Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban?
Quote | Reply
     Wanted to do a gun thread distinct of the other. In talking with co-workers, I was surprised at how many agreed with me that a full auto ban is reasonable. Not at all looking to withdraw carry rights or anything else, just don't see enough "need" for the avg citizen to own a fully auto piece for fun, vs the carnage that can ensue if that weapon gets used in anger.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [dave_w] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
dave_w wrote:
Wanted to do a gun thread distinct of the other. In talking with co-workers, I was surprised at how many agreed with me that a full auto ban is reasonable. Not at all looking to withdraw carry rights or anything else, just don't see enough "need" for the avg citizen to own a fully auto piece for fun, vs the carnage that can ensue if that weapon gets used in anger.

You do know they are already banned don't you?
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [dave_w] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
dave_w wrote:
Wanted to do a gun thread distinct of the other. In talking with co-workers, I was surprised at how many agreed with me that a full auto ban is reasonable. Not at all looking to withdraw carry rights or anything else, just don't see enough "need" for the avg citizen to own a fully auto piece for fun, vs the carnage that can ensue if that weapon gets used in anger.
Full auto weapons have been banned for over 30 years in the U.S.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [dave_w] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You know who agrees with you? The people who implemented the ban 20+ years ago
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [dave_w] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Even if they weren't banned already, a person that is interested enough to have one is certainly going to be interested enough to learn to convert a semi into an auto.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [dave_w] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Gee, I better get one now before the ban takes place...

...oh, wait.

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
windywave wrote:
You know who agrees with you? The people who implemented the ban 20+ years ago

Well, they aren’t totally banned. People can still get them but it’s very very difficult to do it legally.

There are places all around Vegas (gun ranges) where you can rent and shoot full auto rifles.

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Duffy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
   What you said. There are special permits for other things as well, like silencers, that I think should stay in place.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Duffy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Duffy wrote:

Well, they aren’t totally banned. People can still get them but it’s very very difficult to do it legally.

There are places all around Vegas (gun ranges) where you can rent and shoot full auto rifles.
The fact that full auto isn't totally and completely illegal in any manner outside of the military is insane to me. I usually side with the right to own but the idea that this shooter could've obtained the weapons he used legally is just unacceptable.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [dave_w] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I don't know that much about guns but how hard is it to mod OTC weapons? 3d printing and CNC is pretty cheap now, I wonder how that factors into the equation.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Brownie28] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
The fact that full auto isn't totally and completely illegal in any manner outside of the military is insane to me.

Ok. That’s your opinion. I disagree, which is ok.

Quote:
the idea that this shooter could've obtained the weapons he used legally is just unacceptable.

At this we have no idea how he got it.

His obtaining of the weapon (if legal) is not what is unacceptable, it’s his chosen use of it that is.

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Brownie28] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I highly doubt he used fully automatic weapons. They're rare and expensive.

The military switched from fully automatic rifles (M-16) to 3-shot bursts after Vietnam because it just wasn't possible to shoot accurately on full auto. Firing single aimed shots is still probably preferable to 3-round bursts.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Sausagetail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sausagetail wrote:
I highly doubt he used fully automatic weapons. They're rare and expensive.

The military switched from fully automatic rifles (M-16) to 3-shot bursts after Vietnam because it just wasn't possible to shoot accurately on full auto. Firing single aimed shots is still probably preferable to 3-round bursts.

The audio from the videos is pretty clear. He wasn't using three round burst.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Duffy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Duffy wrote:
Quote:
The fact that full auto isn't totally and completely illegal in any manner outside of the military is insane to me.


Ok. That’s your opinion. I disagree, which is ok.

What is the possible use of full auto by a citizen? I typically defend gun owners and their rights in these threads but full auto is my line.

Quote:
Quote:
the idea that this shooter could've obtained the weapons he used legally is just unacceptable.


At this we have no idea how he got it.

His obtaining of the weapon (if legal) is not what is unacceptable, it’s his chosen use of it that is.
Well obviously his means of use is the most unacceptable. He'll probably be found to have had mental health issues, never should've had a weapon, etc. That to me is the biggest issue, our inability to adequately treat mentally unstable people and also keep them away from weapons. BUT, I don't think anyone should be able to get their hands on a full auto weapon.
Last edited by: Brownie28: Oct 2, 17 6:15
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Sausagetail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
I highly doubt he used fully automatic weapons. They're rare and expensive.

You can highly doubt it all you want.

It was definitely full auto gun fire.

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Brownie28] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
I don't think anyone should be able to get their hands on a full auto weapon.

Fair enough. That’s a perfectly reasonable position to have.

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Duffy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
After listening to a video, it does sound like full automatic fire. Probably an illegal conversion.

There's really no benefit to automatic fire for military rifles, which is why they removed that option.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [dave_w] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
    Type something like "steps to own full auto rifle" in your favorite search engine.
Here's the summary:
STEPS FOR BUYING NFA (CLASS III) WEAPONRY AT TARGET WORLD
(As of 11/3/07)
OVERVIEW:
Laws that went into effect in May, 1986 ma
de it illegal for 'civilians' to own fully
automatic firearms that were manufactured
after
that date. Most fully automatic
weapons manufactured and registered
before
May, 1986 may be owned and sold to
individuals. The full-auto
guns that may be owned by
individuals are called
'transferable'.
To purchase a transferable machine gun,
you must meet certain requirements
(generally the same as when you purchase
another gun), fill out special paperwork
(called a 'Form 4'), and pay a one-time tr
ansfer tax per weapon. The tax is $5.00
for all other weapons (AOW), or $200.00 fo
r a silencer, machin
e-gun, destructive
device, short barreled rifles (SBR),
or short barreled shotguns (SBS).
-
http://targetworld.net/...ponry)%2011-3-07.pdf
Last edited by: dave_w: Oct 2, 17 6:31
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [dave_w] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I remember seeing Class III guns or just the uppers going for $16,000. They're collectors items due to rarity.

It's much easier to do an illegal conversion and even that isn't that easy.

http://www.guncite.com/...ontrol_gcfullau.html
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Sausagetail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
This guy didn't need to be accurate in any way. So the automatic definitely added to the carnage.

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot

Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [dave_w] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The videos I've seen sounded an awful lot like an AK, which is a sound I know pretty well.

Ban or not, I can modify one of those to full auto in about 11 minutes.

I talk to myself because mine are the only answers I'll accept - George Carlin
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Tatonka] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
    Found this on actual numbers out there:
Real assault rifles are capable of automatic firing. Therefore, they are regulated by the federal government as machine guns under the Federal Firearms Act of 1934 and the completely misnamed Firearm Owners' Protection Act of 1986. The Firearm Owners’ Protection Act entirely banned the new manufacture or importation of automatic weapons for civilian use. That left roughly 150,000 registered automatic weapons in private ownership and eligible for transfer between individuals. The transfer of such weapons is handled by the ATF's NFA branch. Basically, anyone wanting to legally own a fully automatic weapon needs $15,000 to over $40,000 to buy a weapon from an already licensed owner willing to sell one of theirs, plus pay a $200 federal transfer tax, plus pass a background investigation of National Agency Check with 10-point fingerprinting.
-
https://www.quora.com/...citizens-to-purchase
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [dave_w] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
dave_w wrote:
Found this on actual numbers out there:
Real assault rifles are capable of automatic firing. Therefore, they are regulated by the federal government as machine guns under the Federal Firearms Act of 1934 and the completely misnamed Firearm Owners' Protection Act of 1986. The Firearm Owners’ Protection Act entirely banned the new manufacture or importation of automatic weapons for civilian use. That left roughly 150,000 registered automatic weapons in private ownership and eligible for transfer between individuals. The transfer of such weapons is handled by the ATF's NFA branch. Basically, anyone wanting to legally own a fully automatic weapon needs $15,000 to over $40,000 to buy a weapon from an already licensed owner willing to sell one of theirs, plus pay a $200 federal transfer tax, plus pass a background investigation of National Agency Check with 10-point fingerprinting.
-
https://www.quora.com/...citizens-to-purchase

Yea like someone else said. This asshole probably modded an assault rifle to be fully automatic.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Sausagetail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sausagetail wrote:
After listening to a video, it does sound like full automatic fire. Probably an illegal conversion.

There's really no benefit to automatic fire for military rifles, which is why they removed that option.

There are, however, plenty of advantages to fully automatic machine guns in the military, which is why we still have things like the M60 or M240 which fires the same rounds as an AK-47, for example. We don't know what weapons this guy had, except that the one he seemed to be firing in the video sounds like a fully automatic weapon.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [len] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
He's shooting in a very rare situation though. If he used an assault rifle it was probably underpowered and not accurate enough at those distances. The only reason it worked was because everyone was packed together. If he had to aim at individual people he would've had a hard time. I think a scoped, bolt action hunting rifle would've worked just as well or better.

The idea that only the military needs full automatic is flawed though because the military's assault rifles aren't full auto.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Duffy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Duffy wrote:
windywave wrote:
You know who agrees with you? The people who implemented the ban 20+ years ago


Well, they aren’t totally banned. People can still get them but it’s very very difficult to do it legally.

There are places all around Vegas (gun ranges) where you can rent and shoot full auto rifles.

And expensive. $45,000+ last time I checked and more paperwork than you'd need for a mortgage.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Sausagetail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sausagetail wrote:
I remember seeing Class III guns or just the uppers going for $16,000. They're collectors items due to rarity.

It's much easier to do an illegal conversion and even that isn't that easy.

http://www.guncite.com/...ontrol_gcfullau.html

Lowers. The modification you need is in the lower and the trigger group. Nothing changes in the upper.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [GreenPlease] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
What type of ammo do you need to run full auto? My understanding is most guns will jam with off the shelf ammo.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Sausagetail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sausagetail wrote:
He's shooting in a very rare situation though. If he used an assault rifle it was probably underpowered and not accurate enough at those distances. The only reason it worked was because everyone was packed together. If he had to aim at individual people he would've had a hard time. I think a scoped, bolt action hunting rifle would've worked just as well or better.

The idea that only the military needs full automatic is flawed though because the military's assault rifles aren't full auto.

Some are: the M4A1 and the M16A3 are capable of full auto. That mode is useful when trying to suppress an enemy position. Also, could not disagree more that a bolt action rifle could have caused near as much carnage...not even remotely possible. Their rate of fire and small number of rounds that they carry (usually 3-4) would give folks a lot more time to escape. And, assault rifles are plenty accurate and powerful enough out to 400-500 meters.

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [spot] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
spot wrote:
Sausagetail wrote:
He's shooting in a very rare situation though. If he used an assault rifle it was probably underpowered and not accurate enough at those distances. The only reason it worked was because everyone was packed together. If he had to aim at individual people he would've had a hard time. I think a scoped, bolt action hunting rifle would've worked just as well or better.

The idea that only the military needs full automatic is flawed though because the military's assault rifles aren't full auto.


Some are: the M4A1 and the M16A3 are capable of full auto. That mode is useful when trying to suppress an enemy position. Also, could not disagree more that a bolt action rifle could have caused near as much carnage...not even remotely possible. Their rate of fire and small number of rounds that they carry (usually 3-4) would give folks a lot more time to escape. And, assault rifles are plenty accurate and powerful enough out to 400-500 meters.

400-500m is reaching the max effective range of an assault rifle, although you might get more if you put it on a bi-pod. At this point, I wouldn't rule out a machine gun like an M240 which has a much further effective range. The army types on the forum could comment on whether the audio sounds right, but acoustics on cell-phone video in a concert venue with gunfire coming from a hotel 450m away are difficult to pin down, I think.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
slowguy wrote:
spot wrote:
Sausagetail wrote:
He's shooting in a very rare situation though. If he used an assault rifle it was probably underpowered and not accurate enough at those distances. The only reason it worked was because everyone was packed together. If he had to aim at individual people he would've had a hard time. I think a scoped, bolt action hunting rifle would've worked just as well or better.

The idea that only the military needs full automatic is flawed though because the military's assault rifles aren't full auto.


Some are: the M4A1 and the M16A3 are capable of full auto. That mode is useful when trying to suppress an enemy position. Also, could not disagree more that a bolt action rifle could have caused near as much carnage...not even remotely possible. Their rate of fire and small number of rounds that they carry (usually 3-4) would give folks a lot more time to escape. And, assault rifles are plenty accurate and powerful enough out to 400-500 meters.


400-500m is reaching the max effective range of an assault rifle, although you might get more if you put it on a bi-pod. At this point, I wouldn't rule out a machine gun like an M240 which has a much further effective range. The army types on the forum could comment on whether the audio sounds right, but acoustics on cell-phone video in a concert venue with gunfire coming from a hotel 450m away are difficult to pin down, I think.

yeah, it is close: max effective range for an M16 is 550 meters for a point target, 800 meters for an area target. If he was shooting something bigger than 5.56mm, those ranges would probably go up a bit. the audio did sound an awful lot like a machine gun to me, although it's been since the mid '90s that I was close to one being fired.

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Brownie28] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Brownie28 wrote:
Duffy wrote:
Quote:
The fact that full auto isn't totally and completely illegal in any manner outside of the military is insane to me.


Ok. That’s your opinion. I disagree, which is ok.

What is the possible use of full auto by a citizen? I typically defend gun owners and their rights in these threads but full auto is my line.

Quote:
Quote:
the idea that this shooter could've obtained the weapons he used legally is just unacceptable.


At this we have no idea how he got it.

His obtaining of the weapon (if legal) is not what is unacceptable, it’s his chosen use of it that is.

Well obviously his means of use is the most unacceptable. He'll probably be found to have had mental health issues, never should've had a weapon, etc. That to me is the biggest issue, our inability to adequately treat mentally unstable people and also keep them away from weapons. BUT, I don't think anyone should be able to get their hands on a full auto weapon.



Agreed. I would have no problem outright banning full auto weapons, period. And very stiff sentences for anyone caught modifying a weapon to full auto.

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
slowguy wrote:
Sausagetail wrote:
I highly doubt he used fully automatic weapons. They're rare and expensive.

The military switched from fully automatic rifles (M-16) to 3-shot bursts after Vietnam because it just wasn't possible to shoot accurately on full auto. Firing single aimed shots is still probably preferable to 3-round bursts.


The audio from the videos is pretty clear. He wasn't using three round burst.

Reports are it was a fully automatic rifle and that is likely the case (I have no reason to doubt those reports at this point). However, I would point out that a bump fire stock would produce that exact same sound. So, it is possible he was using a semi-auto with a bump fire stock.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [spot] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
spot wrote:
And very stiff sentences for anyone caught modifying a weapon to full auto.

Under existing laws that will earn you up to 10 years in Federal prison and/or a $250k fine.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [summitt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
summitt wrote:
What type of ammo do you need to run full auto? My understanding is most guns will jam with off the shelf ammo.

Most off the shelf ammo will work just fine. Typically, you want to run 5.56 as opposed to .223. You can buy bulk military 5.56 very easily.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [gotsand] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gotsand wrote:
spot wrote:
And very stiff sentences for anyone caught modifying a weapon to full auto.

Under existing laws that will earn you up to 10 years in Federal prison and/or a $250k fine.

Unfortunately not much of a deterrent for someone already planning on mass murder and suicide.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
slowguy wrote:
spot wrote:
Sausagetail wrote:
He's shooting in a very rare situation though. If he used an assault rifle it was probably underpowered and not accurate enough at those distances. The only reason it worked was because everyone was packed together. If he had to aim at individual people he would've had a hard time. I think a scoped, bolt action hunting rifle would've worked just as well or better.

The idea that only the military needs full automatic is flawed though because the military's assault rifles aren't full auto.


Some are: the M4A1 and the M16A3 are capable of full auto. That mode is useful when trying to suppress an enemy position. Also, could not disagree more that a bolt action rifle could have caused near as much carnage...not even remotely possible. Their rate of fire and small number of rounds that they carry (usually 3-4) would give folks a lot more time to escape. And, assault rifles are plenty accurate and powerful enough out to 400-500 meters.


400-500m is reaching the max effective range of an assault rifle, although you might get more if you put it on a bi-pod. At this point, I wouldn't rule out a machine gun like an M240 which has a much further effective range. The army types on the forum could comment on whether the audio sounds right, but acoustics on cell-phone video in a concert venue with gunfire coming from a hotel 450m away are difficult to pin down, I think.

Agreed. We always had 2 (M240s) mounted on the tanks but once the ground kit came out we had folks on the ground armed with those as well (if memory serves the intent was to phase out the M60). Having said all that, and this is not to minimize the carnage and tragedy, but if he was using an M60 or 240 I would expect the casualties to be much higher. Based on nothing more than my personal experience firing them, just how packed that crowd was, and the rounds being 7.62.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [gotsand] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gotsand wrote:
spot wrote:
And very stiff sentences for anyone caught modifying a weapon to full auto.


Under existing laws that will earn you up to 10 years in Federal prison and/or a $250k fine.

Are people commonly caught? It's not going to be self-reported. There is no compulsory inspection of weapons (except maybe when formally registering a full auto weapon?) And I've spent a lot of time in Nevada. Full auto fire heard out in commonly used shooting areas (whether actual ranges or just open space in the desert) just isn't going to turn a lot of heads. Gun owners aren't going to snitch on each other. I speculate that even a lot of law enforcement types, upon hearing full auto, would not ask to see the proper registration papers, as long as the gun was being fired in a somewhat responsible manner.

I'd think that the laws against modifying a weapon to full auto are one of those laws where you tack it on to other crimes once you've been charged with some other crime. E.g. if you do an armed robbery, and turns out you modified your weapon, then the DA gets to tack on 10 more years, etc.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Sausagetail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sausagetail wrote:
I highly doubt he used fully automatic weapons. They're rare and expensive.

The military switched from fully automatic rifles (M-16) to 3-shot bursts after Vietnam because it just wasn't possible to shoot accurately on full auto. Firing single aimed shots is still probably preferable to 3-round bursts.

That was full auto, 100%, sounded a whole lot like a saw to be honest. Certain sounds are hard to forget.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [dave_w] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
dave_w wrote:
Wanted to do a gun thread distinct of the other. In talking with co-workers, I was surprised at how many agreed with me that a full auto ban is reasonable. Not at all looking to withdraw carry rights or anything else, just don't see enough "need" for the avg citizen to own a fully auto piece for fun, vs the carnage that can ensue if that weapon gets used in anger.

Fully automatic rifles and handguns have been illegal in the United States for decades. You have to go through an inordinate amount of investigation and paperwork to get a federal firearms license to possess such weapons, though there are some folks who have been grandfathered into the system prior to its implementation.

This shooter in Las Vegas is old enough to have benefited from that, of course, but reports are sketchy as to whether he had an ability to acquire fully automatic weapons on his own. There is of course a black market for such weapons, and perhaps he availed himself of that route?

Also, it is possible to modify semi automatic rifles so that they can fire fully automatic, but it's neither as easy as television makes it nor can you just go out and do it without attracting no small amount of attention.

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Ron_Burgundy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ron_Burgundy wrote:
Sausagetail wrote:
I highly doubt he used fully automatic weapons. They're rare and expensive.

The military switched from fully automatic rifles (M-16) to 3-shot bursts after Vietnam because it just wasn't possible to shoot accurately on full auto. Firing single aimed shots is still probably preferable to 3-round bursts.


That was full auto, 100%, sounded a whole lot like a saw to be honest. Certain sounds are hard to forget.

That was actually my first thought as well, but I dismissed it due to the difficulty of the shooter getting his hands on a saw.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
trail wrote:
gotsand wrote:
spot wrote:
And very stiff sentences for anyone caught modifying a weapon to full auto.


Under existing laws that will earn you up to 10 years in Federal prison and/or a $250k fine.


Are people commonly caught? It's not going to be self-reported. There is no compulsory inspection of weapons (except maybe when formally registering a full auto weapon?) And I've spent a lot of time in Nevada. Full auto fire heard out in commonly used shooting areas (whether actual ranges or just open space in the desert) just isn't going to turn a lot of heads. Gun owners aren't going to snitch on each other. I speculate that even a lot of law enforcement types, upon hearing full auto, would not ask to see the proper registration papers, as long as the gun was being fired in a somewhat responsible manner.

I'd think that the laws against modifying a weapon to full auto are one of those laws where you tack it on to other crimes once you've been charged with some other crime. E.g. if you do an armed robbery, and turns out you modified your weapon, then the DA gets to tack on 10 more years, etc.

Stop speculating. It's clear that you don't know what you're talking about.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JSA wrote:
Ron_Burgundy wrote:
Sausagetail wrote:
I highly doubt he used fully automatic weapons. They're rare and expensive.

The military switched from fully automatic rifles (M-16) to 3-shot bursts after Vietnam because it just wasn't possible to shoot accurately on full auto. Firing single aimed shots is still probably preferable to 3-round bursts.


That was full auto, 100%, sounded a whole lot like a saw to be honest. Certain sounds are hard to forget.


That was actually my first thought as well, but I dismissed it due to the difficulty of the shooter getting his hands on a saw.

been a long time since I've heard M16s on full auto and M60s and M240s, but the audio from the attack did sound more to me like a machine gun than an assault rife on full auto. how the hell he would have gotten his hands on any full auto weapon will be interesting to find out.

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [gotsand] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gotsand wrote:


Stop speculating. It's clear that you don't know what you're talking about.


I was asking questions. That's what this thread is for. Calm yourself a bit, and then inform me. Are you familiar with Nevada "full auto culture?" Or just ignore me.

If you're thinking I'm anti-gun, you're wrong. Had an AR-15 at one point.
Last edited by: trail: Oct 2, 17 8:41
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
 
Reports are he had at least 10 different guns in the room so it is possible one of them was full auto, however, the videos on twitter I have seen were not a full auto gun.

There is a video someone took where the camera is directly at the base of the hotel, you can see the muzzle flashes. The rate of fire goes up and down which would indicate either a bump stock or a crank trigger mechanism. It really sounds like a crank mechanism of some sort because it speeds up and slows down like a crank would.

