Skip to comments.USA Today: Guns Used In Texas Shooting Were ‘Less Lethal’ Than Other Shootings
Posted on 05/19/2018 11:14:23 AM PDT by rktman
USA Today reported that less-lethal weapons were used during the school shooting Friday in Santa Fe, Texas, which claimed 10 lives and injured 10 others.
Two details set it apart from the list of other recent deadly attacks: explosives and weapons used, the article said. The guns may have slowed down the gunmans deadly rampage because they have a slower firing rate than firearms used in other recent mass shootings, such as the AR-15
High-powered rifles such as the AR-15 can be fired more than twice as fast as most handguns. The standard magazine for an AR-15 holds 30 rounds, allowing a shooter to continue firing uninterrupted for longer, making the weapon more lethal than other firearms, though clearly the use of any gun can be deadly, especially a shotgun at close range.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
Safer bullets. — Joycelyn Elders.
Since when is an Armalite considered a high-powered rifle?
Wouldn’t be surprised if the liberals blame the NRA for the home-made bombs the antifa kid used.
“clearly the use of any gun can be deadly”
They actually get paid to write such deep-thinkin’ insights.
I just won a bet I made with a friend last evening. The media really are disappointed (1) that the body count wasn’t higher, and (2) that an AR wasn’t the murder weapon. And now this. Stick to the narrative, comrades, always the narrative...
“Mam, sorry to inform you your child is dead. But if it’s any consolation, he was shot with a gun that was less lethal than an AR-15”.
Having thoroughly demonized the semiautomatic weapons used in previous shootings, they are now attempting to demonize shotguns and revolvers. Don’t be surprised when the next shooting is with a bolt action rifle.
So utterly ridiculous. A tank or a bomb is more lethal too. What’s the point other than to push a narrative and ultimately an agenda?
Right; there isn’t one.
As usual the deciding factor was the victims had no means of defending themselves.
>>Now they’re declaring different levels of lethality?
Playing Devil’s Advocate here, but go find a 45 vs 9mm or M16 vs M14 thread here and you’ll find that we declare different levels of lethality too.
I carry a Glock over my old J-frame because of relative lethality. I’d take my AR15 to the civil war before I’d take my lever action because the AR is more lethal—not on a shot-by-shot basis, but on the total merits of the weapon. This is why we all choose to own AR15s!
Close in, a shotgun is gonna be much more lethal. And bullets from a revolver hurt just as much.
The Stupid!! It Burns!
The real translation of the headline is that they're trying to salvage at least some of the gun control narrative, since the guns that were used have been around for well over a hundred years, and LOTS of people own them.
The "cute" part of the paragraph above is saying that an AR 15 can be fired twice as fast as most handguns. Complete, total, utter ignorance. Generally, with almost no exceptions, semi-autos can be fired with equal rapidity, despite barrel length.
Did he use the Joe Biden shotgun? That weapon has been sanctioned by the leftists. For now.
So...buckshot from a shotgun kills people less dead than .223 REM rounds from an AR15?
Got it. Don’t pay these guys no attention.
What this is really working up to is that ALL the leftists will have to admit they do want to take ALL our guns.
...tell THAT to the families of the 10 dead people.
Morefield, dead is dead dickhead.