Y’all know a birding shotgun could kill more than an AR right?
|
Y'all know what can kill even more people? A flamethrower. No background check, registration, licensing, and you can get one delivered to your door in about two days with napalm mix for about $1700. Runtime of about a minute, range of fifty feet. Take that to your next school show-and-tell and see how things go for you. If $1700 is too steep, you can buy the parts on amazon for about $450 and make one in your garage. Plans, shopping lists, it's all a google search away. If you're going to spend your life afraid of inanimate objects, stay away from Home Depot. A trip there can be way more deadly than a trip to any gun store. Don't be afraid of inanimate objects, be afraid of violent people- then either make the choice to be ready for them or bend over and take it. There's really no in-between. A birding shotgun in a crowded school wouldn't get a chance to spread. it would likely hit two/three people per shot, sawed off or open choke could ad a couple more, whereas, an AR-15 can spray a crowd hitting "up to" 15-25 people per mag! A shotgun takes up to a minute to reload, especially with nervous fingers and the shooter would likely be swarmed in that time! Taped together mags can be changed in seconds! An "Assault shotgun" would be more dangerous but these should be outlawed additionally. Your scenario isn't too sexy! JESUS! 2
points
Al, ...an AR-15 can spray a crowd Some of what you say later about the reloading is true, but you misused the word spray, here. A birding shotgun in a crowded school wouldn't get a chance to spread. it would likely hit two/three people per shot, sawed off or open choke could ad a couple more, A shotgun could actually spray a crowd. Using your assumptions, a sawed off shotgun could hit 4 people per shot, times 6 shells, is 24 potential victims. True, you have to eject in between shots, but that is still faster than an AR-15 would be for the same potential number of victims. In addition, the shooter is much more likely to actually hit a victim with each shot using a shotgun than with an AR-15, and the damage of the shot is likely to be greater than with the AR's 22 caliber round. Despite what it looks like, an AR-15 is not even close to an actual assault grade weapon. It is only semi-automatic, which means it requires a trigger pull for each projectile to leave the barrel. Anybody could shoot a semi-automatic handgun (like a Glock 9mm) just as fast. I'm not sure whether you were talking to me or to American_boy, because I didn't even mention shotguns. Regardless, it's clear that you missed the point. Try regulating every item that can be turned into a deadly weapon. It's impossible. Can you imagine the uproar that would ensue if someone walked into a school with a flamethrower and started killing people? Forget the idea of about a dozen or so kids dead; we're talking about a dozen or so kids surviving that situation. And it could happen at any moment. Of course there would be uproar about the legality of flamethrowers but the point is that you can't control them. You can make them in your garage from readily available parts, and it doesn't stop with flamethrowers. Do you know how to make hand grenades with glycerin extracted from bacon grease? Let's just say it's easier than you probably think. So what, exactly, is the point of banning an AR15? To keep death machines out of the hands of violent people? Shit, put me up against a guy with an AR15 any day over someone who's forced to get creative. At least if the AR15s are unregulated then I can return fire. Also, your conclusions that a gunman would be swarmed are rather wishful thinking. One, by the time they've expended a magazine everyone's probably already running. Two, you can still fire in the middle of reloading a tubular magazine with one in the chamber. In fact, you can top off a tubular magazine if you haven't completely expended it. Be afraid of violent people, not inanimate objects. 3
points
1
point
|
