Alright guys. Let's just face the facts, no we do not need to ban all guns. Yes, most gun owners are not criminals. But...

Alright guys. Let's just face the facts, no we do not need to ban all guns. Yes, most gun owners are not criminals. But, it has simply been to easy for unstable individuals to get these guns. This last incident is clear proof that someone who should obviously have had no access to this weapon could easily get one.


Things which are not a good counter argument:

>Its not a gun problem its a radical islam problem
That is a problem, but it doesnt mean we dont also have a gun problem. If any of the shooters from James Holmes to this last guy had pistols things would have been much less bloody.

>If you take away guns from the many law abiding owners only criminals are left with guns.
Nobody uses an ar-15 for self defense. For recreation and killing massive amounts of individuals. And the latter combined with little restrictions on who can purchase guns makes it dangerous.

Lastly, the most classic shitpost in the US
>SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
Taking easy access to an extremely lethal weapon until better restrictions for gun purchasers are put into place does not infringe your right to bear arms. There are many other weapons which you can buy and use to defend yourself or use for recreation.

> The ar-15 isnt even automatic and it doesnt even have that large of a caliber.
It is the most lethal weapon available. Dont tell me about the fact that very little assault rifles are used in murders. IMost people dont plan on a massacres and pistols generally od a better job. Thats why theyre used. But people choose these for massacres for a reason.


Tell me why im wrongg

Other urls found in this thread:

merriam-webster.com/dictionary/armament
youtube.com/watch?v=ejD1Gml-ZGc
law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZS.html
law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/08-1521
law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/14-10078
youtu.be/COZm7uCCjHM
youtu.be/lMH2BRkcCyU
mic.com/articles/64663/5-people-who-used-an-ar-15-to-defend-themselves-and-it-probably-saved-their-lives
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia
youtube.com/watch?v=8hyQDQPEsrs
youtube.com/watch?v=pELwCqz2JfE
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>Comes on Sup Forums and actually types all this
I mean I have seen some newfag posting but this shit takes the cake. Kill yourself

I think it's reasonable to have basic laws like background checks, a mandatory waiting period, and maybe you have to be part of a club and register the firearm, but literally whatever.

I don't care if clappyshoots want to shoot each other up.

This.

SHALL

You realize that long rifles in general are responsible for a very low number of gun deaths, don't you? Why would we ban something that is responsible for like 2% of gun deaths? Fucking retarded.

NOT

2 nra members down. Second amendment lovers better get in here quick to save these guys.

I responded to that in my original post. but ill respond again Just because black people shoot eachother in the hood everyday with pistols driving the pistol murder rate through the roof, doesnt mean that this gun isnt the most lethal gun on the market, and can be used to obliterate in a single instance the most number of people.

Here's 4 more reasons:
Sandy hook
Aurora theatre
san bernadino
pulse night club

Responded to this in the original post also. This is a classic shitpost.

You right to bear arms isnt being infringed, you know why? Because you can still bear many other arms if you'd like.

Thats like saying you should be able to buy a fighter jet or a tank cause in an sense they are just large guns(armaments). Why not bazookas? Gatling guns? Turrets? Grenades? These are all armamanets(arms) Yet u cant own those.

Go fuck urself

You don't need to ban guns , you need to educate people.
For example , look at Switzerland people there have guns but there's no mass shootings
And look at murica , when you give weapons to savages mass shootings becomes a daily routine

>Nobody uses an ar-15 for self defense.

Wrong. When you premise your arguments on such ignorance do not expect to be taken seriously.

I agree. I think that ar-15s could be re implemented n the future, AFTER stores can do a reasonable background check and if that never hapens, they never need to come back. They really serve very little purpose except recreation.

It's complete bullshit I can't buy a tank and shoot old cars with it on my uncles farm or cut a washing machine in half with a light machine gun on the weekends.

>recreation
>mowing people down

Do you realize how easy it is for people to get autos off the black market? Ban it all you want, but if someone has an agenda to kill, they're going to kill.

