Turning The Ballot Box Against Republicans

@Real Music,

Real Music wrote:

I have not yet researched for the answers to my following questions. So, I don't yet have the answers. Oralloy, maybe you already have the answers.
1. How many individuals have been murdered by guns in America as compared to knives?

I think you misunderstand the point. The number who are killed with knives right now doesn't matter.

The point is that if you banned guns, the people who would have been killed with guns would simply be killed with different weapons.

Real Music wrote:

3. How many mass murders were done using guns in America as compared to knives?

If you banned guns, people who were inclined to commit mass murders would use bombs.

1 Reply

It was difficult locating hard data. I did find something. I was only able to find data for the year 2011.

The source of data:

U.S. Department of Justice
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Criminal Justice Information Service Division

In the year 2011
68% of murder victims were murdered by firearms
20% of murder victims were murdered by knives

I wasn't able to find any statistics regarding mass murders. I suspect that either all or virtually all of the mass murders in the U.S. were from assault rifles. I cannot confirm that because I was unable to find data regarding mass murders in the U.S.

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-11

2 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

If you banned guns, people who were inclined to commit mass murders would use bombs.

I don't believe most people are proposing banning all guns. I believe that most people support the right to own a gun. I do believe that most people probably support banning the type of guns that can kill a whole lot of people in a matter of seconds. Bombs are illegal while assault rifles are legal. The question is why aren't they both illegal.

2 Replies

@Real Music,

Real Music wrote:

I don't believe most people are proposing banning all guns. I believe that most people support the right to own a gun.

That's one reason why the gun banners are easily defeated.

Real Music wrote:

I also believe that most people probably support banning the type of guns that can kill a whole lot of people in a matter of seconds.

That has little to do with gun types. That's all due to ammo capacity.

Real Music wrote:

Bombs are illegal while assault rifles are legal. The question is why aren't they both illegal.

Because there isn't a good reason for banning pistol grips on a rifle.

0 Replies

@Real Music,

Real Music wrote:

I suspect that either all or virtually all of the mass murders in the U.S. were from assault rifles. I cannot confirm that because I was unable to find data regarding mass murders in the U.S.

The ones that used handguns certainly weren't.

Having a pistol grip on a rifle doesn't make it any more useful in committing a mass murder.

1 Reply

@Real Music,

Quote:

I suspect that either all or virtually all of the mass murders in the U.S. were from assault rifles.

No. Handguns were used more than rifles by a 5 to 1 ratio.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Maybe I am using the wrong terminology. Maybe I should rephrase in a different use of words. Maybe the correct term that I intended should have been automatic and semi-automatic assault rifles.

2 Replies

@Glennn,

Quote:

No. Handguns were used more than rifles by a 5 to 1 ratio.

Thank you. Does that ratio applies to mass murders or individual murders? I looked everywhere and could not find any statistical data on the types of guns used in mass murders.

2 Replies

@Real Music,

Quote:

Maybe I am using the wrong terminology. Maybe I should rephrase in a different use of words. Maybe the correct term that I intended should have been automatic and semi-automatic assault rifles.

It wouldn't change anything about what I said.

I'm not aware of anyone using an automatic weapon in a mass shooting. Are you?

Tell me the difference between a semi-automatic rifle and a semi-automatic assault rifle.

1 Reply

@Real Music,

Quote:

Does that ratio applies to mass murders or individual murders?

To mass murders.

https://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/rpt/2013-R-0057.htm

1 Reply

@Real Music,

Quote:

I don't believe most people are proposing banning all guns. I believe that most people support the right to own a gun. I do believe that most people probably support banning the type of guns that can kill a whole lot of people in a matter of seconds. Bombs are illegal while assault rifles are legal. The question is why aren't they both illegal.

That's bullshit! It will be an ever increasing encroachment on the 2nd Amendment. Getting rid of AR-15 weapons will do nothing to stop these types of crimes. When the shootings continue you will continue to limit guns. CA is already doing it, nothing they do stops people from being killed, so they will continue to pass laws that do nothing to actually solve any issues, it's all about the guns.

1 Reply

@Glennn,

Thanks again. This link you provide is very informative. The common theme I noticed from your link was mostly used by semi-automatic weapons.

https://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/rpt/2013-R-0057.htm

0 Replies

@Real Music,

Real Music wrote:

Quote:
I'm sure murder victims are much better off if they are killed with knives.

I have not yet researched for the answers to my following questions. So, I don't yet have the answers. Oralloy, maybe you already have the answers.
1. How many individuals have been murdered by guns in America as compared to knives?
3. How many mass murders were done using guns in America as compared to knives?

