Replies

I would argue that an idiot with a machine gun is far more dangerous than with a semi-automatic weapon. Instead of emptying a 9 round clip; he can unload 40 rounds, reload and drop another 40 on his drive-by. I'd much rather try my luck at dodging 9 rounds than 80.

Actually, I'd be far more worried if that same idiot had a bolt action rifle, or a shotgun. In the case of the bolt action rifle, you've got a chance that this guy will take shot placement seriously. In the case of a shotgun, a single blast of 00 buck has a much better change of hitting and killing the target than some idiot doing a "spray and pray."

Think about that for a second... How many shots were fired by that a$$h0le$ in the DC area at each target. They were "snipers." The fact that they were using a semi auto didn't really matter if they only took one shot.

And look at the number of people killed and injured in one of the most infamous incidents where fully automatic weapons were being used: That bank robbery in CA, where the 2 criminals actually fired thousands of rounds. There were people seriously injured: I don't remember the number of fatalities, although I know that at least one of the criminals died on the scene.

Another example would be the McDonalds shooting that started the whole "assault weapons" craze by the gun grabbers. Again, given the number of rounds fired, there were surprisingly few injuries or deaths. If the perp had actually aimed, or used a shotgun, the death toll would have been far higher (although I believe that he did have a shotgin).

Mark

Another example would be the McDonalds shooting that started the whole "assault weapons" craze by the gun grabbers. Again, given the number of rounds fired, there were surprisingly few injuries or deaths. If the perp had actually aimed, or used a shotgun, the death toll would have been far higher (although I believe that he did have a shotgun).

We should all be prepared.. It is only a matter of time before some crazy will slaughter a bunch of unarmed persons with buckshot. -- Bet your bottom dollar that the cry will go up to ban any multiple shot shotgun.

The same people here who rationalize banning multiple shot rapid fire weapons will be caught with their pants down, without a 'talking point' leg to stand on.

And look at the number of people killed and injured in one of the most infamous incidents where fully automatic weapons were being used: That bank robbery in CA, where the 2 criminals actually fired thousands of rounds. There were people seriously injured: I don't remember the number of fatalities, although I know that at least one of the criminals died on the scene.

That was the North Hollywood Bank of America robbery in 1997. Both perps were killed; one by his own hand, and the other while waiting for an ambulance to arrive after the cops took him down. It was alleged that the cops failed to render aid fast enough after they dropped the sumbitch, and even if true, that won't cost me any sleep.

A few cops suffered serious injuries, even permanent ones if memory serves, but no fatalities. I don't recall any serious civilian casualties.

In that incident, the LAPD actually had to borrow .223 rifles from a local gun shop, because the perps were armored. The standard-issue sidearms and shotguns weren't getting the job done.