So, tell me more about these bombs. Are they legal? I was under the impression they are not. Also, did he take those bombs into the theater to kill people? The sad reality of the situation is that he ultimately killed a bunch of people in a crowded theater using a semi-automatic rifle, do you think he would have done equal damage in the same amount of time with a personal handgun? If yes, why?
http://www.emich.edu/cerns/download...uipment/Ammunition for the Patrol Carbine.pdf http://www.evergreen.edu/policeservices/docs/armingofficerstosucceed.pdf
Standard derivative is a statistical tool. Help you to understand more about the mean you would give. We could have used it to discuss the number of cases falling outside the boundaries and what the repercussions for those people are. I know how much the "standard" magazine holds for almost every model of gun. They are all different. Do you know?
This "paper" you have provided is not peer reviewed and it does not involve the use of statistical analysis. Also, it isn't even on topic as it deals with the best ammo for use by law enforcement rather than the use of semi-automatic weapons by the public at large. http://www.evergreen.edu/policeservices/docs/armingofficerstosucceed.pdf This second article is also off topic as it deals with the use of rifles by law-enforcement, not the use of semi-automatic rifles by the general public. Furthermore, this article actually cuts the other direction that what you would like because it recommends weapons as having better penetration, superior wounding ability, better accuracy and greater range. Basically you have provided info that seems to suggest that had the guy would likely have caused less damage if using a lower lethality weapon. I'm lead to conclude that you either did not read the articles you posted or you don't really understand what the words on the pages mean. Either way, you have not provided evidence that semi-automatic weapons make Americans safer if they are in the hands of citizens.
Your joke question was met by papers. It tells why carbine ammo is effective in stopping people and the issues with it. If you seriously want real studies, look at the FBI terminal ballistic studies. Law enforcement faces the same issues as general public when riding by themselves. They are authorized to use deadly force to protect citizens or themselves. They don't shoot at cars running away or any other such nonsense. Where is the disconnect? Thanks I'll look beyond the laughable insult and let you know I don't need to ever make any such foolish argument. Making the public safer at large might fly right in the face of the right to self defense or any other right. Deal with it.
Alcohol and cars have humane and practical purposes. Owning a gun is for the sole purpose of violently harming someone else, for whatever reason. Most all gun owners are very narrow minded, insecure people like CaseyH who don't realize that overall disarmament is the way of the future. The irony is that if they could get the petty fear out of their head and see the big picture, they'd realize they're only promoting a disservice to themselves by stocking up on guns and encouraging other "registered" gun owners to do so in the name of self defense. Notice the poor people from the hood like 50 cent or Ice Cube don't talk about guns and shooting once they make enough money to get out of the hood. It's because it's primarily used and wanted by people with bitter mindsets prone to misjudgment and insecurity due to lack of understanding others. All any real guy needs to protect his home is an ice pick and a few samurai stars. Regardless, if I ever met Casey, I'd **** his gf for fun and then see how he'd put his gun to use... being a mentally stable registered gun owner. One savage deserves another.
...the fact that law enforcement are supposed to be put in situations where they are required to use these weapons on a (somewhat) regular basis, while using your terminology, as far as I can see it, the general public needing it is about three standard deviations away from the mean of a Bell curve? Also, the fact that law enforcement are trained to enforce the law---and the general public isn't (and shouldn't be).
I lost all of my guns in a tragic boating accident. I also don't encourage anyone to buy a gun. So failure on your part.
Not sure what that drivel is supposed to mean but with your limited math capabilities I'm sure you don't either. Exactly on the police. They are put into those situations all the time. Why does that make them more worthy of better equipment? I mow my yard with a commercial grade lawnmower built for people who mow lawns 8-10 hours per day. The simple fact is though, it performs better and last longer than consumer grade lawnmowers. That's my personal choice.
Casey, don't test my math. Lol. You don't even want to go there. A Bell curve is a Gaussian distribution or a normal distribution, three standard deviations above the mean implies a less than 0.5% probability of said event occurring. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/68-95-99.7_rule The second point is because they are qualified to handle that better equipment, and actually need it on a more regular basis? With your whole flash and bang about being able to explain standard deviation, I don't exactly have to explain to you the implications of that, do I?
Tell me the next time we have issues with mass commercial grade lawnmowers killing a mass of people, then I'll start listening. Also, you should be taxed for the extra energy that thing consumes according to me, and Romney's economic adviser, as a random aside.
Why does needing it on a more regular basis qualify them to have better equipment? Isn't everyone's life just as valuable?
It uses less energy due to the efficiency of mowing time. With commercial mowers, time is very valuable. I realize you don't know anything about small engine energy consumption (or firearms) and this is the reason you have no ability to regulate them.
They're not just entrusted to protect their lives, they're also entrusted to protect the lives of others.
Well, there's the fact that I don't work for the relevant agencies. I'm assuming you spend about as much time anyways. Jevons paradox! Before you start; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox
