The murderer is a Mexican national, so the right is going to have a racist hate orgy over this.

Had he been a White guy, I'm sure they would have blamed the victims for foolishly confronting an armed man. Sort of like, "If the woman didn't want to be raped, why was she walking through that parking lot alone at night?"

Some of them might still do that. They need to blame everything other than the gun, our shitty gun control laws and our ghoulish gun-centric culture for this appalling tragedy.

A weapon specifically designed for use in combat such as the AR-15 which was used by US Army Special Forces in Vietnam and wasn't marketed to civilians until cops started buying surplus AR-15s so civilians started demanded they be able to buy them, too.

You fuckwit.

magazine fed semiautomatic rifles have been widely available to civilians for over a hundred years

not ones whose M-16 based design include a gas vent to reduce recoil until the AR-15 came out. This system greatly reduces recoil and allows the rifle to be fired faster and more accurately than predecessor rifles which required a greater deal of training to fire accurately at a high ROF.

AR-15s use a direct impingement gas system that has nothing to do with reducing recoil and everything to do with reducing complexity and weight. and it's not unique to AR-15s nor were they the first to use it

what makes an AR-15 have such low recoil is the cartridge, 223/556 is an "intermediate" power round that is somewhere between a handgun and a full size rifle, it's not magic

You're right crackersmack, our gun violence crisis will be solved by arguing gun semantics. The problem certainly isn't assault rifles like the assault rifle 15 a f high capacity clips.

Anyone who doesn't know the recoil of common rounds like 28/34s and .209 specials has no right to an opinion on this topic.

Crackersmack is missing the point of my statement regarding the gas impingement system. I'll go ahead and point out that the original rifle to use this system was the AR-10, which was not long after developed into both the M-16 and AR-15. The fact that the AR-15 isn't the first to use it is a complete miss of the true point; this gas impingement system was the innovation of that series, as well as the combination of a smaller round which has less stability and has an effect of tumbling within the body and creating a shockwave due to its higher velocity on impact, making for deadlier wounds; we all knew this already, but the point of criticizing this weapon as a "war weapon" is to remind everyone that its innovations are to maximize its killing potential of multiple targets at once.

Killing multiple targets at once is what necessarily makes it a weapon of war, as opposed to the idea of a self defense firearm which would could have for example killed this fuckwit in this featured video.

in any case, arguing over it is fruitless, Crackersmack, especially when you're flat out wrong.

End AR-15's, end weapons of war for the citizenry now.

But the NRA and the weapons industry doesn't use that term. We must continue to allow them to dictate the issue. LOL

@Crackersmack

The AR-15 was specifically designed for use in war, not civilian use.

That makes it a war weapon, not a civilian weapon that was used in war.

Dipshit.

yes the 223/556 round is a tumbling round. again, not unique or new when the AR-15 was introduced. it's not some amazing level up.

pretty much every rifle was designed for war at one point. the AR-15 is so popular in America (1 out of 4 new guns sold by some estimations) because it is inexpensive, fires inexpensive ammunition, and is fun to shoot. Also in the last 20 years we made a whole lot of young American men very familiar with it's operation, so when they come home from committing war crimes they buy what they know


American civilians have had the ability to purchase guns with similar or better capacity for killing mass amounts of people for over one hundred years, and they very rarely used them for mass shootings before relatively recently.

something else changed to make mass shootings so frequent, not the guns. a lot of money is invested in getting you to blame the hellscape we live in on guns though, instead of the people that caused this. who the guns are also a threat to

Even if something else changed, the access to guns is still part of the problem. The gun nuts like to scapegoat the mentally ill, but even if they're right, then guns in the hands of mentally ill are the problem. Let's say it's nihilism. People are abandoning their religion and the state of American capitalism leaves people lonely and hopeless. But their access to guns, is still a huge part of the problem.

true but the focus from liberals is entirely on the part of the problem that they have absolutely no power to do anything about (gun proliferation), and at the expense of the aspects of the problem that they absolutely can do something about (mental health resources, our hellish and uniquely stressful lives under failing capitalism) and my argument is that this intentional

Cracker, what's the taste difference between different rounds? Sample some and report back.

Gun control is only impossible because the GOP has made it impossible. The courts completely changed their interpretation of the 2nd in a generation of Federalist Society meddling. Guns are the only part of mass shootings we can ban. You can't ban nihilistic gamers, mentally ill people, or whoever else you think is responsible. Guns are the main factor, and they are a tangible thing we can regulate.