Rate of fire wasn't fast enough in any of the videos I saw for it to be a full auto gun, all sounded like modified semi-auto.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [dave_w] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
dave_w wrote:
Found this on actual numbers out there:
Real assault rifles are capable of automatic firing. Therefore, they are regulated by the federal government as machine guns under the Federal Firearms Act of 1934 and the completely misnamed Firearm Owners' Protection Act of 1986. The Firearm Owners’ Protection Act entirely banned the new manufacture or importation of automatic weapons for civilian use. That left roughly 150,000 registered automatic weapons in private ownership and eligible for transfer between individuals. The transfer of such weapons is handled by the ATF's NFA branch. Basically, anyone wanting to legally own a fully automatic weapon needs $15,000 to over $40,000 to buy a weapon from an already licensed owner willing to sell one of theirs, plus pay a $200 federal transfer tax, plus pass a background investigation of National Agency Check with 10-point fingerprinting.
-
https://www.quora.com/...citizens-to-purchase


Pretty easy hurdles to jump through.
1) Sell your Honda accord
2) fingerprint check (he had no criminal record)
3) Background check - as long as he has no history
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
400-500m is reaching the max effective range of an assault rifle, although you might get more if you put it on a bi-pod. At this point, I wouldn't rule out a machine gun like an M240 which has a much further effective range. The army types on the forum could comment on whether the audio sounds right, but acoustics on cell-phone video in a concert venue with gunfire coming from a hotel 450m away are difficult to pin down, I think.

Given the height and distance of the shooter, would 400-500m be in his range?

Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
trail wrote:
gotsand wrote:
spot wrote:
And very stiff sentences for anyone caught modifying a weapon to full auto.


Under existing laws that will earn you up to 10 years in Federal prison and/or a $250k fine.


Are people commonly caught? It's not going to be self-reported. There is no compulsory inspection of weapons (except maybe when formally registering a full auto weapon?) And I've spent a lot of time in Nevada. Full auto fire heard out in commonly used shooting areas (whether actual ranges or just open space in the desert) just isn't going to turn a lot of heads. Gun owners aren't going to snitch on each other. I speculate that even a lot of law enforcement types, upon hearing full auto, would not ask to see the proper registration papers, as long as the gun was being fired in a somewhat responsible manner.

I'd think that the laws against modifying a weapon to full auto are one of those laws where you tack it on to other crimes once you've been charged with some other crime. E.g. if you do an armed robbery, and turns out you modified your weapon, then the DA gets to tack on 10 more years, etc.

It's rare. Spend any time around "gun enthusiasts" if that's how you want to term them and you'd quickly realize nobody would ever fathom the conversion. There's no practical application and the vast majority of those people are worried about going to jail because their barrel is 1/4" too short or runs afoul of some other obscure regulation.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [aarondb4] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
aarondb4 wrote:

Reports are he had at least 10 different guns in the room so it is possible one of them was full auto, however, the videos on twitter I have seen were not a full auto gun.

There is a video someone took where the camera is directly at the base of the hotel, you can see the muzzle flashes. The rate of fire goes up and down which would indicate either a bump stock or a crank trigger mechanism. It really sounds like a crank mechanism of some sort because it speeds up and slows down like a crank would.

Rate of fire wasn't fast enough in any of the videos I saw for it to be a full auto gun, all sounded like modified semi-auto.

So after finding videos of a crank trigger mechanism and a bump stock, pretty much any prohibition on automatic weapons is pointless.

As an IP attorney I am always amazed at the things people come up with. Solving problems I never knew existed. Here are two more.

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [j p o] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
j p o wrote:
aarondb4 wrote:

Reports are he had at least 10 different guns in the room so it is possible one of them was full auto, however, the videos on twitter I have seen were not a full auto gun.

There is a video someone took where the camera is directly at the base of the hotel, you can see the muzzle flashes. The rate of fire goes up and down which would indicate either a bump stock or a crank trigger mechanism. It really sounds like a crank mechanism of some sort because it speeds up and slows down like a crank would.

Rate of fire wasn't fast enough in any of the videos I saw for it to be a full auto gun, all sounded like modified semi-auto.


So after finding videos of a crank trigger mechanism and a bump stock, pretty much any prohibition on automatic weapons is pointless.

As an IP attorney I am always amazed at the things people come up with. Solving problems I never knew existed. Here are two more.

Yep, I had heard of the bump fire stock before, but not the crank trigger until this morning. After watching some vids on it, the vids from Vegas definitely sound like a crank trigger. The rate of fire is not consistent or fast enough to be a full auto weapon.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [aarondb4] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It's actually pretty difficult to purchase a full auto fire arm today.

I have a buddy that owns one legally and I've shot it. It's a Krinkov AK74. After shooting it I know you couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with anything after the 2nd bullet. This to me is a novelty to own from a practical point of view.

After shooting it I did some research and about 5 years ago this same rifle could be purchased for roughly $19,000 if you could go through all the paperwork and transfer. Way too far out of my price range but for some people I guess not. The one for sale was pre-ban so it has been in the US for many years and who knows if it's changed hands.

People say it's easy to buy one which is not exactly correct. Getting the tax stamp requires you to go through an extensive background check beyond a standard fire arm purchase including finger printing and what can be months of waiting. The other factor that most don't think of is the seller of this weapon has to file paperwork as well and transfer it through a Federal Fire Arms License holder. Lots of trace ability on these.

So it can be done but there is a lot of hoops to jump through in order to purchase one legally.

To modify one is already against the law and the chance of getting caught is high unless you own the equipment to do it. I'm not aware of any gun smith that would do this under the table although I'm sure they exist. Any machinist wouldn't touch this either as it would raise a lot of questions. Not to say it can't be done but not everyone can do it either.

I'm sure we will find this guy had deep mental health issues. I don't have a solution for that but critical thinking drives to the root cause of the issue and I don't believe the fire arm chosen addresses the root cause.

Just my 2 cents and this is truly a sad day.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [aarondb4] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
aarondb4 wrote:

Yep, I had heard of the bump fire stock before, but not the crank trigger until this morning. After watching some vids on it, the vids from Vegas definitely sound like a crank trigger. The rate of fire is not consistent or fast enough to be a full auto weapon.

I disagree. Listen to the rate of fire from Vegas:





Now listen to the rate of fire on a SAW:



If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [GreenPlease] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
GreenPlease wrote:

It's rare. Spend any time around "gun enthusiasts" if that's how you want to term them and you'd quickly realize nobody would ever fathom the conversion.

I grew up around gun enthusiasts. My dad was an amateur gunsmith and I was his primarily hand-loader. I manufactured more rounds than some small countries. :)

My father being dead, the statute of limitations is up, right? I remember talking with his buddies about selling most of his stuff after he died, and was told, "Don't try to sell it. Destroy it." If you get my drift.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [j p o] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I disagree with anyone that says Class III firearms or fully automatic firearms are hard to obtain for the average citizen. Not sure if it is still there but there was a shop next to the gun club in Scottsdale that specialized in selling these out of a strip mall. If I wanted one it would just be a matter of the money, time, and paperwork. Since they have to be manufactured before 1986, there are no new ones being made, so many people buy them as investments....there are better places to put investment money.

There is a tiny town out in the desert half-way between Phoenix and Vegas called Wikieup where they hold the annual Big Sandy Machine Gun Shoot. Check out some youtube videos or the home page if you want to see the type of weapons (and people) that show up for this type of thing.

http://mgshooters.com/

There are, however, very few cases of a legally owned NFA-registered Class III rifle used for a crime....like maybe two.

Anyway, reports are the Vegas shooter used a modified weapon. Assuming an AR-15 or AK-47 type weapon...after a couple hundred rounds he would have very little accuracy due to barrel heating...not that AK's are accurate to begin with.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JSA wrote:
aarondb4 wrote:


Yep, I had heard of the bump fire stock before, but not the crank trigger until this morning. After watching some vids on it, the vids from Vegas definitely sound like a crank trigger. The rate of fire is not consistent or fast enough to be a full auto weapon.


I disagree. Listen to the rate of fire from Vegas:





Now listen to the rate of fire on a SAW:


Close, although even in that video right at the beginning the rate of fire seems to go up then down just a tad before it settles on a consistent rate.

Here is the video I mentioned, clearly not a full auto rate of fire. Of course, with 8+ guns in the room it is possible he had a full auto as well as a modified semi of some sort.

https://twitter.com/...s/914735456943607808
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [aarondb4] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Interesting. You are right, that is an inconsistent rate of fire that may suggest a crank fire or bump fire.

Of course it is hard to tell with cell phone video from different angles. However, like you said, he had 10 guns, so there could be multiple variants.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JSA wrote:
Interesting. You are right, that is an inconsistent rate of fire that may suggest a crank fire or bump fire.
This. The variation in cyclic rate makes it pretty clear that it wasn't a "real" automatic weapon. Likely an illegal mod like several here have suggested.

Whole thing is tragic.

Books @ Amazon
"If only he had used his genius for niceness, instead of Evil." M. Smart
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [big kahuna] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
big kahuna wrote:
dave_w wrote:
Wanted to do a gun thread distinct of the other. In talking with co-workers, I was surprised at how many agreed with me that a full auto ban is reasonable. Not at all looking to withdraw carry rights or anything else, just don't see enough "need" for the avg citizen to own a fully auto piece for fun, vs the carnage that can ensue if that weapon gets used in anger.


Fully automatic rifles and handguns have been illegal in the United States for decades. You have to go through an inordinate amount of investigation and paperwork to get a federal firearms license to possess such weapons, though there are some folks who have been grandfathered into the system prior to its implementation.

This shooter in Las Vegas is old enough to have benefited from that, of course, but reports are sketchy as to whether he had an ability to acquire fully automatic weapons on his own. There is of course a black market for such weapons, and perhaps he availed himself of that route?

Also, it is possible to modify semi automatic rifles so that they can fire fully automatic, but it's neither as easy as television makes it nor can you just go out and do it without attracting no small amount of attention.

Depends on your definition of easy. If you have rudimentary gunsmithing skills, depending on the weapon, it's not that difficult. Maybe a seven on a scale of one to ten for an AR type weapon if you can source the sear for the trigger group. If you have to make the sear yourself the difficulty scale goes way up. A semi-auto sear is easy enough. A full-auto sear, if not made correctly (which is tough), will likely fail in short order.

IMO, it's more likely this was a black market purchase. Even that's tough to comprehend though given that the ATF sets up honey-pot stings for full auto weapons all the time.

Maybe we'll find out this guy had some sort of drug cartel connection.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [GreenPlease] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
not that difficult. Maybe a seven on a scale of one to ten for an AR type weapon if you can source the sear for the trigger group.

Not sure how you consider a 7 on a scale of 10 not that difficult, particularly when that's only possible after acquiring a full auto sear, which itself would be incredibly difficult.

All speculation, but the easiest way to go about something like this would be to buy one of those crank fire triggers or something similar. There aren't that many people with even rudimentary gunsmithing skills, even among shooting enthusiasts.









"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
trail wrote:
GreenPlease wrote:


It's rare. Spend any time around "gun enthusiasts" if that's how you want to term them and you'd quickly realize nobody would ever fathom the conversion.


I grew up around gun enthusiasts. My dad was an amateur gunsmith and I was his primarily hand-loader. I manufactured more rounds than some small countries. :)

My father being dead, the statute of limitations is up, right? I remember talking with his buddies about selling most of his stuff after he died, and was told, "Don't try to sell it. Destroy it." If you get my drift.

An improperly manufactured full auto sear will fail in short order.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vitus979 wrote:
not that difficult. Maybe a seven on a scale of one to ten for an AR type weapon if you can source the sear for the trigger group.

Not sure how you consider a 7 on a scale of 10 not that difficult, particularly when that's only possible after acquiring a full auto sear, which itself would be incredibly difficult.

All speculation, but the easiest way to go about something like this would be to buy one of those crank fire triggers or something similar. There aren't that many people with even rudimentary gunsmithing skills, even among shooting enthusiasts.

That's true. IMO, it's more likely this was a black market purchase.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [RangerGress] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
The variation in cyclic rate makes it pretty clear that it wasn't a "real" automatic weapon.

I'll defer to the experts, although I will say that the acoustics associated with shooting from a hotel room in that hotel with the angled shape between the wings, and taking audio all the way down at the concert area with a cell phone and who knows what other sound equipment still going, might make it difficult to rely on the sound as a certain indicator.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Only time a real automatic weapon sounds like that is when it's so dirty it's having a hard time operating.

BTW, in reference to the post on the first page, and it's not a big deal, but the M60 does not fire the same round as a AK47. Same diameter bullet, but the AK round is lighter and slower. It's like comparing a 357 Magnum to a .38.

There's been several comments in this thread that an M16/14 is pretty uncontrollable in full auto. +1 from me. I joined up in '82 and the Marines still had the M16A1. It would happily do full-auto if you flicked the selector switch all the way. Maybe with enough practice folks can be effective with that sort of thing, but I couldn't have hit a barn at 10 paces. The recoil knocked the weapon all over the place.

Books @ Amazon
"If only he had used his genius for niceness, instead of Evil." M. Smart
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The acoustics do make it tough to tell but I'm inclined to say it's a crank trigger. There's irregularity at the beginning of each string of fire and the cyclic rate is quite low for an automatic weapon.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [GreenPlease] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
GreenPlease wrote:
The acoustics do make it tough to tell but I'm inclined to say it's a crank trigger. There's irregularity at the beginning of each string of fire and the cyclic rate is quite low for an automatic weapon.

I agree. Twitter video in post 55 is why I feel that way
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [ironmayb] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ironmayb wrote:
GreenPlease wrote:
The acoustics do make it tough to tell but I'm inclined to say it's a crank trigger. There's irregularity at the beginning of each string of fire and the cyclic rate is quite low for an automatic weapon.


I agree. Twitter video in post 55 is why I feel that way

It's impossible to count, but that sounded like way more than 30 shots (which is standard magazine size for those who don't know).

I miss YaHey
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [justgeorge] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
justgeorge wrote:
ironmayb wrote:
GreenPlease wrote:
The acoustics do make it tough to tell but I'm inclined to say it's a crank trigger. There's irregularity at the beginning of each string of fire and the cyclic rate is quite low for an automatic weapon.


I agree. Twitter video in post 55 is why I feel that way


It's impossible to count, but that sounded like way more than 30 shots (which is standard magazine size for those who don't know).

Easily could have had a 40, 45, 60, or 100 round mag. This is why having 10 guns was ridiculous. You can only fire 1 at a time, can have oversized mags, and can reload a mag quite quickly and easily.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [RangerGress] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
BTW, in reference to the post on the first page, and it's not a big deal, but the M60 does not fire the same round as a AK47. Same diameter bullet, but the AK round is lighter and slower. It's like comparing a 357 Magnum to a .38.

Thanks. I remember them both being 7.62, but it's been a long time since I had any reason to fire an M60.

Quote:
There's been several comments in this thread that an M16/14 is pretty uncontrollable in full auto. +1 from me. I joined up in '82 and the Marines still had the M16A1. It would happily do full-auto if you flicked the selector switch all the way. Maybe with enough practice folks can be effective with that sort of thing, but I couldn't have hit a barn at 10 paces. The recoil knocked the weapon all over the place.

Yep. Very light weapon compared to the kick. That's why I suggested he might have used a bipod or something like that to steady whatever weapon he did use.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [justgeorge] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
justgeorge wrote:
ironmayb wrote:
GreenPlease wrote:
The acoustics do make it tough to tell but I'm inclined to say it's a crank trigger. There's irregularity at the beginning of each string of fire and the cyclic rate is quite low for an automatic weapon.


I agree. Twitter video in post 55 is why I feel that way


It's impossible to count, but that sounded like way more than 30 shots (which is standard magazine size for those who don't know).

I would say 40-50 and I don't know if they started before the video did.

I know someone who possesses a fair number of firearms including ones like I believe this one is (or pretty close to it). I don't think standard magazines are SOP for those who would chose to own this type of firearm. I could be wrong.

The firearms in my life are for specific purposes (sporting clays and protection). As such I don't see the need or attraction of these firearms. But in my limited experience those that do have that interest/attraction are not interested in "standard" anything as it relates to their firearms.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [ironmayb] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ironmayb wrote:
justgeorge wrote:
ironmayb wrote:
GreenPlease wrote:
The acoustics do make it tough to tell but I'm inclined to say it's a crank trigger. There's irregularity at the beginning of each string of fire and the cyclic rate is quite low for an automatic weapon.


I agree. Twitter video in post 55 is why I feel that way


It's impossible to count, but that sounded like way more than 30 shots (which is standard magazine size for those who don't know).


I would say 40-50 and I don't know if they started before the video did.

I know someone who possesses a fair number of firearms including ones like I believe this one is (or pretty close to it). I don't think standard magazines are SOP for those who would chose to own this type of firearm. I could be wrong.

The firearms in my life are for specific purposes (sporting clays and protection). As such I don't see the need or attraction of these firearms. But in my limited experience those that do have that interest/attraction are not interested in "standard" anything as it relates to their firearms.

That is a pretty broad brush you have out there. I know lots of people who own AR's or AK's, none of them have more than the standard 30 round mag. The drum stuff is known for being unreliable, pointless, and expensive to shoot, so most people avoid them.

Not all AR owners are wearing camo and prepping for the government showdown.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [aarondb4] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
aarondb4 wrote:
ironmayb wrote:
justgeorge wrote:
ironmayb wrote:
GreenPlease wrote:
The acoustics do make it tough to tell but I'm inclined to say it's a crank trigger. There's irregularity at the beginning of each string of fire and the cyclic rate is quite low for an automatic weapon.


I agree. Twitter video in post 55 is why I feel that way


It's impossible to count, but that sounded like way more than 30 shots (which is standard magazine size for those who don't know).


I would say 40-50 and I don't know if they started before the video did.

I know someone who possesses a fair number of firearms including ones like I believe this one is (or pretty close to it). I don't think standard magazines are SOP for those who would chose to own this type of firearm. I could be wrong.

The firearms in my life are for specific purposes (sporting clays and protection). As such I don't see the need or attraction of these firearms. But in my limited experience those that do have that interest/attraction are not interested in "standard" anything as it relates to their firearms.


That is a pretty broad brush you have out there. I know lots of people who own AR's or AK's, none of them have more than the standard 30 round mag. The drum stuff is known for being unreliable, pointless, and expensive to shoot, so most people avoid them.

Not all AR owners are wearing camo and prepping for the government showdown.

you did read the part that said "i could be wrong" and the part that said "in my limited experience" right?
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
slowguy wrote:
Quote:
BTW, in reference to the post on the first page, and it's not a big deal, but the M60 does not fire the same round as a AK47. Same diameter bullet, but the AK round is lighter and slower. It's like comparing a 357 Magnum to a .38.


Thanks. I remember them both being 7.62, but it's been a long time since I had any reason to fire an M60.

Quote:
There's been several comments in this thread that an M16/14 is pretty uncontrollable in full auto. +1 from me. I joined up in '82 and the Marines still had the M16A1. It would happily do full-auto if you flicked the selector switch all the way. Maybe with enough practice folks can be effective with that sort of thing, but I couldn't have hit a barn at 10 paces. The recoil knocked the weapon all over the place.


Yep. Very light weapon compared to the kick. That's why I suggested he might have used a bipod or something like that to steady whatever weapon he did use.


NYT says 19 weapons, and "two rifles with scopes were mounted on tripods and positioned in front of the two windows in the hotel room." maybe they don't know the difference between bipods and tripods, but this confirms what you're suspecting.

EDIT: correction: 19 rifles in the hotel room.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Last edited by: Slowman: Oct 2, 17 13:43
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Very strange.

This was clearly pre-meditated but why so many guns? Surely he tested whatever device he used (likely a crank trigger) and the rifles he chose to mount on tripods. A couple of backups would be understandable but after maybe four rifles or so he was increasing the chances he would draw suspicion (it's not like he could fit them all in a couple of bags). I suppose he could have moved the cache into the hotel piecemeal from his car.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [GreenPlease] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
I suppose he could have moved the cache into the hotel piecemeal from his car.

Extremely likely, he was checked in for several days.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [GreenPlease] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
GreenPlease wrote:
Very strange.

This was clearly pre-meditated but why so many guns? Surely he tested whatever device he used (likely a crank trigger) and the rifles he chose to mount on tripods. A couple of backups would be understandable but after maybe four rifles or so he was increasing the chances he would draw suspicion (it's not like he could fit them all in a couple of bags). I suppose he could have moved the cache into the hotel piecemeal from his car.

Yeah, very weird. The only thing I can think of is that perhaps he was expecting others to follow and grab a weapon? Or maybe there was somebody else in the room reloading for a while and then booked before the cops got there? Other wise it makes no sense.

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [spot] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
eah, very weird. The only thing I can think of is that perhaps he was expecting others to follow and grab a weapon? Or maybe there was somebody else in the room reloading for a while and then booked before the cops got there? Other wise it makes no sense.


Actually it is easy to see where his head might have been, and he had days to bring in the guns, even though a few hours could have done it too. Look, he obviously was thinking he was going down with this ship, he really could not know how exactly that was going to happen. He probably envisioned some Davy Crokett at the Alamo ending, getting as many loaded weapons as possible around him so in the final minutes he would just grab and shoot, no more reloading. I'm guessing he got surprised by the quick response(relatively speaking because of the alarm) and he took the only thing left he could from the cops, his own life. Perhaps he figured he might be up there for 30 or 40 minutes before the end game, so he was ready for any scenario.


On the other hand he was a gun nut, they are finding a lot more around his house. Perhaps he just felt more comfortable having a bunch of his friends with him. Doubt he just came by all these weapons recently, been a hobby of his for awhile I would guess...
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
monty wrote:
eah, very weird. The only thing I can think of is that perhaps he was expecting others to follow and grab a weapon? Or maybe there was somebody else in the room reloading for a while and then booked before the cops got there? Other wise it makes no sense.


