0
DJL

There is a difference between Mass Shootings and Gun Crime

Recommended Posts

A big issue I've seen recently is people lumping them together. They're not the same thing and they don't have the same solutions.

Mass shootings are domestic terrorism. The weapons used are a combination or semi-automatic rifles and semi-automatic pistols. These phrases aren't exact and I know some people take exception to the phrase semi-automatic but for these purposes it means a weapon that fires as fast as you can pull the trigger. The most typical weapon in the conversation is what's being referred to as an assault rifle meaning a higher caliber semi-automatic weapon designed for military use but adapted for the civilian market, the AR-15 being the most popular. The rails and scopes and flash suppressors are of no consequence.

Gun Crimes are typically committed with handguns because you can conceal them. There are many fewer instances of rifles being used in gun crime regardless of what you saw in 1980's gangster rap videos.

The Federal Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 was designed to remove the former from sale in the United States because of recent mass https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Banshootings and the ability of these weapons to inflict higher damage because of repeated fire and bullet velocity and power. Ronald Reagan supported banning "semi-automatic assault gun" (his words). The resulting bill was slightly watered down and had a 10 year expiration date. When the expiration date arrived several research groups claimed that the ban did not have an appreciable effect on gun violence and others noted that the weapons within the bill were typically not used in gun crime. The ban was allowed to expire on the basis of crime, not domestic terrorism.

Going forward it should be known that the point of an assault rifle ban is not to stop street crime but to keep domestic terrorists from using weapons that can inflict a large amount of damage in a short amount of time and from a longer distance. The wounds from a .223 or 5.56 NATO and similar are much more severe than from a 9mm or 45ACP.https://www.wired.com/2016/06/ar-15-can-human-body/

Debate them separately and understand that there's crossover. For example domestic terrorists also typically carry a 9mm or 45 so you're not going to solve all problems with an assault rifle ban, just the severity of those attacks. You CAN, however, lessen gun crime AND the outcome of domestic terrorism by LONG TERM PERMANENT restrictions on both. There is no debate to the fact that if there are fewer weapons being made and there are tighter safeguards on who can wield them then eventually the number in use illegally will be reduced.
"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phil1111

Mass shootings are NOT domestic terrorism.

Terrorism is defined as the use of violence and, or intimidation, to obtain political goals. No mass shootings with the exception of the California IS incident had political objectives.



It's a much better approximation if your "goal" is the actual intimidation and violence. Just to say they were crazy is to say that they spun a dial and that's what he ended up doing. They were angry, they wanted to take it out on people and they chose to terrorize them. Don't get bogged down with the definitions just because they didn't do it because of geopolitics.
"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"You CAN, however, lessen gun crime AND the outcome of domestic terrorism by LONG TERM PERMANENT restrictions on both. There is no debate to the fact that if there are fewer weapons being made and there are tighter safeguards on who can wield them then eventually the number in use illegally will be reduced. "

Agree. The problem is that republicans want to nibble around the edges of the issues. The NRA is correct about many points they make. But in the end neither they nor the RNC want to compromise because they fear, probably rightly, a slippery slope to outright bans. The whole AR-15 debate is but a sidebar on the whole discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand your point. By separating out the issues it may be possible to reduce mass killings with restrictions on some weapons that could be ruled as complying with the 2nd amendment.

On the other hand, making a difference in gun crime altogether through gun control would require a constitutional amendment.

One is actually achievable, the other is not. It's better to do what you can that to just rail away that nothing can be done.
Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gowlerk

I understand your point. By separating out the issues it may be possible to reduce mass killings with restrictions on some weapons that could be ruled as complying with the 2nd amendment.

On the other hand, making a difference in gun crime altogether through gun control would require a constitutional amendment.

One is actually achievable, the other is not. It's better to do what you can that to just rail away that nothing can be done.



The admission by everyone needs to be that while the 2nd amendment was designed to provide the citizenry with weapons capable of waging war that some of those weapons are actually WAY too capable of waging war. We don't allow machine guns for obvious reasons, do we want to make the same admission about weapons with high rate of fire, high velocity rounds, with high volume magazines?

Most people I know would much rather have a handgun for self defense than a 3 foot long chunk of metal anyway. Hunters don't need a 30-round magazine and many are even split over the need for semi-auto even though it provides a quicker follow-up shot.

So, where does that put us?
"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
texascrw

When did the Feds outlaw possession of legally registered machine guns? You need to go back and do a little more research.



