Shooting at Movie screening of TDKR in Colorado

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by Aleks

Neither do I! So let's fix the root of the issue and tackle mental health issues and identification of unstable individuals!

Was he mentally unstable?

The example of the guy I named previously, the masters in engineering student guy, was not mentally unstable.

If the root cause is mental health, tackle it, sure. Also tackle the supply. But thats just the immediate thought in my head because its the morning after the tragedy. Just very sad news, again not trying to promote a personal agenda and to my recollection I have never waged into a liberals/anti-gun thread before... its just more of a reflection in a morning-after-tragedy, thats all.

[Aleks]

Originally Posted by RT14

By being able to kill 15 people in 5 seconds compared to 2 people in 5 seconds. As an "expert" I find it hard to believe you don't see a difference.

If there's no difference between an assault rifle and a hand gun, why don't we send armies into battle with hand guns? They both kill people, what's the difference? Right?

Watch videos of trained shooters and you'll see that semi automatic is hardly a limitation on accuracy and round count. And armies do go into battle with pistols, browning hi powers actually in Canada and beretta 92s in the US. They also have shotguns. Point?

[Senator Clay Davis]

There a few major differences between auto and semi, most notably you do not have to continuosly fire with an automatic weapon (pull the trigger and hold it and it will fire till the clip is gone; semi auto not so much).

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Originally Posted by Aleks

Yes...I am. Better take away my motorcycle too!

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

Can I also take away your Galaxy Nexus?

[Displaced Flames fan]

I'm bowing out of this thread in response to Res' post a couple of pages ago, which is bang on.

That said, I reported a post (should've reported several) to the moderators. Some of you don't like what someone has to say so you start the name calling and dismissive drive bys. I don't think Aleks has been offensive, inflammatory or insensitive in any way, but since you disagree with him you feel it's ok to call him names and request he be removed from the thread.

Grow up.

[Tinordi]

Somebody took a taco bell sized dump in this thread.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Aleks

Yes...I am. Better take away my motorcycle too! And you can't use stats if they aren't accurate, Canada does not have thousands of lives lost to firearms violence every year. In fact firearms violence accounts for nearly the least amount of deaths of all violence inclusively. Don't throw out big numbers for emotional value on your argument.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/r..._deces-eng.htm

[LouCypher]

Originally Posted by Burninator

I'm not an expert, but my understanding of what classifies something as a firearm is the speed of the projectile (lethality). You don't need a firearms license to own a paint ball gun, but you do a glock 9mm. Rubber bullets can be lethal.

No argument here as I know they can and have been lethal but are also designed to reduce the lethal factor. I guess the real gist of my point is who needs lethal weaponry and who doesn't, and can intentionally lethal weapons be denied to those who dont need them for self defence.That being said a kitchen knife is lethal, so it can get really complicated sorting out what is designed with the intent of being lethal, who is permitted to possess lethal instruments and what can be lethal when placed in the wrong hands. All really complicated without having to make society baby safe.

[Tinordi]

You do not lose liberties by losing the ability to use a device who's primary purpose is to kill people.

/bottomline

[BBQorMILDEW]

Can we please get back to mourning the lives of the 14 killed and the numerous others injured?


FFS!

[kirant]

Originally Posted by Aleks

Its still a rifle. That's the point I'm making. No you can't compare a pistol to a rifle. That's not what I'm doing

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

Looking back (I needed to search up, have been out of the topic for a while) - I think you might be getting stuck on the concept of pure raw damage.

The concern is in the capability of an untrained person. Trained shooters, sure, there's less difference between semi and full automatic. But to an untrained or minimally trained person (who is the primary user in this case), it's much easier to blast and deal damage if all they have to do is hold the trigger. They don't have the same aiming instincts a trained shooter has. For them, it could easily be the difference between 15 shots in 3 seconds and 2 shots in 5.

Originally Posted by Aleks

And armies do go into battle with pistols, browning hi powers actually in Canada and beretta 92s in the US. They also have shotguns. Point?

They also don't go in with them as their primary weapon. Shotguns, if memory serves, are specialized tools while sidearms are designed as backups. When general heavy lifting is required, rifles are most frequently brought in. Correct me if I'm wrong though, as I don't commonly look at military equipment and distribution.

Yes, by technicality, you're right - we DO sent in the troops with handguns. However, we don't expect them to perform with those better than an enemy who's equally trained, but given a rifle.