Actually it is easy to see where his head might have been, and he had days to bring in the guns, even though a few hours could have done it too. Look, he obviously was thinking he was going down with this ship, he really could not know how exactly that was going to happen. He probably envisioned some Davy Crokett at the Alamo ending, getting as many loaded weapons as possible around him so in the final minutes he would just grab and shoot, no more reloading. I'm guessing he got surprised by the quick response(relatively speaking because of the alarm) and he took the only thing left he could from the cops, his own life. Perhaps he figured he might be up there for 30 or 40 minutes before the end game, so he was ready for any scenario.




On the other hand he was a gun nut, they are finding a lot more around his house. Perhaps he just felt more comfortable having a bunch of his friends with him. Doubt he just came by all these weapons recently, been a hobby of his for awhile I would guess...

Yeah, that's probably more likely.

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
slowguy wrote:
Quote:
BTW, in reference to the post on the first page, and it's not a big deal, but the M60 does not fire the same round as a AK47. Same diameter bullet, but the AK round is lighter and slower. It's like comparing a 357 Magnum to a .38.


Thanks. I remember them both being 7.62, but it's been a long time since I had any reason to fire an M60.

Quote:
There's been several comments in this thread that an M16/14 is pretty uncontrollable in full auto. +1 from me. I joined up in '82 and the Marines still had the M16A1. It would happily do full-auto if you flicked the selector switch all the way. Maybe with enough practice folks can be effective with that sort of thing, but I couldn't have hit a barn at 10 paces. The recoil knocked the weapon all over the place.


Yep. Very light weapon compared to the kick. That's why I suggested he might have used a bipod or something like that to steady whatever weapon he did use.


NYT says 19 weapons, and "two rifles with scopes were mounted on tripods and positioned in front of the two windows in the hotel room." maybe they don't know the difference between bipods and tripods, but this confirms what you're suspecting.

EDIT: correction: 19 rifles in the hotel room.

AP says 19 rifles were found at his home, not in the hotel room (AP says 10 in the hotel room). IDK which report is accurate. AP is also reporting "explosive devices" were found at his home.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JSA wrote:
Slowman wrote:
slowguy wrote:
Quote:
BTW, in reference to the post on the first page, and it's not a big deal, but the M60 does not fire the same round as a AK47. Same diameter bullet, but the AK round is lighter and slower. It's like comparing a 357 Magnum to a .38.


Thanks. I remember them both being 7.62, but it's been a long time since I had any reason to fire an M60.

Quote:
There's been several comments in this thread that an M16/14 is pretty uncontrollable in full auto. +1 from me. I joined up in '82 and the Marines still had the M16A1. It would happily do full-auto if you flicked the selector switch all the way. Maybe with enough practice folks can be effective with that sort of thing, but I couldn't have hit a barn at 10 paces. The recoil knocked the weapon all over the place.


Yep. Very light weapon compared to the kick. That's why I suggested he might have used a bipod or something like that to steady whatever weapon he did use.


NYT says 19 weapons, and "two rifles with scopes were mounted on tripods and positioned in front of the two windows in the hotel room." maybe they don't know the difference between bipods and tripods, but this confirms what you're suspecting.

EDIT: correction: 19 rifles in the hotel room.


AP says 19 rifles were found at his home, not in the hotel room (AP says 10 in the hotel room). IDK which report is accurate. AP is also reporting "explosive devices" were found at his home.

yeah, i don't know. i just checked, to see if i had this wrong, NYT is still saying 19 rifles in the hotel room, but i've also seen written 10 in the hotel room. either way, that's a lot of rifles. a lot of round trips. you'd kind of wonder whether you were going to get stopped or checked making your way up there, i would think, unless these were collapsible or something. and, of course, how many rifles does it take?

as to motive, no real idea that i can find, but his biological father had a notorious past that it seems perhaps included psychosis manifesting itself in violent behavior. but he and his brother never lived with the father. otherwise, wow. seemed successful in business. fairly squared away. i don't know how much takeaway there's going to be from this, if we're all trying to learn something.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JSA wrote:
Slowman wrote:
slowguy wrote:
Quote:
BTW, in reference to the post on the first page, and it's not a big deal, but the M60 does not fire the same round as a AK47. Same diameter bullet, but the AK round is lighter and slower. It's like comparing a 357 Magnum to a .38.


Thanks. I remember them both being 7.62, but it's been a long time since I had any reason to fire an M60.

Quote:
There's been several comments in this thread that an M16/14 is pretty uncontrollable in full auto. +1 from me. I joined up in '82 and the Marines still had the M16A1. It would happily do full-auto if you flicked the selector switch all the way. Maybe with enough practice folks can be effective with that sort of thing, but I couldn't have hit a barn at 10 paces. The recoil knocked the weapon all over the place.


Yep. Very light weapon compared to the kick. That's why I suggested he might have used a bipod or something like that to steady whatever weapon he did use.


NYT says 19 weapons, and "two rifles with scopes were mounted on tripods and positioned in front of the two windows in the hotel room." maybe they don't know the difference between bipods and tripods, but this confirms what you're suspecting.

EDIT: correction: 19 rifles in the hotel room.


AP says 19 rifles were found at his home, not in the hotel room (AP says 10 in the hotel room). IDK which report is accurate. AP is also reporting "explosive devices" were found at his home.

l.a. times says "19 weapons" including 1 legal full auto.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply

l.a. times says "19 weapons" including 1 legal full auto.

Not quite:


At least one of them had been modified with a legal “bump stock” style device that allows the shooter to rapidly fire off rounds without actually converting it to a fully automatic weapon, the source said.
The devices modify the gun’s stock so that the recoil helps accelerate how quickly the shooter can pull the trigger. The devices are legal in the U.S.












"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vitus979 wrote:

l.a. times says "19 weapons" including 1 legal full auto.

Not quite: At least one of them had been modified with a legal “bump stock” style device that allows the shooter to rapidly fire off rounds without actually converting it to a fully automatic weapon, the source said. The devices modify the gun’s stock so that the recoil helps accelerate how quickly the shooter can pull the trigger. The devices are legal in the U.S.

thanks for the clarification. do you think this alone could have accounted for the performance of the weapon caught on audio?

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JSA wrote:

AP says 19 rifles were found at his home, not in the hotel room (AP says 10 in the hotel room). IDK which report is accurate. AP is also reporting "explosive devices" were found at his home.

They found tannerite and maybe a few pounds of Ammonium nitrate, unless that was part of the tannerite. Not sure if the Sheriff was saying it was one thing or two. Probably not at all unusual to own tannerite in the desert where you can use them in target practice.

19 rifles are a lot for someone who is not a hunter. I have a neighbor who hunts a lot of different things and he probably has more than that many rifles, but only a few hand guns. But this guy was not a hunter, so a bit unusual, unless they collectables. I hear he was a multimillionaire.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm not an expert on those kinds of things, but yes, I think so:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_U6tORrODJE








"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
vitus979 wrote:

l.a. times says "19 weapons" including 1 legal full auto.

Not quite: At least one of them had been modified with a legal “bump stock” style device that allows the shooter to rapidly fire off rounds without actually converting it to a fully automatic weapon, the source said. The devices modify the gun’s stock so that the recoil helps accelerate how quickly the shooter can pull the trigger. The devices are legal in the U.S.


thanks for the clarification. do you think this alone could have accounted for the performance of the weapon caught on audio?

Speaking from experience - yes.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [patf] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
patf wrote:
JSA wrote:


AP says 19 rifles were found at his home, not in the hotel room (AP says 10 in the hotel room). IDK which report is accurate. AP is also reporting "explosive devices" were found at his home.


They found tannerite and maybe a few pounds of Ammonium nitrate, unless that was part of the tannerite. Not sure if the Sheriff was saying it was one thing or two. Probably not at all unusual to own tannerite in the desert where you can use them in target practice.

19 rifles are a lot for someone who is not a hunter. I have a neighbor who hunts a lot of different things and he probably has more than that many rifles, but only a few hand guns. But this guy was not a hunter, so a bit unusual, unless they collectables. I hear he was a multimillionaire.

Couple things. 1) Tannerite would make perfect sense, as you note. 2) He had an Alaska hunting license. 3) I do not find 19 rifles that unusual, especially when you consider there are people are this forum with 6+ bikes.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vitus979 wrote:
I'm not an expert on those kinds of things, but yes, I think so:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_U6tORrODJE

ah. well. after having watched that video, and speaking only as a novice observer, i don't think i could distinguish between this and a fully automatic weapon, as regards function.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JSA wrote:
patf wrote:
JSA wrote:


AP says 19 rifles were found at his home, not in the hotel room (AP says 10 in the hotel room). IDK which report is accurate. AP is also reporting "explosive devices" were found at his home.


They found tannerite and maybe a few pounds of Ammonium nitrate, unless that was part of the tannerite. Not sure if the Sheriff was saying it was one thing or two. Probably not at all unusual to own tannerite in the desert where you can use them in target practice.

19 rifles are a lot for someone who is not a hunter. I have a neighbor who hunts a lot of different things and he probably has more than that many rifles, but only a few hand guns. But this guy was not a hunter, so a bit unusual, unless they collectables. I hear he was a multimillionaire.


Couple things. 1) Tannerite would make perfect sense, as you note. 2) He had an Alaska hunting license. 3) I do not find 19 rifles that unusual, especially when you consider there are people are this forum with 6+ bikes.

plus, i'm pretty sure i've had that many in a las vegas hotel room at one time.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
i don't think i could distinguish between this and a fully automatic weapon, as regards function.

As regards function, I don't think there's a difference. I'm only pointing out that it was a semi-auto rifle with a legal stock installed to allow rapid fire. (Only because there's been a lot of speculation about whether he illegally converted a weapon to actual full-auto, or legally acquired a full-auto weapon, or illegally acquired a full-auto weapon somehow.)

This kind of stock sells for about 100 bucks. Installs in a minute or two. I don't expect it'll be legal much longer.










"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
 
Hookers?

_________________________________
I'll be what I am
A solitary man
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JSA wrote:
Slowman wrote:
vitus979 wrote:

l.a. times says "19 weapons" including 1 legal full auto.

Not quite: At least one of them had been modified with a legal “bump stock” style device that allows the shooter to rapidly fire off rounds without actually converting it to a fully automatic weapon, the source said. The devices modify the gun’s stock so that the recoil helps accelerate how quickly the shooter can pull the trigger. The devices are legal in the U.S.


thanks for the clarification. do you think this alone could have accounted for the performance of the weapon caught on audio?


Speaking from experience - yes.
I've no personal experience with the bump stock, but the guy in the next office has and he says that the odd changing cyclic firing rate of the sound track is a good fit for a bump stock.

Re. why lots of weapons in the hotel room. We might be looking at that question too logically. The right way to do this sort of thing would be to take your most effective weapon and have a lot of full magazines at your elbow. Then have one back up weapon in case of a mechanical problem. But Hollywood and human nature is funny about this sort of thing. Both like extra weapons more than they like extra loaded magazines. Maybe because the latter lacks coolness, I dunno. So it's not so hard to imagine that some unstable knucklehead felt a largely irrational desire to turn his hotel room into an armory.

Books @ Amazon
"If only he had used his genius for niceness, instead of Evil." M. Smart
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
vitus979 wrote:
I'm not an expert on those kinds of things, but yes, I think so:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_U6tORrODJE


ah. well. after having watched that video, and speaking only as a novice observer, i don't think i could distinguish between this and a fully automatic weapon, as regards function.

As a shooter, you could tell a slight difference. But, I can tell you, it is pretty damn close to full-auto.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JSA wrote:
Slowman wrote:
vitus979 wrote:
I'm not an expert on those kinds of things, but yes, I think so:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_U6tORrODJE


ah. well. after having watched that video, and speaking only as a novice observer, i don't think i could distinguish between this and a fully automatic weapon, as regards function.

As a shooter, you could tell a slight difference. But, I can tell you, it is pretty damn close to full-auto.

Not directed at you......Why the fuck is that legal? For all intents and purposes it turns a semi-auto into a full auto. I don't understand why things like that and crank triggers are legal; you may not be able to achieve the same cyclic rate as a real full auto gun, but it sure looked and sounded like you could get lots of rounds down range in a big fat hurry. I have a hard time understanding how anyone could defend the need for the bump stock or a crank trigger.

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I have a question for the experienced shooters here, how many rounds do you think he shot? I heard somewhere on the news talking about how he had so many magazines like 10 or more of 30 rounds each. But wouldn't it have to be like a 100 of those to inflict this kind of damage? I mean he hit around 600 people, so assuming one bullet one victim, how many misses are there typically for every hit in this kind of shooting? lots of people there interviewed were saying they saw bullets hitting the ground and stage, so certainly some misses..

I would think at least 5 misses for every hit, but maybe because of the density of people less? Could it have been 2k to 3k rounds shot off in 10 minutes with the weapon he had? What would a 100 magazines look like, how heavy, how big a bag??
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [spot] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Deer. Lots and lots of deer.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vitus979 wrote:
i don't think i could distinguish between this and a fully automatic weapon, as regards function.

As regards function, I don't think there's a difference. I'm only pointing out that it was a semi-auto rifle with a legal stock installed to allow rapid fire. (Only because there's been a lot of speculation about whether he illegally converted a weapon to actual full-auto, or legally acquired a full-auto weapon, or illegally acquired a full-auto weapon somehow.)

This kind of stock sells for about 100 bucks. Installs in a minute or two. I don't expect it'll be legal much longer.

well, one could speculate. i figure the onus is no longer on the folks who lean toward making firearms illegal, as that has not born fruit. it's on the firearms advocates to decide what they want legal. i just try to keep my head down, figuratively and literally, and hope that the 2nd amendment advocates will choose wisely what should be legal.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [oldandslow] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
oldandslow wrote:
Deer. Lots and lots of deer.

Maybe heavily armed deer. Wearing Kevlar.

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JSA wrote:
Slowman wrote:
vitus979 wrote:
I'm not an expert on those kinds of things, but yes, I think so:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_U6tORrODJE


ah. well. after having watched that video, and speaking only as a novice observer, i don't think i could distinguish between this and a fully automatic weapon, as regards function.


As a shooter, you could tell a slight difference. But, I can tell you, it is pretty damn close to full-auto.

my guess is that, to those on the receiving end, if feels pretty damn close to full-auto.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
 
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JSA wrote:
Slowman wrote:
vitus979 wrote:
I'm not an expert on those kinds of things, but yes, I think so:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_U6tORrODJE


ah. well. after having watched that video, and speaking only as a novice observer, i don't think i could distinguish between this and a fully automatic weapon, as regards function.


As a shooter, you could tell a slight difference. But, I can tell you, it is pretty damn close to full-auto.

How well does it actually work? I've seen once at the state range. Range officer wanted to see how it worked and not many were there. Usually not allowed.

It seem like the guy had trouble getting it to fire consistently and finish a whole magazine. It was probably new to him. But in your experience was it easy to use a bump stock?
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [oldandslow] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
oldandslow wrote:
Deer. Lots and lots of deer.

;-)

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I don't know much about all that but the local radio station analyzed some of the bursts and came up with about 100 rounds per cycle. I would think the barrels would get really hot in short order and he would have to switch guns. I think there could have been several thousand rounds must have weighed hundreds of pounds. It is astounding he got that and all those rifles and they said he had shooting platforms too.

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot

Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [spot] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
spot wrote:
JSA wrote:
Slowman wrote:
vitus979 wrote:
I'm not an expert on those kinds of things, but yes, I think so:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_U6tORrODJE


ah. well. after having watched that video, and speaking only as a novice observer, i don't think i could distinguish between this and a fully automatic weapon, as regards function.


As a shooter, you could tell a slight difference. But, I can tell you, it is pretty damn close to full-auto.


Not directed at you......Why the fuck is that legal? For all intents and purposes it turns a semi-auto into a full auto. I don't understand why things like that and crank triggers are legal; you may not be able to achieve the same cyclic rate as a real full auto gun, but it sure looked and sounded like you could get lots of rounds down range in a big fat hurry. I have a hard time understanding how anyone could defend the need for the bump stock or a crank trigger.

Why do I "need" it? Fuck you, that why! Of course, I am kidding.

Why? Because it is fun. That's it. Honest answer. It serves no real practical purpose. It is inaccurate, hard to control, and expensive as hell (i.e., it burns through ammo like crazy). Again, I'll be honest - it is really fun blowing through 30 rounds with a bump stock. But, that's about it. After one mag, you start seeing dollar signs as you eat through ammo.

Why is it legal? Again, honest answer - legal loophole. "Semi-auto," by law, means one round fires with each pull of the trigger. In this case, it is the rapid pull of the trigger that fires the rounds so quickly. SHOULD it be legal? Well, that's a good question.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You can do the same thing with you finger on the trigger and your thumb in your belt loop. Probably works less well, but it works.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
monty wrote:
I have a question for the experienced shooters here, how many rounds do you think he shot? I heard somewhere on the news talking about how he had so many magazines like 10 or more of 30 rounds each. But wouldn't it have to be like a 100 of those to inflict this kind of damage? I mean he hit around 600 people, so assuming one bullet one victim, how many misses are there typically for every hit in this kind of shooting? lots of people there interviewed were saying they saw bullets hitting the ground and stage, so certainly some misses..

I would think at least 5 misses for every hit, but maybe because of the density of people less? Could it have been 2k to 3k rounds shot off in 10 minutes with the weapon he had? What would a 100 magazines look like, how heavy, how big a bag??

Nope. A few things you need to consider.

1. A single round can go through more than one person. If it doesn't strike bone, one round could go through 2 or more people.
2. Firing down and some blacktop areas, rounds ricocheted. Some hit people after hitting the ground.
3. Nowhere near 600 people were shot. It appears everyone who was killed was shot. But, the vast majority of those injured were not hit by a round. The vast majority suffered injuries from be trampled and other injuries from trying to get over barriers, etc.
4. People were shoulder-to-shoulder. Until they scattered, almost certainly, each shot hit at least one person, if not more. Thus, two 30-round magazines could have easily hit and killed 58 people.

I don't know how many mags he had, but 30 would be heavy, but easy to put in a bag and bring into a hotel.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I can really only see two uses for something like that: It's fun to play with at the range, and something like the Las Vegas shooting.

On the one hand, it's awfully hard to justify a gadget that makes range time a little more entertaining when the trade off is giving a nut the capability to do this.

On the other hand, full auto weapons (or approximations thereof haven't been used in many shootings. And people can and have carried out attacks that are just as deadly without firearms at all.

It's a loophole, and I expect it'll be closed. Personally, I won't have much of a problem with that, because there's no real use for it anyway.

The bigger issue, to me, is how we're ultimately going to cope with mass killings, as distinct from mass shootings. We have technology, and we frequently gather in extremely large, extremely vulnerable groups. I don't see an easy solution that fits our society.








"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [patf] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
patf wrote:
JSA wrote:
Slowman wrote:
vitus979 wrote:
I'm not an expert on those kinds of things, but yes, I think so:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_U6tORrODJE


ah. well. after having watched that video, and speaking only as a novice observer, i don't think i could distinguish between this and a fully automatic weapon, as regards function.


As a shooter, you could tell a slight difference. But, I can tell you, it is pretty damn close to full-auto.


How well does it actually work? I've seen once at the state range. Range officer wanted to see how it worked and not many were there. Usually not allowed.

It seem like the guy had trouble getting it to fire consistently and finish a whole magazine. It was probably new to him. But in your experience was it easy to use a bump stock?

Before the great flood of '09, I had two - one for a 9mm carbine and one for an AR. On the 9mm carbine, it is flawless. It might as well be full auto. Fairly easy to control. Consistent. Smooth. Easy.

On an AR chambered in 5.56, to me, it is more difficult than an M16 on full auto (which is difficult). When you shoulder an AR, you push it back into your shoulder to get a good placement. It is locked back into your shoulder. When you use a bump-fire stock, you have to push the AR forward to engage it. So, it is an awkward movement. You are simultaneously pushing forward and back. This causes the AR to be unstable, even more so than a full auto M16. Now, if you mount it on a bipod, it definitely will be more stable.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
There have been three (3) instances of crimes committed with legally obtained fully automatic rifles since 1934.

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [CW in NH] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
CW in NH wrote:
You can do the same thing with you finger on the trigger and your thumb in your belt loop. Probably works less well, but it works.

Yep. This guy made his own bump fire device for a Glock:




If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
FWIW, this is a bump fire vs the guy who is the fastest shooter in the world. The older guy has a "standard" semi-auto AR. The younger guy has a bump fire AR.




If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vitus979 wrote:
I can really only see two uses for something like that: It's fun to play with at the range, and something like the Las Vegas shooting.

On the one hand, it's awfully hard to justify a gadget that makes range time a little more entertaining when the trade off is giving a nut the capability to do this.

On the other hand, full auto weapons (or approximations thereof haven't been used in many shootings. And people can and have carried out attacks that are just as deadly without firearms at all.

It's a loophole, and I expect it'll be closed. Personally, I won't have much of a problem with that, because there's no real use for it anyway.

The bigger issue, to me, is how we're ultimately going to cope with mass killings, as distinct from mass shootings. We have technology, and we frequently gather in extremely large, extremely vulnerable groups. I don't see an easy solution that fits our society.

welcome to life in europe. i think we've done a pretty good job, as a society, of absorbing and mainstreaming immigrant populations (versus europe), and i'm guardedly optimistic this helps inoculate us against what europe experiences. we also, for our racial problems, don't have too many dylann roofs. but home-grown malcontents? like this guy? and tim mcvey? no good way to see this coming.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JSA wrote:
FWIW, this is a bump fire vs the guy who is the fastest shooter in the world. The older guy has a "standard" semi-auto AR. The younger guy has a bump fire AR.



the old guy has quite a finger. he must be a popular guy in the hay. i don't think i'd want to be near the receiving end of either shooter.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [aarondb4] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I had to google what a bump stock is. Landed on this page:

https://www.thetrace.org/2015/11/ar-15-bump-fire-legal/


First sentence: "For some gun enthusiasts, it’s a vision of American paradise."

“Read the transcript.”
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Exactly.

These kinds of killings are less and less a gun issue, imo. Every time someone drives a truck through a crowd of people or sets off a homemade bomb at a concert, the less significance the gun has, and the more likely it is some copycat will choose an alternative means to carry out mass violence.

I don't know how Vegas (or anywhere else) will or should respond to something like this. Someone mentioned metal detectors at hotels, which is simply not possible. Even if it was, and even if they were effective, what does that kind of security mean for a destination like Las Vegas? How many people are going to travel to Sin City to endure the kind of security we have to deal with from the TSA city wide? At the same time, at what point does it become too much of a risk to attend major public events?








"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
monty wrote:
I have a question for the experienced shooters here, how many rounds do you think he shot? I heard somewhere on the news talking about how he had so many magazines like 10 or more of 30 rounds each. But wouldn't it have to be like a 100 of those to inflict this kind of damage? I mean he hit around 600 people, so assuming one bullet one victim, how many misses are there typically for every hit in this kind of shooting? lots of people there interviewed were saying they saw bullets hitting the ground and stage, so certainly some misses..

I would think at least 5 misses for every hit, but maybe because of the density of people less? Could it have been 2k to 3k rounds shot off in 10 minutes with the weapon he had? What would a 100 magazines look like, how heavy, how big a bag??

You're assuming they are all gunshot wounds and not injuries from being trampled etc.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You're assuming they are all gunshot wounds and not injuries from being trampled etc. //

Well certainly some of them are, I really don't know how many. Do you? Have they made any announcements as to the types of injuries? Of course a bunch have to be trampling, maybe heart attacks, but a lot would be bullet wounds too. Anyway I was just wondering how many rounds he actually shot, guess we will know that answer pretty definitely in the next week or so.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vitus979 wrote:
Exactly.

These kinds of killings are less and less a gun issue, imo. Every time someone drives a truck through a crowd of people or sets off a homemade bomb at a concert, the less significance the gun has, and the more likely it is some copycat will choose an alternative means to carry out mass violence.

I don't know how Vegas (or anywhere else) will or should respond to something like this. Someone mentioned metal detectors at hotels, which is simply not possible. Even if it was, and even if they were effective, what does that kind of security mean for a destination like Las Vegas? How many people are going to travel to Sin City to endure the kind of security we have to deal with from the TSA city wide? At the same time, at what point does it become too much of a risk to attend major public events?

It's a bit like shark attacks.

In the water, it's the water itself that's probably going to kill you. Shark attacks are rarer than winning the lottery, but makes international news every time.

Bombs and gunmen kill people in first world countries, but drunk/distracted driving is far more likely to kill you.

Self driving cars can't come soon enough. If we really want to save lives that is.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [patf] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
patf wrote:
JSA wrote:
Slowman wrote:
vitus979 wrote:
I'm not an expert on those kinds of things, but yes, I think so:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_U6tORrODJE


ah. well. after having watched that video, and speaking only as a novice observer, i don't think i could distinguish between this and a fully automatic weapon, as regards function.


As a shooter, you could tell a slight difference. But, I can tell you, it is pretty damn close to full-auto.


How well does it actually work? I've seen once at the state range. Range officer wanted to see how it worked and not many were there. Usually not allowed.

It seem like the guy had trouble getting it to fire consistently and finish a whole magazine. It was probably new to him. But in your experience was it easy to use a bump stock?

Bump fire "works" in that it puts a lot of rounds down range rather quickly but the weapon moves around A LOT and there's no good way to stabilize it because in order to function the weapon needs to move. Again, to my ear, the cyclic rate is too low for bump fire or a conventional full auto weapon. It sounds like a crank trigger.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
vitus979 wrote:

l.a. times says "19 weapons" including 1 legal full auto.

Not quite: At least one of them had been modified with a legal “bump stock” style device that allows the shooter to rapidly fire off rounds without actually converting it to a fully automatic weapon, the source said. The devices modify the gun’s stock so that the recoil helps accelerate how quickly the shooter can pull the trigger. The devices are legal in the U.S.


thanks for the clarification. do you think this alone could have accounted for the performance of the weapon caught on audio?

I'm more inclined to say it's a crank trigger. The cyclic rate to my ear is too low.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [FishyJoe] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
FishyJoe wrote:

Self driving cars can't come soon enough. If we really want to save lives that is.

Sure! What could possibly go wrong?

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
JSA wrote:
FWIW, this is a bump fire vs the guy who is the fastest shooter in the world. The older guy has a "standard" semi-auto AR. The younger guy has a bump fire AR.




the old guy has quite a finger. he must be a popular guy in the hay. i don't think i'd want to be near the receiving end of either shooter.

Just wondering if you could comment on how a full auto ban may have prevented this...given that we know next-to-nothing about the weapons used and that what happened in France where MANY more people were killed and both semi-autos and full-autos have been banned for longer than the Brownlee brothers have been alive?

Emotions are high right now. Data, however, is irrefutable.


----------------------------------------------------------------

My training
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [stal] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
stal wrote:
Slowman wrote:
JSA wrote:
FWIW, this is a bump fire vs the guy who is the fastest shooter in the world. The older guy has a "standard" semi-auto AR. The younger guy has a bump fire AR.




the old guy has quite a finger. he must be a popular guy in the hay. i don't think i'd want to be near the receiving end of either shooter.


Just wondering if you could comment on how a full auto ban may have prevented this...given that we know next-to-nothing about the weapons used and that what happened in France where MANY more people were killed and both semi-autos and full-autos have been banned for longer than the Brownlee brothers have been alive?

Emotions are high right now. Data, however, is irrefutable.

data is irrefutable, you're right. if there is data, and i don't think you've provided any. many more people were killed on 9/11 and no guns were used at all, but i don't think that constitutes data.

i have no expertise in this, so when you're asking me to comment on the lethality of this, i'm not the voice of authority. just, can i answer your question with a question? this guy seemed pretty knowledgeable and experienced in firearms. he appears to have owned about 30 long guns. if you're saying this guy is just as deadly with a semi-auto as an auto, he appears to have had 29 other long guns in his arsenal. why didn't he use one of those? why did he choose the one weapon that had a bump stock? what is it you know that he doesn't know about the actual versus theoretical lethality of his attack?

this is my one and only post to you on this, because i don't want to get into the typical LR circle jerk with you; i don't know enough to speak with any authority; and i'm ambivalent about the legal issues surrounding gun ownership. i will leave that to you, because it's your responsibility now. your side won. so you guys get to set the rules now. you decide what should be legal. but because you are a stickler for data, 89 people were killed at the bataclan in shooting episode lasting, to my recollection, about 45min, with 3 gunmen doing the shooting. las vegas lasted 10 to 15 minutes, 59 dead (so far), 1 gunman. my guess is that the victims, and the intended victims who escaped, and the injured, would have been happier with a lower rate of fire. but i don't know. you'd have to ask them.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
stal wrote:
Slowman wrote:
JSA wrote:
FWIW, this is a bump fire vs the guy who is the fastest shooter in the world. The older guy has a "standard" semi-auto AR. The younger guy has a bump fire AR.




the old guy has quite a finger. he must be a popular guy in the hay. i don't think i'd want to be near the receiving end of either shooter.


Just wondering if you could comment on how a full auto ban may have prevented this...given that we know next-to-nothing about the weapons used and that what happened in France where MANY more people were killed and both semi-autos and full-autos have been banned for longer than the Brownlee brothers have been alive?

Emotions are high right now. Data, however, is irrefutable.


data is irrefutable, you're right. if there is data, and i don't think you've provided any. many more people were killed on 9/11 and no guns were used at all, but i don't think that constitutes data.

i have no expertise in this, so when you're asking me to comment on the lethality of this, i'm not the voice of authority. just, can i answer your question with a question? this guy seemed pretty knowledgeable and experienced in firearms. he appears to have owned about 30 long guns. if you're saying this guy is just as deadly with a semi-auto as an auto, he appears to have had 29 other long guns in his arsenal. why didn't he use one of those? why did he choose the one weapon that had a bump stock? what is it you know that he doesn't know about the actual versus theoretical lethality of his attack?

this is my one and only post to you on this, because i don't want to get into the typical LR circle jerk with you; i don't know enough to speak with any authority; and i'm ambivalent about the legal issues surrounding gun ownership. i will leave that to you, because it's your responsibility now. your side won. so you guys get to set the rules now. you decide what should be legal. but because you are a stickler for data, 89 people were killed at the bataclan in shooting episode lasting, to my recollection, about 45min, with 3 gunmen doing the shooting. las vegas lasted 10 to 15 minutes, 59 dead (so far), 1 gunman. my guess is that the victims, and the intended victims who escaped, and the injured, would have been happier with a lower rate of fire. but i don't know. you'd have to ask them.

Answering a question with a question is always the sign of a weak argument...but I'll answer yours even though you did not mine.

Dan Empfield Question: "Why didn't he use one of those? [semi auto rifle]"
Random internet dude answer: We don't know. We don't know $hit yet. Preliminary indications from LEOS show that he probably used an illegally modified semi-auto (yes using a bumpfire stock to murder folks makes it an illegally modified semi-auto) rifle. Espousing an argument for gun-control or a ban on title 2 weapons doesn't make any sense yet. Policy should be based on data not emotions. If it turns out that this evil fucker used a legal full-auto weapon then we should DEFINITELY explore further restrictions. Preliminary indications show that...just like the bataclan (France)...criminals don't give a shit about gun laws and will do whatever they want whenever they want. Historical data suggests that stricter gun laws don't do shit and only infringe on the rights of legal firearm owners. Do you need more examples...perhaps a local one (San Bernadino?).

Question for you (if I'm allowed another one): If the weapon wasn't a legally owned full-auto...should we relax the full-auto weapons laws because they're clearly working and too strict? Less folks have been killed in the US from title 2 weapons than in France over the past [Brownlee era] years. If data drives our policies...you should agree.

So there's my one and only permissible response to your question.

Who cares though. Why waste a good crisis?


----------------------------------------------------------------

My training
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
but because you are a stickler for data, 89 people were killed at the bataclan in shooting episode lasting, to my recollection, about 45min, with 3 gunmen doing the shooting. las vegas lasted 10 to 15 minutes, 59 dead (so far), 1 gunman. my guess is that the victims, and the intended victims who escaped, and the injured, would have been happier with a lower rate of fire.

If I recall correctly, the Paris shooters were armed with full auto AK47s. (And bombs.) The rate of fire of the weapons was not the difference.









"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vitus979 wrote:
but because you are a stickler for data, 89 people were killed at the bataclan in shooting episode lasting, to my recollection, about 45min, with 3 gunmen doing the shooting. las vegas lasted 10 to 15 minutes, 59 dead (so far), 1 gunman. my guess is that the victims, and the intended victims who escaped, and the injured, would have been happier with a lower rate of fire.

If I recall correctly, the Paris shooters were armed with full auto AK47s. (And bombs.) The rate of fire of the weapons was not the difference.

whoa there....don't let data get in the way here. Clearly....guns are the problem. Let's not let the fact that France has stricter gun laws than ANY state in the union get in the way of a good gun-control argument.

If France had stricter gun control laws then CLEARLY nobody would have died. CLEARLY.


----------------------------------------------------------------

My training
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [stal] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
stal wrote:
Slowman wrote:
stal wrote:
Slowman wrote:
JSA wrote:
FWIW, this is a bump fire vs the guy who is the fastest shooter in the world. The older guy has a "standard" semi-auto AR. The younger guy has a bump fire AR.




the old guy has quite a finger. he must be a popular guy in the hay. i don't think i'd want to be near the receiving end of either shooter.


Just wondering if you could comment on how a full auto ban may have prevented this...given that we know next-to-nothing about the weapons used and that what happened in France where MANY more people were killed and both semi-autos and full-autos have been banned for longer than the Brownlee brothers have been alive?

Emotions are high right now. Data, however, is irrefutable.


data is irrefutable, you're right. if there is data, and i don't think you've provided any. many more people were killed on 9/11 and no guns were used at all, but i don't think that constitutes data.

i have no expertise in this, so when you're asking me to comment on the lethality of this, i'm not the voice of authority. just, can i answer your question with a question? this guy seemed pretty knowledgeable and experienced in firearms. he appears to have owned about 30 long guns. if you're saying this guy is just as deadly with a semi-auto as an auto, he appears to have had 29 other long guns in his arsenal. why didn't he use one of those? why did he choose the one weapon that had a bump stock? what is it you know that he doesn't know about the actual versus theoretical lethality of his attack?

this is my one and only post to you on this, because i don't want to get into the typical LR circle jerk with you; i don't know enough to speak with any authority; and i'm ambivalent about the legal issues surrounding gun ownership. i will leave that to you, because it's your responsibility now. your side won. so you guys get to set the rules now. you decide what should be legal. but because you are a stickler for data, 89 people were killed at the bataclan in shooting episode lasting, to my recollection, about 45min, with 3 gunmen doing the shooting. las vegas lasted 10 to 15 minutes, 59 dead (so far), 1 gunman. my guess is that the victims, and the intended victims who escaped, and the injured, would have been happier with a lower rate of fire. but i don't know. you'd have to ask them.


Answering a question with a question is always the sign of a weak argument...but I'll answer yours even though you did not mine.

Dan Empfield Question: "Why didn't he use one of those? [semi auto rifle]"
Random internet dude answer: We don't know. We don't know $hit yet. Preliminary indications from LEOS show that he probably used an illegally modified semi-auto (yes using a bumpfire stock to murder folks makes it an illegally modified semi-auto) rifle. Espousing an argument for gun-control or a ban on title 2 weapons doesn't make any sense yet. Policy should be based on data not emotions. If it turns out that this evil fucker used a legal full-auto weapon then we should DEFINITELY explore further restrictions. Preliminary indications show that...just like the bataclan (France)...criminals don't give a shit about gun laws and will do whatever they want whenever they want. Historical data suggests that stricter gun laws don't do shit and only infringe on the rights of legal firearm owners. Do you need more examples...perhaps a local one (San Bernadino?).

Question for you (if I'm allowed another one): If the weapon wasn't a legally owned full-auto...should we relax the full-auto weapons laws because they're clearly working and too strict? Less folks have been killed in the US from title 2 weapons than in France over the past [Brownlee era] years. If data drives our policies...you should agree.

So there's my one and only permissible response to your question.

Who cares though. Why waste a good crisis?

if your idea of data is just how many people get killed by what kind of weapon, then any sort of long gun of any type should be legal and all handguns should be illegal. and while we're at it, bazookas, mortars and close air support aircraft should be legal for private users too. but airliners should be banned from the skies, because data shows them to be quite deadly in the hands of terrorists.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
stal wrote:
Slowman wrote:
stal wrote:
Slowman wrote:
JSA wrote:
FWIW, this is a bump fire vs the guy who is the fastest shooter in the world. The older guy has a "standard" semi-auto AR. The younger guy has a bump fire AR.




the old guy has quite a finger. he must be a popular guy in the hay. i don't think i'd want to be near the receiving end of either shooter.


Just wondering if you could comment on how a full auto ban may have prevented this...given that we know next-to-nothing about the weapons used and that what happened in France where MANY more people were killed and both semi-autos and full-autos have been banned for longer than the Brownlee brothers have been alive?

Emotions are high right now. Data, however, is irrefutable.


data is irrefutable, you're right. if there is data, and i don't think you've provided any. many more people were killed on 9/11 and no guns were used at all, but i don't think that constitutes data.

i have no expertise in this, so when you're asking me to comment on the lethality of this, i'm not the voice of authority. just, can i answer your question with a question? this guy seemed pretty knowledgeable and experienced in firearms. he appears to have owned about 30 long guns. if you're saying this guy is just as deadly with a semi-auto as an auto, he appears to have had 29 other long guns in his arsenal. why didn't he use one of those? why did he choose the one weapon that had a bump stock? what is it you know that he doesn't know about the actual versus theoretical lethality of his attack?

this is my one and only post to you on this, because i don't want to get into the typical LR circle jerk with you; i don't know enough to speak with any authority; and i'm ambivalent about the legal issues surrounding gun ownership. i will leave that to you, because it's your responsibility now. your side won. so you guys get to set the rules now. you decide what should be legal. but because you are a stickler for data, 89 people were killed at the bataclan in shooting episode lasting, to my recollection, about 45min, with 3 gunmen doing the shooting. las vegas lasted 10 to 15 minutes, 59 dead (so far), 1 gunman. my guess is that the victims, and the intended victims who escaped, and the injured, would have been happier with a lower rate of fire. but i don't know. you'd have to ask them.


Answering a question with a question is always the sign of a weak argument...but I'll answer yours even though you did not mine.

Dan Empfield Question: "Why didn't he use one of those? [semi auto rifle]"
Random internet dude answer: We don't know. We don't know $hit yet. Preliminary indications from LEOS show that he probably used an illegally modified semi-auto (yes using a bumpfire stock to murder folks makes it an illegally modified semi-auto) rifle. Espousing an argument for gun-control or a ban on title 2 weapons doesn't make any sense yet. Policy should be based on data not emotions. If it turns out that this evil fucker used a legal full-auto weapon then we should DEFINITELY explore further restrictions. Preliminary indications show that...just like the bataclan (France)...criminals don't give a shit about gun laws and will do whatever they want whenever they want. Historical data suggests that stricter gun laws don't do shit and only infringe on the rights of legal firearm owners. Do you need more examples...perhaps a local one (San Bernadino?).

Question for you (if I'm allowed another one): If the weapon wasn't a legally owned full-auto...should we relax the full-auto weapons laws because they're clearly working and too strict? Less folks have been killed in the US from title 2 weapons than in France over the past [Brownlee era] years. If data drives our policies...you should agree.

So there's my one and only permissible response to your question.

Who cares though. Why waste a good crisis?

if your idea of data is just how many people get killed by what kind of weapon, then any sort of long gun of any type should be legal and all handguns should be illegal. and while we're at it, bazookas, mortars and close air support aircraft should be legal for private users too. but airliners should be banned from the skies, because data shows them to be quite deadly in the hands of terrorists.

Agreed. Firearm (or weapon) legislation is not based on data at all regardless of jurisdiction. Especially not per capita data. Thus the entire purpose of this thread is moot and we should create policy based on who is in power at the time. Totally reasonable.

Or we could just go by what works in the States...like the founders of our country intended.

But again who cares...never waste a good crisis or care about facts. #resist


----------------------------------------------------------------

My training
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Something to consider when debating gun laws. Data is from 2010

31,672 gun related deaths. 11,078 were homicides.
36,000 car related deaths.
98,000 malpractice related deaths
100,000 alcohol related deaths
400,000 obesity related deaths
450,000 tobacco related deaths. 50,000 were from 2nd hand smoke

I agree that automatic weapons should be banned, which they are. The majority of FB posts are calling for a complete ban of guns. Over reaction due to the tragic events. Do you ban all the above as well?
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [wdowe] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
wdowe wrote:
Something to consider when debating gun laws. Data is from 2010

31,672 gun related deaths. 11,078 were homicides.
36,000 car related deaths.
98,000 malpractice related deaths
100,000 alcohol related deaths
400,000 obesity related deaths
450,000 tobacco related deaths. 50,000 were from 2nd hand smoke

I agree that automatic weapons should be banned, which they are. The majority of FB posts are calling for a complete ban of guns. Over reaction due to the tragic events. Do you ban all the above as well?

the rhodes scholar schooling me on "data" in the posts above, using france as an example of why none of this matters at all, neglects to mention that france has about 70 percent fewer guns than the U.S., per capita, and has about 70 percent of fewer gun deaths, per capita. so, data is apparently how we determine public policy. until (apparently) it isn't.

here's what doesn't matter: what anybody else beside gun enthusiasts think. i don't know why you're even asking me, because i'm not a gun enthusiast, and i don't spend that much time thinking about gun laws, and if i was james brady brought back to life, with the oratorical skills of william jennings bryan, it wouldn't make a damn bit of difference what i say. what matters is what gun enthusiasts think, because they very clearly set the agenda. so you guys do what you want. you guys decide what the gun laws should be. you guys decide what sort of death rate from gun violence is sustainable. and that's what we're going to do as a country and you won't hear a peep from me. just please don't blow smoke up my ass and try to pretend that america's highest (by far!) rate of gun ownership doesn't give us the highest (by far!) death rate by gun among 1st world countries.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [wdowe] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
wdowe wrote:
Something to consider when debating gun laws. Data is from 2010

31,672 gun related deaths. 11,078 were homicides.
36,000 car related deaths.
98,000 malpractice related deaths
100,000 alcohol related deaths
400,000 obesity related deaths
450,000 tobacco related deaths. 50,000 were from 2nd hand smoke

I agree that automatic weapons should be banned, which they are. The majority of FB posts are calling for a complete ban of guns. Over reaction due to the tragic events. Do you ban all the above as well?

Firstly, let me pass on my thoughts to your country in this time of tragedy.