Because every citizen aged is part of the militia.
Because its a god given, natural right.
Because being able to defend myself against all enemies, foreign and domestic, is my duty.
Because it's not the bill of needs.
Because the military and police don't exist to defend my life.

First, the AR-15 is not even close to the most lethal firearm. And any basic knowledge of firearms and ballistics can confirm that.
Secondly he could very easily have killed that many people with a handgun. Infact the Virginia Tech shooter killed approximately 45 people with three handguns.
Their not regulated as hard as pistols because they're not concealable. And if we instilled a culture of self reliance/defense then people commiting mass shootings would never have a chance.
But because faggot liberals like you preach that a person can't/shouldn't/won't defend themselves, people will crumple into a ball and surrender to death instead of fight. Just like in Paris.
Faggot liberals like you are forcibly taking the survival instincts away from people and turning us into domestic cattle.
So go ahead and take my weapons, but guess what? You're gonna have to fight to take them. I hope you're prepared for that.

First of all, is just a few of the gays would have had a CC weapon that guy would have been in serious troubble before he could harm that many people. He probably wouldn't even had attacked in the first place if it wasnt a "gun-free" zone. Now please post this thread on /k/.

>Nobody uses an ar-15 for self defense.
Its infact very popular for HD.

>It is the most lethal weapon available.
Well now I know you are full of shit. An AK clone or any other SA rifle that can accept large magazines is just as good for killing people.

In 95% of Islamic terrorist attacks on bars and restaurants they use bombs not guns.
Taking away everyone's guns wouldn't guarantee this wouldn't happen. He would have just found another way.

Omar had no criminal record

Nothing added to gun background check that he was under FBI suspicion

Government screws up and blames legal gun owners and guns themselves than the person carrying it out.

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

if you don't understand why we have guns, and why we have such lax rules surround them, I encourage you to take a look at all of history

Very few may, find me a source of people actually using these gun to defend themselves. Cause everytime i see a self defense homicide a pistol is almost always used and occasionally a shotgun. So Im just gonna assume that most people would prefer those. Its much easier to keep a pistol loaded near ur bed then an ar-15.

We used to teach gun safety and marksmanship in our schools. The liberals put an end to it.

what the fuck makes an AR 15 "more deadly" than a pistol? ALL FUCKING GUNS ARE DEADLY WEAPONS. just claiming that its scary and looks like what the military uses is like saying red cars should be banned because they look like they go faster. kill yourself

Holy shit, a remotely sane American?
Fuck i thought all had receded into some sort of neo-Aztecs fond of the pointless spilling of their own blood.

Though honestly from what i know from your countrymen you'll need more than a little bit of luck, dense as diamond that lot.

Pressure cookers and nails have shown to be effective at killing and maiming people too.

I would imagine its pretty hard. Not impossible but fairly hard to a semo automatic off the black market ive been buying drugs since i was 12 and never once hve been offered a black market gun. secondly. I trust our police to infiltate black market guns, and they can always be traced back to the source. However, what I cant live with is us freely handing over guns to people who do such things.

tl;dr: Ill take my chances with the black market. Because I know thats at least harder than a guy handing a gun over to someone at the local gun shop.

True

I forgot that Sup Forums is just a perpetual shitposting machine.

You don't actually have idea whatsoever what you're talking about. And this is why you people are never ever taken seriously by gun owners. We just roll our eyes and dismiss you. Don't want that reaction? Then educate yourself.

The AR platform is a fine platform for self-defense. The cartridge is ideal for residential neighborhoods because of its ballistics. The platform is exceptionally modable because of an enormous aftermarket, allowing users to build weapons to fit their specific needs. The weapon is easily controllable, with minimal recoil and 1 MOA accuracy. It's a great self-defense weapon and millions of Americans keep one for this purpose.

Again, you do not know what you are talking about, and therefore the rest of us are not intellectually obliged to take your shit arguments seriously.

....and he was a fucking security guard.