I didn't say outlaw. As you said, "federally registered". Tell us more about the process required to register and own a machine gun.
"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You weren't very clear. You said, "don't allow", which most people would take to mean, "can't have". And I would imagine you are quite aware of the process for owning NFA weapons, such as full auto, suppressors, short shotguns and rifles, etc. It is a long, drawn out process, I believe the wait time for approval is up to six to nine months at the moment, because of the backlog of applications. Not for machine guns, since they are out of the price reach of most people, but for suppressors.
No doubt you want me to detail the whole, long process so you can say how that is how we should do so-called "assault rifles" or all firearms. People can go to BATF's website and read the rules, process etc. if they are interested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
texascrw

You weren't very clear. You said, "don't allow", which most people would take to mean, "can't have". And I would imagine you are quite aware of the process for owning NFA weapons, such as full auto, suppressors, short shotguns and rifles, etc. It is a long, drawn out process, I believe the wait time for approval is up to six to nine months at the moment, because of the backlog of applications. Not for machine guns, since they are out of the price reach of most people, but for suppressors.
No doubt you want me to detail the whole, long process so you can say how that is how we should do so-called "assault rifles" or all firearms. People can go to BATF's website and read the rules, process etc. if they are interested.



I'm sure it's slightly in depth, no need to list it any more than you did. I'd never go through the process to own one but I'd drop a chunk of change to fire a Tommy Gun and a few select others on a range.

The "assault rifle" label needs a better definition so we all agree to what we're going after which is a combination of items whose only purpose is to unload a lot of damage in a short period. High rate of fire (semi-auto), chambers a high velocity round, receives a high volume mag. Aside from a few people that specific combination is not needed for hunting and people typically want something else for home defense. Typically and with a few exceptions if you remove just one of those three you have a hunting rifle. For example I have a 22LR which hold 15 rounds in the stock. Sure I can unload the whole thing very fast but I'm not putting holes in people that will take 5 surgeries to fix if they live through it. Also, since you have to load it through the stock which takes a while.
"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thompson's are fun to shoot, if you can afford the ammo. You should go to Knob Creek in Tenn. Not that far from you. All of the Class III people show up and many will let you shoot their stuff, for a reasonable fee. They hold it once a year and I believe it is in the spring. You can find them online and get the details. Lots of firepower demonstrations and there are people set up on the firing line just so people can try out different weapons. Everything from sub guns to belt feds. Lots of fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Most people do not have a problem with machine guns in society BECAUSE of the restrictions that are placed upon them. And the evidence shows that it is effective at keeping them out of the hands of the wrong people, that they are NOT commonly used in crimes,

Let's do the same with all the AR-15 and similar weapons, magazines and such - federal licensing, strong background checks et al.

It is the very definition of a working restrictive system that still allows people that WANT guns to have them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tkhayes

Most people do not have a problem with machine guns in society BECAUSE of the restrictions that are placed upon them. And the evidence shows that it is effective at keeping them out of the hands of the wrong people, that they are NOT commonly used in crimes,

Let's do the same with all the AR-15 and similar weapons, magazines and such - federal licensing, strong background checks et al.

It is the very definition of a working restrictive system that still allows people that WANT guns to have them.



I was thinking exactly that. The loopholes and expense in getting full auto puts a high bar in acquisition. AFAIK no lawfully acquired full auto has ever be used in the commission of a crime. At least in the last 20 years. If you needed a carry permit for five years before you could buy a AR-15. It would certainly change the dynamics of their use and acquisition.

The flip side is at the 2018 SHOT show. The national firearms trade show. There was at least 50 companies selling mainly AR's. Some exclusively. Its a huge business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tkhayes

Most people do not have a problem with machine guns in society BECAUSE of the restrictions that are placed upon them.



Most people have no clue of the difference between a semi auto AR-15 and a select fire M-16.

A couple years ago, during the "open carry of rifles" idiocy, there were a couple guys who walked towards the farmer's market with AR-15s over their shoulders.

Numerous calls to the cops were made, most claimed 'two guys with machine guns' were walking down the street.
"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wolfriverjoe

***Most people do not have a problem with machine guns in society BECAUSE of the restrictions that are placed upon them.



Most people have no clue of the difference between a semi auto AR-15 and a select fire M-16.

A couple years ago, during the "open carry of rifles" idiocy, there were a couple guys who walked towards the farmer's market with AR-15s over their shoulders.



Numerous calls to the cops were made, most claimed 'two guys with machine guns' were walking down the street.


Yes. An AR-15 is a very threatening looking weapon. You can make fun of people for not knowing all about the differences between models of rifles. But remember, the tough and threatening look is a large factor in why they are so popular. It certainly isn't because they are so useful. Why should you be surprised people are intimidated by them?
Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gowlerk

******Most people do not have a problem with machine guns in society BECAUSE of the restrictions that are placed upon them.



Most people have no clue of the difference between a semi auto AR-15 and a select fire M-16.

A couple years ago, during the "open carry of rifles" idiocy, there were a couple guys who walked towards the farmer's market with AR-15s over their shoulders.



Numerous calls to the cops were made, most claimed 'two guys with machine guns' were walking down the street.


Yes. An AR-15 is a very threatening looking weapon. You can make fun of people for not knowing all about the differences between models of rifles. But remember, the tough and threatening look is a large factor in why they are so popular. It certainly isn't because they are so useful. Why should you be surprised people are intimidated by them?

Tactical style weapons have one design in mind and that is for the ease and effectiveness in shooting other people. Same would happen if they had AK-47's. I assume the guys were attention seeking and that just means they're assholes.
"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0