22 dead, dozens wounded (and counting) in USA’s latest 2nd Amendment celebration

[Aristides]

I said the only two large rivers left to dam were the Fraser and Skeena, the country’s two largest salmon rivers. You maintained we could get the equivalent of ten Site C’s from hundreds of piddling run of river projects, most located in the middle of nowhere. I think you are full of shit and it has nothing to do with some fantasy agenda you id.iots dreamed up.

And I am not lying when I say I think you are full of shit.

Edited October 29, 2023 by Aristides

[Rebound]

On 10/27/2023 at 7:11 AM, Perspektiv said:

So guns shoot themselves? Purchase and load themselves?

Illegal guns truck themselves over borders? 

Sports cars drive themselves excessively fast?

The portability of beer, is to blame for drinking and driving?

Or just maybe, there is an underlying social problem that causes these people to want to respond via violence? Mental health issues that causes someone to disregard the lives of others, because theirs is so hard for them to live? Same thing that pushes someone to publicly commit suicide.

What about a handgun?

The likeliest weapon by far, used in most mass shootings? 

Removing one weapon does nothing to curb the issue.

You're finding the easy scapegoat, and playing politics to distract from the fact that statistically this would barely reduce the overall death toll from these shootings.

If you truly are serious about mass shootings, you must talk about all guns on the table. Period.

But you must also be statistically accurate. If most lawful gun owners are law abiding, then what is the true end game here?

False.

I am very familiar with firearms. Handguns do not have the same range and muzzle velocity as an assault weapon. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Rebound said:

False.

I am very familiar with firearms. Handguns do not have the same range and muzzle velocity as an assault weapon. 

You can't perform a mass shooting with a handgun?

Most mass shootings aren't done with handguns, statistically?

Is this what you're trying to say?

[Aristides]

37 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

You can't perform a mass shooting with a handgun?

Most mass shootings aren't done with handguns, statistically?

Is this what you're trying to say?

AR's are much more effective. Larger magazines, longer range, more accurate. That's why they are the weapon of choice for mass killers. The Las Vegas shooting couldn't have been done with hand guns.

Edited October 29, 2023 by Aristides

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Aristides said:

AR's are much more effective.

But you can still perform one with a handgun, no?

5 minutes ago, Aristides said:

The Las Vegas shooing couldn't have been done with hand guns

So is the concern the casualty count, or the fact that there are mass shootings?

Which ones require fixing?

If its casualty count, you're spot on.

If it's mass shootings, then removing the lesser used weapon, won't remotely statistically put a dent into things.

So again. Are you saying you cannot perform a mass shooting with a handgun?

Are far more mass shootings not performed with handguns? 

[Aristides]

1 minute ago, Perspektiv said:

But you can still perform one with a handgun, no?

So is the concern the casualty count, or the fact that there are mass shootings?

Which ones require fixing?

If its casualty count, you're spot on.

If it's mass shootings, then removing the lesser used weapon, won't remotely statistically put a dent into things.

So again. Are you saying you cannot perform a mass shooting with a handgun?

Are far more mass shootings not performed with handguns? 

I'm saying it is much easier with an AR. I've fired handguns, it takes real skill to hit anything that isn't quite close. My issue isn't so much the weapons themselves, it's the fact Americans will let anyone have them.

[Deluge]

17 hours ago, robosmith said:

Many do; esp the gun manufacturers who profit greatly from the fear fomented by mass murder.

But where are your sources that actually show that jubilation, robo? We need actual sources, not more of your mindless drivel.

Gun manufacturers make profits, but they're also helping keep Americans armed and proteced. 

 

Edited October 29, 2023 by Deluge

[Deluge]

17 hours ago, robosmith said:

Obviously, it is NOT ONLY the mentally ill whom are misusing guns. Duh

Then what's your proposal, diapers? How do we keep guns out of the wrong hands and still keep the Left's filthy, disgusting hands off the 2nd Amendment and our gun rights? 

[Aristides]

1 hour ago, Deluge said:

But where are your sources that actually show that jubilation, robo? We need actual sources, not more of your mindless drivel.

Gun manufacturers make profits, but they're also helping keep Americans armed and proteced. 

 

Perdue Pharma made billions flogging OxyContin to Americans, supposedly saving them from pain. That didn’t work out too well either.

