Parkland, FL 2/14/18 School Shooting, 17 Killed (Another mass shooting!)

[ssvarc]

i guess we're all assuming that its obvious that an assault rifle is far from being the weapon of choice in a home invasion , and that people that do choose to defend their homes will be using a more sensible weapon.

Yes, about that "obvious" assumption, here is a link where you can educate yourself.

https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2015/5/26/the-ar-for-home-defense-one-experts-opinion

[gingyguy]

Yes, about that "obvious" assumption, here is a link where you can educate yourself.

https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2015/5/26/the-ar-for-home-defense-one-experts-opinion

your expert agrees that over penetration is a issue by the assault rifle. he says that bullet for bullet a handgun is possibly worse.
but in a AR15 it wont be bullet for bullet

[aygart]

Vast majority of mass shootings in US are done with handguns.

Vast majority of mass casualty shootings (four or more deaths) in US are with handguns.

The deadliest school shooting in the US was done with handguns. (It was also the deadliest school shooting in the world not committed by terrorists.)

We have already gone through how these arguments are fallacious.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

That's not my claim. I'll quote myself again.

No that was your claim. Now you want to qualify it and that is fine. At least you come to realize that more murders have been committed with guns than lives saved.

You love to cherry pick statistics. You seem to have left the deadliest mass shooting committed with an AR.

You are also fuzzy on the constitution. Even so called free speech has restrictions. SCOTUS has allowed restrictions on guns.

Yes an AR can be used for hunting. It can also be used to hammer a nail and even dig a hole. The fact is it is an assault rifle. If you know anything at all about guns you would not even argue this fact.

[aygart]

Yes, about that "obvious" assumption, here is a link where you can educate yourself.

https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2015/5/26/the-ar-for-home-defense-one-experts-opinion

Finally a substantive argument. Wow it took this long.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

do they even make them anymore?

No but they were built to last forever.

[ssvarc]

Huh? Because it doesn't say that it was a handgun we should assume that it was an assault rifle? argumentum ad ignorantiam
If we don't know that it was an assault rifle then how does it show anything? You are trying to show something about assault rifles saving lives and have not done so.

1. First off, as I've explained to @gingyguy, the use of an AR, particularly in home defense, is reasonable.

Many, many experts feel it's preferred. (To be honest, at this time I don't recall a single expert who prefers a different gun for home defense, although perhaps you can find.)

There's absolutely no reason to assume or dismiss it's use in that capacity beyond the percentage of homes that have them, compared to other guns.

And if they have both types of guns, it's reasonable to assume they would choose the better one, the AR.

So your claim that the stories were only about handguns, was either a) you didn't bother to read them, b) lack of reading comprehension, c) lack of honesty.

2. I wasn't trying to show something about AR's. I was trying to show the common sense basis for believing that guns save more lives of innocent citizens then are murdered by them.

Let me refresh your memory.

What's the question?
How do want me to respond to some idiotic statement that guns saved more lives each year than murders committed. That's like me saying the Torah was written by the devil.

And my response:

Sure, because everyone knows that having a gun never saved anyone's life, or saved someone from being injured, or saved someone from being raped, or having their property taken.

Everyone knows that the police are always with you 24/7 and that there is absolutely no need to be able to defend yourself, they'll do it for you.

Everyone believes that 80+ olds (see the last link below) would just as easily be able to defend themselves without a gun against a young hoodlum.

Right?

What about:
http://www.kltv.com/story/37406038/bowie-county-sheriffs-office-private-citizen-shot-man-trying-to-break-into-home

https://patch.com/georgia/woodstock/waffle-house-customer-shoots-armed-robbers-photos-released

http://www.theadvocate.com/new_orleans/news/crime_police/article_05488ee0-088d-11e8-881d-2f2e163c4e43.html

http://www.wtae.com/article/one-dead-after-shooting-in-springdale-township/16565279

