If all you were trying to say was that mass murders can still happen without "high capacity" magazines or "assault weapons," then of course I agree. I just think we have to be careful in saying that kind of thing. If we appear to be saying that guns like the AR offer no advantages over pistols or shotguns, then we risk sounding disingenuous. Instead, we should make very clear that police use such guns because they are such an efficient means of hurting people, and that human beings have a right to the same efficient means of hurting people. For defense of themselves and their country, of course. I don't think our gains in gun rights have come from claiming that our guns are harmless. I think they've come from pointing out that we have a right to harm bad guys, in some situations.
I also don't think it's helpful to bring Rambo into the discussion. It is true that people sometimes do courageous things. Or maybe desperate things, driven by fear.
Well, "advantages over what" Fistful?
A shotgun?
Maybe but who is going to try and "charge" at a psycho shooter who has a shotgun? I dunno. Remember the Aurora shooter had atleast 4 firearms.
If you want to ban ARs, then what about M-1 carbines? Don't tell me that an M-1 carbine wouldn't be very nearly as effective as an AR. Especially if the AR's magic 100 round magazine jammed. Never once have I had an M-1 carbine magazine jam on me.
The reason I brought Rambo in this--maybe that wasn't fair to you -- but Diane Feinstein was whining on TV about the Aurora guy having these large capacity "clips" and that if he hadn't, maybe somebody could have charged him when he ran out of ammo.
I wanted to grab her by the throat (even cable TV doesn't permit this --unfortunatly
) and yell in her face:
"Holmes had a shotgun and two handguns and you think that tactic would work?!?!?!??! No, nimrod, the shooter would simply transition to another gun and kill the Rambo!!"I also think that people like her have no idea how quickly a rifle like an AR --or an M-1 Carbine, or a Glock -- can be reloaded. 10 round mag, 20, 30, 50, whatever. If Holmes had had 10 magazines of 10 rounds each, the AR probably would not have jammed on him and he would not have needed to transition to another weapon.
As to ARs having an advantage, OK. But a Glock has an advantage -- it is easier to conceal.
Depending on how you look at things and what is important to you, an advantage in one situation can be a disadvantage in another.
Don't tell that to Feinstein, Schumer and that
ilk because to them, the only purpose ARs serve and 30 rnd. mags serve is to kill a lot of people really fast.
