Scary Looking Semi-automatic Firearm Update

After the Sandy Hook tragedy I urged caution, and patients to ensure that we knew the facts before we started screaming at one another about gun control.  It is always a good idea to know the facts of an issue before you begin a debate.  Well a recent news story from NBC has shown why we should be patient. 

“This continues to be a very complex investigation and there is a lot of contradictory information out there, but we have some new information this morning (one month ago) from a couple of federal officials and state officials.

They say now that there were actually four handguns inside the school, not just two as we were initially told. Four handguns and apparently only handguns that were taken into the school.

We knew that Adam Lanza, the man said to be the gunman here, also had an ‘assault-style’ AR-15 -style rifle that he had had taken to the school, it was in the car he drove there, his mother’s car, but we have been told by several officials that he had left that in the car“

Here is a link to the original story.

http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/50208495#50208495

Is the NBC report creditable, I don’t know.  I will have to research the issue more. I do no NBC has had a history of editing stories to fit a narrative. Like in the Trevon Martin case, where they edited the 911 call to make the shooter sound more racists.  So is this proof scary looking semi-automatic rifle was not used in the shooting, not necessarily, but it is reason to question whether another gun control law would have stopped this beast from killing those people, or if it would have been as ineffective as the other laws he broke to commit this act.

I will keep you up to date as more information becomes available.

Advertisements
12 comments
  1. A Semi-automatic gun ban wouldn’t have stopped Adam Lanza. I heard rumors that he didn’t use the Bushmaster and he easily could have done his damage with 4 hand guns.That being said….James Holmes with a Automatic Rifle carrying a couple more 100 round clips woulda been much worse.Should we make hand grenades and landmines available at Chicks Sporting Goods? There is a line and many people refuse to admit it exists….but it does.

  2. @tendollar4ways – You keep making assumptions, but only ones that fit your argument, without looking at the whole picture.  Just because a weapon is fully auto, doesn’t mean it’s accurate or that the shooter is accurate.  It would be pretty much impossible for him to hit a different target with each round.  The toll would not have been much worse, if at all.  The rounds would have been expelled faster, meaning he may have actually hit LESS people with a fully auto rifle.  It would have also made it a necessity to reload sooner, meaning it would have given a window to take him down.It’s actually possible, that with a fully auto rifle, the toll would have been less.Concealed carry would have stopped the Aurora shooter in his tracks, possibly preventing any loss of life other than his.  Especially with the way a theater is set up and where he was, it would have been unlikely innocents would have been shot by someone trying to stop him as the seats are higher in the back of the theater and he was near the doors by the screen, actually putting him in the worst spot for himself.The shooter at the mall in Oregon was stopped by an armed citizen, Nick Meli.  When he brandished his weapon, the shooter fled and shot himself.While Joseph Zamudio didn’t use his gun to stop the man that shot Gabby Giffords, the fact that he had a concealed carry helped him make the decision to help.  He even stated that had he gotten there sooner, he may have shot the gunman.I notice you enjoy posting the names of the shooters, futher giving them credibility and fame.  Yet, you continue to ignore those that have used concealed carry to stop would be shooters.  Funny how that works to your agenda, and your typical “make up my mind before even taking a small glance at the facts” tactics.

  3. @obamawatch – I know. However if he had a fully auto + a few extra 100 round clips….woulda been worse.@grim_truth – In 1997 there were a couple of yahoos who held off 90 + Police for 47 mins with 2 fully automatic weapons in North Hollywood and body armor. I find hit hard to beleive Ms. Adams with a 9 mm woulda stopped anyone in Newtown.You two wanna make sure lunatics like Holmes, Lanza, etc have access to the most deadly and lethal weapons availble and it is insane. No Anthrax at CVS, No Hand Grenades at Sportsmart, We shouldn’t be selling RPG’s or Surface to air missles to any asshole who wants one.You two are lunatics!

