Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 18 minutes later[^][v]#445,142
Please take this race baiting elsewhere
HaikerensGuide !dBGi/iH4eY joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 20 minutes after the original post[^][v]#445,143
> walter > opinion
Metæ joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 51 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#445,158
I think it's primarily psychological. It's big and black and scary looking. Also it looks like the M16/M4 which is full auto so it must be a scary army weapon.
Aside from the Sandy Hook shootings and the Aurora theater shooting, most firearm homicides seem to be committed with pistols. I'd be willing to bet that 90+% of the firearm murders in Chicago were committed with handguns.
Think about it from a utilitarian standpoint: why would you, as a criminal, want a weapon that's retardedly expensive ($1k minimum), fires expensive ammo, is impossible to conceal, and hard to maneuver in tight spaces? It's everything you don't want in a gun to do urban crimes with.
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 24 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#445,160
@previous (Metæ) > Aside from the Sandy Hook shootings and the Aurora theater shooting
and Santa Monica... and Portland...
Are you really puzzled about why there is a discussion about banning a weapon that people keep using for shooting sprees?
Falco !a7Q.SWNEJw joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 8 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#445,162
> Are you really puzzled about why there is a discussion about banning a weapon that people keep using for shooting sprees?
lolthis
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 3 hours later, 5 hours after the original post[^][v]#445,181
Liberals hate all forms of personal power. It's the logical side effect of believing their opinion in all matters should be relevant.
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 6 hours later, 12 hours after the original post[^][v]#445,225
@445,160 (E)
He doesn't care. None of those sorts care. They want their guns and nothing else matters.
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 6 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^][v]#445,226
USAmerica: dozens of horrible, mass murders every day. Solution? More guns for everyone.
Anonymous H replied with this 13 years ago, 3 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^][v]#445,227
@previous (I)
The problem is that there are too many guns, meaning that crazy people can easily get ahold of them. More guns is clearly the answer.
Anonymous E replied with this 13 years ago, 52 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^][v]#445,242
@445,225 (H)
I think of Meta as a pretty sane person. I'm just wondering why he thinks it's odd that people are talking about banning a weapon that has been used so often to commit mass murder. I realize that mass murder can be committed with a lot of different weapons, but it seems a little weird to make powerful weapons readily available to people who might do that.
US State laws (and well, borders) seem to be a big hurdle to reasonable gun laws. New York (outside of NYC) has a lot of rural countryside. California has a lot of wilderness. These states are trying to make gun laws on a basis that has to account for hiking in the mountains and living in the middle of one of the world's largest cities at the same time. How the fuck do you do that?? In Los Angeles it's pretty evident that that you shouldn't have any need to walk down the street with a massive gun. In the backwoods of central California, it actually makes sense. You might meet a bear. You might meet a rabid mountain lion. (You probably don't need an AR-15 to deal with these BTW, but it's probably a good idea to be armed just in case) New York? Same problem: Big cities and a lot of rural space to govern over at the same time.
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 1 hour later, 14 hours after the original post[^][v]#445,260
not a liberal, but AR-15 is a bitch gun. theres literally no skill involved in killing shit with it.
@445,160 (E)
for every sucessful shot an AR-15 gets in, a pistol gets hundreds
(Edited 4 minutes later.)
Anonymous E replied with this 13 years ago, 13 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^][v]#445,266
@previous (J)
Yes, I see the point. Handguns are by far more dangerous on the whole. But why do people do people who go on shooting sprees always seem to need an AR-15? If you are making a statistical argument, then isolated handgun violence kills a few people at a time while AR-15s kill many and cause tragedies. What are people doing that's necessary or useful with AR-15s that can't be done with a handgun?
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 53 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^][v]#445,279
@previous (E) > But why do people do people who go on shooting sprees always seem to need an AR-15?
there have only been twelve shootings that involved an AR15. thats a pitiful number to be calling "always".
now to answer your question, its because it looks like the M16
> If you are making a statistical argument, then isolated handgun violence kills a few people at a time while AR-15s kill many and cause tragedies.
different motivation. suicidal neckbeards wanna go out with a bang and use a gun that looks like a something in CoD, whereas people that kill with a pistol are likley only interested in a few people
also, fun fact- unless your firing a pump-action you can squeeze the trigger fast enough to make a gun functionally automatic.
> What are people doing that's necessary or useful with AR-15s that can't be done with a handgun?
its got more distance than a handgun, allowing you to place your targets much further back.
it can use many types of ammo, allowing you to practice with cheap ammo and then go hunting with the expensive stuff
you can modify the shit out of it with just a screwdriver- literally the build-your-own-computer of the gun world
(Edited 4 minutes later.)
Anonymous E replied with this 13 years ago, 7 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^][v]#445,280
@previous (J) > same reason fedoras are so popular nowadays.
