Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
Oddly it looks like the Orlando thread has been closed... not sure why.
Anyway, I just can't see any reason why the AR15 in particular is this huge threat for mass shootings? The guy had a handgun on him, in addition to an AR15 - it seems to me that he would have done just as much damage with the handgun. They're both semi-automatic weapons with a similar fire rate.
Is there some reason I'm wrong about this? I don't know much about guns, but it's not like he's trying to aim and shoot at people from 30+ yards away, he's just firing bullets more or less randomly into a crowd of people. The same thing is true of most of these incidents where the "number of people shot count" is high, like the Colorado theatre shooting.
|
The AR15 has a higher magazine capacity, fires the round at a much higher rate and is far and away more accurate than a pistol. I'm not saying a pistol can't inflict mass casualties as it happened at the church shooting last year I believe. It's just that semi auto rifles like the AR15 can inflict much much more damage at a quicker rate.