WTF they want?
Unarmed security guards at the courthouse?

Their argument about banning guns works about as well as banning guns after the fort Hood shooting.

What is black market for 200? Nice try OP, but your degeneracy isn't fooling anyone.

Banning guns in the US would be retarded.

Making guns easier to get in the EU would also be retarded.

Why? Because there are 350 000 000 guns in the US right now and they wouldn't magically go away if someone would ban them. Its insanly easy to get an illegal gun in the US. Its comparably hard to get on in Europe.

So ur argument is either this right.

We need ar-15s because they are extremely lethal weapons and if our government tries to fight us we'll only have our shotguns and pistols.

But why cant use have a tank? THat is a form of arms merriam-webster.com/dictionary/armament
Theres the definition in case u wanna say its not.

So u admit that u dont have access to all arms. Yet this 1 specific 1 which is extremely easy to get and extremely lethal you're okay with? Why dont u attack the government right now then? Theyre infringing ur rights, theyre coming down on u this is why u have ur guns isnt it?


good argument. URE A BITCH, IF OBAMA RAPED UR MOM U WULDNT DO SHIT. NO GUN IS GONNA FIX THAT NO MATTER HOW BIG OR HOW STRONG>

Correlate gun murders to gun ownership. (Hint: you can't)

You make some good points

The gun is not the problem

>>university of Texas clock tower sniper
killed 31 injured
>> weapon of choice
>>pump action shotgun
>>BOLT ACTION RIFLE

>But why cant use have a tank?

You can. Google "private tank ownership."

Once again, a gun grabber that doesn't know what he's talking about. Surprise surprise.

>Pressure cookers and nails have shown to be effective at killing and maiming people too.

Yeah, thats probably why they are so popular in the military.

please no.
We'll be SOL when zombie apocalypse happens.
Handguns and shotguns just won't cut it.

>AKs used in mass shootings
>0
OP BTFO

>came up with this shit out of nowhere

your problem is you have absolutely no experience with gun rights activism as it currently stands today. so allow me to inform you on what our dictum is for this scenario.

if you cannot be trusted with a gun, you cannot be trusted without a custodian.

>access to weapons
>unstable
put them in prisons and mental hospitals. that's where they belong. they don't come out until they're trustworthy with a firearm.

this

You can buy RPGs, Grenades, Mortars, all that shit as long as you pay an NFA tax stamp

Gun control fag BTFO Again!

and thats fine americans can use it for self defense.

AFter the proper back ground checks are put into place that stop psychopaths from getting ahold of them.

This isnt an issue with this specific gun. Its an issue with the fact that this specific gun is far to easy to get. So argueing based on the logistics of the gun is flatout stupid. ITs not about the gun. Its about expecting that people who can obtain this gun are properly vetted.

The gun is not the problem
>> 1966
>> university of Texas clock tower sniper
>> 18 killed 31 injured
>> weapon of choice
>> pump action shotgun
>> BOLT ACTION RIFLE

You clearly don't understand the purpose of the second Amendment. If the governing body outguns the entire population, how can you say that the People consent to be governed and aren't just being coerced into it out of fear of death?

Let's face the facts here, if the term shall not be infringed means nothing to you then your probably don't understand freedom and should either kys or gtfo as soon as possible.

youtube.com/watch?v=ejD1Gml-ZGc

don't be an uninformed pleb.

>You can have a tank. Hell, you can even have a working AT gun if you want. You just need to register it as a DD.

Anything above 37mm IIRC is however expensive as shit as each round needs to be registered as DD with a 200$ tax stamp.

It might be easy for people in the hood to get guns. But I assure u, I have only met 1 person in my entire life who had an illegal gun. And people who get these guns have to have it in with gangs generally. Even gangs dont just sell there illegal guns to anybody, you know why? Because theyre rare so even if htat was the case theyre the people commiting these mass shootings arent going to be getting these guns.

We have background checks. What exactly more do you want from the NICS? The shooter today went through NICS. He was cleared. What specifically do you think would have made him not clearable?

Guns don't kill people, people with access to guns use them in order to kill people much more easily than they would have without access to guns

Not reading all that, but the solution is simple: don't allow mudskins to carry firearms anymore.

Pipe bombs are also far too easy to assemble from household items. Should we start banning nails because they have the potential for gross misuse?
>oh no muh tactical screw nail is scary

By the government huh? The system we have now is disgusting and infringes on the 2nd amendment of all United States citizens. More regulation and legislation will only serve to erode the constitution more.

restrictions on access fail 100% of the time. if any of the hundreds that already exist worked, there would not have been any mass shootings for the past two or three decades.

Yes Yes OP this is good work your doing it's perfect!

Agree with taking guns = full cucked

I misunderstood your previous post then. I though you were talking about killing people in general as a terrorist act, not fighting a war.

In that case, pressure cookers at a crowded marathon finish line in Boston is a terrible way to injure and kill people and would never happen.

Explain australia then

>I have only met 1 person in my entire life who had an illegal gun.

Are you litterally retarded? Anyone who has an illegal firearm will not tell you that they do if they to arent retarded. Its not that hard to get and anyone with the intent to kill 50 people can get one in the US. Most people die from illegal guns, not from legal ones.

#NotAllGunOwners

No niggers.

Debating trolls is boring. Can someone make a huge macro with

>Gun control cake .png
>Violent crimes by race.png
>Gun control vs the ABCs.png
>US, UK, AUS violent crime graph indicating a steady decrease since the 70s and gun control in the latter two riding the wave of that decrease
>Murders being picked up in those latter two easily by other weapons
>'Mass shootings' even after Obama's justice dept conflated them with gang crime (at least 4 people shot including minor injuries in a single event) are statistically anomalous

Further more on matters of policy
You are not going to confiscate the most popular rifle in the US en masse

You are not going to repeal the 2A or SCOTUS your way around it.

It is viable for home defense, farm defense and store defense (though handguns would be obviously better for close quarters).

It is an excellent rifle for hunting, especially depending on the build.

OP is proof that sociopaths are a problem in this country. They speak with a certain distinguished manner to push a point across that's only part-true to convince you the other 3/4 of their bullshit is true.
People can still get black market guns, with no age or background check. There's a fucking open border at the south. Do you not remember Operation Fast & Furious? Our own government was giving guns to the enemy. Yet you propose that we trust them to "temporarily" ban them the same way we propose to temporarily ban muslims? Fuck off. We have laws providing the right to ban muslims, the 2nd amendment says "shall not be infringed" (saying this is a shitpost doesn't make it a shitpost, faggot) so let me repeat this for you.
SHALL
NOT
FUCKING
BE
INFRINGED

sage

DC v. Heller, 554 US 570 (2008)
law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZS.html

McDonald v. Chicago, 561 US 742 (2010)
law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/08-1521

Doesn't matter. Banning an entire class of arms is unconstitutional. Functional bans are the same as outright bans.

Caetano v. Massachussetts, 577 US ___ (2016)
law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/14-10078

2A applies to more than just guns.

Now please go die in a fire.

If you can find the connections to buy weed, then you can find the connections to buy a gun. Just because you only have one friend does not mean non retards can't find illegal weapons

My connection is a bit wonky so hopefully this isn't a repost
He mentioned
>psychopaths
So he is obviously alluding to psychological background checks.

Never mind that putting the government in charge of who is sane and insane is a disastrous premise, that this is not needed based on pure statistics, that the new psychology textbooks are conflating "homophobia" and "transphobia" with agoraphobia and the like, and that psychologists, psychology departments, psychology boards, and psychology standards between nations are in troubling disagreement on key issues- namely Depression, disorders with a depressive component, and required treatment.

Enjoy losing your gun for being in a blue rut.

Can other guns kill people ? Yes. But on average a shooting involving a bolt action rifle will be much less deadly than 1 using an ar. Like I said, it is possible to kill 50 people with a a knife, but it is much much less likely.

So the whole idea that other gns have killed as many people is a really bad argument and i hope u now see why.

Tl;dr: Anything CAN kill an equal amount to ar-15, but it is much less likely to occur.
Except that all those are much much harder to get arent they? Yeah they really are. Next argument that one is stupid is fuck and u sound stupid when u use it.

Corroboration to said statement:
Please see this post by me to why that is a shit argument.
And lets not forget the fact that its also hard to get ar-15s on the black market.

Maybe for your faggot ass it is, but for most it's easier to get one off the black market then to get one legally.

youtu.be/COZm7uCCjHM
youtu.be/lMH2BRkcCyU
mic.com/articles/64663/5-people-who-used-an-ar-15-to-defend-themselves-and-it-probably-saved-their-lives

you focus on the object, not the mindset of the tool-using mammal.
if not a gun, then a bomb.
if not a bomb, then a car, or an airplane, or a boat.
or sticks, or rocks, for that matter.
you simply cannot prevent violence by passing laws, especially those which disarm the people who obey them.

Let me break this down for people who have never fired a gun before.

Commercial AR's are semiautomatic. That means it only fires one bullet every time you pull the trigger.

It also only fires a .22 caliber bullet.

The only functional difference between an AR and the average hunting rifle is that the AR has a gas powered chambering mechanism, which means the next round is chambered automatically after you fire.

A proficient shooter could have killed just as many people with a couple pistols, as we saw at VTech. In close quarters like that you'd actually probably be able to hit more people with pistols.

Does anyone have this gif?

This is the same argument against plane travel.
>Aviation results in the least amount of deaths per mile traveled
>>Haha but my car doesn't drop 20k feet when my engine fails.
>>Furthermoe when a plane does crash it results in more people killed per instance

>But that's already controlled for in the stats. You're just using an emotional appeal.

>>You are just heartless about deaths

>No I am just saying that the benefits car outweigh the risks

>>Not accepted you lose checkmate atheists

I dont mean psychological background checks. I personally disagree with that. But a more comprehensive background check system does have to be put into place.

Ur right to bear arms shall not be infringed not ur right to have whatever armaments u want to have. U can not jst have tanks, jets, any military grade equipment u want so stfu and stop acting like u already cant own certains weapons.

>ban AR-15s!
Less than 15% of gun murders are done by rifles.


>muh, muh US has the most gun deaths!
60% of US gun deaths are suicides; and it's the same relative amount of suicide as other countries like the UK and Japan, they just kill themselves in more gruesome ways because they can't get guns.

The US is also 111th in murder-per-capita. Countries like Mexico, Venezuela, and Brazil with strict-as-fuck gun laws still have higher murder rates. The reason we have lots of murders is because of shitskins; which leftists want to import more of for some reason.

The major city in the US with the lowest murder rate is Plano, Texas - where lots of people are gun owners, and the gun laws are lax.

>we can take ur guns away if we want, you don't need big magazines, etc.
The Supreme Court case of Heller v. Disctrict of Columbia already ruled that owning a semi-automatic gun is a Constitutional right:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

From a philosophical/Constitutional perspective, gun ownership should be a right. The Preamble to the Constitution states that people have a right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". If citizens have a right to life, that means that they should have a right to defend their life by adequate means. Women, old people, and the disabled can't defeat a gang of dindus in melee combat - thus, guns are necessary.

>b-b, but, you don't need guns because you have cops!
The Supreme Court Case Warren v District of Columbia ruled that the police do not have a duty to risk their life to protect you:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia

Also, aren't you lefty types always shitting on the cops? I thought if a cop gets anywhere near you, it would trigger you.

>Stefan Molyneux shits on gun control:
youtube.com/watch?v=8hyQDQPEsrs

>Bill Whittle shits on gun control:
youtube.com/watch?v=pELwCqz2JfE

Omar was investigated by the FBI for connections to radical islamic terrorism twice, but that doesn't show up in a background check.

