Stopping an active shooter

[CB Jones]

Well, I've tried to explain it, but you're still caught up on the technical terms. It's a forest for the trees situation.

Well I will admit, I'm a very rational thinker and will at times get caught up of the technical details and facts.

To me, I just want to find common ground and agree to the technical details and facts....then discuss the other aspects surrounding the issue.

 

[Tez3]

I was told the SLR. would blow up if you used it full auto for too lo

OH says no, it just used to much ammunition for it to be 'cost effective'. After all money is so much more important than troops lives.

A guy shooting from a distance is one example.

Depends on the circumstances, in a military one you just call in airstrikes.

Suicide bombing is another trend

It's not a 'trend', these have been happening for a very long time, from at least the 11th century. You may have just become aware.

 

[drop bear]

Fully automatic, Semi-automatic, and Bump Firing are technical terms with finite definitions.

How does the term Bump Fired Semi-Auto Weapon vs Fully Automatic Weapon create any spin? Both terms cause problems for Gun Advocates.

I understand the argument over the definition of an assault rifle but this one escapes me.

Well I bet the people who make the bump thingies are pretty mad keen not to be considered full auto at the.moment

 

[hoshin1600]

definition is a separate issue from intent. the intent of a bump stock is to circumvent the restrictions on full auto firing. full auto firing being the ability to fire more than one projectile with a single pull of a firing mechanism. one trigger pull, one projectile. a bump stock allows a somewhat continuous flow of projectiles with a single trigger pull through a mechanical means that does not require modification of the firing mechanism.

bottom line,, the bump stock is an attempt to get around the law.

range test starts at 1:33

 

[lklawson]

Oh I understand, it is a convenient definition and the bump stock does not fit the definition as it has been defined by a government agency.

It's not a "convenient" definition. It is THE definition. So what is your definition of FA?

However, it is a device that enables a sustained higher rate of fire than the person would be able to sustain without it. I inderstand that use of the device technically results in a separate pull of the trigger for each shot. But it creates a momentum that results in the equivalent of shots being fired without the shooter deliberately pulling the trigger, i.e. the momentum created by the device makes it happen for him as long as he holds his finger in position.

The end result is equivalent to a fully automatic weapon. It is accomplished through use of a device designed for that purpose. It is much harder to reach and sustain that result without use of such a device.

So your definition is "shooting faster than I feel like a person should be able to?"

I saw reference to a statement by a manufacturer of the bump stock, stating that there is currently nothing illegal about the device, and going to pains to describe why it does not fit the governments definition of an automatic weapon.

This is true.

Not just "the government definition," any definition.

However, I see a company looking to distance themselves from responsibility through plausible deniability for the role that their device played in this incident. I see a company with bankrupt morals and ethics and I feel it reflects the general morality and ethics of the industry as a whole.

I’ve rebuilt swords and have sold some of my finished items to some people. If I ever found out someone used an item that I made to kill someone, much less 58, I would be horrified. But that’s just me.

That's nice. But it should not be about how you "feel." This should be about facts.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Congress may take up a bill introduced to ban bump fire stocks.

 

[lklawson]

When firing FA you fire in bursts unless the weapon is belt fed in which case you can fire continuously but when using a magazine fed FA weapon you fire in two or three round bursts. You don't need to be accurate when shooting at a large crowd of tightly packed people if you just want to kill people and you don't care who as in the case of this psychopath.

The testimony so far is that he fired in long strings.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[lklawson]

Yes there was a case of a hotel security guard being shot and injured in the hallway when he approached the door to the room. The shooter had put cameras outside the room so he would know if anybody was coming. Im thinking, perhaps hotel security should be armed and should wear bullet proof vests. Most of the time we don't even have ordinary police around the moment when something like this happens let alone SWAT teams.

The Press Conferences from LV LEO to date have set the timeline that the thrice cursed donkey anus stopped shooting after he shot through the door at the guard.

What it looks like is, true to usual sequence of events, the very second it looks like one of these douche-nozles is going to encounter what might be "armed" resistance, they're done.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[lklawson]

Anyway, there were so many people and they were so tightly packed that he didn't need to be accurate. He probably would've killed more people if he had driven a truck through the crowd which seems to be the trend in Europe although it did happen in Virginia.

Yes. He had a pilot license and could have had a much greater effect by smashing his plane into the crowd.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[lklawson]

I spent some time in the army. And we never went full auto. Guys came back from war and never went full auto.

Semi auto in the conventional manner has enough ability to effectively kill as any other method short of a belt fed machine gun.

So the bump stock aspect is kind of meh. It is mostly down to the amount of rounds you can hold, accuracy and portability. Which of course in your case is as much as the public want to pay for.