No, CS is right. Any sort of common sense gun control, to say nothing of targeted bans, buyback programs, firearms insurance, or even federal funding for firearms deaths research, are unrealistic and just too darn hard. If these things were possible then I'm sure other countries would have implemented some or all of them by now, right? Gee, I wish we had their experience and history to use a guide, but darn it, we just don't. Oh well.

Instead we really should be doing the things CS has clearly, unambiguously, and exhaustively laid out over their many years on this site that will truly help the poor and disenfranchised of this country. Which, so far, seems to consist only of "Don't Vote (and don't vote for Democrats especially hard)."

We can and must precrime jail all gamers.

there are between 150 and 300 million guns in circulation in America. the cat is out of the bag. you cannot do anything about this. it is not realistic to pretend that you can do what Australia or the UK did. those countries never had a personal right to firearm ownership and never had a significant political faction that cared only about firearms laws. those countries had relatively functional governments when they passed gun control, unlike 21st century America.

those countries also have a much more stable and accountable law enforcement network; America has massive and violent metro police forces that would enforce strict gun control laws mostly against the poor and racial minorities, and also little violent warlord fiefdom sheriff offices everywhere that would refuse to enforce gun control altogether.

there are several ways that you could significantly reduce homicides and suicides in America for way less money and effort that your weird impossible authoritarian gun control fantasies, but as we know liberals will always choose violence, war, and money for cops over anything that might actually help the dirty poors and keep them from killing themselves/each other

Most people will turn their guns in.

Because despite all their bravado and talk of standing up to tyranny, they can't bear the thought of being on the wrong side of the law.

you're never gonna get to a point where you demand that people turn in their guns. it's impossible. gun control is the liberal version of the mars colony; a stupid, stupid fantasy held up as a logical next step by so many drooling retards that it is actually hampering progress

Support for gun control has been growing.

The day will come.

It's funny that many of the people who were like "no no you simpleton, we can't do anything about climate change, housing, or healthcare because Joe Manchin might not vote for it, you fucking moron don't you know how the senate works?" have turned around and are like "sure let's ban all guns easy peasy"

yeah it's weird how the filibuster and "the parliamentarian" (lmao) are not even on the radar screen when we are jerking our little boners over the idea of sicing cops on maga chuds

Even passing a federal "assault weapon" ban would require an airtight supermajority and several changed/added SCOTUS seats. Implementing it would be very difficult. And it would save like 100 lives a year.

State level stuff is likely to get shut down by the Supreme Court. Since we've decided we're not going to court pack, we gotta wait at least until Clarence Thomas dies under a democratic president who can overcome a filibuster.

To meaningfully reduce gun homicides you'd have to basically just ban guns. Which would actually save some lives (I'd be happy to be the only one with a gun at work), but would be incredibly difficult to get passed or implement.

Meaningful gun control would be about as hard to achieve as universal healthcare. The latter would save more lives. But gun control is viewed by liberals as de rigueur orthodoxy, while universal health care is still controversial even as a goal and is regarded as pie in the sky utopianism to implement.

I think this is more evidence that PMC liberals engage with politics not with concrete demands to improve people's lives, but to confirm that their preferences are the right ones.

What the almighty fuck are you talking about? Armed people get shot and killed all the god-damned time.

Had one of the victims had a gun, they would either have been killed or would maybe have managed to wound or kill the attacker AFTER the attacker had shot at the victims. Or the might just have managed to scare them off without even wounding them.

Either way, you're still looking at a lot of victims, especially with a semi-automatic rifle.

Or were you being sarcastic?

I read the sarcasm

People can conceal carry, open carry, but mass shooter always have the element of surprise.

It's hard for me to spot such sarcasm when I know so many people who believe that for reals.

Grotesque caricatures lose potency when the real people are already so grotesque.

The only benefit to mass gun ownership is boosting the self esteem and power fantasies of the saddest rejects of society.

Which is why only the saddest rejects defend it here.

Yeah I'm joking and yeah the situation's fucked. Ideally some safe storage laws that, while not really enforceable, would at least encourage people to do the bare minimum to keep their guns out of the hands of kids, while also providing another thing to charge organized crime shitheads with during busts

Most likely he escaped to Mexico by now

He was caught in a house less than 20 miles away from the killings.

He was hiding under a pile of clothes in a closet.

The city he was found in is named "Cut and Shoot."

ok now what are you gonna do about it? what's your best-case gun control scenario? you make everything but a break-action shotgun illegal, now how to you enforce that? with brutally violent police that are literally above the law. fuck off with your fake concern for public safety.

