Florida Night Club Shooting - at least 20 dead - impact on US elections?

An assault weapon ban probably is ineffective or statistically insignificant in impact. If you can get it, it sets a precedent for restricting guns in some way in the courts, and acculturates citizens to the idea that controls can be put on guns. From a gun control perspective, I don't see it as a worthless milestone even if it has no measurable impact on gun violence. You may be right that the background check is the lower hanging fruit, and there seems to be more focus there anyway -- I think there might even be grounds for agreement between rights advocates and gun opponents.

As for liberals' priorities, I wouldn't read too much into it. People are frustrated that there are a lot of factors that are uncontrollable. One factor, gun rights, should be controllable but we can't agree on what to do with it. On opposing extremism and in defeating ISIS, I think we already have broad agreement, so there isn't much to argue about there.

Keep seeing people question his target selection. It seems to me to have been extremely effective. An extremely soft target, whereas the tourist venues will have security, big spaces, and other problems. I'd worry that nightclubs might now be more popular targets because of how effective this guy was.

 

Did you get all that mr. 13 in 33? Deckard is now against you for posting a link to an article. All of the links to liberal articles and tweets you post don't matter because of this one article with a title he disapproves of.

Consider yourself warned because Deckard is OUTRAGED

 

A grenade can also come close to the carnage and yet it's the AR15 that is used overwhelmingly. We can pretend about what's not happening or we can just address what's actually happening.

 

I'm not arguing one way or the other, just mentioning a point. If this could all be moot, because none of the above were attainable, I'd be all for it.

Edit: Also, the Fort Hood shooter a few years back used an FN 5-7 handgun. So this gun does have the unfortunate instance of being used to mass kill.

 

When I run this thing through my mind, I'm reminded of how hypocritical some these mutha****az really are. Some can have thousands of dollars in their pockets and enjoy a night out and have orgies with woman while sharing their body fluids with their co conspirators.. Lebanese party mutha****az etc... Yet on their straight days, they can't stand in a room with another woman without her husband fiancee' also occupying the room.

After their orgy sex filled party they rest up a couple days and then suit up. Black Jihadeee eyes ablazed they set off bombs and gun down people. Even the same people they were laughing with and enjoying their sex filled orgy parties the nights before. You see how hard it is to differentiate Muslims? Very hard indeed.

 

Handguns are more effective in close quarters and he could have gotten closer to the club and possibly in the club before having to start shooting if he were using handguns. When it comes to close range, a handgun is vastly superior to an AR-15, the military uses rifles because they are usually shooting at a significant distance, something handguns simply can't do effectively. You'd be much better off with a shotgun or handgun when operating at close range such as this guy was.

Also, with handguns you can use much larger caliber rounds, a standard .223 AR-15 is illegal for deer hunting in several states because it's deemed too small a caliber to take down game the size of a deer and they don't want an inexperienced hunter to not get a good shot and cause the animal to suffer. A normal AR-15 fires what is essentially a .22 round which is only really useful to shoot rabbits, squirrels, and other varmints. Often a kid's first rifle is a 22, so let's not pretend that an AR-15 is a tank.

As to how many rounds you can fire off, both handguns and assault rifles that are legal to purchase are semi-automatic, you can shoot as fast as you can pull the trigger for either and with handguns, you can do 2 at a time. Reloading a handgun isn't any slower than reloading an AR.

 

This is why assault rifle bans are pointless. This guy shouldn't have been allowed a driver's license or any kind of weapon at all and law enforcement failed to flag him for further observation or prosecute him for beating his wife.

 

Bringing up Mexico in relation to his point about Chicago/Indiana is not helping your stance, given that a huge amount of the guns used there come from the US.

 

The problem with that is you are advocating for the rights of citizens to be stripped on a whim without due process.....and that's just not something that is going to fly without changing the constitution. As far as the law is concerned, the guy never did anything wrong in his life. The fact that he was under "security review" by the FBI is sort of irrelevant, the likely next president of the US is currently under "security review" by the FBI...how much does that really mean? If you'll let people the FBI is investigating become president, what case is there to refuse them a drivers license or a firearm?

 

I think his upbringing with very oppressed and Muslim conservative to the point where it messed his mind. He grew up at a time when Muslims were harassed and threatened. Right after 9/11 this guy was like 11 years old. So he had a deep down 'jihadee mindset' building up for years. To have gotten his job, he had to be a sociopath and kept most of his thoughts to himself until uttering them out loud later on.

 

Obama did send a ton of guns there with Fast and Furious but a HUGE amount come from the desertions of the Mexican army to the cartels.

 

Which is a result of the other failed prohibition tried in America. Every time there is a problem or perceived problem the same people suggest prohibition to solve it and it never works. At some point I hope we realize that prohibition simply doesn't work in America. The American people just won't have it.

 

You have no idea what you're talking about. I mean, have you ever even shot a rifle? Jesus.

 

LOL, yeah....I have 3 AR-15's, I think the problem here is that YOU don't know what you are talking about which honestly wouldn't be surprising given your political leanings.

If you think anything I said was inaccurate, point it out and explain why you think I'm wrong. Should be entertaining.

 

So you are saying that if this guy just had hand guns we would have killed more people?

Then why did he bother with an AR? Why didn't he just use his handguns?

 

I think we're kinda splitting hairs here. An AR is definitely not suited for close quarters COMBAT, but in a setting like what we saw in Orlando all bets are off. Handgun with multiple or extended mags or AR-15, either way a lot of lives will be lost. Sadly, as we've recently seen.

 

Yeah, I doubt that... Mr. 22 is the same as 223. Maybe you should go shoot a 22 and a 223 and check out the difference for yourself. I'll wait. Maybe then you can explain the difference between hunting deer and shooting at a room full of people. I'll wait for that one too John Wayne.

How is it even legal for a sociopath like you to own a weapon? Thank you 2nd amendment.

 

Yes it is, not as good as a bomb though and only marginally more effective than a handgun.

Feel free to bounce off the walls about it then realize these guys got FULL AUTO gear in France of all places. Whatever jihadists need they will end up getting.

 

True, but the straw purchase problem is a big one for them. Wasn't it 70-something percent of the 100,000 seized guns they traced over a few years span were American?

 

Probably easier to get full auto there than here, with the open borders and preponderance of East Euro/Russian arms floating around.