Secondly, looking at the data above....
31,672 gun related deaths Over reaction due to the tragic events.
so wdowe, your data shows that in 2010, 31,672 of your people ( that's an awful lot of real people, not one of those individuals is DATA, each one of those is a real someone to someone else) died from a Gun Related Death.
that's averaged over the year as 86+ deaths per day. even if half were suicides, then that's still 43 real people KILLED per day from a gun related death.
wdowe, do you want to pick which 43 people that will be tomorrow?
Maybe someone else can pick the next 43 people to die on Thursday, and someone else who's arguing the minutia of the current gun laws can pick the 43 to die on Friday of this week..
From afar, many many people in the world look at this and want to scream from the top of our lungs...
"How can this not be a thing that you're (USA) not moving heaven and hell to rectify"
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Avago] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
 1,516 mass shootings in 1,735 days: America's gun crisis – in one chart
The attack at a country music festival in Las Vegas that left at least 58 people dead is the deadliest mass shooting in modern US history – but there were six other mass shootings in America this past week alone.
No other developed nation comes close to the rate of gun violence in America. Americans own an estimated 265m guns, more than one gun for every adult.
Data compiled by the Gun Violence Archive reveals a shocking human toll: there is a mass shooting – defined as four or more people shot in one incident, not including the shooter – every nine out of 10 days on average.
Tuesday 3 October 2017 05.09 AE
Guardian US interactive team and Sam Morris
Tuesday 3 October 2017 05.09 AEDT
= Death (1,719 total)
= Injury (6,510)
Oct 1, 2017Las Vegas, NV
Oct 1, 2017Lawrence, KS
Sep 30, 2017Memphis, TN
Sep 28, 2017New Orleans, LA
Sep 26, 2017Baltimore, MD
Sep 26, 2017Philadelphia, PA
Sep 26, 2017Memphis, TN
Sep 24, 2017Antioch, TN
Sep 24, 2017Mays Landing, NJ
Sep 24, 2017Baltimore, MD
Sep 24, 2017Syracuse, NY
Sep 23, 2017Bakersfield, CA
Sep 23, 2017Danville, IL
Sep 20, 2017Gary, IN
Sep 17, 2017Petersburg, VA
Sep 17, 2017Detroit, MI
Sep 16, 2017Columbia, SC
Sep 13, 2017Memphis, TN
Sep 13, 2017Rockford, WA
Sep 13, 2017Philadelphia, PA
Sep 13, 2017York, PA
Sep 10, 2017Plano, TX
Sep 10, 2017New Orleans, LA
Sep 9, 2017Selma, AL
Sep 6, 2017Chicago, IL
Sep 4, 2017Bellwood, IL
Sep 3, 2017Inglewood, CA
Sep 2, 2017Chicago, IL
Sep 2, 2017Louisville, KY
Aug 28, 2017Clovis, NM
Aug 27, 2017Sacramento, CA
Aug 27, 2017Evansville, IN
Aug 25, 2017Gainesville, FL
Aug 24, 2017Saint Louis, MO
Aug 22, 2017Chicago, IL
Aug 21, 2017Whitakers, NC
Aug 21, 2017Newark, NJ
Aug 21, 2017Baltimore, MD
Aug 21, 2017Newark, NJ
Aug 21, 2017Memphis, TN
Aug 20, 2017Chicago, IL
Aug 20, 2017Brooklyn, NY
Aug 19, 2017Cleveland, OH
Aug 16, 2017Wyandanch, NY
Aug 14, 2017North Hollywood, CA
Aug 13, 2017Philadelphia, PA
Aug 13, 2017Suffolk, VA
Aug 13, 2017Sacramento, CA
Aug 12, 2017Saint Louis, MO
Aug 8, 2017Chicago, IL
Aug 6, 2017Oakland, CA
Aug 6, 2017Bronx, NY
Aug 6, 2017Bronx, NY
Aug 5, 2017Tallahassee, FL
Aug 5, 2017Allendale, SC
Aug 5, 2017Lakewood, NJ
Aug 4, 2017Lodge Grass, MT
Aug 3, 2017Washington, DC
Aug 2, 2017Baltimore, MD
Aug 1, 2017Fresno, CA
Aug 1, 2017Toppenish, WA
Aug 1, 2017Chicago, IL
Jul 31, 2017Decatur, IL
Jul 30, 2017Norfolk, VA
Jul 30, 2017El Paso, TX
Jul 29, 2017Salisbury, NC
Jul 29, 2017Buffalo, NY
Jul 28, 2017Wilmington, DE
Jul 27, 2017Chicago, IL
Jul 26, 2017High Point, NC
Jul 23, 2017Chicago, IL
Jul 23, 2017Baton Rouge, LA
Jul 22, 2017Cincinnati, OH
Jul 19, 2017Los Angeles, CA
Jul 19, 2017Richmond, VA
Jul 18, 2017Trenton, NJ
Jul 18, 2017Milwaukee, WI
Jul 18, 2017El Mirage, AZ
Jul 15, 2017Philadelphia, PA
Jul 15, 2017Chicago, IL
Jul 9, 2017Lawrenceville, VA
Jul 8, 2017Cincinnati, OH
Jul 8, 2017Alton, IL
Jul 6, 2017Meridian, MS
Jul 5, 2017Madison, ME
Jul 5, 2017Chicago (Roseland), IL
Jul 5, 2017Savannah, GA
Jul 4, 2017Hampton, VA
Jul 4, 2017Raleigh, NC
Jul 4, 2017Orlando (Pine Castle), FL
Jul 3, 2017Prattville, AL
Jul 3, 2017Pontiac, MI
Jul 2, 2017Jersey City, NJ
Jul 2, 2017Greenwood, SC
Jul 1, 2017Newark, NJ
Jul 1, 2017Little Rock, AR
Jul 1, 2017Momence, IL
Jul 1, 2017Oakland, CA
Jun 30, 2017Bronx, NY
Jun 27, 2017Chicago, IL
Jun 25, 2017Saint Louis, MO
Jun 25, 2017Washington, DC
Jun 24, 2017Fort Lauderdale, FL
Jun 24, 2017New York (Manhattan), NY
Jun 24, 2017Willingboro, NJ
Jun 22, 2017Atlanta, GA
Jun 18, 2017Saint Louis, MO
Jun 18, 2017Myrtle Beach, SC
Jun 18, 2017Washington, DC
Jun 18, 2017Chicago, IL
Jun 17, 2017Columbus, OH
Jun 17, 2017Chicago, IL
Jun 15, 2017La Madera, NM
Jun 15, 2017Richmond, VA
Jun 14, 2017San Francisco, CA
Jun 14, 2017Alexandria, VA
Jun 14, 2017Canton, OH
Jun 13, 2017Baltimore, MD
Jun 13, 2017Saint Louis (University City), MO
Jun 13, 2017Baltimore, MD
Jun 11, 2017Chicago, IL
Jun 11, 2017Chattanooga, TN
Jun 11, 2017Houston, TX
Jun 10, 2017Memphis, TN
Jun 9, 2017Fort Worth, TX
Jun 8, 2017New Orleans, LA
Jun 6, 2017Sandy, UT
Jun 5, 2017Orlando, FL
Jun 3, 2017New Orleans, LA
Jun 3, 2017Saint Louis, MO
Jun 2, 2017Laredo, TX
Jun 2, 2017Los Angeles, CA
Jun 1, 2017Saint Louis, MO
May 30, 2017Middletown, OH
May 29, 2017Louisville, KY
May 28, 2017Paterson, NJ
May 28, 2017Phenix City, AL
May 28, 2017Moss Point, MS
May 27, 2017Bogue Chitto, MS
May 27, 2017Washington, DC
May 27, 2017New York (Manhattan), NY
May 26, 2017Miami, FL
May 21, 2017Des Moines, IA
May 21, 2017Mesa, AZ
May 20, 2017Philadelphia, PA
May 16, 2017Ruffin, SC
May 14, 2017Jonesboro, AR
May 14, 2017Avon Park, FL
May 14, 2017Dolton, IL
May 14, 2017Fort Worth, TX
May 10, 2017Trenton, NJ
May 9, 2017Kansas City, KS
May 7, 2017Chicago, IL
May 4, 2017Flint, MI
May 2, 2017Jacksonville, FL
May 1, 2017Dallas, TX
Apr 30, 2017Topeka, KS
Apr 30, 2017San Diego, CA
Apr 30, 2017Loris, SC
Apr 30, 2017Jacksonville, FL
Apr 29, 2017Whittier, CA
Apr 29, 2017Los Angeles (Boyle Heights), CA
Apr 29, 2017Germantown, MD
Apr 29, 2017Sacramento, CA
Apr 29, 2017Compton, CA
Apr 29, 2017Virginia Beach, VA
Apr 28, 2017Chester, PA
Apr 27, 2017Newark, NJ
Apr 26, 2017Miami, FL
Apr 21, 2017Palm Bay, FL
Apr 20, 2017Louisville, KY
Apr 16, 2017Columbus, OH
Apr 16, 2017Elizabeth City, NC
Apr 16, 2017Vallejo, CA
Apr 15, 2017Birmingham, AL
Apr 15, 2017Banning, CA
Apr 15, 2017Indianapolis, IN
Apr 15, 2017Rock Falls, IL
Apr 15, 2017Harvey, IL
Apr 15, 2017Philadelphia, PA
Apr 13, 2017Atlanta, GA
Apr 9, 2017San Antonio, TX
Apr 9, 2017Fort Wayne, IN
Apr 7, 2017Houston, TX
Apr 7, 2017Saint Paul, MN
Apr 7, 2017Hickory, NC
Apr 7, 2017Chicago, IL
Apr 6, 2017Lake Charles, LA
Apr 3, 2017Philadelphia, PA
Apr 3, 2017Lubbock, TX
Apr 2, 2017Chicago, IL
Apr 2, 2017Des Moines, IA
Apr 1, 2017Oklahoma City, OK
Apr 1, 2017Tampa, FL
Apr 1, 2017Pittsburg, CA
Mar 30, 2017Chicago, IL
Mar 27, 2017Sanford, FL
Mar 26, 2017Cincinnati, OH
Mar 26, 2017Houston, TX
Mar 26, 2017Cleveland, OH
Mar 25, 2017Cleveland, OH
Mar 25, 2017Knoxville, TN
Mar 25, 2017Detroit, MI
Mar 24, 2017Saint Louis, MO
Mar 24, 2017Fresno, CA
Mar 22, 2017Rothschild, WI
Mar 19, 2017Louisville, KY
Mar 18, 2017Detroit, MI
Mar 15, 2017Metairie, LA
Mar 10, 2017New Orleans (Gentilly), LA
Mar 10, 2017Chicago, IL
Mar 7, 2017Chicago, IL
Mar 5, 2017Columbus, GA
Mar 4, 2017Topeka, KS
Mar 4, 2017Sacramento, CA
Mar 3, 2017Riverside, CA
Mar 3, 2017Philadelphia, PA
Feb 28, 2017Cincinnati, OH
Feb 27, 2017Newport News, VA
Feb 26, 2017Gary, IN
Feb 25, 2017Warren, OH
Feb 25, 2017Jacksonville, FL
Feb 22, 2017Rochester, NY
Feb 21, 2017Toomsuba, MS
Feb 21, 2017Cleveland, OH
Feb 20, 2017Cleveland, OH
Feb 19, 2017Norfolk, VA
Feb 18, 2017South Bend, IN
Feb 18, 2017Philadelphia, PA
Feb 15, 2017Chicago, IL
Feb 15, 2017Salinas, CA
Feb 12, 2017Caruthersville, MO
Feb 12, 2017Newburgh, NY
Feb 12, 2017Greenville, FL
Feb 11, 2017Chicago, IL
Feb 11, 2017Savannah, TN
Feb 10, 2017New Orleans, LA
Feb 9, 2017Jackson, MS
Feb 8, 2017Cleveland, OH
Feb 7, 2017Little Rock, AR
Feb 7, 2017Columbia, SC
Feb 6, 2017Yazoo City, MS
Jan 31, 2017Memphis, TN
Jan 31, 2017Washington, DC
Jan 30, 2017Minneapolis (Crystal), MN
Jan 29, 2017Shreveport, LA
Jan 27, 2017Brownsville, TN
Jan 26, 2017Albany, GA
Jan 25, 2017Chicago, IL
Jan 22, 2017Manvel, TX
Jan 22, 2017Atlanta, GA
Jan 22, 2017Chicago (Englewood), IL
Jan 21, 2017Memphis, TN
Jan 21, 2017Jonesboro, GA
Jan 21, 2017Boynton Beach, FL
Jan 20, 2017Como, MS
Jan 20, 2017Fresno, CA
Jan 16, 2017Miami, FL
Jan 16, 2017Houston, TX
Jan 15, 2017Capulin, CO
Jan 15, 2017Magnolia, MS
Jan 12, 2017Kansas City, MO
Jan 12, 2017Salinas, CA
Jan 11, 2017Chicago, IL
Jan 11, 2017Newark, NJ
Jan 7, 2017Flint, MI
Jan 6, 2017Fort Lauderdale, FL
Jan 6, 2017Pasadena, CA
Jan 4, 2017Fontana, CA
Jan 3, 2017Allen, TX
Jan 1, 2017Dallas, TX
Jan 1, 2017Miami, FL
Jan 1, 2017Winstonville, MS
Dec 31, 2016Lenox (El Dorado), GA
Dec 31, 2016Houston, TX
Dec 30, 2016Wallingford, CT
Dec 30, 2016Mansfield, OH
Dec 28, 2016Columbus, GA
Dec 25, 2016Chicago, IL
Dec 25, 2016Mount Vernon, NY
Dec 25, 2016Ozark, AL
Dec 24, 2016Wilson, NC
Dec 24, 2016Madison, NC
Dec 23, 2016Birmingham, AL
Dec 23, 2016Chicago, IL
Dec 17, 2016Chicago (Roseland), IL
Dec 17, 2016Charlotte, NC
Dec 16, 2016Chicago, IL
Dec 16, 2016Chicago, IL
Dec 12, 2016Sacramento, CA
Dec 11, 2016Orlando (Pine Hills), FL
Dec 11, 2016Baltimore, MD
Dec 11, 2016Brooklyn, NY
Dec 11, 2016Rocky Mount, NC
Dec 9, 2016Channelview, TX
Dec 9, 2016Fresno, CA
Dec 5, 2016Albuquerque, NM
Dec 3, 2016Los Angeles, CA
Dec 2, 2016Bloomfield, NJ
Dec 1, 2016Clearlake Oaks, CA
Nov 30, 2016Baltimore, MD
Nov 28, 2016Mission (Palmview), TX
Nov 28, 2016Wilmington, CA
Nov 28, 2016San Pedro, CA
Nov 27, 2016New Orleans, LA
Nov 27, 2016Kansas City, MO
Nov 26, 2016Chicago, IL
Nov 25, 2016New Orleans, LA
Nov 24, 2016Louisville, KY
Nov 24, 2016Albany, NY
Nov 23, 2016Olive Branch, MS
Nov 22, 2016Clewiston, FL
Nov 18, 2016Chicago, IL
Nov 17, 2016Dyersburg, TN
Nov 13, 2016San Diego, CA
Nov 13, 2016Jacksonville, FL
Nov 13, 2016San Antonio, TX
Nov 13, 2016Orlando, FL
Nov 12, 2016Sacramento, CA
Nov 12, 2016Kansas City, MO
Nov 12, 2016Bridgeport, CT
Nov 11, 2016Houston, TX
Nov 10, 2016Houston, TX
Nov 9, 2016Chicago, IL
Nov 9, 2016Seattle, WA
Nov 9, 2016Memphis, TN
Nov 5, 2016Fort Lauderdale (Lauderhill), FL
Nov 5, 2016Oakland, CA
Nov 5, 2016Chicago, IL
Nov 5, 2016Myrtle Beach, SC
Nov 5, 2016San Antonio, TX
Nov 4, 2016Philadelphia, PA
Nov 3, 2016Orange, NJ
Nov 3, 2016Chicago, IL
Nov 2, 2016Little Rock, AR
Nov 1, 2016Memphis, TN
Oct 31, 2016Shreveport, LA
Oct 30, 2016Capitol Heights, MD
Oct 30, 2016Newburgh, NY
Oct 30, 2016San Antonio, TX
Oct 30, 2016Toledo, OH
Oct 30, 2016New York (Manhattan), NY
Oct 29, 2016Dayton, OH
Oct 29, 2016Los Angeles, CA
Oct 29, 2016Riverside, CA
Oct 28, 2016Jackson, MS
Oct 28, 2016Miami Gardens, FL
Oct 27, 2016Jackson, GA
Oct 25, 2016Roanoke, VA
Oct 25, 2016Dayton, OH
Oct 23, 2016Wellston, OK
Oct 22, 2016Oakland, CA
Oct 18, 2016San Francisco, CA
Oct 17, 2016Chicago (Englewood), IL
Oct 15, 2016Los Angeles, CA
Oct 15, 2016Rockford, IL
Oct 15, 2016Mobile, AL
Oct 14, 2016Chicago, IL
Oct 13, 2016Chicago, IL
Oct 9, 2016Grand Rapids, MI
Oct 9, 2016Sacramento, CA
Oct 8, 2016Brooklyn, NY
Oct 4, 2016New Orleans, LA
Oct 3, 2016Minneapolis, MN
Oct 2, 2016San Antonio, TX
Oct 1, 2016Pembroke Township, IL
Oct 1, 2016Fresno, CA
Sep 29, 2016San Francisco, CA
Sep 26, 2016Houston, TX
Sep 26, 2016Humble, TX
Sep 26, 2016Winston Salem (Winston-salem), NC
Sep 25, 2016Champaign, IL
Sep 24, 2016Baltimore, MD
Sep 23, 2016Burlington, WA
Sep 18, 2016Lynchburg, VA
Sep 18, 2016Philadelphia, PA
Sep 18, 2016Pittsburgh, PA
Sep 17, 2016Washington, DC
Sep 17, 2016Indianapolis, IN
Sep 17, 2016Orlando, FL
Sep 17, 2016Miami, FL
Sep 16, 2016Philadelphia, PA
Sep 16, 2016Los Angeles (Hollywood), CA
Sep 14, 2016Houston, TX
Sep 13, 2016Fort Wayne, IN
Sep 11, 2016Fort Wayne, IN
Sep 11, 2016New Orleans, LA
Sep 11, 2016Jersey City, NJ
Sep 11, 2016Kansas City, MO
Sep 11, 2016Saginaw, MI
Sep 11, 2016New Bern, NC
Sep 10, 2016Miami, FL
Sep 8, 2016Del Valle, TX
Sep 8, 2016Hot Springs National Park (Hot Springs), AR
Sep 5, 2016Chicago, IL
Sep 5, 2016Reading, PA
Sep 4, 2016Roanoke, VA
Sep 3, 2016Wilmington, NC
Sep 3, 2016Chicago, IL
Aug 30, 2016Atlanta, GA
Aug 30, 2016Chicago (Englewood), IL
Aug 29, 2016Temecula, CA
Aug 29, 2016Egg Harbor City, NJ
Aug 28, 2016Saint Louis, MO
Aug 28, 2016Lubbock, TX
Aug 28, 2016Dadeville, AL
Aug 28, 2016Bronx, NY
Aug 27, 2016Miami, FL
Aug 27, 2016Bessemer (Brighton), AL
Aug 25, 2016Bridgeton, NJ
Aug 21, 2016Bridgeport, CT
Aug 21, 2016Boston, MA
Aug 20, 2016Citronelle, AL
Aug 20, 2016Tacoma, WA
Aug 20, 2016Hamden, CT
Aug 18, 2016Waterbury, CT
Aug 17, 2016Oakland, CA
Aug 14, 2016Minneapolis, MN
Aug 14, 2016Norfolk, VA
Aug 13, 2016Milwaukee, WI
Aug 13, 2016Los Angeles, CA
Aug 13, 2016Richmond Hill, NY
Aug 13, 2016Joplin, MO
Aug 12, 2016Jacksonville, FL
Aug 12, 2016Dallas, TX
Aug 11, 2016Philadelphia, PA
Aug 10, 2016Sacramento, CA
Aug 10, 2016Evanston, IL
Aug 8, 2016Albuquerque, NM
Aug 8, 2016Jacksonville, FL
Aug 7, 2016Arvada, CO
Aug 7, 2016Los Angeles, CA
Aug 7, 2016Vicksburg, MS
Aug 7, 2016Chicago, IL
Aug 6, 2016Reading (Sinking Spring), PA
Aug 5, 2016Perris, CA
Aug 5, 2016Pontiac, MI
Aug 4, 2016Memphis, TN
Aug 3, 2016Decatur, GA
Aug 2, 2016Hollywood (West Park), FL
Aug 1, 2016Evansville, IN
Jul 31, 2016Miami, FL
Jul 31, 2016Austin, TX
Jul 30, 2016Mukilteo, WA
Jul 30, 2016Saint Louis, MO
Jul 30, 2016Townsend (Eulonia), GA
Jul 29, 2016Athens, GA
Jul 28, 2016Chicago, IL
Jul 28, 2016Elmira, NY
Jul 28, 2016Baltimore, MD
Jul 25, 2016Fort Myers, FL
Jul 24, 2016Hamilton, OH
Jul 23, 2016Bastrop, TX
Jul 23, 2016Cincinnati, OH
Jul 23, 2016North Charleston, SC
Jul 23, 2016Brooklyn, NY
Jul 22, 2016Kankakee, IL
Jul 21, 2016Chicago, IL
Jul 20, 2016Fresno, CA
