Perspective: Murder by 'assault weapon'

sPzAbt505

sPzAbt505

Hand of the King
From 2004 to 2011 inclusive - over 8 years

Total Murders.......... 138,810
Total firearms............ 93,538
Rifles........................... 3,850
Blades....................... 18,014
Blunt objects.............. 5,858
Hands, fists, feet, etc.. 8,246

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/uc...s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

Assuming that ALL of the "rifles" were 'assault weapons' and that a different 'assault weapon' was used for each murder, you are...
>4.7x more likely to be murdered with a blade...
>1.5x more like to be murdered with a blunt object...
>2.1x more likely to be murdered with someone's hands/feet...
... than an 'assault weapon'.

Given this, there is no sound reason to ban 'assault weapons'.
 
The Dude said:
So 93,000 gun murders gets you pumped; NRAZI boy
Click to expand...
We all know that you smile every time you read/hear about children being killed with guns, and pray for same every night.

Now then -- given the facts, can you present a sound argument for banning 'assault weapons'?
 
sPzAbt505 said:
We all know that you smile every time you read/hear about children being killed with guns, and pray for same every night.

Now then -- given the facts, can you present a sound argument for banning 'assault weapons'?
Click to expand...

Topspin couldn't present a rational argument for anything.
 
So I guess we're all in agreement than the narrow regulation of assault weapons, as opposed to all firearms, is silly.
 
I mean, it's really a question of what you're trying to accomplish, innit? If you're trying to minimize the likelihood of another mass shooting like Newtown or Aurora or something like that, bannig assault weapons is probably going to help accomplish that goal. If instead you're trying to minimize gun violence and murder mnore generally, banning assault weapons isn't going to have much of an impact.
 
Dungheap said:
I mean, it's really a question of what you're trying to accomplish, innit? If you're trying to minimize the likelihood of another mass shooting like Newtown or Aurora or something like that, bannig assault weapons is probably going to help accomplish that goal. If instead you're trying to minimize gun violence and murder mnore generally, banning assault weapons isn't going to have much of an impact.
Click to expand...
the ONLY thing that will reduce mass shootings or gun violence are outright bans. come and take them. anything else is nothing more than ways to create more criminals for the government to control.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
the ONLY thing that will reduce mass shootings or gun violence are outright bans. come and take them. anything else is nothing more than ways to create more criminals for the government to control.
Click to expand...

(1) The bold is hilarious.

(2) I disagree that the only thing that will reduced mass shootings or gun violence is an outright ban. Eliminating them might require banning, but reducing does not.

(3) You've got some noun-verb issues as underlined.
 
Dungheap said:
(1) The bold is hilarious.
Click to expand...
then by all means, please try.

Dungheap said:
(2) I disagree that the only thing that will reduced mass shootings or gun violence is an outright ban. Eliminating them might require banning, but reducing does not.
Click to expand...
did you manage to see the video I posted about the speed of firing with semi auto handguns and the negligent difference between two 15 round mags, three 10 round mags, and six 5 round mags????? banning a particular weapon, or even making it harder to buy, will do absolutely zero to attain your desired goal of reducing mass shootings, especially when gov agents are exempted.

Dungheap said:
(3) You've got some noun-verb issues as underlined.
Click to expand...
my wife already criticizes my grammar, thank you.
 
Dungheap said:
I mean, it's really a question of what you're trying to accomplish, innit? If you're trying to minimize the likelihood of another mass shooting like Newtown or Aurora or something like that, bannig assault weapons is probably going to help accomplish that goal. If instead you're trying to minimize gun violence and murder mnore generally, banning assault weapons isn't going to have much of an impact.
Click to expand...

Except, neither minimizes anything and both are patently unconstitutional.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top