I don't yet know the answers to my own following questions. I will start researching to see if the answers to my questions can be found. I welcome anyone in A2K in assisting me.

While you're at it, check out how many people have saved themselves from assault and possible murder by criminals because they had a gun.

1 Reply

@Real Music,

Quote:

Thank you. Does that ratio applies to mass murders or individual murders? I looked everywhere and could not find any statistical data on the types of guns used in mass murders.

How many "mass murders/shootings" take place in our major cities each month? Look up Chicago's states, while the city is large, the majority of those gun crimes take place in 2 parts of town. How many people are shot during a drive-by?
Here are 2 news stories that are 2 days apart in Chicago Labor Day weekend 2017:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-chicago-shootings-violence-labor-day-weekend-20170901-story.html

https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/dead-wounded-chicago-labor-day-weekend-shootings-442562323.html

The point being, there is an average shot or killed on a holiday weekend in the inner cities compared to a mass shooting at a school.

0 Replies

@Glennn,

Quote:

I'm not aware of anyone using an automatic weapon in a mass shooting. Are you?

You are misunderstanding what I posted. Oralloy was correcting me over a terminology. I posted the term assault rifle. Oralloy was stating that the term assault rifle only referred to the type of grip on the gun. I then clarified my terminology to specify the weapon. I wasn't concern about what type of grip was on a gun. I am concern about a weapon that can fire off multiple rounds with one squeeze of the trigger. The weapons that can do that are define as either semi-automatic or automatic weapons

It seems like these mass murders in recent years were mostly used by either semi-automatic or automatic weapons. The link you provided supports that finding.

https://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/rpt/2013-R-0057.htm

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

Quote:

That's bullshit! It will be an ever increasing encroachment on the 2nd Amendment.

That's typical of the tripe that Charlatan Heston and the other NRA charlatans have pumped into ignorant people's heads.

1 Reply

@Real Music,

Real Music wrote:

Maybe I am using the wrong terminology. Maybe I should rephrase in a different use of words. Maybe the correct term that I intended should have been automatic and semi-automatic assault rifles.

An assault rifle is just a rifle with a pistol grip on it. Bans on assault rifles are bans on pistol grips and nothing more.

Well, there are other cosmetic features in addition to pistol grips, but the pistol grips are a good representation of all of the other harmless features and it's easier to just say pistol grips.

The NRA will have no trouble defeating any assault weapons ban because there is no reason to ban pistol grips, and if the impossible happens and the ban gets passed over the objections of the NRA, the courts will strike down the ban for the same reason.

I generally have a policy of not telling anyone how to achieve successful gun control, but I get a vibe from your posts that you aren't out to violate my rights like some people are, so I'll make an exception.

The way to achieve what you want is to make any detachable handgun magazine over ten rounds and any detachable rifle magazine over five rounds fall under the 1934 National Firearms Act.

That would still allow enough firepower for people to defend themselves and it is justifiable with a good reason, so it would pass muster with the Second Amendment. And it would take larger magazines out of the hands of someone who wants to go on a shooting spree.

1 Reply

@Real Music,

Real Music wrote:

I am concern about a weapon that can fire off multiple rounds with one squeeze of the trigger. The weapons that can do that are define as either semi-automatic or automatic weapons

If it can fire multiple rounds with one trigger pull then it is full auto, not semi-auto.

Such weapons are already restricted and I know of no massacre within the last 80 years that has involved full auto weapons.

1 Reply

@camlok,

camlok wrote:

That's typical of the tripe that Charlatan Heston and the other NRA charlatans have pumped into ignorant people's heads.

Nope. What he said was absolutely true.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

And it would take larger magazines out of the hands of someone who wants to go on a shooting spree.

No one would argue against that being the goal of most Americans. I seriously doubt that the NRA would ever support that goal. The reason the NRA would never support that goal is because the gun manufacturers and ammunition manufacturers would never support that goal. The NRA biggest financial supporter is not the paid members of the NRA. The biggest financial supporter of the NRA are the gun manufacturers and ammunition manufacturers. There goal is to sell as many guns and as much ammunitions to as many customers as humanly possible. Anything that interferes with that goal will result in the gun manufacturers ordering the NRA to fight against it.

The NRA say they represent the will of it's members. That's not entirely true. Many of the laws that the NRA opposes, the NRA members actually support. The NRA really represent the gun industry.

1 Reply

Turning The Ballot Box Against Republicans

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know