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/utah/articles/2018-02-04/pistol-packing-passer-by-aids-utah-policeman-being-assaulted

http://www.wbko.com/content/news/Concealed-Carry-holder-holds-robbery-suspect-until-deputies-arrive-472231523.html

https://www.tcpalm.com/story/news/crime/indian-river-county/2018/02/01/shooting-reported-southwest-indian-river-county/1088776001/

http://myfox8.com/2018/02/01/fort-bragg-soldier-allegedly-shoots-kills-wifes-attacker-at-north-carolina-home/

https://txktoday.com/crime/man-shot-attempting-break-house-liberty-eylau/

http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2018/01/holyoke_man_arrested_for_assau.html

https://patch.com/florida/landolakes/new-port-richey-mother-says-son-strangled-her-so-she-shot-him

http://www.wusa9.com/mobile/article/news/local/maryland/83-year-old-retired-md-teacher-shoots-intruder/513321441

(This is just from one week, and it's a drop in the bucket. It doesn't include cases where just displaying the weapon caused the criminal to walk away, but those are people saved as well. Etc.)

Come on. It's "ridiculous" to believe those news reports. You should only believe the ones where guns killed people.

All on their own.

Big, black, bad, scary looking guns.

Just killed people.

Common sense.

It's so ridiculous to believe that the proper use of a gun can save a person, that I'll just insult people who bring up that point.

That'll prove me right and them wrong.

Right?

Once again, not quoting my claims correctly.

People are trying to score debating points, not trying to have an honest, serious discussion.

Sad.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Yes, about that "obvious" assumption, here is a link where you can educate yourself.

https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2015/5/26/the-ar-for-home-defense-one-experts-opinion

How many links you want me to produce showing a handgun is the best choice. Try and use common sense if at all possible.

[ssvarc]

your expert agrees that over penetration is a issue by the assault rifle. he says that bullet for bullet a handgun is possibly worse.
but in a AR15 it wont be bullet for bullet

No. He states quite explicitly that overpenetration is an issue by all bullets, but certainly worse from pistols and shotguns.

"The fact of the matter is that many of these bullets will penetrate numerous walls, but standard 5.56 loadings are the least of your worries when compared to pistol and shotgun fodder, which continue to take top honors in the category of over-penetration." 

[gingyguy]

No. He states quite explicitly that overpenetration is an issue by all bullets, but certainly worse from pistols and shotguns.

"The fact of the matter is that many of these bullets will penetrate numerous walls, but standard 5.56 loadings are the least of your worries when compared to pistol and shotgun fodder, which continue to take top honors in the category of over-penetration."

but shooting more bullets (assault weapon) gets you more over penetration

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Once again, not quoting my claims correctly.

People are trying to score debating points, not trying to have an honest, serious discussion.

Sad.

This has nothing to do with debating points. If you claim 1+1=3 then yes we can't have an honest discussion.

Be honest and admit you were mistaken when you said: guns saved more lives each year than murders committed.

[aygart]

1. First off, as I've explained to @gingyguy, the use of an AR, particularly in home defense, is reasonable.

Many, many experts feel it's preferred. (To be honest, at this time I don't recall a single expert who prefers a different gun for home defense, although perhaps you can find.)

There's absolutely no reason to assume or dismiss it's use in that capacity beyond the percentage of homes that have them, compared to other guns.

And if they have both types of guns, it's reasonable to assume they would choose the better one, the AR.

So your claim that the stories were only about handguns, was either a) you didn't bother to read them, b) lack of reading comprehension, c) lack of honesty.

My point was that it shows nothing about ARs how about we only go with what can be actaully shown without any assumptions at all. I did not say that they definitely were handguns, only that they were not shown to be ARs. If you have something to show about ARs then go ahead and do so. Don't expect me to answer just from your saying those could have been ARs.

2. I wasn't trying to show something about AR's. I was trying to show the common sense basis for believing that guns save more lives of innocent citizens then are murdered by them.

Let me refresh your memory.

And my response:


Once again, not quoting my claims correctly.

People are trying to score debating points, not trying to have an honest, serious discussion.

Sad.

As part of a disucssion where all @ChaimMoskowitz proposed was to ban ARs. The way you are making such blatantly fallacious arguments and exaggerating what people have written while also constantly in almost every single post making personal attacks makes a statement about who is the one not ready for an honest discussion.

[ssvarc]

No that was your claim. Now you want to qualify it and that is fine. At least you come to realize that more murders have been committed with guns than lives saved.