  4. @tendollar4ways – It is obvious that you have very little experience with firearms.  That is fine, many people these days lack a practical real world knowledge of fire arms, it is a by product of a radical progressive movement attempting to demonize them.  An AR-15 is a large hard to conceal firearm.  The 100 round mags are large, bulky, awkward to work with, heavy, and very impractical for someone trying to sneak into someplace.  So the idea of  “If he just happened to have a different gun and few extra 3 pound magazines on him, he would have been able to wipe out more people” is just insane and grasping for straws.  The extra weight would have slowed him down, it would have made him easier to spot before he got to the theater, it would have made him stick out.   That is why the majority of shooters don’t use semi-automatic hunting rifles, they use hand guns.  You are just as likely to be a victim of a mass murderer with a revolver as you are with one using a scary looking semi-automatic rifle. Then there is the fact that he didn’t use a fully automatic rifle, he used an AR-15.  He came into a room filled with un-armed victims who where unable to defend themselves.  They had to wait for the police to arrive. We don’t know that, just because a gun fires faster does not equate to more kills.  The Military has realized this. Many modern M-16’s don’t even have a full auto option. They have opted in stead for a three round burst option, because full auto results in a waste of ammunition. Why is it hard to believe that someone with a gun could have stopped someone else with a gun? It happens all the time. What do you think the police are going to do when they get there? The whole idea behind concealed carry permits is the idea that its takes too long for the police to respond to a crime, and that people must be able to defend themselves.  Guns are used 989,883 times a year by civilians defending themselves. There have been many cases where an armed teacher has stopped a school shooting, you just don’t hear about that.  One such incident is the Pearl River MS Shooting is one, the 16 year old would be mass murder was stopped when the assistant principle Joel Myrid retrieved his .45 caliber hand gun from his car. Now if I just handed someone a gun, I don’t expect that will even their odds, they have to be trained on how to use it first.  They need to practice with it, make its use second nature.  Then yes, I do believe that Ms. Adams with a .45 (lets at least give them a nice gun) would have made a difference. Often times you will find that women are far better shots than men.  I don’t know why, they just seem to have a knack for it. Why is it you think that women can defend themselves, do you think that she has to have a policemen come do it for her?Even having an armed police officer in the school would make a difference. The reason school shootings have such high fatality rates is because the shooters have 20 minutes or more to reign down death upon unarmed helpless individuals. I fail to see how looking at the situation rationally makes us lunatics. We have tried your way. We have made it illegal to have guns at schools, yet somehow school massacres are still happening. Maybe that is because gun bans are ineffective at preventing people from trying to kill one another.  Maybe it is because gun bans only attempt to address a symptom of the problem, the cause. The definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. What the progressive left is proposing is the exact same thing that they have proposed for the last 50 years. Ban guns, make it harder to get guns, make gun owners look like criminals.  They have tried it, and it has failed.  So who is the lunatic?Maybe I should tag stalin, adolf, and a few other mass murders who first sought to disarm their people?

  5. He would have been spotted?? I bet a lot of people saw him leave, thought wtf is he going to go smoke a joint? I have seen people pull that crap and think nothing of it. Dude with an automatic rifle with a bunch of fish in a barrel (people in  a elevated theater) could kill more people faster than with a semi-automatic. Simple math and physics.http://newsone.com/1829045/live-science-study-racists-right-wing-low-iqs/You have some weird fetish with a metal object too dude. Pussy…it is much much better. Makes ya as stupid or you do even stupider shit but it will keep ya from trying to tell me 100 round in 12.5 seconds is less deadly than 50 rounds in 60 seconds.

  6. @tendollar4ways – you don’t know much about guns, and that is alright.  When a gun fires, it recoils, that recoil, then throws off the next shot.  A skilled marksmen might be able to do more damage, but not your average shooter.  That is physics.  One I am not a racists, nice try at diversion. Two a typical progressive zealot tactic to make anyone who dares question the will of the hierarchy to appear as morons. I would go into math with you, and explain the concepts of firearms with you, but there is no debating with a zealot who has no respect for the person he is talking to.

  7. @obamawatch – Yea…my last comment was uncalled for.  I was going for the IQ vs the Rascist angle btw but that too was uncalled for.I have said this 100 times to people like you and I will say it again. There is a difference between banning all hand guns and banning automatic rifles, land mines and hand grenades. You answer ever argument and act as if everyone on the left wants to ban every single gun from BB to Fully Automatic. This too is disrespectful.This is pretty much why discussion go no where.

  8. @tendollar4ways – You do realize that fully automatic weapons are illegal in this country, unless you have a class III license. I am not talking about whether or not they should be banned.   That is a debate for another day. What I am talking about is the radical left wanting to exploit the death of children to not only ban semi-automatic rifles, but alter the meaning and purpose of the second amendment.  I have said this a thousand times,  the AR-15 is a semi automatic rifle, it just looks scary. If it was fully automatic it wouldn’t be an AR-15 it would be an M-16.  I treat every gun ban for what it is, a precedent setting action. If we allow the government to limit our rights, rights that we specifically reserved for the people, what is to stop them from limiting other rights?  All these corrupt power whores in Washington need is a precedent, and they will run with it. The current gun ban proposed by Senator Feinstein  is a gun grab, going after countless firearms, and giving the attorney general the authority to add specific firearms to the banned list.  I go after gun control legislation, because it is always a gut jerk reaction to anytime a monster unleashes chaos on the world. There is no evidence that more gun control will curve the violence in this nation. All these gun bans are, are political stunts, that politicians can hold up and say “I did something, and they wanted to kill puppies and hurt kids”.  They do not deal with the issue that lead to the violence in the first place.   The gun does not cause a person to go crazy, the world we live in does. The collapse of the American Family, the disintegration of our communities, these are not things that government can fix, but rather things that you and I must work together to fix. These politicians forget about the outside world, they live in palaces, with armed guards, and limos.  I would also like to point out that there are radicals out there, such as Senator Feinstein who do want to ban all fire arms, and come and take them straight from the American People. 

  9. @tendollar4ways – If I have offended you, I do apologize, that does happen from time to time. I try to prevent it, but it is hard to keep everyone on the un-offended list.

  10. Naw..don’t worry about offending me homey. If you aren’t offending me, I would be bored.

Let the discussion begin

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: