General Gun Violence/Gun Control #2

Status
Not open for further replies.
*caution: graphic subject matter related to the Washington Post article*

That fact is in most of the articles I’ve read. But the AR-15 was the choice of weapon used in the worst mass-shootings in the US in recent history. I was looking to see what the statistics were on which weapon has caused the most deaths, but it’s soul-destroying to go down that rabbit hole. My guess is that the AR-15 caused most deaths and injuries, but I don’t want to google it anymore today.

I can’t imagine why anyone would defend the use of that type of weapon. Especially after I saw the Washington Post article and photos. What happened in Las Vegas. I couldn’t even tell what I was looking at in one photo with the field of victims. Then it struck me. I’m heartbroken. All the body bags in the Uvalde school corridor. And what, you won’t ban that weapon because it’s ‘your right’ to own it?

I have to wonder if those defending their right to own an AR-15 or other AR weapon have been willing to look at the pictures and read the words of survivors and first responders in the WaPo article. Even if they only use their AR weapon at the firing range, I would hope that anyone who owns one is courageous enough to view the damage they cause to innocent victims of mass shootings.
JMO

In another article from WaPo’s series, we see a 3-D animation of the damage caused to the human body by an AR-15 compared to a typical handgun. There is no comparison. Read it and weep.


Quoting from the link:
The AR-15 fires bullets at such a high velocity — often in a barrage of 30 or even 100 in rapid succession — that it can eviscerate multiple people in seconds. A single bullet lands with a shock wave intense enough to blow apart a skull and demolish vital organs. The impact is even more acute on the compact body of a small child.

“It literally can pulverize bones, it can shatter your liver and it can provide this blast effect,” said Joseph Sakran, a gunshot survivor who advocates for gun violence prevention and a trauma surgeon at Johns Hopkins Hospital.

[snip]
The first part of this report is a 3D animation that shows the trajectory of two different hypothetical gunshots to the chest — one from an AR-15 and another from a typical handgun — to explain the greater severity of the damage caused by the AR-15.

The second part depicts the entrance and exit wounds of two actual victims — Noah Pozner, 6, [Newtown CT] and Peter Wang, 15 [Parkland FL] —killed in school shootings when they were struck by multiple bullets.

This account is based on a review of nearly 100 autopsy reports from several AR-15 shootings as well as court testimony and interviews with trauma surgeons, ballistics experts and a medical examiner.

The records and interviews show in stark detail the unique mechanics that propel these bullets — and why they unleash such devastation in the body.
 
Trigger Warning for this body cam vid below.

Saw this recently, more fallout from sheriffs simply refusing to enforce our laws:



"In this particular case, it sounds like there was plenty of information that the law enforcement had that would have triggered the implementation of a red flag law," Day said.

The law is the extreme risk firearm protection order. It was enacted in July 2020 after two years of debate in the state capitol.

However, the majority of elected sheriffs in New Mexico oppose it and have said they will not enforce the law. However, the passed law allows law enforcement and prosecutors to petition a court."
 
Trigger Warning for this body cam vid below.

Saw this recently, more fallout from sheriffs simply refusing to enforce our laws:



"In this particular case, it sounds like there was plenty of information that the law enforcement had that would have triggered the implementation of a red flag law," Day said.

The law is the extreme risk firearm protection order. It was enacted in July 2020 after two years of debate in the state capitol.

However, the majority of elected sheriffs in New Mexico oppose it and have said they will not enforce the law. However, the passed law allows law enforcement and prosecutors to petition a court."

To be fair, this is in the same article :

“[...] Consequently, the Officers lacked authority to arrest, place into protective custody either party against their will, or file a petition pursuant to the Extreme Risk Firearm Protection Order Act."

Essentially, there were no grounds to file a red-flag order to begin with.
 
I have to wonder if those defending their right to own an AR-15 or other AR weapon have been willing to look at the pictures and read the words of survivors and first responders in the WaPo article. Even if they only use their AR weapon at the firing range, I would hope that anyone who owns one is courageous enough to view the damage they cause to innocent victims of mass shootings.
JMO

In another article from WaPo’s series, we see a 3-D animation of the damage caused to the human body by an AR-15 compared to a typical handgun. There is no comparison. Read it and weep.


Quoting from the link:
The AR-15 fires bullets at such a high velocity — often in a barrage of 30 or even 100 in rapid succession — that it can eviscerate multiple people in seconds. A single bullet lands with a shock wave intense enough to blow apart a skull and demolish vital organs. The impact is even more acute on the compact body of a small child.

“It literally can pulverize bones, it can shatter your liver and it can provide this blast effect,” said Joseph Sakran, a gunshot survivor who advocates for gun violence prevention and a trauma surgeon at Johns Hopkins Hospital.

[snip]
The first part of this report is a 3D animation that shows the trajectory of two different hypothetical gunshots to the chest — one from an AR-15 and another from a typical handgun — to explain the greater severity of the damage caused by the AR-15.

The second part depicts the entrance and exit wounds of two actual victims — Noah Pozner, 6, [Newtown CT] and Peter Wang, 15 [Parkland FL] —killed in school shootings when they were struck by multiple bullets.

This account is based on a review of nearly 100 autopsy reports from several AR-15 shootings as well as court testimony and interviews with trauma surgeons, ballistics experts and a medical examiner.

The records and interviews show in stark detail the unique mechanics that propel these bullets — and why they unleash such devastation in the body.

Articles like both of the aforementioned WaPo articles are published in an attempt to convey utter shock for the sake of argument. The recently published WaPo article depicting photographic scenes from AR-related incidents is a scene that is commonplace amongst any Mass-Casualty event, irrespective of whether the firearm used was a rifle or handgun, or if any firearm was even used at all.

The ballistic depictions (in regards to the contradistinction of 9mm vs .223 wound channels) is laughable, and fails to account for a myriad of variables - not in the least bit, different cartridge configurations. I'd go far as to say that that specific instance of that article is blatantly and intentionally misleading.
 
Articles like both of the aforementioned WaPo articles are published in an attempt to convey utter shock for the sake of argument. The recently published WaPo article depicting photographic scenes from AR-related incidents is a scene that is commonplace amongst any Mass-Casualty event, irrespective of whether the firearm used was a rifle or handgun, or if any firearm was even used at all.

The ballistic depictions (in regards to the contradistinction of 9mm vs .223 wound channels) is laughable, and fails to account for a myriad of variables - not in the least bit, different cartridge configurations. I'd go far as to say that that specific instance of that article is blatantly and intentionally misleading.

Can you link a source to everything you’ve stated as fact, please?
 
Can you link a source to everything you’ve stated as fact, please?

What are you looking for specifically? Most of the comment that you quoted is both widely accepted common knowledge, and personal experience utilizing simulated gelatin mediums.

Further, where is your earlier source link stating that the AR is the most used weapon in mass murders?
 
What are you looking for specifically? Most of the comment that you quoted is both widely accepted common knowledge, and personal experience utilizing simulated gelatin mediums.

Further, where is your earlier source link stating that the AR is the most used weapon in mass murders?

If you’re discrediting the Washington Post article saying their facts are incorrect you should be able to cite sources. You’re not identified here as an expert, so please link the information that disproves what they’ve reported.

I posted the links a few times (one link below). From what I’ve read. handguns are the most commonly used guns in mass shootings, and the AR was the weapon of choice in the majority of the worst mass shootings in recent US history.

My guess is that the AR has injured and killed more people than handguns in mass shootings, but I’d have to research that. After reading the Washington Post article and seeing the photos I don’t want to revisit the topic for a while in order to see if that’s true.

 
If you’re discrediting the Washington Post article saying their facts are incorrect you should be able to cite sources. You’re not identified here as an expert, so please link the information that disproves what they’ve reported.

I posted the links a few times (one link below). From what I’ve read. handguns are the most commonly used guns in mass shootings, and the AR was the weapon of choice in the majority of the worst mass shootings in recent US history.

My guess is that the AR has injured and killed more people than handguns in mass shootings, but I’d have to research that. After reading the Washington Post article and seeing the photos I don’t want to revisit the topic for a while in order to see if that’s true.


Websleuth's 'expert' label or not, opinion is allowed; Just as you're able to freely state your opinion of the AR being used more often in mass murders. It is my opinion that the wound channel depiction by WaPo is misleading, based upon extensive first hand experience, and knowledge that permeates the overall firearm community.
 
Bbm there it is
To be fair, this is in the same article :

“[...] Consequently, the Officers lacked authority to arrest, place into protective custody either party against their will, or file a petition pursuant to the Extreme Risk Firearm Protection Order Act."

Essentially, there were no grounds to file a red-flag order to begin with.
Bbm Great. :(
 
Websleuth's 'expert' label or not, opinion is allowed; Just as you're able to freely state your opinion of the AR being used more often in mass murders. It is my opinion that the wound channel depiction by WaPo is misleading, based upon extensive first hand experience, and knowledge that permeates the overall firearm community.
Bbm, when stated as opinion iirc
 
Articles like both of the aforementioned WaPo articles are published in an attempt to convey utter shock for the sake of argument. The recently published WaPo article depicting photographic scenes from AR-related incidents is a scene that is commonplace amongst any Mass-Casualty event, irrespective of whether the firearm used was a rifle or handgun, or if any firearm was even used at all.

The ballistic depictions (in regards to the contradistinction of 9mm vs .223 wound channels) is laughable, and fails to account for a myriad of variables - not in the least bit, different cartridge configurations. I'd go far as to say that that specific instance of that article is blatantly and intentionally misleading.
Bbm, and IMO also recognizes the UTTER SHOCK the world feels. Unfathomable IMO. Endless. Laughable? Nothing is laughable about gun murders imo. The world weeps.
 
Last edited:
Websleuth's 'expert' label or not, opinion is allowed; Just as you're able to freely state your opinion of the AR being used more often in mass murders. It is my opinion that the wound channel depiction by WaPo is misleading, based upon extensive first hand experience, and knowledge that permeates the overall firearm community.

SBM

In an earlier post I wrote that the AR-15 was the most commonly used firearm in mass shootings, but I corrected it in a following post. It’s the most commonly used weapon in your deadliest mass shootings. And it’s not my opinion.

“Mass shootings involving AR-15s have become a recurring American nightmare.

The weapon, easy to operate and widely available, is now used more than any other in the country’s deadliest mass killings.”

That’s probably the third source I've cited to back up the information.
 
WaPo gave a basic description of the cartridge used for their wound channel depiction.

As per their footnotes, WaPo stated that cartridge used was from the brand Remington, and had a 55grain bullet weight. The problem here, is that Remington manufactures a variety of .223 loads with a 55g weight, all with different velocity ranges.
When WaPo compared this mystery .223 round to the 9mm round in the wound channel depiction, they neglected to state any information whatsoever of said 9mm round.

Simply, in the methodology alone, these depictions of wound channels cannot be peer-reviewed, due to WaPo choosing what to share and what to omit.

Further, wound channels from a 9mm are often much larger than the WaPo article depicts due to hollow-point bullets being a much more common handgun round, most tend to be similar to the wound channel that they depicted with the 223 round.
If I had to guess, I'd say that WaPo opted to use a low-velocity 9mm round nose bullet for these depictions (not at all common for defensive or offensive use), but without any source information from WaPo directly, their depictions are as good as moot, and again not open to be properly peer-reviewed.

ETA CORRECTION :
223 Remington is actually the full name of the 223 round, and thus WaPo's 223 round can describe ANY ROUND FROM ANY MANUFACTURER with a 55g weight. Really shoddy reporting imo
 
Last edited:
SBM

In an earlier post I wrote that the AR-15 was the most commonly used firearm in mass shootings, but I corrected it in a following post. It’s the most commonly used weapon in your deadliest mass shootings. And it’s not my opinion.