Edited October 29, 2023 by Aristides

[Hodad]

7 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Perdue Pharma made billions flogging OxyContin to Americans, supposedly saving them from pain. That didn’t work out too well either.

Both appear to be addictive and deadly. But at least the oxyheads are only killing themselves.

[CdnFox]

11 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Total BS. You are so shamelessly dishonest it’s disgusting. Just because someone expresses an opinion on a tragedy doesn’t mean they’re “thrilled”.

 

Sure it does.  I mean - you're not worried about the PEOPLE, that's for sure. If you were THAT would be in there but no... just really excited about attacking gun owners.

Quote

Were conservatives thrilled about the Hamas massacre?  By your logic they must be 

Pretty much every conservatives started out saying that was beyond horrible.  Can you point to the headline or post that was made here saying  "Hamas kills people in celebration of their right to hate jews"?  No??  Not one??

What WAS the headlines and thread  topics here?  "Hamas attacks isreal".  Hmm.

So conservatives first reaction was the truth, and sadness for the deaths. Then the appropriate anger at the attack, and later on discussing things like should we be concerned about this religion and the demonstrations in our streets? Not like you - minute one "Oh lets make this POLITICIAL!! YAAAAY!!"

And you are back to blaming others for your own pathetic behavior.   "OHHH  - CONSERVATIVES CELEBRATE DEATH SO I SHOULD BE ABLE TO AS WELL!!!!"

Bullshit buddy.  We didn't - you did.  That was your choice.

When push came to shove -your first reaction was to dance on the dead in celebration of your perceived political victory. That is horrible.

55 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Both appear to be addictive and deadly. But at least the oxyheads are only killing themselves.

Actually they kill thousands of others.  They tend to get other people addicted and sell them drugs and force them to steal to support their own habits. Right now in BC the 'safe supply drugs given to those addicts are being resold to school children so they can buy harder drugs. New addicts -future dead people

But y'know - the left kind of likes drug addicts so we don't blame those killers for their crimes.

[Aristides]

2 hours ago, Hodad said:

Both appear to be addictive and deadly. But at least the oxyheads are only killing themselves.

A lot of them were made oxyheads by the medical profession. 

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Aristides said:

it takes real skill to hit anything that isn't quite close.

So, if someone passes their background checks and hits the gun range routinely, that should do the trick?

The only point you're making, is in the reduction of deaths.

It does nothing to stop or even dramatically reduce the occurrence of mass shootings.

As per your own admission, should such a person practice heavily with their firearm, they could still kill a significant amount of people.

Sure, those numbers would be as astronomical as over 30 or 50 people, as per recently witnessed in the US, it does nothing to stop someone to hit a crowded area, with a very good gun.

My aunt in the US swears by her Glock, and I know people who prefer Smith and Wessons or Rugers, to name a few.

Tell me, how I don't get a high kill count, shooting at a large crowd, near a locked exit?

You've done nothing to prove removing ARs or similar weapons from circulation would reduce the occurrence of mass shootings.

You're pointing to the most popularized mass shootings, ignoring that there have literally been dozens this year alone, and are demonizing a weapon vs the culture that creates such men.

You're essentially demonizing V8 engines and Miller beer for high speed crashes under the influence, vs what could cause a person to be as selfish as to take their life, and lives of others by getting behind the wheel when they clearly aren't in a condition to.

 

[Aristides]

44 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

So, if someone passes their background checks and hits the gun range routinely, that should do the trick?

The only point you're making, is in the reduction of deaths.

It does nothing to stop or even dramatically reduce the occurrence of mass shootings.

As per your own admission, should such a person practice heavily with their firearm, they could still kill a significant amount of people.

Sure, those numbers would be as astronomical as over 30 or 50 people, as per recently witnessed in the US, it does nothing to stop someone to hit a crowded area, with a very good gun.

My aunt in the US swears by her Glock, and I know people who prefer Smith and Wessons or Rugers, to name a few.

Tell me, how I don't get a high kill count, shooting at a large crowd, near a locked exit?

You've done nothing to prove removing ARs or similar weapons from circulation would reduce the occurrence of mass shootings.

You're pointing to the most popularized mass shootings, ignoring that there have literally been dozens this year alone, and are demonizing a weapon vs the culture that creates such men.

