Blue and Red - I will come back and point out that cities (blue and red) are prone to have concentrated poverty, gang activity, etc. that drives murder and firearm fatality rates. Also, these mass events are happening by and large in suburban districts.
Whatever, that is all pettifogging that leads us away from the core issue here.
I think the problem that people on the left want to see addressed on the right is the gun culture. You say it's "family values" or the death of the "nuclear family" - okay, maybe that is a contributor - but that seems like code and is in fact an entirely different issue, with a different set of solutions - and could take decades. We are talking about what we can do to address gun violence in this country NOW and specifically to address mass gun violence events.
This is the culture I am talking about (below). So how do you suggest we address that? How do we instill the same respect for guns that we were brought up to observe. The same concern for gun safety. etc.