[CalgaryFan1988]

Originally Posted by Aleks

You're right. One gun will kill you more. Carry on.

They are all equally dangerous. OK? Sure some will shoot farther and more accurate but the fact is I can die by .22 or I can die by .50bmg all the same. The fact is the round in an ak47 is similar to rounds used in any firearms...that has nothing to do with it as a gun. In fact the .223 or 5.56 round used in the m4 military gun is a common coyote round

I'm not a self proclaimed gun "expert" such as yourself, but if all guns kill equally such as you claim, i'm curious as to why American and Canadian soldiers alike take fully automatic weapons into combat. Very confusing......

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Aleks

Watch videos of trained shooters and you'll see that semi automatic is hardly a limitation on accuracy and round count. And armies do go into battle with pistols, browning hi powers actually in Canada and beretta 92s in the US. They also have shotguns. Point?

You seem to be making a very compelling argument that all of these types of firearms should be strictly controlled. I agree.

[CalgaryFan1988]

And back onto topic, one of the victims was one of the survivors in the Toronto Eaton center shooting. Being subject to one shooting is bad enough.

http://news.sympatico.ctvnews.ca/hom...oting/5ea17146

[sun]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

I'm bowing out of this thread in response to Res' post a couple of pages ago, which is bang on.

That said, I reported a post (should've reported several) to the moderators. Some of you don't like what someone has to say so you start the name calling and dismissive drive bys. I don't think Aleks has been offensive, inflammatory or insensitive in any way, but since you disagree with him you feel it's ok to call him names and request he be removed from the thread.

Grow up.

HE COMPARED AN ASSAULT RIFLE TO A CAR AND TO A KITCHEN KNIFE AND NOW TO A MOTORCYCLE. He has made this thread all about him and his idiotic semantical arguments instead of about the tragedy that has occurred. While derailing, he has not made a single coherent point in favour of his argument in any of the dozens of posts from his Galaxy Nexus sent by tapatalk 2.

[Byrns]

Originally Posted by CalgaryFan1988

I'm not a self proclaimed gun "expert" such as yourself, but if all guns kill equally such as you claim, i'm curious as to why American and Canadian soldiers alike take fully automatic weapons into combat. Very confusing......

The automatic setting on the rifles used by the military is intended for suppression fire, not for mass killing. In fact it's much harder to hit someone using automatic fire vs. semi-automatic.

[FiftyBelow]

Originally Posted by Aleks

While we are at it should we restrict the public use of cars? They kill people way more often.....or what it he had gone and killed people with a kitchen knife? Should they be banned?

Ahhh, the classic "guns don't kill people, people kill people" argument. Aside from the fact that guns are weapons and are designed to kill, it also fails to acknowledge that there are classes of firearms and weapons that are capable of more damage than others.

By your logic, we might as well remove civilian restrictions on grenades, RPGs, missiles etc. After all, only people kill people right?

[return to the red]

If people want to banter back and forth about gun regulation perhaps it should be seperated into it's own thread, this one should be reserved for the tragedy that unfolded.

[Aleks]

Originally Posted by CalgaryFan1988

I'm not a self proclaimed gun "expert" such as yourself, but if all guns kill equally such as you claim, i'm curious as to why American and Canadian soldiers alike take fully automatic weapons into combat. Very confusing......

The US army actually does not have fill auto on their weapons. There is little advantage other than a waste of ammo and a need to reload more often. They do have burst mode. Canadian c7's do have full auto tho. Most guerilla or insurgent forces have off the shelf ak's which are full auto select fire capeable

[HPLovecraft]

Originally Posted by CalgaryFan1988

I'm not a self proclaimed gun "expert" such as yourself, but if all guns kill equally such as you claim, i'm curious as to why American and Canadian soldiers alike take fully automatic weapons into combat. Very confusing......

It's actually not primarily because of the stopping power of an automatic rifle. They are mostly used because of the basic foundational doctrine of all modern militaries: fire suppression. The more ammunition you can throw at an enemy, as quickly and effectively as possible, the less they shoot at you, and the more time you have to flank them or take them out in some other way. In other words, automatic rifles are great at unleashing lots and lots of deadly projectiles. Not all of them will hit and kill your enemy, but even if they don't, they'll panic him or make him stay behind cover.

Of course, stopping power is important, too, especially when you have enemies utilizing cover. Most pistols don't have the power to go through small cover the way an automatic rifle does.