Jul 19, 2016West Memphis, AR
Jul 17, 2016Baton Rouge, LA
Jul 17, 2016Houston, TX
Jul 17, 2016Detroit, MI
Jul 16, 2016Bakersfield, CA
Jul 16, 2016Clarksville, TN
Jul 16, 2016Dallas, TX
Jul 16, 2016Cleveland, OH
Jul 16, 2016San Bernardino, CA
Jul 15, 2016Woodland, WA
Jul 14, 2016Crosby, TX
Jul 14, 2016Akron, OH
Jul 14, 2016Oakland, CA
Jul 13, 2016Saint Louis, MO
Jul 13, 2016Warner Robins, GA
Jul 11, 2016Saint Joseph, MI
Jul 11, 2016Baltimore, MD
Jul 11, 2016Jackson, MI
Jul 11, 2016Washington, DC
Jul 7, 2016Dallas, TX
Jul 7, 2016Bristol, TN
Jul 7, 2016Baton Rouge, LA
Jul 5, 2016Los Angeles, CA
Jul 4, 2016Houston, TX
Jul 4, 2016Phoenix, AZ
Jul 4, 2016Brooklyn, NY
Jul 4, 2016Pittsburgh, PA
Jul 4, 2016Cleveland, OH
Jul 4, 2016Chicago (Englewood), IL
Jul 3, 2016Monroe, LA
Jul 3, 2016Chattanooga, TN
Jun 30, 2016Chicago, IL
Jun 29, 2016Las Vegas, NV
Jun 28, 2016Los Angeles (county), CA
Jun 28, 2016Chicago, IL
Jun 27, 2016Woodburn, OR
Jun 26, 2016Atlanta, GA
Jun 26, 2016Houston, TX
Jun 26, 2016Charlotte, NC
Jun 26, 2016Corpus Christi, TX
Jun 26, 2016Marlboro (county), SC
Jun 25, 2016Fort Worth, TX
Jun 25, 2016Norfolk, VA
Jun 25, 2016Chicago, IL
Jun 24, 2016District Heights, MD
Jun 24, 2016Hartford, CT
Jun 24, 2016Kansas City, KS
Jun 22, 2016Olympia, WA
Jun 22, 2016Dekalb (county), GA
Jun 22, 2016Chicago, IL
Jun 21, 2016Louisville, KY
Jun 21, 2016Willingboro, NJ
Jun 19, 2016Roanoke, VA
Jun 18, 2016Waycross, GA
Jun 18, 2016Exmore, VA
Jun 18, 2016Chicago, IL
Jun 14, 2016Oakland, CA
Jun 14, 2016Wilmington, DE
Jun 13, 2016Brooklyn, NY
Jun 13, 2016Chicago, IL
Jun 13, 2016Fresno, CA
Jun 12, 2016Orlando, FL
Jun 11, 2016Roswell, NM
Jun 11, 2016Panorama City, CA
Jun 11, 2016Charlotte, NC
Jun 11, 2016Stockton, CA
Jun 11, 2016Webster, MN
Jun 9, 2016Fort Walton Beach, FL
Jun 8, 2016Boston, MA
Jun 8, 2016Washington, DC
Jun 6, 2016Visalia, CA
Jun 5, 2016Cape Coral, FL
Jun 5, 2016Phoenix, AZ
Jun 5, 2016Brooklyn, NY
Jun 5, 2016Minneapolis, MN
Jun 4, 2016Denver, CO
May 31, 2016Chicago, IL
May 31, 2016Fort Wayne, IN
May 30, 2016Sacramento, CA
May 30, 2016Baltimore, MD
May 29, 2016Houston, TX
May 29, 2016Trenton, NJ
May 29, 2016Indianapolis, IN
May 29, 2016Las Vegas, NV
May 23, 2016Newark, NJ
May 22, 2016Stockton, CA
May 22, 2016New Orleans, LA
May 22, 2016Nashville, TN
May 21, 2016Jackson, GA
May 18, 2016Indianapolis, IN
May 17, 2016Ravenel, SC
May 15, 2016Moultrie, GA
May 15, 2016Evansville, IN
May 14, 2016Charleston, WV
May 14, 2016Atlanta, GA
May 11, 2016Birmingham, AL
May 11, 2016Chicago, IL
May 8, 2016Austin, TX
May 6, 2016Bethesda, MD
May 6, 2016Detroit, MI
May 6, 2016Montgomery, AL
May 5, 2016Shreveport, LA
May 5, 2016Miami, FL
May 4, 2016Minneapolis, MN
May 1, 2016Murfreesboro, TN
Apr 29, 2016Oakland, CA
Apr 29, 2016Saint Louis (Ferguson), MO
Apr 27, 2016Kilmichael, MS
Apr 27, 2016Baton Rouge, LA
Apr 26, 2016District Heights (Forestville), MD
Apr 25, 2016Miami, FL
Apr 25, 2016Nashville, TN
Apr 24, 2016Chicago (Englewood), IL
Apr 24, 2016Halifax, VA
Apr 24, 2016Denver, CO
Apr 23, 2016Auburn, AL
Apr 23, 2016Topeka, KS
Apr 23, 2016Las Vegas, NV
Apr 23, 2016New York (Manhattan), NY
Apr 22, 2016Piketon, OH
Apr 22, 2016Appling, GA
Apr 21, 2016Baltimore, MD
Apr 19, 2016Chicago, IL
Apr 19, 2016Blountsville, AL
Apr 19, 2016Chicago, IL
Apr 18, 2016Long Beach, CA
Apr 17, 2016Philadelphia, PA
Apr 17, 2016Edinburg, TX
Apr 17, 2016Pelzer, SC
Apr 16, 2016Orlando, FL
Apr 16, 2016Detroit, MI
Apr 16, 2016Enterprise, AL
Apr 10, 2016Milwaukee, WI
Apr 10, 2016Los Angeles, CA
Apr 9, 2016Anniston, AL
Apr 9, 2016Memphis, TN
Apr 9, 2016Albuquerque, NM
Apr 7, 2016Chicago, IL
Mar 31, 2016Chicago (Englewood), IL
Mar 25, 2016Denver, CO
Mar 25, 2016Chicago, IL
Mar 21, 2016Chicago, IL
Mar 19, 2016Wetumpka, AL
Mar 19, 2016Plantation, FL
Mar 15, 2016Atlanta, GA
Mar 13, 2016Fort Myers, FL
Mar 12, 2016Oakland, CA
Mar 12, 2016Portland, OR
Mar 11, 2016Detroit, MI
Mar 11, 2016Trenton, NJ
Mar 9, 2016Pittsburgh (Wilkinsburg), PA
Mar 8, 2016San Antonio, TX
Mar 7, 2016Kansas City, KS
Mar 7, 2016Lafayette, LA
Mar 6, 2016Compton, CA
Mar 6, 2016Chelsea, MA
Mar 6, 2016Roswell, GA
Mar 5, 2016Wichita, KS
Mar 4, 2016Columbus, OH
Feb 28, 2016Riverside (Jurupa Valley), CA
Feb 28, 2016Detroit, MI
Feb 27, 2016Woodbridge (Lake Ridge), VA
Feb 26, 2016Belfair, WA
Feb 25, 2016Hesston, KS
Feb 23, 2016Glendale, AZ
Feb 23, 2016Daytona Beach, FL
Feb 21, 2016Hazelwood, MO
Feb 21, 2016Houston, TX
Feb 20, 2016Kalamazoo, MI
Feb 20, 2016Iuka, MS
Feb 20, 2016Tampa, FL
Feb 20, 2016Bessemer, AL
Feb 20, 2016Orlando, FL
Feb 19, 2016Edgerton, MO
Feb 19, 2016Vallejo, CA
Feb 14, 2016Houston, TX
Feb 14, 2016Eutaw (Union), AL
Feb 13, 2016Marrero, LA
Feb 7, 2016Orlando, FL
Feb 7, 2016Pass Christian, MS
Feb 7, 2016Rochester, NY
Feb 7, 2016Chicago (Englewood), IL
Feb 6, 2016Tampa, FL
Feb 6, 2016Los Angeles, CA
Feb 6, 2016Apopka, FL
Feb 3, 2016Washington, DC
Jan 30, 2016Glendale, AZ
Jan 27, 2016Chesapeake, VA
Jan 26, 2016Seattle, WA
Jan 25, 2016Perris, CA
Jan 23, 2016Los Angeles, CA
Jan 17, 2016Ware Neck (Gloucester Courthouse), VA
Jan 11, 2016Wilmington, DE
Jan 8, 2016Chicago, IL
Jan 8, 2016Washington, DC
Jan 7, 2016Memphis, TN
Jan 6, 2016Lakeland, FL
Dec 31, 2015New Orleans, LA
Dec 27, 2015Jackson, TN
Dec 26, 2015Philadelphia, PA
Dec 25, 2015Jacksonville, FL
Dec 25, 2015Mobile, AL
Dec 21, 2015San Leandro, CA
Dec 20, 2015Wilmington, NC
Dec 20, 2015Miami (Goulds), FL
Dec 20, 2015Miami-dade (county), FL
Dec 13, 2015Los Angeles, CA
Dec 13, 2015Huntington Beach, CA
Dec 12, 2015Lovejoy (Brooklyn), IL
Dec 12, 2015Savannah, GA
Dec 11, 2015Baltimore, MD
Dec 11, 2015Pittsburgh (Mount Oliver), PA
Dec 8, 2015Cincinnati (Fairmount), OH
Dec 6, 2015Omaha, NE
Dec 6, 2015Raceland, LA
Dec 2, 2015San Bernardino, CA
Dec 2, 2015Savannah, GA
Nov 29, 2015Kankakee, IL
Nov 27, 2015Colorado Springs, CO
Nov 27, 2015Sacramento, CA
Nov 24, 2015Horry (county), SC
Nov 23, 2015Columbus, OH
Nov 23, 2015Minneapolis, MN
Nov 22, 2015North Charleston, SC
Nov 22, 2015New Orleans, LA
Nov 22, 2015Newburgh, NY
Nov 22, 2015Chicago, IL
Nov 22, 2015Brownsville, TX
Nov 22, 2015Seattle, WA
Nov 21, 2015Baltimore, MD
Nov 20, 2015Pittsburgh, PA
Nov 18, 2015Fresno, CA
Nov 16, 2015Cherokee (county), AL
Nov 15, 2015Tennessee Colony, TX
Nov 15, 2015Philadelphia, PA
Nov 14, 2015Johnstown, PA
Nov 13, 2015Jacksonville, FL
Nov 9, 2015Indianapolis, IN
Nov 8, 2015Des Moines, IA
Nov 8, 2015Warren, MI
Nov 7, 2015Denver, CO
Nov 6, 2015Bakersfield, CA
Nov 3, 2015Jacksonville, FL
Nov 2, 2015Pendleton, SC
Oct 28, 2015Houma, LA
Oct 27, 2015Fort Worth, TX
Oct 26, 2015Evansville, IN
Oct 25, 2015Phoenix, AZ
Oct 25, 2015Four Oaks, NC
Oct 25, 2015Washington, DC
Oct 24, 2015Bamberg, SC
Oct 22, 2015Nashville, TN
Oct 19, 2015Calumet City, IL
Oct 18, 2015New Orleans, LA
Oct 17, 2015Fort Myers, FL
Oct 17, 2015Elkhart, IN
Oct 12, 2015Decatur, GA
Oct 10, 2015Peoria, IL
Oct 10, 2015Memphis, TN
Oct 10, 2015Charlotte, NC
Oct 9, 2015Flagstaff, AZ
Oct 6, 2015Baltimore, MD
Oct 2, 2015Baltimore, MD
Oct 1, 2015Roseburg, OR
Sep 28, 2015Chicago, IL
Sep 28, 2015Chicago, IL
Sep 28, 2015Cincinnati (Evanston), OH
Sep 28, 2015Dayton, OH
Sep 27, 2015Greenville, GA
Sep 27, 2015Chicago, IL
Sep 27, 2015Kansas City, MO
Sep 25, 2015Danville, IL
Sep 24, 2015Chicago, IL
Sep 23, 2015Norcross, GA
Sep 23, 2015Shreveport, LA
Sep 23, 2015Fort Myers, FL
Sep 20, 2015Chicago, IL
Sep 20, 2015Philadelphia, PA
Sep 20, 2015Tulsa, OK
Sep 19, 2015Indianapolis, IN
Sep 17, 2015Geddes, SD
Sep 17, 2015Albion, MI
Sep 15, 2015Newark, NJ
Sep 13, 2015Ocala, FL
Sep 12, 2015Rochester, NY
Sep 12, 2015Minneapolis, MN
Sep 12, 2015Minneapolis, MN
Sep 12, 2015Shreveport, LA
Sep 11, 2015Charlotte, NC
Sep 10, 2015Excelsior (Greenwood), MN
Sep 8, 2015Chicago, IL
Sep 8, 2015Berlin, GA
Sep 7, 2015Gary, IN
Sep 7, 2015Denver, CO
Sep 5, 2015Las Vegas, NV
Sep 5, 2015Charlotte, NC
Sep 5, 2015Columbia, MO
Sep 5, 2015Daytona Beach, FL
Aug 30, 2015Memphis, TN
Aug 29, 2015Bristol, TN
Aug 29, 2015Tyler, TX
Aug 28, 2015Brooklyn, NY
Aug 27, 2015Salinas, CA
Aug 26, 2015West Palm Beach, FL
Aug 26, 2015Chicago, IL
Aug 26, 2015Minneapolis (Brooklyn Center), MN
Aug 25, 2015New Orleans, LA
Aug 23, 2015Modesto, CA
Aug 22, 2015Roswell, NM
Aug 22, 2015Orlando (Pine Hills), FL
Aug 21, 2015Cincinnati, OH
Aug 21, 2015Durham, NC
Aug 20, 2015Grulla (La Grulla), TX
Aug 19, 2015Rochester, NY
Aug 16, 2015Fort Worth, TX
Aug 16, 2015Bennettsville, SC
Aug 16, 2015Chicago, IL
Aug 15, 2015Orangeburg, SC
Aug 15, 2015Pittsburgh, PA
Aug 15, 2015Los Angeles, CA
Aug 10, 2015Long Beach, CA
Aug 9, 2015Detroit, MI
Aug 9, 2015Forest, MS
Aug 9, 2015Kansas City, MO
Aug 8, 2015Houston, TX
Aug 8, 2015Gastonia, NC
Aug 8, 2015Blytheville, AR
Aug 7, 2015Barre (Berlin), VT
Aug 6, 2015Columbia, SC
Aug 4, 2015Saint Louis, MO
Aug 3, 2015Brooklyn, NY
Aug 2, 2015Chicago, IL
Aug 2, 2015Brooklyn, NY
Aug 2, 2015Baltimore, MD
Aug 2, 2015Savannah, GA
Aug 2, 2015Chicago, IL
Aug 1, 2015Orlando, FL
Jul 30, 2015Pittsburgh, PA
Jul 27, 2015Rockford, IL
Jul 26, 2015Kansas City, MO
Jul 26, 2015New Orleans, LA
Jul 25, 2015Hopewell, VA
Jul 24, 2015Erie, PA
Jul 23, 2015Lafayette, LA
Jul 22, 2015Suwanee, GA
Jul 21, 2015Miami Gardens, FL
Jul 20, 2015Bronx, NY
Jul 19, 2015Louisville, KY
Jul 19, 2015Suffolk, VA
Jul 19, 2015Rocky Mount, NC
Jul 18, 2015Baton Rouge, LA
Jul 18, 2015Salem, OR
Jul 18, 2015Santa Paula, CA
Jul 18, 2015San Diego, CA
Jul 17, 2015Chicago, IL
Jul 17, 2015Cincinnati (Westwood), OH
Jul 16, 2015Chattanooga, TN
Jul 16, 2015Dallas, TX
Jul 15, 2015Holly Hill, SC
Jul 15, 2015Baltimore, MD
Jul 15, 2015Cleveland, OH
Jul 15, 2015Atlanta, GA
Jul 15, 2015Detroit, MI
Jul 14, 2015Saint Louis, MO
Jul 13, 2015Stockton, CA
Jul 13, 2015Norwalk, CA
Jul 12, 2015River Forest, IL
Jul 12, 2015Jersey City, NJ
Jul 7, 2015Baltimore, MD
Jul 7, 2015Cleveland, OH
Jul 5, 2015East Orange, NJ
Jul 5, 2015Fort Wayne, IN
Jul 5, 2015Shreveport, LA
Jul 4, 2015Pittsfield, MA
Jul 4, 2015Washington, DC
Jul 4, 2015San Antonio, TX
Jul 4, 2015Syracuse, NY
Jul 4, 2015Louisville, KY
Jul 2, 2015Indianapolis, IN
Jun 29, 2015Opa Locka, FL
Jun 28, 2015Harrington, DE
Jun 28, 2015Venice, IL
Jun 28, 2015Detroit, MI
Jun 27, 2015Taunton, MA
Jun 27, 2015Detroit, MI
Jun 24, 2015New York (Manhattan), NY
Jun 22, 2015Philadelphia, PA
Jun 21, 2015Lexington, KY
Jun 21, 2015Pittsburgh (Wilkinsburg), PA
Jun 20, 2015Detroit, MI
Jun 20, 2015Philadelphia, PA
Jun 20, 2015Morven, NC
Jun 19, 2015Woonsocket, RI
Jun 17, 2015Charleston, SC
Jun 16, 2015Miami Gardens, FL
Jun 15, 2015Brooklyn, NY
Jun 14, 2015Camden, NJ
Jun 14, 2015Saint Louis, MO
Jun 14, 2015Tulsa, OK
Jun 13, 2015Columbus, OH
Jun 13, 2015Fayetteville, GA
Jun 13, 2015Milledgeville, GA
Jun 13, 2015Bronx, NY
Jun 13, 2015Oklahoma City, OK
Jun 12, 2015Allapattah, FL
Jun 11, 2015Bridgeport, CT
Jun 11, 2015Houston, TX
Jun 10, 2015Los Angeles, CA
Jun 9, 2015Saint Louis, MO
Jun 7, 2015Deer Lodge, MT
Jun 6, 2015Buffalo, NY
Jun 6, 2015Chicago, IL
Jun 5, 2015New Orleans, LA
Jun 5, 2015Davenport, IA
Jun 3, 2015Wyandanch, NY
May 31, 2015Conyers, GA
May 31, 2015Cleveland, OH
May 31, 2015Springdale, MD
May 31, 2015New Haven, CT
May 30, 2015San Diego, CA
May 28, 2015Chester, PA
May 28, 2015Chicago, IL
May 28, 2015Omaha, NE
May 26, 2015New Orleans, LA
May 25, 2015Decatur, IL
May 24, 2015Montgomery, AL
May 24, 2015Flint, MI
May 24, 2015Brockton, MA
May 24, 2015Saint Louis, MO
May 23, 2015Fresno, CA
May 20, 2015Baltimore, MD
May 18, 2015Miami, FL
May 18, 2015Kinloch, MO
May 17, 2015Waco, TX
May 16, 2015Baltimore, MD
May 16, 2015Milwaukee, WI
May 16, 2015Rochester, NY
May 12, 2015Tucson, AZ
May 12, 2015Capitol Heights, MD
May 10, 2015Cleveland, OH
May 10, 2015Newark, NJ
May 10, 2015Jersey City, NJ
May 7, 2015Detroit, MI
May 7, 2015Cincinnati, OH
May 4, 2015Buffalo, NY
May 3, 2015Menasha, WI
May 3, 2015Dayton, OH
May 3, 2015Houston, TX
May 3, 2015South Bend, IN
May 3, 2015Bronx, NY
May 1, 2015Milwaukee, WI
Apr 27, 2015Brooklyn, NY
Apr 27, 2015Gila Bend, AZ
Apr 25, 2015Gates, NY
Apr 25, 2015Trenton, NJ
Apr 21, 2015Killeen, TX
Apr 19, 2015Richmond, VA
Apr 18, 2015Lumberton, NC
Apr 18, 2015Paterson, NJ
Apr 18, 2015Montgomery, AL
Apr 18, 2015Williamsport, PA
Apr 18, 2015Charlotte, NC
Apr 16, 2015Phoenix, AZ
Apr 7, 2015Rome, GA
Apr 5, 2015Louisville, KY
Apr 5, 2015Pittsburgh, PA
Apr 5, 2015Indianapolis, IN
Apr 5, 2015Benton Harbor, MI
Apr 3, 2015Daytona Beach, FL
Apr 2, 2015Baltimore, MD
Mar 27, 2015Panama City Beach, FL
Mar 26, 2015Amarillo, TX
Mar 24, 2015Indianapolis, IN
Mar 23, 2015Clarksville, TN
Mar 22, 2015Albuquerque, NM
Mar 21, 2015Tampa, FL
Mar 20, 2015Lancaster, TX
Mar 18, 2015Mesa, AZ
Mar 18, 2015Newark, NJ
Mar 17, 2015Stockton, CA
Mar 15, 2015Compton, CA
Mar 14, 2015Atlanta, GA
Mar 14, 2015Coachella, CA
Mar 13, 2015Brookhaven, MS
Mar 10, 2015Columbus, GA
Mar 9, 2015Chicago, IL
Mar 8, 2015Seneca, SC
Mar 7, 2015Saint Louis, MO
Mar 4, 2015San Bernardino, CA
Mar 1, 2015Detroit, MI
Mar 1, 2015Orange County, FL
Feb 28, 2015Baltimore, MD
Feb 26, 2015Tyrone, MO
Feb 25, 2015Houston, TX
Feb 23, 2015Daytona Beach, FL
Feb 22, 2015Killeen, TX
Feb 22, 2015Clarkesville, GA
Feb 22, 2015Charleston, SC
Feb 20, 2015Sacramento, CA
Feb 17, 2015Little Rock, AR
Feb 15, 2015Long Beach, CA
Feb 9, 2015New Port Richey, FL
Feb 8, 2015Friendship, TN
Feb 7, 2015Douglasville, GA
Feb 6, 2015Tulsa, OK
Feb 5, 2015Beachwood (Warrensville Heights), OH
Feb 1, 2015New York (Manhattan), NY
Feb 1, 2015Syracuse, NY
Jan 31, 2015Lagrange, GA
Jan 28, 2015Dekalb County, GA
Jan 26, 2015Stockton, CA
Jan 24, 2015Arverne (Queens), NY
Jan 24, 2015Omaha, NE
Jan 23, 2015Boston, MA
Jan 20, 2015Clarksville, TN
Jan 19, 2015San Antonio, TX
Jan 13, 2015Rockford, IL
Jan 13, 2015Portsmouth, VA
Jan 11, 2015Hope Mills, NC
Jan 11, 2015Lakeland, FL
Jan 11, 2015San Jose, CA
Jan 10, 2015Wichita, KS
Jan 9, 2015San Francisco, CA
Jan 8, 2015Boston, MA
Jan 7, 2015Chattanooga, TN
Jan 6, 2015Miami, FL
Jan 4, 2015Dallas, TX