You're essentially demonizing V8 engines and Miller beer for high speed crashes under the influence, vs what could cause a person to be as selfish as to take their life, and lives of others by getting behind the wheel when they clearly aren't in a condition to.

 

Not really. Cops don't carry carbines in their cars because their side arms are good enough.

My son is a cop and I have fired his Glock and a Baretta 9MM at a police range. You can't hope to do the same thing with a hand  gun as you can with a rifle. Barrel length is everything when it comes to accuracy. The longest Glock barrel is 6 inches, the shortest legal AR barrel is 16 inches, most are 20".  The 20" AR also has double the muzzle velocity of a 6" 9MM Glock. No comparison. Any handgun is a short range weapon, even in skilled hands.

 

The Vegas shooter killed 60 and wounded over 400 at a range of just under 500 yards. Completely impossible with a hand gun.

Edited October 29, 2023 by Aristides

[OftenWrong]

7 hours ago, Aristides said:

am not lying when I say I think you are full of shit

No but you could be mistaken, as you've been wrong on so many other counts.

[Aristides]

2 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

No but you could be mistaken, as you've been wrong on so many other counts.

I have?  I didn't make it personal by calling someone a liar, up until then it was just a disagreement. CdnFox can't handle disagreements so he has to call people liars.

[CdnFox]

26 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Not really. Cops don't carry carbines in their cars because their side arms are good enough.

 

Ahem.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/toronto-police-rifles-1.3409707

Toronto the last GTA police force to acquire high-powered rifles for its front-line officers

 

Quote

The Vegas shooter killed 60 and wounded over 400 at a range of just under 500 yards. Completely impossible with a hand gun.

Well first off your range is wrong there. And secondly yes it's entirely possible to do that with a handgun.  Accuracy means nothing when you're firing into a crowd, he wasn't picking out individual targets.

And against unarmored people a .40 will kill just fine at those ranges, never mind something like a 50 or a 44 mag or a 357

Generally a rifle will pack more energy at range but he was shooting a 223, which is a pretty small cartridge to begin with, and these were unarmored people.

Sounds like yet another example of someone who knows nothing of guns

And of course - if what he had was pistols there would have been nothing stopping him from throwing some extended 30 rounders into a few glocks, strapping on 4 in holsters and carrying 2 - and just walking up to the crowd pulling the trigger as fast as he could. Fact is - that probably would have resulted in more than 40 dead.  The tactics follow the weapon of choice - not the other way around.

But every one knows if you want the paper time use an ar. It's scary -  it can hold 500 rounds of ammo and  it's got the shoulder thing that goes up and you'll get lots of time in the  news if you use that.

Remember - the virginia tech shooter killed 32 with just two pistols, and basically ran out of people at that point.

Edited October 29, 2023 by CdnFox

[CdnFox]

 

15 minutes ago, Aristides said:

I have?  I didn't make it personal by calling someone a liar, up until then it was just a disagreement. CdnFox can't handle disagreements so he has to call people liars.

 

I can't handle liars.  You're not just wrong - you lie.

And then you get mad when other people recognize you're a liar.  Not just that you disagree - but that you deliberately and knowingly say things that are false regularly and engage in dishonest debate tactics.

Don't hate on me just because of YOUR bad choices in life.

[Aristides]

3 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Ahem.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/toronto-police-rifles-1.3409707

Toronto the last GTA police force to acquire high-powered rifles for its front-line officers

 

Well first off your range is wrong there. And secondly yes it's entirely possible to do that with a handgun.  Accuracy means nothing when you're firing into a crowd, he wasn't picking out individual targets.

And against unarmored people a .40 will kill just fine at those ranges, never mind something like a 50 or a 44 mag or a 357

Generally a rifle will pack more energy at range but he was shooting a 223, which is a pretty small cartridge to begin with, and these were unarmored people.

Sounds like yet another example of someone who knows nothing of guns

And of course - if what he had was pistols there would have been nothing stopping him from throwing some extended 30 rounders into a few glocks, strapping on 4 in holsters and carrying 2 - and just walking up to the crowd pulling the trigger as fast as he could. Fact is - that probably would have resulted in more than 40 dead.  The tactics follow the weapon of choice - not the other way around.