“Mass shootings involving AR-15s have become a recurring American nightmare.

The weapon, easy to operate and widely available, is now used more than any other in the country’s deadliest mass killings.”

That’s probably the third source I've cited to back up the information.

WaPo here also failed to mention that in some of those 10 cases, the AR was not the only weapon used. The Vegas shooting, for instance is an example of this.

It is also important to note that WaPo asterisks' their own talking-point about ARs being the most used, in stating that they are only accounting for incidents beginning in 2012.
 



The new law bars individuals convicted of a misdemeanor involving domestic violence from possessing, using, transporting, selling, purchasing, carrying, shipping, receiving or distributing firearms or ammunition in Michigan for eight years after they've paid all fines, served out any imprisonment term and completed the conditions of probation imposed on them.

Those who violate the ban will be guilty of a felony and could spend up to five years in prison and pay up to a $5,000 fine. The bills signed by Whitmer will take effect in mid-February.
 



The new law bars individuals convicted of a misdemeanor involving domestic violence from possessing, using, transporting, selling, purchasing, carrying, shipping, receiving or distributing firearms or ammunition in Michigan for eight years after they've paid all fines, served out any imprisonment term and completed the conditions of probation imposed on them.

Those who violate the ban will be guilty of a felony and could spend up to five years in prison and pay up to a $5,000 fine. The bills signed by Whitmer will take effect in mid-February.
Oh that's great, she seems to me to be a solid person. I am glad she is alive. If she is able to up the fine to $200,000 and the sentence to 20 years if allowed I will donate to her good works.

 



The new law bars individuals convicted of a misdemeanor involving domestic violence from possessing, using, transporting, selling, purchasing, carrying, shipping, receiving or distributing firearms or ammunition in Michigan for eight years after they've paid all fines, served out any imprisonment term and completed the conditions of probation imposed on them.

Those who violate the ban will be guilty of a felony and could spend up to five years in prison and pay up to a $5,000 fine. The bills signed by Whitmer will take effect in mid-February.
Possession of a firearm by a convicted domestic abuser was already illegal under federal law.
 
Possession of a firearm by a convicted domestic abuser was already illegal under federal law.
Per the article BBM:

Federal law prohibits those with misdemeanor domestic violence convictions from purchasing and possessing a gun. But having a state law that mirrors that federal one would ensure the ban is actually enforced, said April Zeoli, director of the policy core for the Institute for Firearm Injury Prevention at the University of Michigan, in a February interview. "So right now in Michigan, if you're convicted of a domestic violence misdemeanor crime, you don't necessarily lose your right to have a gun. You do federally," she said. "It's not really being implemented. So any guns you already have, no one makes sure you get rid of them."
 
Per the article BBM:

Federal law prohibits those with misdemeanor domestic violence convictions from purchasing and possessing a gun. But having a state law that mirrors that federal one would ensure the ban is actually enforced, said April Zeoli, director of the policy core for the Institute for Firearm Injury Prevention at the University of Michigan, in a February interview. "So right now in Michigan, if you're convicted of a domestic violence misdemeanor crime, you don't necessarily lose your right to have a gun. You do federally," she said. "It's not really being implemented. So any guns you already have, no one makes sure you get rid of them."
This is fine by me. BUT, it requires police and especially prosecutors to actually follow through.
 
Please let us know your potential legislative solution to this one:


Yet another California gang member, felon in possession of a firearm, violating both his parole & probation conditions.

Readers here already know that I prefer a solution that does not reduce my civil rights or the civil rights of other law-abiding taxpayers here in the USA.

jmho ymmv lrr
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
85
Guests online
474
Total visitors
559

Forum statistics

Threads
625,631
Messages
18,507,324
Members
240,827
Latest member
shaymac4413
Back
Top