Jan 4, 2015Roanoke, VA
Jan 2, 2015Savannah, GA
Jan 1, 2015Memphis, TN
Dec 31, 2014Los Angeles, CA
Dec 29, 2014New Orleans, LA
Dec 27, 2014Los Angeles, CA
Dec 27, 2014Sacramento, CA
Dec 26, 2014East St. Louis, IL
Dec 24, 2014Saint Louis, MO
Dec 23, 2014Winchester, KY
Dec 22, 2014Webster, NY
Dec 22, 2014Detroit, MI
Dec 22, 2014Chicago, IL
Dec 21, 2014Sarasota, FL
Dec 21, 2014Calumet City, IL
Dec 21, 2014Waynesboro, MS
Dec 20, 2014Rockford, IL
Dec 16, 2014Elizabeth, NJ
Dec 14, 2014Miami, FL
Dec 13, 2014Tampa, FL
Dec 12, 2014Macon, GA
Dec 12, 2014Portland, OR
Dec 7, 2014South Bend, IN
Dec 2, 2014Saint Louis, MO
Dec 2, 2014Newport News, VA
Nov 30, 2014Chattanooga, TN
Nov 30, 2014Brooklyn, NY
Nov 29, 2014Atlanta, GA
Nov 29, 2014Newark, NJ
Nov 28, 2014Memphis, TN
Nov 27, 2014Georgetown, TX
Nov 26, 2014San Francisco, CA
Nov 23, 2014Denver, CO
Nov 23, 2014Accomack County, VA
Nov 22, 2014Sisseton, SD
Nov 22, 2014Cleveland, OH
Nov 22, 2014Springfield, OH
Nov 21, 2014Pittsburgh, PA
Nov 19, 2014Chicago, IL
Nov 18, 2014North Las Vegas, NV
Nov 16, 2014Akron, OH
Nov 16, 2014El Paso, TX
Nov 15, 2014Springfield, MO
Nov 15, 2014Miami, FL
Nov 8, 2014Pomona, CA
Nov 7, 2014Compton, CA
Nov 7, 2014Los Angeles, CA
Nov 5, 2014San Francisco, CA
Oct 29, 2014Memphis, TN
Oct 26, 2014Cadiz, KY
Oct 24, 2014Marysville, WA
Oct 24, 2014Sacramento, CA
Oct 18, 2014Graniteville, SC
Oct 18, 2014Brooklyn, NY
Oct 18, 2014Queens, NY
Oct 16, 2014Detroit, MI
Oct 14, 2014Peachtree Corners, GA
Oct 13, 2014Atlanta, GA
Oct 12, 2014Stockton, CA
Oct 12, 2014Atlanta, GA
Oct 11, 2014Utica, NY
Oct 8, 2014Guilderland, NY
Oct 8, 2014Atlanta, GA
Oct 5, 2014Jacksonville, FL
Oct 5, 2014Detroit, MI
Oct 4, 2014Memphis, TN
Oct 4, 2014Pomona, CA
Sep 29, 2014Walterboro, SC
Sep 29, 2014Fresno, CA
Sep 28, 2014Miami, FL
Sep 28, 2014Philadelphia, PA
Sep 27, 2014Saint Louis, MO
Sep 26, 2014Darlington County, SC
Sep 21, 2014East Liverpool, OH
Sep 20, 2014Panola County, MS
Sep 19, 2014Queens, NY
Sep 18, 2014Bell, FL
Sep 15, 2014New Orleans, LA
Sep 14, 2014Flour Bluff, TX
Sep 14, 2014Anchorage, AK
Sep 11, 2014Detroit, MI
Sep 6, 2014Macon, GA
Sep 6, 2014Orlando, FL
Sep 4, 2014Flint, MI
Sep 3, 2014Los Angeles, CA
Sep 2, 2014Jackson, MS
Sep 2, 2014Highland, CA
Aug 31, 2014Livermore, CA
Aug 29, 2014Brooksville, FL
Aug 27, 2014Detroit, MI
Aug 24, 2014San Fernando, CA
Aug 24, 2014Augusta, GA
Aug 24, 2014Chicago, IL
Aug 20, 2014Memphis, TN
Aug 18, 2014Saint Martinville, LA
Aug 17, 2014East Palo Alto, CA
Aug 17, 2014Queens, NY
Aug 17, 2014Boston, MA
Aug 17, 2014Las Vegas, NV
Aug 16, 2014Plainfield, NJ
Aug 16, 2014Salt Lake City, UT
Aug 14, 2014Memphis, TN
Aug 13, 2014New Orleans, LA
Aug 13, 2014Clarksville, TN
Aug 12, 2014Bartow County, GA
Aug 12, 2014Buffalo, NY
Aug 10, 2014New Orleans, LA
Aug 10, 2014Moreno Valley, CA
Aug 10, 2014Washington, DC
Aug 10, 2014Wrightsville, GA
Aug 9, 2014Minneapolis, MN
Aug 8, 2014Albuquerque, NM
Aug 8, 2014Washington, DC
Aug 8, 2014Milwaukee, WI
Aug 6, 2014Bakersfield, CA
Aug 4, 2014Atlanta, GA
Aug 3, 2014Culpeper, VA
Aug 3, 2014Humble, TX
Aug 3, 2014Saint Louis, MO
Aug 3, 2014Columbia, TN
Aug 2, 2014Dallas, TX
Aug 2, 2014Pittsburgh, PA
Aug 2, 2014New Bedford, MA
Aug 1, 2014Philadelphia, PA
Jul 30, 2014Hope Mills, NC
Jul 28, 2014Philadelphia, PA
Jul 27, 2014Saint Louis, MO
Jul 26, 2014Saco, ME
Jul 26, 2014Pine Bluff, AR
Jul 26, 2014Sylvester, GA
Jul 25, 2014Chicago, IL
Jul 23, 2014Braddock, PA
Jul 21, 2014Irvington, NJ
Jul 21, 2014Memphis, TN
Jul 20, 2014East Saint Louis, IL
Jul 20, 2014Las Vegas, NV
Jul 19, 2014Chicago, IL
Jul 14, 2014Sacramento, CA
Jul 13, 2014Stamford, CT
Jul 13, 2014Skyway, WA
Jul 13, 2014Washington, DC
Jul 12, 2014Pasadena, CA
Jul 11, 2014Chicago, IL
Jul 9, 2014Spring, TX
Jul 8, 2014Providence, RI
Jul 7, 2014San Bernardino, CA
Jul 7, 2014Stopover, KY
Jul 6, 2014Miami, FL
Jul 6, 2014Buffalo, NY
Jul 6, 2014Saint Louis, MO
Jul 5, 2014Portland, OR
Jul 5, 2014Indianapolis, IN
Jul 5, 2014Norfolk, VA
Jul 5, 2014Houston, TX
Jul 5, 2014Centreville, IL
Jul 5, 2014Kalamazoo, MI
Jul 4, 2014Norfolk, VA
Jul 2, 2014Chester, PA
Jun 30, 2014Lexington, KY
Jun 29, 2014New Orleans, LA
Jun 29, 2014Los Angeles, CA
Jun 29, 2014Saint Louis, MO
Jun 28, 2014Antioch, CA
Jun 28, 2014Manhattan, NY
Jun 27, 2014Detroit, MI
Jun 27, 2014San Diego, CA
Jun 27, 2014San Diego, CA
Jun 26, 2014Detroit, MI
Jun 26, 2014Milwaukee, WI
Jun 25, 2014Lowell, MA
Jun 24, 2014Miami, FL
Jun 22, 2014Windsor, CA
Jun 21, 2014Memphis, TN
Jun 21, 2014Washington, DC
Jun 20, 2014Seat Pleasant, MD
Jun 15, 2014Kokomo, IN
Jun 15, 2014Park Forest, IL
Jun 13, 2014Los Angeles, CA
Jun 9, 2014Paterson, NJ
Jun 8, 2014Opp, AL
Jun 7, 2014Moncks Corner, SC
Jun 7, 2014Oak Park, MI
Jun 4, 2014Chicago, IL
Jun 3, 2014Atlanta, GA
Jun 2, 2014Chicago, IL
Jun 1, 2014Chicago, IL
Jun 1, 2014Sacramento, CA
May 31, 2014San Bernardino, CA
May 25, 2014Toledo, OH
May 24, 2014Myrtle Beach, SC
May 24, 2014Detroit, MI
May 23, 2014Goleta (Isla Vista), CA
May 23, 2014Bellflower, CA
May 23, 2014New Orleans, LA
May 21, 2014Dallas, TX
May 18, 2014Sandusky, OH
May 17, 2014Coachella, CA
May 17, 2014Washington, DC
May 13, 2014Atlanta, GA
May 12, 2014Chicago, IL
May 11, 2014Sacramento, CA
May 11, 2014Memphis, TN
May 10, 2014Decatur, GA
May 10, 2014Sacramento, CA
May 10, 2014Stone Mountain, GA
May 4, 2014Chicago, IL
May 4, 2014Wheat Ridge, CO
May 3, 2014Jonesboro, AR
Apr 30, 2014Chicago, IL
Apr 29, 2014Kennesaw, GA
Apr 27, 2014Troy, NY
Apr 25, 2014Memphis, TN
Apr 22, 2014Los Angeles, CA
Apr 20, 2014Tampa, FL
Apr 20, 2014Montgomery, IL
Apr 20, 2014Chicago, IL
Apr 14, 2014Washington, DC
Apr 12, 2014New Orleans, LA
Apr 11, 2014Richmond, IN
Apr 9, 2014Lookout Valley, TN
Apr 9, 2014Rockford, IL
Apr 7, 2014New Orleans, LA
Apr 6, 2014Oklahoma City, OK
Apr 6, 2014Springfield, MA
Apr 5, 2014Chicago, IL
Apr 5, 2014Phoenix, AZ
Apr 5, 2014Fairfield, CA
Apr 2, 2014Fort Hood, TX
Mar 30, 2014Starkville, MS
Mar 30, 2014Charlotte, NC
Mar 23, 2014Arlington, TX
Mar 23, 2014Long Beach, CA
Mar 23, 2014San Francisco, CA
Mar 21, 2014North Charleston, SC
Mar 16, 2014Beaumont, TX
Mar 16, 2014Waynesboro, GA
Mar 14, 2014Brooklyn, NY
Mar 9, 2014Fremont, OH
Mar 9, 2014Austin, TX
Mar 8, 2014Richmond, CA
Mar 8, 2014Chicago, IL
Mar 5, 2014Pelzer, SC
Mar 1, 2014Pittsburgh, PA
Mar 1, 2014Detroit, MI
Feb 25, 2014Glade Spring, VA
Feb 22, 2014Wilmington, CA
Feb 20, 2014Alturas, CA
Feb 20, 2014Indianapolis, IN
Feb 16, 2014Dallas, TX
Feb 16, 2014Orange County, FL
Feb 16, 2014Fort Worth, TX
Feb 16, 2014Jacksonville, FL
Feb 16, 2014Fort Wayne, IN
Feb 15, 2014Las Vegas, NV
Feb 12, 2014Oakland, CA
Feb 12, 2014Stockton, CA
Feb 12, 2014Gary, IN
Feb 7, 2014Miami, FL
Feb 6, 2014New Orleans, LA
Feb 5, 2014Chicago, IL
Feb 3, 2014Franklin, IN
Jan 27, 2014Seattle, WA
Jan 27, 2014Rocky Mount, NC
Jan 25, 2014Chicago, IL
Jan 25, 2014Belle Glade, FL
Jan 21, 2014Newark, NJ
Jan 20, 2014Manassas, VA
Jan 16, 2014Spanish Fork, UT
Jan 16, 2014Ardmore, OK
Jan 14, 2014Los Angeles, CA
Jan 13, 2014Detroit, MI
Jan 12, 2014Tallulah, LA
Jan 12, 2014Huntsville, AL
Jan 12, 2014Elgin, IL
Jan 11, 2014Tallulah, LA
Jan 3, 2014Queens, NY
Jan 1, 2014Norfolk, VA
Dec 31, 2013Brooklyn, NY
Dec 28, 2013Montgomery, AL
Dec 26, 2013Lockport, LA
Dec 26, 2013Slidell, LA
Dec 25, 2013Irvington, NJ
Dec 25, 2013Medford, NY
Dec 22, 2013Muskegon, MI
Dec 21, 2013Trenton, NJ
Dec 21, 2013Shelby, NC
Dec 15, 2013Homestead (Florida City), FL
Dec 15, 2013Channelview, TX
Dec 14, 2013Statesville, NC
Dec 7, 2013Wilmington, DE
Dec 1, 2013Topeka, KS
Dec 1, 2013Miami, FL
Nov 30, 2013Lansing, MI
Nov 30, 2013Valdosta, GA
Nov 29, 2013Fresno, CA
Nov 29, 2013Indianapolis, IN
Nov 28, 2013Rochester, NY
Nov 25, 2013Minneapolis, MN
Nov 25, 2013Oakland, CA
Nov 23, 2013Tulsa, OK
Nov 21, 2013Philadelphia, PA
Nov 20, 2013Houston, TX
Nov 15, 2013Houston, TX
Nov 11, 2013Brooklyn, NY
Nov 10, 2013Phoenix, AZ
Nov 10, 2013Canton, OH
Nov 9, 2013Cypress, TX
Nov 7, 2013Detroit, MI
Nov 5, 2013Jacksonville, FL
Nov 5, 2013Washington, DC
Nov 3, 2013Los Angeles, CA
Nov 3, 2013Perris, CA
Nov 2, 2013Radcliff, KY
Oct 29, 2013Bradley (Callison), SC
Oct 27, 2013Vallejo, CA
Oct 27, 2013Southern Pines, NC
Oct 27, 2013Roseville, CA
Oct 27, 2013Beaumont, TX
Oct 26, 2013New Haven, CT
Oct 26, 2013Miami Gardens, FL
Oct 21, 2013Pittsburgh (Homewood), PA
Oct 20, 2013Miami, FL
Oct 20, 2013Margate, FL
Oct 13, 2013Harrisburg, PA
Oct 12, 2013Tulsa, OK
Oct 9, 2013Paris, TX
Oct 6, 2013Philadelphia, PA
Oct 6, 2013Avondale, AZ
Oct 5, 2013Fresno, CA
Oct 5, 2013Buffalo, NY
Oct 2, 2013Omaha, NE
Sep 29, 2013Chicago, IL
Sep 27, 2013Zanesville, OH
Sep 25, 2013Haw River, NC
Sep 24, 2013Huntington, WV
Sep 22, 2013Muskegon, MI
Sep 22, 2013Wichita, KS
Sep 22, 2013Saint Louis, MO
Sep 21, 2013Palm Beach, FL
Sep 20, 2013Rice, TX
Sep 20, 2013Long Beach, CA
Sep 19, 2013Chicago, IL
Sep 18, 2013Memphis, TN
Sep 17, 2013Stockton, CA
Sep 17, 2013Kissimmee, FL
Sep 17, 2013Las Vegas, NV
Sep 17, 2013Lansing, MI
Sep 16, 2013Washington Navy Yard, DC
Sep 15, 2013Snellville, GA
Sep 15, 2013Yakima, WA
Sep 15, 2013Colorado Springs, CO
Sep 14, 2013Marion, NC
Sep 12, 2013Crab Orchard, TN
Sep 12, 2013Washington, DC
Sep 11, 2013New York, NY
Sep 10, 2013Bridgeport, CT
Sep 7, 2013Gary, IN
Sep 7, 2013Saint Louis, MO
Sep 5, 2013Charlotte, NC
Aug 25, 2013Lake Butler, FL
Aug 25, 2013Minneapolis, MN
Aug 25, 2013Latta, SC
Aug 25, 2013Oakland, CA
Aug 20, 2013Baltimore, MD
Aug 19, 2013Chicago, IL
Aug 18, 2013Chesterfield, SC
Aug 18, 2013Chicago, IL
Aug 18, 2013Toledo, OH
Aug 18, 2013Port Norris, NJ
Aug 17, 2013San Francisco, CA
Aug 14, 2013Oklahoma City, OK
Aug 13, 2013Philadelphia, PA
Aug 11, 2013Portsmouth, VA
Aug 11, 2013Brooklyn, NY
Aug 10, 2013Wilmington, DE
Aug 9, 2013Saint Louis, MO
Aug 7, 2013Dallas, TX
Aug 6, 2013Saylorsburg, PA
Aug 6, 2013Montclair, NJ
Aug 4, 2013Salinas, CA
Aug 4, 2013Kansas City, MO
Aug 3, 2013Detroit, MI
Aug 2, 2013Newark, NJ
Aug 2, 2013Indianapolis, IN
Jul 30, 2013Lea (county), NM
Jul 29, 2013Granger, WA
Jul 26, 2013Hialeah, FL
Jul 26, 2013Clarksburg, WV
Jul 25, 2013Inkster, MI
Jul 24, 2013Topeka, KS
Jul 21, 2013Brooklyn, NY
Jul 20, 2013Brooklyn, NY
Jul 19, 2013Hartford, CT
Jul 19, 2013Madera, CA
Jul 17, 2013Oakland, CA
Jul 14, 2013Wichita, KS
Jul 14, 2013Grand Rapids (Kentwood), MI
Jul 13, 2013Trenton (Hamilton Township), NJ
Jul 13, 2013Oklahoma City, OK
Jul 13, 2013Campbell, OH
Jul 13, 2013Washington, DC
Jul 12, 2013Greensburg, KY
Jul 12, 2013San Francisco, CA
Jul 11, 2013Charlotte, NC
Jul 9, 2013Rockford, IL
Jul 9, 2013Baltimore, MD
Jul 7, 2013Stockton, CA
Jul 7, 2013Pompano Beach, FL
Jul 7, 2013Chicago, IL
Jul 7, 2013Meridian, MS
Jul 6, 2013Brooklyn, NY
Jul 6, 2013Florence, AL
Jul 4, 2013Pontiac, MI
Jul 4, 2013Chicago, IL
Jul 1, 2013Fort Worth, TX
Jun 30, 2013Brooklyn, NY
Jun 30, 2013Aurora, CO
Jun 29, 2013North Charleston, SC
Jun 28, 2013Chicago, IL
Jun 27, 2013Three Rivers, CA
Jun 25, 2013Chicago, IL
Jun 24, 2013Kansas City, MO
Jun 23, 2013Kansas City, MO
Jun 23, 2013Virginia Beach, VA
Jun 23, 2013Chattanooga, TN
Jun 23, 2013Sacramento, CA
Jun 23, 2013New Orleans, LA
Jun 22, 2013Baltimore, MD
Jun 22, 2013Providence, RI
Jun 21, 2013Chicago, IL
Jun 21, 2013Norfolk, VA
Jun 21, 2013Greenville, NC
Jun 16, 2013Chicago, IL
Jun 15, 2013Providence, RI
Jun 15, 2013Houston, TX
Jun 15, 2013Nashville, TN
Jun 14, 2013High Point, NC
Jun 10, 2013Chicago, IL
Jun 10, 2013Saint Louis, MO
Jun 9, 2013York, PA
Jun 7, 2013Santa Monica, CA
Jun 2, 2013Lagrange, GA
Jun 2, 2013Virginia Beach, VA
Jun 2, 2013Indianapolis, IN
Jun 1, 2013Vallejo, CA
Jun 1, 2013Milwaukee, WI
May 31, 2013Atlanta, GA
May 29, 2013Chicago, IL
May 28, 2013Memphis, TN
May 25, 2013Hampton, VA
May 25, 2013Flint, MI
May 24, 2013Bakersfield, CA
May 23, 2013Bean Station, TN
May 20, 2013Chicago, IL
May 19, 2013Memphis, TN
May 19, 2013Detroit, MI
May 18, 2013Lunenburg County (county), VA
May 16, 2013Philadelphia, PA
May 15, 2013Detroit, MI
May 13, 2013Cincinnati, OH
May 12, 2013New Orleans, LA
May 12, 2013Apache Junction, AZ
May 11, 2013Columbus, IN
May 11, 2013Jersey City, NJ
May 11, 2013Philadelphia, PA
May 10, 2013Los Angeles, CA
May 6, 2013Johnstown, PA
May 5, 2013Palo Alto, CA
May 4, 2013Smithfield, NC
May 2, 2013Newark, NJ
Apr 28, 2013Jackson, TN
Apr 28, 2013Chester, PA
Apr 28, 2013Charlotte, NC
Apr 27, 2013Williston, FL
Apr 25, 2013Oberlin, OH
Apr 24, 2013Manchester, IL
Apr 22, 2013Harvey, LA
Apr 22, 2013Chicago (Englewood), IL
Apr 21, 2013Federal Way, WA
Apr 18, 2013Akron, OH
Apr 14, 2013Phoenix, AZ
Apr 14, 2013Lexington, KY
Apr 10, 2013Vallejo, CA
Apr 9, 2013Philadelphia, PA
Apr 7, 2013Long Beach, CA
Apr 7, 2013New York (Manhattan), NY
Apr 6, 2013Greenwood, SC
Mar 31, 2013Auburn, WA
Mar 30, 2013Merced (county), CA
Mar 22, 2013Brooklyn, NY
Mar 21, 2013Kansas City, MO
Mar 21, 2013Chicago, IL
Mar 17, 2013Stockton, CA
Mar 17, 2013Belle Glade, FL
Mar 16, 2013Galt, CA
Mar 14, 2013Modesto, CA
Mar 13, 2013Mohawk, NY
Mar 13, 2013Oceanside, CA
Mar 11, 2013Washington, DC
Mar 10, 2013Kansas City, MO
Mar 7, 2013Jackson, MS
Mar 5, 2013Indianapolis, IN
Mar 4, 2013Los Banos, CA
Mar 3, 2013Moultrie, GA
Mar 3, 2013Saginaw (county), MI
Mar 2, 2013Shreveport, LA
Feb 24, 2013Macon, GA
Feb 23, 2013Lancaster, CA
Feb 22, 2013Grand Rapids, MI
Feb 21, 2013Tulsa, OK
Feb 19, 2013Orange (county), CA
Feb 12, 2013Midvale, UT
Feb 11, 2013Wilmington, DE
Feb 11, 2013Vallejo, CA
Feb 9, 2013New Orleans, LA
Feb 7, 2013Chicago, IL
Feb 3, 2013Yuba (county), CA
Feb 2, 2013Memphis, TN
Jan 26, 2013Charenton, LA
Jan 26, 2013Springfield, OH
Jan 26, 2013Washington, DC
Jan 25, 2013Saint Louis, MO
Jan 23, 2013Baltimore, MD
Jan 23, 2013Chattanooga, TN
Jan 21, 2013New Orleans, LA
Jan 21, 2013Brentwood, CA
Jan 19, 2013Albuquerque, NM
Jan 7, 2013Tulsa, OK
Jan 1, 2013Hawthorne, CA
Jan 1, 2013Mckeesport, PA
Source: Gun Violence Archive
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
2) He had an Alaska hunting license.