We can take the police’s guns away once there’s so few guns on the streets that any microdick cop can’t justify needing a gun anymore.


And suck my balls

We need to ban all semi-automatic weapons from police and civilian use.

Yes, I know how many weapons that includes.

Gun Control is as doomed to fail as Prohibition was 100 years ago.

See Chicago...

you idiots don't even understand the scope of what you're demanding; besides the obvious problems of police enforcing laws unevenly against racial minorities and poor people, there are 150-300 million semiautomatic firearms in private hands in America. you literally cannot collect them all, or even a significant percentage of them.

all you would be doing is even further empowering racist and violent police. which is the answer that liberals give for every problem.

We know you’re a disingenuous idiot when you argue that the solution to racist violent cops is giving minorities more guns, thus giving the police more excuses to shoot on sight.

"After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it. I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military."

William S. Burroughs

Guns ain't going anywhere buddy.

But why the extremist terms. The only extremist side that really exists is the right, who wants no regulations at all. The left would be thrilled if we could just get a database or some wait times.

@Pillager

Chicago is a racist dogwhistle. "Oh, those scary Black people in Chicago with their guns. (That the mostly get from Indiana)" Federal level gun laws would certainly make it harder for people in Chicago to get guns.

But really, the problem in Chicago is poverty, not guns. You ant to fix the crime issues in Chicago? Fix poverty. But that would cost us money. Worse, it would mean spending tax dollars to actually help Black people, which will never get past the GOP.

Anyway, keep your stupid guns after we outlaw them. If you get caught with them, we can always send you to jail.

I honestly thought we were above mentioning chicago. Well, most of us.

I see we're back to FBI statistics-level discourse.

Binro, the Ray-cis card or toxic #IDpol won't get gun control passed.

A fair size cemetery will be filled with gun grabbers who act out looney liberal fantasies of 2nd amendment violators.

Looks like pillager finally shoved that red pill all the way up his ass

SolRo, long after you & I in the ground the US will still be flooded with guns.

No laws will prevent smuggling, illegal gunsmithing or eliminate what's already here.

Sorry, the FBI quote is about active shooter incidents.

"Black Americans die from gun violence at nearly 2.4 times the rate of white Americans."

But let's focus obsessively on the one type of gun violence that primarily affects rich white people, even though it accounts for a tiny fraction of gun homocides.

Mass shootings are the most attention grabbing, and you're right just general gun violence in America is far worse. The same forces, NRA/GOP are making all kinds of violence worse. It's the mass shootings that get people motivated and moving to make change, so I just wouldn't poo poo with some statistics.

The majority of gun deaths are suicides.

Suicides and homicides have very different etiologies and solutions; it's misleading to group them together.

Cena: Mass shootings do have an impact larger than their pure death count. Kind of like terrorism? So, you're right that we shouldn't be dismissive. But, still, the focus on assault rifle bans distracts from possible reforms that would actually save lives.

my solution: encourage society to be smarter and more empathetic as a whole

how: no fucking idea

... weed?

As long as it's a steady supply. Pot heads without their daily supply can be bitchy as hell.

I’m going to try ketamine once insurance starts covering treatments

People can make guns without 3D printing.

3D printing might make it slightly faster to make some parts, but most of the important bits still require special equipment and materials.

If only that were true. Here in CA, during the recently expired "Single Shot Exemption" days of "legally purchased off-roster" firearms - where firearms were modified and then reconfigured in a weird kabuki dance of swapping in and swapping out 3D printed parts in order to conform to CA DoJ standards - it became abundantly clear to all the FFLs I dealt with that the only metal parts needed in a firearm's construction are the barrel and the firing pin. Everything else can be mold-injected nylon - even the slide. I myself can disassemble and reassemble a Glock 19 part for part - a mere 34 of them in total - blindfolded, in about 2-3 minutes, and could easily and quickly teach you the same. Guns are not complicated.

Somehow even with the advent of 3D printers the countries with hard gun laws aren’t awash in plastic AK47s

It’s about cost and ease of access.

Mass shooters tend to all be failures at life. Getting access to 3D printing would still be too much of a barrier for them to figure out.

That’s even the case for petty criminals

Why track down someone that can print a gun for you at high expense when you can buy a knife for pocket change?

How many mass murderers are like Paddock and how many are like this asshole?

What's the ratio of suer-geniuses who carefully plan their massacres compared to drunk assholes with guns?