Im speaking a difference between a machine gun and a hand gun .
Mass shooting ability should be define has erring on the offensive side and not the defensive right ?

If you put a rifle in full auto in the hand of one rank amateur and the same rifle in semi-auto mode in the hand of another rank amateur, then I would say that for most scenarios, the one shooting semi-auto is likely the most dangerous one. He / she will tend to have more control of the fire-arm and will tend to waste less ammunition.

Of course, it depends on the specific hypothetical we construct, we can construct scenarios where this is not true. However, this idea that full auto capable weapons are automatically more dangerous is far from always true.

For hand guns vs long guns, comparisons can make more sense. It is far, far more difficult and takes much more effort to be a decent shot with a handgun than a long gun. However, most hand guns are easily concealable which can be problematic. Without knowing the data, I'd also guess that they have a lower treshold for using in anger or depression.

Majority of gun deaths in US are suicides. Whatever is handy serves. It's a public health oroblem

I've heard it said that suicide is the sincerest form of self-criticism.

(I used to be suicidal, so I have some license to joke about it.)

There have been zero mass shootings with a machine gun.

It's hard to ever know what you're talking about because you conflate terms constantly and one has to guess that when you say "machine gun" you mean AR15 rifle and when you say "semi" you also mean AR15 rifle, but I'm starting to catch on to your usage.

The highest death count at a school shooting was with a handgun, btw.

Infringe is pretty specific. If you infringe upon my individual gun rights then you are infringing the gun rights of the militia. Since that would be illegal, you cannot infringe upon my gun rights either.

See how simple that is? That’s why “shall not be infringed” was added. It doesn’t say broken, or bent, it says infringed. Which means someone is coming close to making a change.

Restrictions are infringements.

Are you saying everyone in the country where there are lots of guns may be influenced by the guns to commit mass murders?

We simply know that’s not the case as there are 0 women school shooters.

Switzerland has lots of guns and women and there are mass murders there committed by women regularly, so it must be something unique to American women.

You argument above would be spot-on correct were it not for the fact that we no longer have or need "a well-regulated militia." We now have a standing army.

[QUOTE=Cuepee;57958585]Right wingers will say with no sarcasm that the US needs more prisons and longer jail terms, along with far more access to guns in public, to really start to address the US crime issues.


and left wing whacko's blame the victims of these crimes instead of the criminal .

according to your script the criminal is just misunderstood and how dare the victim think they should be able to walk down the street in broad daylight without being robbed and beaten.

the only reason he beat that old woman was because she didn't willingly give up her purse "HOW DARE SHE, WHAT A NERVE ON HER"

http://www.acolumbinesite.com/weapon.php

When you post a link as a response to a post without giving a reason for why you posted it, then people have to guess why. My guess is that you think Columbine was the most deadly school shooting? Sadly, it wasn't - the largest school shooting was with only handguns.

but there were several women mass shooters and that only in the U.S.

why are you talking about school shootings, she killed 6 people. wtf

I don’t care about the largest mass shooting .
Those guns aren’t necessary to be legal aka 9mm handgun and others shown in there .

Dont u think those guns used are over the top ?
When I say handgun i dont think of those for defensive purposes ….mû use those to do max damage in offence purpose .
That is th wooing they used them , to inflict max pain .

If u need those kinda of gun to Defend yourself u got a problem.

You're talking about the TEC-DC9?

I don't know, man. It seems like your position would be a lot more consistent if you were also against standard handguns that killed 32 people by one person, but you said those handguns are fine for self-defense and you don't care about the numbers.

So why do the states have national guards? Which are essentially militias

Exactly. The problem is tyranny

What government tyranny are you currently experiencing? When those words were written, arms between government vs citizens were fairly close.

The United States, a beacon of freedom, incarcerates 20% of the worlds prison population. The police are held to less than a 1% conviction rate when murdering civilians , and I am at risk for being murdered by the police just for being a male.

That is reality.

Everyone? No, that would be a really weird thing to assert.

"National Guards"

"essentially militias."

Think, man, think!

What would you estimate the probability of you being murdered by the police within the next twelve months is?

If you don't have a police record, the chance of you being murdered by a cop within the next year is around 0%

For the record, I agree with you that our incarceration rate is too high by a factor of about 10.

Good luck solving those problems with a gun.

Does that 20% number seem high or low to you? How does it compare to other developed countries per capita? I assume our police are far more likely to catch a rapist or murderer than all/most poor countries but probably also better than most developed countries too.

Do you have stats for all of this or did you just see a headline about the 20% number and not think about it too much?