You love to cherry pick statistics. You seem to have left the deadliest mass shooting committed with an AR.

You are also fuzzy on the constitution. Even so called free speech has restrictions. SCOTUS has allowed restrictions on guns.

Yes an AR can be used for hunting. It can also be used to hammer a nail and even dig a hole. The fact is it is an assault rifle. If you know anything at all about guns you would not even argue this fact.

Let's quote my claim again.

...many more innocent citizens lives are saved by guns every year then are murdered by them...

Can't we agree on the truth when it's starting us in the face?

Sad.

If you don't like my statistics, bring your own. If you'll provide links to your statistics, I'll did the same. Until then this is just innuendo of someone losing an argument.

As for your innuendo about my grasp on the Constitution, here was my last Constitutional response to you.

...
4. We don't have to prove our reasons for exercising Constitutional rights. Same as someone using 1A doesn't need to prove that his free speech has utility.

You, who want to restrict the right, need to prove that there's an overwhelming public harm that can't be met any other reasonable way, that won't cause more harm if restricted.

What was"fuzzy"? Where did I say that there can be no restrictions?

As for your remarks about the uses of AR's, I've already addressed this above.

[ssvarc]

This has nothing to do with debating points. If you claim 1+1=3 then yes we can't have an honest discussion.

Be honest and admit you were mistaken when you said: guns saved more lives each year than murders committed.

You mangle my claim and then expect me to accept it as my own?

I chose my words carefully and specifically.

Here is what I actually said: "...many more innocent citizens lives are saved by guns every year then are murdered by them..."

And here is the link to it:

...many more innocent citizens lives are saved by guns every year then are murdered by them...

[aygart]

Let's quote my claim again. Can't we agree on the truth when it's starting us in the face?

Sad.

If you don't like my statistics, bring your own. If you'll provide links to your statistics, I'll did the same. Until then this is just innuendo of someone losing an argument.

Where did you bring any statistics showing which was more than the other? Burden of proof fallacy. You hav not backed up your claim at all. He does not need to prove it wrong. If you feel that the numbers of saved is higher go show it not just that there are some who were saved.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Here is the exact quote:

Finally, since many more innocent citizens lives are saved by guns every year then are murdered by them, any broad based ban will end up causing even more innocent deaths. The exact opposite of any sane policy choice.

Now you say:

Can't we agree on the truth when it's starting us in the face?

In 2016 we had over 17k+ murders. Please show me where over 17k+ lives were saved by guns in 2016. If you can't just admit you were mistaken and move on.
https://qz.com/1086403/fbi-crime-statistics-us-murders-were-up-in-2016-and-chicago-had-a-lot-to-do-with-it/

ETA: Those stats where not all murders. Change stats to 2014 and 8k+. Will try and find updated stats.
https://qz.com/1086403/fbi-crime-statistics-us-murders-were-up-in-2016-and-chicago-had-a-lot-to-do-with-it/

[aygart]

Here is the exact quote:Now you say:In 2016 we had over 17k+ murders. Please show me where over 17k+ lives were saved by guns in 2016. If you can't just admit you were mistaken and move on.
https://qz.com/1086403/fbi-crime-statistics-us-murders-were-up-in-2016-and-chicago-had-a-lot-to-do-with-it/

Were all of those 17k killed by guns?

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Were all of those 17k killed by guns?

Didn't look but I am guessing the answer is no. Thanks for pointing that out. Let me go Google again. 

[TimT]

Let me go Google again. 

Thats where it’s all coming from ?

[ssvarc]

but shooting more bullets (assault weapon) gets you more over penetration

Shooting more bullets from an AR (which is an assumption which we'll get back to) will incur more instances, but not more (further distance) over-penetration.

Experts feel that AR's are better since you'll miss less often, which is the single biggest issue leading to over-penetration.

This is in that article.

There is no reason to assume that having an AR will lead to "spray and pray". You could just as easily "spray and pray" with a pistol. This boils down to common sense, training, and being responsible for each bullet you shoot.

Finally, not all AR magazines have more bullets, particularly if you live in a state that restricts magazine capacity, in which case they'll both have the same, leaving you with the more accurate, less penetrating weapon in the AR.