Oh, okay.
> its got more distance than a handgun > you can modify the shit out of it with just a screwdriver
You're really committed to helping people who want to ban it make their point, aren't you?
> it can use many types of ammo
Meta says it fires expensive ammo. I'm confused.
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 18 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^][v]#445,283
@previous (E) > You're really committed to helping people who want to ban it make their point, aren't you?
the reasons that make it such a joy to own also makes it easy to fearmonger- theres just no avoiding that when it comes to firearms
> Meta says it fires expensive ammo. I'm confused.
metas a dumbass. theres only one part of the gun that cant be [legally] modified, and it doesnt handle bullets.
Anonymous E replied with this 13 years ago, 14 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^][v]#445,285
@previous (J)
Okay, so once more: What are people doing that's necessary or useful with AR-15s that can't be done with a handgun? Are there zombie invasions I don't know about?
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 28 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^][v]#445,299
@previous (E)
long range, is pretty much the only thing an AR15 can do that a handgun cant. all the other things are of note are of value only to a gun enthusiast.
also, as a reply to that obsessively edgy last sentence, the gun is man legos- or as a shooting buddy calls them- mangos.
Anonymous E replied with this 13 years ago, 3 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^][v]#445,300
@previous (J) > are of value only to a gun enthusiast.
yep.
Long range is something a gun is doing. What are people doing that's necessary or useful with AR-15s that can't be done with a handgun?
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 5 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^][v]#445,302
@previous (E)
long range shooting. semantics enough for you?
Anonymous E replied with this 13 years ago, 10 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^][v]#445,308
@previous (J)
You're not answering the question. What are people doing that would require an AR-15? Are they defending their homes? Protecting themselves from muggers? How would longer range help with that? Are they protecting themselves from burglars and muggers with sniper fire?? What are people doing that is necessary or useful that would necessitate the use of such a weapon?
Edit: To be blunt, "long range shooting" is a bit like "archery" or "fencing". It is neither necessary nor useful for your average person.
(Edited 6 minutes later.)
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 43 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^][v]#445,316
@previous (E)
yes i am. i did not enter this thread to convince anyone of the the guns the practical application of the gun, i came into this thread with the sole purpose of explaining why it should not be made a boogieman by a coven of liberals.
perhaps you need to stop posting at night? it really seems to be affecting your reading comprehension.
Anonymous E replied with this 13 years ago, 19 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#445,551
@previous (J)
ZOMG! Repeating retarded answers. Personal attacks when repeating retarded answers fails. That method of citing individual points and then making stupid comments. Mountainman?? Are you back?
Anonymous B replied with this 13 years ago, 8 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#445,687
Meta !PARAdoxiHw replied with this 13 years ago, 38 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#445,693
@445,242 (E)
But rifles in general, and the AR-15 in particular don't seem to figure much in the homicide statistics. According to the FBI data link, there were 8,583 firearm homicides in the US in 2011, of which 323 were committed with rifles. That, if my math is correct, equates to 3.8% of homicides being committed with any rifle. Compare this with 6,220 for pistols (almost twenty times as many).
I am not some crazed prepper doomsday Timothy McVeigh armed-to-the teeth NRA lifetime member wingnut. I just don't see any factual basis for the AR-15 hysteria.
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 13 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#445,694
I do not own an AR but I never ride anywhere without my AK. My brother-in-law has two ARs though. GUNS ARE AWESOME
Meta !PARAdoxiHw replied with this 13 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#445,695
@445,266 (E) > Yes, I see the point. Handguns are by far more dangerous on the whole. But why do people do people who go on shooting sprees always seem to need an AR-15? If you are making a statistical argument, then isolated handgun violence kills a few people at a time while AR-15s kill many and cause tragedies. What are people doing that's necessary or useful with AR-15s that can't be done with a handgun?
They don't always seem to need it, though. The Navy Yard shooter didn't, nor did the Columbine High School shooters, nor did the Virginia Tech Shooter, nor did the Fort Hood Shooter. The brothers Tsarnaev and Timothy McVeigh and the Unabomber didn't need any guns at all.
As for what are they doing that they can't do with a handgun? Nothing. Which is why AR-15s are not frequently used (see FBI data from my previous post).
Anonymous B replied with this 13 years ago, 5 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#445,696
Meta !PARAdoxiHw replied with this 13 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#445,697
I think also it's the media and fear effect from isolated mass shootings. Everyone lost their shit and panicked after 9/11, which killed 3,000 people. But in terms of fatalities, there's a 9/11 every 1.2 months on America's roads, yet no one is afraid to get behind the wheel every day and drive to work.
It's the same with shootings. There's probably been more people killed in Chicago this year then in all the mass shootings, yet which are people focusing on?
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 9 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^][v]#445,885