But every one knows if you want the paper time use an ar. It's scary -  it can hold 500 rounds of ammo and  it's got the shoulder thing that goes up and you'll get lots of time in the  news if you use that.

Remember - the virginia tech shooter killed 32 with just two pistols, and basically ran out of people at that point.

Our local police have had C8's for over ten years. Your link is seven years old.

The low muzzle velocity of a handgun would mean a slug would be not be carrying a lot of energy at 500 yards even if you could hit something at that range. An AR is far more lethal at that range and the rate of fire using a bump stock would also be higher. 

A 9mm handgun slug is packing just over 100 ft lbs of energy at 500 yards, a .223 slug from an AR is packing about 1500 ft lbs. 

Edited October 30, 2023 by Aristides

[Aristides]

3 hours ago, CdnFox said:

 

 

I can't handle liars.  You're not just wrong - you lie.

And then you get mad when other people recognize you're a liar.  Not just that you disagree - but that you deliberately and knowingly say things that are false regularly and engage in dishonest debate tactics.

Don't hate on me just because of YOUR bad choices in life.

Why do you feel the need to be such an A hole?  It is obviously compensating for something. Oh well, back on ignore.

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, Aristides said:

Our local police have had C8's for over ten years.

Yes - so suggesting they don't carry patrol carbines would be inaccurate.

 

3 minutes ago, Aristides said:

The low muzzle velocity of a handgun would mean a slug would be not be carrying a lot of energy at 500 yards even if you could hit something at that range.

More than enough to kill a person. Depends on the handgun of course but lots of them would be quite lethal especially from an elevated position.

Hell - even 22lr says "dangerous out to a mile" right on the box:   LOL

7 minutes ago, Aristides said:

An AR is far more lethal at that range and the rate of fire using a bump stock would also be higher. 

At 500 yards both of them are stretching things. The lethality wouldn't be radically different.  Niether are designed for those ranges at all.  Both would be capable of killing - And a bump stock just makes the fire less accurate.

Quote

A 9mm handgun slug is packing just over 100 ft lbs of energy at 500 yards, a .223 slug from an AR is packing about 1500 ft lbs. 

You've done your math wrong. Unless that's some super crazy custom load.  5.56 doesn't have 1500 fps coming out of the barrel, never mind at 500 yards.  It's usually more like 1000 - 1200 fps at the barrel. It might have 200-300 at that range. A 357 would have more like 100.

But in either case - why would the pistol be a 9 mm? Why not a 44 mag? Or a 357?  Or 50 sw?

I mean - if we're going that route then i say the ar platform is chambered in 22lr You can get conversion kids for that.

 

 And as i said you could easily just walk up to the crowds and fire with two pistols and do even more damage.

 

 

[CdnFox]

18 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Why do you feel the need to be such an A hole?  It is obviously compensating for something. Oh well, back on ignore.

Why do you need to lie? It's obviously compensating for something  

For whatever reason you want to be angry at people to don't tolerate liars. 

And you are well aware that you are one.  You're going to find in life (if you haen't already) that a LOT of people don't appreciate that.

There is something fundamentally wrong with you if you behave badly like that and get mad at other people for your own behavior. Everyone makes mistakes but you go way beyond that and you know that's true. So - correct that and you won't have that problem.

 

[Deluge]

10 hours ago, Aristides said:

Perdue Pharma made billions flogging OxyContin to Americans, supposedly saving them from pain. That didn’t work out too well either.

There's nothing in the Constitution about Pharma. 

You pacifists will say anything to get rid of legal gun ownership, won't you. I'll bet violent criminals absolutely love you ldiots. lol

[Aristides]

36 minutes ago, Deluge said:

There's nothing in the Constitution about Pharma. 

You pacifists will say anything to get rid of legal gun ownership, won't you. I'll bet violent criminals absolutely love you ldiots. lol

You really don't listen very good. I don't think guns should be banned. I'm not in favour of doing so in my own country but you Americans are insane.

https://www.npr.org/2023/10/29/1209340362/mass-shootings-halloween-tampa-chicago-atlanta

Edited October 30, 2023 by Aristides

[CdnFox]

22 minutes ago, Aristides said:

You really don't listen very good. I don't think guns should be banned. I'm not in favour of doing so in my own country but you Americans are insane.

nobody believes you.  You don't come across as being believable. This is why it's important not to lie.