That reporting was erroneous. ADFG says that he had an Alaska fishing license in 2009 and 2010, but they have no record that he ever had an Alaska hunting license.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [wdowe] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
wdowe wrote:
Something to consider when debating gun laws. Data is from 2010

31,672 gun related deaths. 11,078 were homicides.
36,000 car related deaths.
98,000 malpractice related deaths
100,000 alcohol related deaths
400,000 obesity related deaths
450,000 tobacco related deaths. 50,000 were from 2nd hand smoke

I agree that automatic weapons should be banned, which they are. The majority of FB posts are calling for a complete ban of guns. Over reaction due to the tragic events. Do you ban all the above as well?

I don’t get this argument; never have. The logic of it is that you don’t tackle something with a low number on that list because there are other things with higher numbers. So don’t address obesity until you’ve got tobacco related deaths down to under 400,000? Why not? More acutely, why can’t there be multiple efforts in multiple fronts to reduce avoidable deaths?
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [wdowe] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
wdowe wrote:
Something to consider when debating gun laws. Data is from 2010

31,672 gun related deaths. 11,078 were homicides.
36,000 car related deaths.
98,000 malpractice related deaths
100,000 alcohol related deaths
400,000 obesity related deaths
450,000 tobacco related deaths. 50,000 were from 2nd hand smoke

I agree that automatic weapons should be banned, which they are. The majority of FB posts are calling for a complete ban of guns. Over reaction due to the tragic events. Do you ban all the above as well?

The top 5 in your list are largely from self inflicted harm from personal vices. The medical stuff is also not generally malicious. The difference with gun deaths is that they are usually something that people did to someone else without their consent. They are instruments created for the purpose of killing.

To try to minimize it by comparing it to causes of every day mortality is just stupid.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [stal] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Nothing is going to change nationally, Sandy Hook did nothing - those were 1st graders.. Las Vegas- their survival needs people to come relaxed with open pockets. See some local ordinaces as well has massive increase in security. There will probably be short influx of people, but average joe has rebooked their vacation.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [keepcycling] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
keepcycling wrote:
Nothing is going to change nationally, Sandy Hook did nothing - those were 1st graders.. Las Vegas- their survival needs people to come relaxed with open pockets. See some local ordinaces as well has massive increase in security. There will probably be short influx of people, but average joe has rebooked their vacation.

What would you change? Serious question.

Keep in mind a few facts: We have a Constitutional Right to bear arms. We are a country of excess with individuals who have the financial means to do more, per capital, than citizens of any other country in the world. We have almost unfettered access to travel. We do not tolerate what we perceive as "excessive" police presence. We are still pissed about the TSA restrictions at airports. We refuse to infringe on the "privacy interests" of those with mental health issues.

So, what do you want to change?

I will tell you these incidents could be reduced and it would not involve a gun ban. Are you ready to go down that road?

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [RZ] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Not trying to minimize anything. Does someone give consent to be hit and killed by a drunk driver? We can argue back on forth on details. My point was, which all of you missed was.... FB posts and people in general are calling for a complete ban of guns. Go ahead and put more restrictions or ban the auto / semi auto weapons. Go ahead and make the laws more difficult for the everyday person to get a gun. That's fine, I would support that. Banning all guns, in my opinion is an over reaction to a tragic situation.

Bad shit happens everyday. It will continue to happen as the world we live in gets worse everyday. Until people can respect each other as individuals nothing will change. The world is getting less intelligent each day and common sense in nearly gone.

Again, I am not minimizing the tragic events of any mass shootings. Please don't put words in my mouth.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [wdowe] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Since ammo is the consumable- this would logically (not saying anything about second amendment) that guns could be controlled. Over time stockpiles would decrease.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Duffy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Duffy wrote:
Quote:
I highly doubt he used fully automatic weapons. They're rare and expensive.


You can highly doubt it all you want.

It was definitely full auto gun fire.

I've heard full auto M-16, AK-47 and other model auto weapons, fired all but the AK myself in my military career. The sounds coming from the hotel room Sunday did not match those sounds. To me, it sounded like one of those wind up attachments that make a semi auto fire more quickly but make it harder to aim.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [vecchia capra] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vecchia capra wrote:
Duffy wrote:
Quote:
I highly doubt he used fully automatic weapons. They're rare and expensive.


You can highly doubt it all you want.

It was definitely full auto gun fire.

I've heard full auto M-16, AK-47 and other model auto weapons, fired all but the AK myself in my military career. The sounds coming from the hotel room Sunday did not match those sounds. To me, it sounded like one of those wind up attachments that make a semi auto fire more quickly but make it harder to aim.

Greenplease already mentioned this.

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [vecchia capra] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
They've already announced he used a bump-stock(s). All his weapons were legally obtained, no full-auto in the bunch.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [vecchia capra] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vecchia capra wrote:
Duffy wrote:
Quote:
I highly doubt he used fully automatic weapons. They're rare and expensive.


You can highly doubt it all you want.

It was definitely full auto gun fire.


I've heard full auto M-16, AK-47 and other model auto weapons, fired all but the AK myself in my military career. The sounds coming from the hotel room Sunday did not match those sounds. To me, it sounded like one of those wind up attachments that make a semi auto fire more quickly but make it harder to aim.


FFS, who give a flying phuck what specific weapon or setup he used....
how do y'all over there ever hope to reduce the incidents of gun related deaths or yet another Orlando, another Sandy Hook or another Las Vegas type mass shooting when most of you are dissecting the specifics of the weapon used.

do any of the smart Slowtwitched have any real world ideas to help reduce the social catastrophe that has resulted from your constitutional right to bear arms and the number of weapons in your community?
if this was occurring in some dry sandy country just south east of the Mediterranean, then many of you may even suggest " just turn it to glass".
so what's your home-grown solution to the one thing that kills ten times more people per year than 911 ever did. I mean y'all waged more than a decade long war, costing trillion$ and countless lives of combatants and civilians in that case.... so what are you going to do?

oh yeah, send prayers and thoughts.....and not politicise it.

well phuck me America, you are not apparently strong enough to look inwards
Last edited by: Avago: Oct 3, 17 13:58
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Avago] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Avago wrote:
well phuck me America, you are not apparently strong enough to look inwards

In 1996, after 35 people were killed in the Port Arthur Massacre, you blokes effectively outlawed guns to prevent mass killings.

Between 1971 and 1996 (25 years), you had 16 mass murders, killing 99 people. 15 of those 99 were killed by arson. 33 of those 99 were lone gunmen who killed their families.

But, in 1996, you decided enough was enough. Fair enough.

Since 1996 (21 years), you have had 14 mass murders, killing 89 people.

That gun ban really worked out for ya.

That's not to say America does not have a lot of work to do. It most certainly does. But snarky comments from the Land Down Under are laughable, at best.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JSA wrote:
Avago wrote:

well phuck me America, you are not apparently strong enough to look inwards


In 1996, after 35 people were killed in the Port Arthur Massacre, you blokes effectively outlawed guns to prevent mass killings.

Between 1971 and 1996 (25 years), you had 16 mass murders, killing 99 people. 15 of those 99 were killed by arson. 33 of those 99 were lone gunmen who killed their families.

But, in 1996, you decided enough was enough. Fair enough.

Since 1996 (21 years), you have had 14 mass murders, killing 89 people.

That gun ban really worked out for ya.

That's not to say America does not have a lot of work to do. It most certainly does. But snarky comments from the Land Down Under are laughable, at best.

Doesn't Australia have one of the lowest rates of gun homicides in the world?
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JSA wrote:
Avago wrote:

well phuck me America, you are not apparently strong enough to look inwards


In 1996, after 35 people were killed in the Port Arthur Massacre, you blokes effectively outlawed guns to prevent mass killings.

Between 1971 and 1996 (25 years), you had 16 mass murders, killing 99 people. 15 of those 99 were killed by arson. 33 of those 99 were lone gunmen who killed their families.

But, in 1996, you decided enough was enough. Fair enough.

Since 1996 (21 years), you have had 14 mass murders, killing 89 people.

That gun ban really worked out for ya.

That's not to say America does not have a lot of work to do. It most certainly does. But snarky comments from the Land Down Under are laughable, at best.

My comments JSA are not snarkly, I really am genuine when I say what can you do to reduce this carnage, the ongoing, never-ending carnage.

the point JSA is that by doing SOMETHING, we effectively reduced the potential of future incidents.
What I try to do is not dissect the data to the n'th degree. This is real people that we are talking about.
so in Oz for the years that you listed, we've had 90% of the deaths of the previous time frame... and that a terrible result.
now factor in what may have happened if there had not been an outlawing of guns.
how has the USA fared if we look at the years that you've listed, say the 21 years up to 1996 and then the 21 years since 1996...
That I'm guessing will be terrifyingly HUGE increase in dead people. Your own people, not enemy combatants, not others over there somewhere but your own people.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [FishyJoe] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
FishyJoe wrote:
JSA wrote:
Avago wrote:

well phuck me America, you are not apparently strong enough to look inwards


In 1996, after 35 people were killed in the Port Arthur Massacre, you blokes effectively outlawed guns to prevent mass killings.

Between 1971 and 1996 (25 years), you had 16 mass murders, killing 99 people. 15 of those 99 were killed by arson. 33 of those 99 were lone gunmen who killed their families.

But, in 1996, you decided enough was enough. Fair enough.

Since 1996 (21 years), you have had 14 mass murders, killing 89 people.

That gun ban really worked out for ya.

That's not to say America does not have a lot of work to do. It most certainly does. But snarky comments from the Land Down Under are laughable, at best.


Doesn't Australia have one of the lowest rates of gun homicides in the world?

Both before and after the ban, they are in the lowest 25%. That's the point. Most of these foreign countries think banning guns will end mass killings. If you look at statistics like those I posted above, effectively banning guns had virtually no effect of the total number of mass killings or total number of deaths from said mass killings. I'm sure Australia felt good about its gun restrictions. But those actions were justified by the call to end mass killings. Statistically, those actions had zero effect on mass killings.

Now, I am not claiming the same effect would happen in the US. But, Australia is regularly pointed to as the example of action being taken after a mass shooting. However, if you look at the actual numbers, it is a foolish statistic.

Before the ban: If we take out the 7 gang members killed in a shootout with another gang and we take out the family murder-suicides, there were 40 members of the public killed in shooting sprees. 99 total deaths.

After the ban: 28 members of the public were killed in shooting sprees. 89 total deaths.

Are guns the common denominator in these mass murders?

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Avago] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Avago wrote:
My comments JSA are not snarkly, I really am genuine when I say what can you do to reduce this carnage, the ongoing, never-ending carnage.

If that is the case, then I apologize and welcome any suggestions because this is a problem and those of us in the US recognize it as such. Where we struggle is our fear of giving up a fundamental Constitutional Right and the slippery slope we fear that could cause.

Agavo wrote:
the point JSA is that by doing SOMETHING, we effectively reduced the potential of future incidents.
You don't know that. You did not have a trend or a pattern. You had one outlier. You pushed through this legislation on the basis that it would reduce mass murders. My stats show it did no such thing. Now, you can claim that, without this action, the killings between 1996 and 2017 would have doubled. But that is pure speculation and, as I mentioned, you did not have a pattern or a trend suggesting that would be the case. In addition, your politicians "promised" (I use that term lightly) this would REDUCE mass killings by preventing them in the future. It did not.

Agavo wrote:
What I try to do is not dissect the data to the n'th degree. This is real people that we are talking about.
so in Oz for the years that you listed, we've had 90% of the deaths of the previous time frame... and that a terrible result.
now factor in what may have happened if there had not been an outlawing of guns.

Yes, it is real people we are talking about. In the US, you are talking about taking away a real Constitutional Right from real people. If we are going to do that, we need some significant justification. We need more than speculation that this will make us safer as a people.

We have a lot of people over here who are pointing to Australia as the example. Poor choice as your mass murder rate did not statistically dip as a result of your ban. Well, here we would be talking about removing a Constitutional Right, so we are going to need a little more than your pure speculation that is not supported by the numbers.

Agavo wrote:
how has the USA fared if we look at the years that you've listed, say the 21 years up to 1996 and then the 21 years since 1996...
That I'm guessing will be terrifyingly HUGE increase in dead people. Your own people, not enemy combatants, not others over there somewhere but your own people.

Therein lies the horrible dilemma we face. Hopefully, my responses above give you a little insight as to why it is such an important issue.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Since 1996 (21 years), you have had 14 mass murders, killing 89 people.

So in a given year on average, just over 4 people are killed in a mass murder.

I would think that whatever they are doing, maybe the U.S could look into it instead of dismissing it outright.

Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Sanuk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sanuk wrote:
Since 1996 (21 years), you have had 14 mass murders, killing 89 people.

So in a given year on average, just over 4 people are killed in a mass murder.

I would think that whatever they are doing, maybe the U.S could look into it instead of dismissing it outright.

Which is the same rate as before the ban. So, did the gun ban reduce mass murders?

The point is - Australia cannot be used as an example of effective gun control used to reduce mass murders. It didn't. The second point is - the issue of mass murder is independent of the tool used, at least in Australia, which keeps being brought up here in the US.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
64,million adults are on psychiatric meds and half of these are on opioids also.
40 million are on opioids only.

This about close to half the adult population. Perhaps we could start by restricting their gun ownership. However that will never fly and most of those people would never cause a problem so perhaps it is too broad a brush to use. But how do you pinpoint the half dozen who would cause a problem?
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JSA wrote:
justgeorge wrote:
ironmayb wrote:
GreenPlease wrote:
The acoustics do make it tough to tell but I'm inclined to say it's a crank trigger. There's irregularity at the beginning of each string of fire and the cyclic rate is quite low for an automatic weapon.


I agree. Twitter video in post 55 is why I feel that way


It's impossible to count, but that sounded like way more than 30 shots (which is standard magazine size for those who don't know).


Easily could have had a 40, 45, 60, or 100 round mag. This is why having 10 guns was ridiculous. You can only fire 1 at a time, can have oversized mags, and can reload a mag quite quickly and easily.

I really hope I am posting/posing this topic in the correct thread. When I went thru each of the thread topics in relation to the LV shooting, this one seemed the most appropriate.

As more info keeps coming out, I keep seeing the lack of info on one particular topic. How can a man, age 64, who did not appear to be a buff/muscular fellow, shoot as many rounds as he did in 10 minutes? I admittedly have shot guns all of one time, and after a few hours of going at it, shot about 100 rounds (pistol, mosin-nagant, and shot gun for skeet shooting), I was worn out. Yet, here is this man who (maybe) shot 1000's of rounds of ammo. I do realize we have yet to see more detailed images of the room. Would we not see these ammo casings everywhere? Again, I just don't get it...how is it physically possible to shoot that many rounds?
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [satchmo] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You don't watch the news much do you? Go search bump stock...
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [satchmo] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Are you saying you wore out by the recoil? If so .223 does not have much of a recoil. Women love shooting .223 vs 30 cal or shotgun. From the one picture I saw there was a mixture of .223 and .308 brass. I am not sure how much of each he shot, but .223 would not wear you out as much as the .308.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [orphious] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I did watch the video's and they, too, looked like it would be difficult to fire that many rounds with a bump stock.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [patf] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
patf wrote:
Are you saying you wore out by the recoil? If so .223 does not have much of a recoil. Women love shooting .223 vs 30 cal or shotgun. From the one picture I saw there was a mixture of .223 and .308 brass. I am not sure how much of each he shot, but .223 would not wear you out as much as the .308.

Thanks for clarifying.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [satchmo] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Plus his weapons, or least a couple of them, had bi-pods, this reduces the need to hold the weapon while firing, which would also reduce fatigue.

--------------------------
The secret of a long life is you try not to shorten it.
-Nobody
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [orphious] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Just as an FYI, shooting with a bump stock on is not physically easy by any means even if it's 5.56x45 going down range. The fact that the shooter had worked out the ballistics on a piece of scratch paper (previously thought to be a suicide note on the nightstand) to determine the optimum point of aim... that just adds to the mystery here. Clearly this was well planned out even if things didn't go exactly to plan.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [GreenPlease] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It doesn't take long for the media cycle or even the Slowtwitch cycle to move on.
Mass shooting in Las Vegas!
Change gun laws / don't change gun laws
NFL, players take a knee to make comment re black civil rights ( not to be shot unjustly by police)
Get those boys back on the field, fine them if they don't!
Pressure the NFL team owners to get them back on their feet
Who's smarter, Trump or Tillerman?
Now NBC should have their license pulled
Eminem rapped stuff about your POTUS, some like rap, some hate rap

Why are we not surprised that the only people who really care about what last week held as important for them are those who were directly affected. Possibly relatives of the dead and those injured.

what a wonderful world.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Avago] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Avago wrote:
It doesn't take long for the media cycle or even the Slowtwitch cycle to move on.
Mass shooting in Las Vegas!
Change gun laws / don't change gun laws
NFL, players take a knee to make comment re black civil rights ( not to be shot unjustly by police)
Get those boys back on the field, fine them if they don't!
Pressure the NFL team owners to get them back on their feet
Who's smarter, Trump or Tillerman?
Now NBC should have their license pulled
Eminem rapped stuff about your POTUS, some like rap, some hate rap

Why are we not surprised that the only people who really care about what last week held as important for them are those who were directly affected. Possibly relatives of the dead and those injured.

what a wonderful world.

Umm....just wondering why you think this thread needs reviving?

No Full-Auto weapons were used. Everyone (including Slowman) who was tacitly arguing for a ban on transferable (pre 1986 collectible) select fire weapons has shown that their reactions were 100% emotional and based on nothing more than BS reporting/speculation from their favorite liberal rag rather than evidence based policy.

As I suggested before...we should wait for the facts. The facts are in. Anyone who argues for a full-auto ban based on the LV tragedy is not arguing for fact-based-policy and most likely a card carrying member of the Michael Bloomberg / Diane Feinstein "head in the sand" fan club.

Perhaps you should start a new thread more germane to the policy argument: "Bump stocks, time to ban?".

Or perhaps: "Murder, time to ban?"


----------------------------------------------------------------

My training
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Avago] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Why are we not surprised that the only people who really care about what last week held as important for them are those who were directly affected. Possibly relatives of the dead and those injured.

How quickly you forgot about the people in Puerto Rico.

I can only assume that you were not directly affected and that you are not a relative of the dead or injured.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Sanuk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Poor, unforgotten Houston.








"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [stal] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
[quote stal

Umm....just wondering why you think this thread needs reviving?
?"[/quote]
Stal, firstly this thread was still on the front page, and the Las Vegas shootings happened on the 3rd of October '17, which based on my old fashioned arithmetic was a whole 9 days ago. Had I have revived a thread on Sandy Hook or Orlando I can understand that this may be old news, but 9 day ago.... not so old.

My comments really are not about banning guns or anything other than the speed of the current news cycles where stories, major one even are here today and pffft, gone tomorrow.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Avago] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It needs to be very hard for people to get hold of powerful weapons, legally or illegally. In Australia, to get hold of a small hand gun would be very difficult. To get hold of an AK47 would be impossible. There are probably none in the country. I've never heard of criminals in Australia using anything other than antique shotguns and small pea shooter pistols. I was watching some American police doco and the police were responding to a shooting, apparently a house had been shot up by 3 guys all armed with AK47s... the two guys in the house had fired back also armed with AK47s.... that's just madness. Nowhere else in the developed world is that happening.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [zedzded] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
zedzded wrote:
It needs to be very hard for people to get hold of powerful weapons, legally or illegally. In Australia, to get hold of a small hand gun would be very difficult. To get hold of an AK47 would be impossible. There are probably none in the country. I've never heard of criminals in Australia using anything other than antique shotguns and small pea shooter pistols. I was watching some American police doco and the police were responding to a shooting, apparently a house had been shot up by 3 guys all armed with AK47s... the two guys in the house had fired back also armed with AK47s.... that's just madness. Nowhere else in the developed world is that happening.


Um, France? Bataclan ring a bell? Where the gun laws are even stricter than in California.

Sorry if I'm letting facts get in the way of your "common sense" argument.

Edited: misspelled Bataclan


----------------------------------------------------------------

My training
Last edited by: stal: Oct 12, 17 2:01
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Avago] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
My comments really are not about banning guns or anything other than the speed of the current news cycles where stories, major one even are here today and pffft, gone tomorrow.

It's the same everywhere in the world. In 2013, there was a massive typhoon in the Philippines, and the town with the most damage was where I lived for a year, volunteering at an orphanage in Tacloban. I was in Thailand at the time and decided to go back there to see if I could help. I waited a few weeks until some help had arrived and in that time started raising money to help rebuild some homes and to assist some people who lost everything they had, which wasn't much to begin with.

I told donors that I had to raise the money within 30 days because by then, CNN would stop the broadcasts, they would be off the front pages and people would move on to the next disaster. When I got there, all the main agencies were there and CNN was broadcasting but within a few weeks that stopped.

The coverage did last about a month because of the devastation (they were without power in many places for almost a year) and the staggering loss of life and property.

This is nothing new and you're right, the only people who will stay involved are those with a personal vested interest. I stayed there a month and have gone back to the City to check up on things a half dozen times. I still sponsor a few of the children. If I hadn't been involved, I would be like everyone else. That's the way things work.
Last edited by: Sanuk: Oct 12, 17 5:19
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Sanuk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It is true. Puerto Rico is struggling to stay on the radar right now and majority don't have power or water.

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot

Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [len] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It is true. Puerto Rico is struggling to stay on the radar right now and majority don't have power or water.


Yeah but did you hear about Eminem? OMG !!!!
Quote Reply