If the system in place to restrict guns was actually reformed to clear loopholes like that, then crimes like this wouldn't occur.

There isn't a gun problem, it's an administrative problem that lets the mentally ill and literal terrorists obtain weapons. The second amendment in itself is not at fault for that. In fact Omar would've probably just have gotten an unregistered AR-15 from one of his ISIS connections if he was denied the ability to purchase his weapons, not dissimilar to how acts of terror like this were committed throughout Europe.

Never thought I'd see americans on this board go full goy

Sad day

>muh NRA

You realize that anti-gun leftist groups and Federal agencies like the ATF have way more power, right? Frankly, it's a miracle the NRA gets anything done at all.

No its not. People benefit from flying in planes and thy make those decisions themselves.. When people are are forced to be surrounded by others(of unkown stability) who have potentially lethal weapons they do not gain any benefits, only negatives and also they had no say in the matter u cant force someone on a plane legally.

No, you go fuck yourself. Why shouldn't that guy be able to own any of those things? Why is he/she/it not allowed to be trusted with higher end weaponry? On a side note, you totally can buy tanks and fighter jets. Why is an armed populace so threatening to people like you? You shot yourself in the foot on your intentions from the get go. You ignore rates for hand guns and claim an AR is the most lethal option on the market. What becomes the most lethal option once you get your precious "assault weapons" ban through? Will you go after the runner up? Then the "3rd" most lethal firearm? After all, we never run out of "most lethal" options until all guns are banned. One type of rifle will never be enough for you people. You will come for everything one arm at a time while screeching the same drivel as you did for all the other arms you wanted banned. Guns are nothing more than tools devoid of any moral standing. Their use is a symptom and the people using them in these horrid disgusting acts are the disease. Yet you want to advance you political agenda using the trojan horse of a failed human condition to fool people into thinking you want anything more than to control each and every aspect of their lives. 1/10 rustled my jimmies

>Nobody uses an ar-15 for self defense.
The AR-15 is just about the best home defense gun you can own. Lots of people use it.

>extremely lethal weapon
The 2nd amendment is not for self defense or hunting. It is for protection from government tyranny. If anything, gun laws are already too strict for this purpose.

>It is the most lethal weapon available.
Bombs are much more lethal than an AR-15.

I agree with you and can't see a reason why people can't buy 23mm autocannons or TOWs

What happens when he dies when no one expects it?

already responded 10 times to the less than 15% of gun murders are done by rifles.

Thats cause niggers are mostly killing eachother with pistols. Theyre concealable, easier to steal and mch cheaper. That is why theyre used for planned hits on specific targets. Ar-15s are used ofr mass murders.

Also u cant ban pistols, that is THE number 1 self defense weapon. Go fuck urself

The left want the citizens to not have guns but still want the police and security to have them. Would Hillary or Bernie disavow having armed guards? No.

>Tl;dr: Anything CAN kill an equal amount to ar-15, but it is much less likely to occur.

"much less" is an in an overstatement.

The main reason rifles developed higher capacity was because in military situations, people miss around 90% of all shots fired; look it up. High-capacity rifles were also needed to provide "suppressing fire" to keep enemies pinned in a position so that other soldiers could flank them.

In a civilian situation, there's no real difference; because you aren't firing at armed people behind cover (especially if it's gay liberals, kek). So a bolt-action rifle with a big magazine; or even with 2-3 small magazines like a Lee Enfield that was developed before WWI can be just as deadly.

However, most criminals don't use rifles - they use pistols because they're easier to hide and carry around. So basically all you're doing is taking a long-range rifle option away from the honest citizens; who'd use it to defend themselves in various situations, such as in rural areas, and to act as a buffer against government oppression.

Not an argument

if i had no credible arguments against banning this specific rifle or putting into place stricter background checks id also shit post and act like i siad all guns to make me seem like more of an extremist. But sadly no ones gonna buy that, cause thats not what i said.

no ban works on items that will still be mass produced in the place they are banned.
there is nothing special or deadly about AR models. its a rifle. there are many like it.
until we stop producing millions of rifles per year for police/military use (and for export to literally anyone who wants them including cartel and terrorist backed third world governments) no ban will ever be effective. make them completely illegal and they will start falling off trucks in record numbers while on their way for export or delivery to the military. ban manufacturing of them in the states and U.S. companies will move to central America and then cartels will have a new thing to smuggle in through Mexico and Canada.
ban 30 round magazines and people who want 30 round magazines will learn to make them. ban specific intermediate calibers and everyone will go back to shooting full power hunting rounds. ban hunting rounds and everyone will start using hot loaded pistol calibers out of long barrel carbines.
deal with it, bans don't work.

We should be able to own tachyon lances and antimatter missiles also.

>So basically all youre doing is taking a long range rifle option away from the honest citizens

Except the 4 mass murders ho werent honest citizens also wouldnt hve them. none of which were trained marksman and yet still managed to cause massive damage due to the lethality of these guns. Also when ure in a packed night club or movie theatre its pretty hard to miss so dont tell me a bolt action is gonna be just ass effective when all ur shots are gonna hit the more shots the better. simple math.

Most Murders and manslaughter are due to violent crime activity.

Violent crime is committed disproportionately by Blacks and Hispanics, and disproportionately via gang activity.

Gangs prefer cheap, easily obtainable, easily maintained, easily concealed and easily disposable close-quarters weapons

Semi automatic rifles are arguably nine of those.

Fists, clubs, bricks, bats, knives and handguns however do fit the bill.

However, being that the gang member is versatile in these weapons, to them they are all potentially interchanable.

That is why the expected drop in total violent crime and specifically total murders in the UK and Australia that was expected to happen post gun bans
>Mind you violent crime was already steadily declining
Was simply picked up by other weapons, and almost immediately. They didn't need a transition period.

What's interesting is that handguns are potentially a greater force multiplier than knives and melee weapons. So that means of if hangs killed the same amount of people before and after the gun bans, they are more proficient than in murdering others with those weapons than the general population is defending themselves with bats knives and clubs.

On its face this makes more sense, since the general civilian population doesn't hone knife fighting, close combat and skill bashing skills for a living. They can hone shooting skills at the range, but this too is now restricted from law abiding citizens.

>Where am I going with this ?
For gangs it seems firearms provide marginal returns to no return as a force multiplier compared to other weapons

For the general population however, firearms act much better as a force multiplier.

Of theres many like it and there isnt anything special or deadly about it why was it used in many recent major mass shootings so effectively? Somethings up with that specific rifle. Unless u claim it was merely coincidence but im not buying that and i dont think u are either.

When you're in a packed nightclub a 17-round Glock pistol is easier to wield and kill with anyway; and you were being defensive of pistols earlier.

Also, there is a massive push for open-carry currently, and many states have approved it; so people carrying AR-15s will become more common.

Also, you don't understand that there are bolt-actions with magazine wells also.

Typical nogunz.

U have no proof that a 17 round glock is easier to wield nad kill with then a ar-15 rifle. Absolutely none thats complete bullshit speculation from nowhere.

If it was so much easier then why was an ar-15 chosen? Whatever that reason is, thats why they need to be banned and there IS a reason.

shit argument.

notice how he didn't respond to your post

I understand that bolt actions have "Clips" I know that they can be fired fairly quickly. But they can NOT be fired as quickly as an ar-15 can but the GENERAL UNTRAIN PERSONS. Which is exactly what all the people were who used the ar-15 so effectively to massacre people. When normal people become killing machines due ot the lethality of a weapon, this concerns me.

We already tried the Assault Weapons Ban in the 90s and it did ABSOLUTELY FUCKING NOTHING. Gun crime continues to trend downwards despite these spergs running around going for high scores, and rifles are very rarely used for the mundane gun crime that drives murder stats.

fuck off and neck yourself statist bootlicker