Is one of these more dangerous than the other?
Aug 18, 2019 09:33:37 #
controversy wrote:
The ad hominems and sophomoric retorts are amusing. Is there an informed adult available who has an actual answer to the question?
The answer is common sense. Which weapon has the most capability in the wrong hands to inflict terrible carnage. Decisions for "gun control" could be made on some combination of caliber, muzzle velocity, semiautomatic capability, and size of magazine and ease of changing magazines.
In this case, the pink rifle could be a pellet gun or a 22LR caliber. While it may well be semi-automatic, it is not likely to be capable of inflicting mass carnage, although such a 22LR could certainly hurt and k**l people. But the reality, shown in studies of survivability of wounds, clearly show that odds of death goes up significantly with higher-caliber and higher-velocity round. An AK-47 round does horrific damage. An AR-15 not as bad, but much worse than a lower-velocity round of similar size. An AK can take your arm off - and if not can shatter your humerus, femur = or skull - into hundreds of little bits of bone.
Let's pretend we are radiologists - sorry no skull or spine x-rays - they didn't survive to be x-rayed:
Aug 18, 2019 09:37:34 #
sb wrote:
The answer is common sense. Which weapon has the most capability in the wrong hands to inflict terrible carnage.
...
...
...
...
What about cars in the wrong hands?
Aug 18, 2019 09:45:42 #
Longshadow wrote:
What about cars in the wrong hands?
Or knives and blunt objects both of which are responsible for more deaths than the AK 47 and AR 15.
Aug 18, 2019 10:01:40 #
robertjerl wrote:
They are the same Ruger Mini-14 rifle with differe... (show quote)
Good job!! I wondered how many comments it would take before someone recognized that these are fundamentally the same weapon.Aug 18, 2019 10:48:53 #
Aug 18, 2019 11:02:06 #
rwoodvira wrote:
I don't believe the founders envisioned automatic weapons - I just don't see the need in modern society for assault weapons. An additional problem is a disparity in state laws in the purchase of weapons. I once had a job that I felt I needed a carry permit. I live in New Jersey, forget about it.
If I moved across the Delaware River to Chester or Delaware County in Pennsylvania - no problem.
If I moved across the Delaware River to Chester or Delaware County in Pennsylvania - no problem.
The musket was the state of the art weapon of the day when the constitution was written, one has to remember that the founders supported citizens of this country keeping what were the military weapons of the day within their homes as our country was defended by m*****as at that time.
I think that if you are going to make the argument to ban so called "Assault Rifles" then you have to make it on it's own merit and that stating that the founders could not envision the modern weapons of today is a weak argument that does not stand up to a thoughtful counter argument.
Aug 18, 2019 11:08:33 #
Alafoto
Loc: Montgomery, AL
The pink Mini 14 will k**l you just as quickly as the menacing looking rifle that I can't readily identify below it. So too, in the hands of a determined assailant, will a butcher knife, a hammer or a brick. Which of those weapons would you prefer to be armed with if attacked? Even if the police are only 5 minutes away someone who means you harm can do a lot of damage before their arrival.
I'm 73 years old and not in particularly good shape. I do not intend to go toe to toe with some 20 year old thug in the Walmart parking lot. The police, when they arrive, can confiscate my legally owned and carried pistol and take my name, etc. while they wait for the medical examiner to cart the young gentleman away.
So, let's outlaw all guns. Also knives, any metallic tools, bricks, chunks of concrete, etc. That way we will all be safe from the evils of guns. Except the ones still in the hands of the people who use them as a tool of their trade. You've heard of those guys...robbers, mass murderers; people like that. I guarantee they WILL NOT give up their guns.
I'm 73 years old and not in particularly good shape. I do not intend to go toe to toe with some 20 year old thug in the Walmart parking lot. The police, when they arrive, can confiscate my legally owned and carried pistol and take my name, etc. while they wait for the medical examiner to cart the young gentleman away.
So, let's outlaw all guns. Also knives, any metallic tools, bricks, chunks of concrete, etc. That way we will all be safe from the evils of guns. Except the ones still in the hands of the people who use them as a tool of their trade. You've heard of those guys...robbers, mass murderers; people like that. I guarantee they WILL NOT give up their guns.
Aug 18, 2019 11:13:32 #
Aug 18, 2019 11:16:04 #
Alafoto
Loc: Montgomery, AL
controversy wrote:
Still wondering if anyone can answer the original question. Given the number of self-identified firearms experts who have replied, one would think at least one of them would know.
The answer to the question is that either is equally deadly in the hands of someone who would do you harm, since both are of the same caliber. Even in the hands of someone who doesn't know how to properly firearms, i.e. assume EVERY gun is loaded, never point a gun at anyone or anything you don't wish to destroy and keep your finger off the trigger until you intend to shoot.
NEITHER is more or less deadly than the other when not in the hands of a crazy or criminal.
Aug 18, 2019 11:17:23 #
controversy wrote:
The ad hominems and sophomoric retorts are amusing. Is there an informed adult available who has an actual answer to the question?
Yes, speters gave you the answer.
"The one with the less IQ"
Aug 18, 2019 11:17:55 #
Aug 18, 2019 11:19:26 #
Rose42 wrote:
Or knives and blunt objects both of which are responsible for more deaths than the AK 47 and AR 15.
Aug 18, 2019 11:20:35 #
speters wrote:
Just ban the one with the worse IQ!
Your answer will not go good with the left.
Aug 18, 2019 11:21:53 #
repleo wrote:
40,000 reasons per year why.
So first off your number is wrong, clearly you are overstating. Secondly forgive me for asking but if a group of people can so be so adamant in their support of non-regulated a******ns in this country, how can they decry suicide so strongly as they do when they discuss guns?
Clearly we we speak of gun deaths in this country suicide is a huge percentage of those deaths, why do people support the murder of an innocent in let's say the 5th or 6th month of a pregnancy where life is being taken against the will of the victim, a murder if you choose to be honest, however the same group stands so strongly against one's own ability to make the decision to and act to end his/her own life.
Makes no sense to me.
Aug 18, 2019 11:30:05 #
controversy wrote:
Still wondering if anyone can answer the original question. Given the number of self-identified firearms experts who have replied, one would think at least one of them would know.
I believe I did answer the question that was asked. Maybe not quite the answer you want to hear?
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.