To be bluntly honest, the inherent accuracy problems of FA fire itself, coupled with the additional accuracy problems required by "bump fire," frankly we're LUCKY that this sub-human crap-stain chose to use a bump-fire stock. He could have murdered more if he'd just used semi auto and accurate fire.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Fully automatic, Semi-automatic, and Bump Firing are technical terms with finite definitions.

How does the term Bump Fired Semi-Auto Weapon vs Fully Automatic Weapon create any spin? Both terms cause problems for Gun Advocates.

I understand the argument over the definition of an assault rifle but this one escapes me.

I'll point back to my earlier post, where I tried to make it clear that FC didn't claim the shooter used a fully automatic weapon. He claimed he "in effect" used one. That phrase makes it clear that the weapon(s) in question were not technically fully automatic, but provide a similar effect.

You're arguing it doesn't meet the technical definition. And you're right. And he never said they did.

 

[lklawson]

Had he used a FA he would've no doubt got it off the black market. At least some of his guns he must've got off the black market.

We do not know that yet. That said, I'm betting the opposite. I don't think it likely that any of his firearms were black market. But, again, we won't know for some time.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[lklawson]

From what I know you can get FA weapons in some states but to do so requires licensing at the federal level and you have to pay an expensive fee and you get registered with the federal government as a Class III firearms holder and even then you can only get FA weapons that were manufactured prior to 1986.

Depends on what you think of as "expensive" for licensing. The fee for a Class 3 is $200. That might be cheap for you or a lot for me. But the fact that civilian licensing for FA is restricted to only those manufactured AND REGISTERED prior to '86, enforces an economics Artificial Scarcity model which drive prices extremely high. It's not uncommon for a Class 3 firearm to command 300-500% more than a semi-auto version would. Roached out Class 3 firearms are usually over $5K as a starter and often go to more than you pay for a luxury car.

And that's only the ones which were registered. For example, if you come across a WWII "bring back" that came home with your grandpa, but he stuck it in the back of his closet and didn't register... well, you're hosed. Even though it was made before '86, it wasn't REGISTERED. There is NO WAY to register it now. It is illegal to posses.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[oftheherd1]

We don't? Dang. And here I thought my wife was actually seeing clients, mostly on the taxpayer's dime, as a Board Certified, State Licensed, Counselor.

I'll have to be sure to tell her that she doesn't actually have a job.

What percentage of her patients do you estimate she commits for involuntary in-house treatment at mental health facilities?

 

[lklawson]

The distinction is different, Kirk. The definition of “fully automatic” is an official thing. That definition currently hinges on whether a single trigger pull fires one cartridge or many (excepting multi-barrel setups). Functionally, a bump stock produces an effect quite similar to what is officially “fully automatic”. That is the intent of the phrase - to indicate that the effect is similar.

And what "effect" is that? Be specific please.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[lklawson]

I was told the SLR. would blow up if you used it full auto for too long. It can be modified back by using a matchstick aparently. (Not something I was ever allowed to try)

Most guns are damaged by sustained fire, usually by heat.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[lklawson]

Since he was using rifles, a person would need a class IV or Class III set of body armor. It's pretty heavy stuff...

Depends on how much energy is siphoned off of the bullet by penetrating the door first. I know of at least one case where a LEO was saved by his class II vest from a .30 cal rifle round because the suspect shot him through a residential door.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Gerry Seymour]

And what "effect" is that? Be specific please.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

Rapid fire without having to (manually) pull the trigger over and over. The only reason we're having this argument is because the legal definition of "fully automatic" requires (in most cases, I think there have been exceptions to this) that the trigger only be pulled once. If the definition changed to "a single actuation of the external firing mechanism", then bump stocks and the sort of reverse-trigger device (I can't recall what it's called nor the manufacturer) would actually be classified within it. Both allow the user to make a single action and fire many times - the same effect as someone firing a fully automatic weapon.

 

[oftheherd1]

This to a certain degree was an awareness issue. People did not recognize that the sound was gunfire and then did not act quickly enough.

I have mentioned this with awareness you don't know what you don't know. And the sound of automatic gunfire from 40 stories up as opposed to fire crackers or just something silly is something I would not have known until I saw people dropping.

Certainly, for whatever reasons, most people seem not to have realized it was gun fire. But those who have been around automatic fire of different sorts, whether in combat or at ranges, probably would have. When I first heard a clip on TV, and heard the gunfire, I could tell it was automatic fire of some sort, but was a little puzzled as to what kind of weapon it was. I spoke to some where I work who are more recent veterans and/or still are involved with weapons. Two correctly opined it might have been a bump stock. I had never even heard of such a thing.

 

[lklawson]

Well, I've tried to explain it, but you're still caught up on the technical terms. It's a forest for the trees situation.

No, I don't think so. From everything you have written, it really appears that your objections is "how fast can bullets come out of the end."

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk