I just stumbled across this FBI report on the characteristics of mass shooters. Now many have said we should not blame the gun itself so it seems logical to look at what makes a mass shooter and why there are so many in the USA https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/pre-attack-behaviors-of-active-shooters-in-us-2000-2013.pdf Some of the key findings include
For a long time I wondered how over 900 people could blindly follow Jim Jones in Jonestown. Think about that; over 900 people allowed themselves to be talked into killing themselves. Since trump has been elected I'm learning that there are an awful lot of people whose minds are easier to control than I ever imagined possible. Just like the guy who went to the pizza shop in Chicago to release the children being held captive by the Clinton's. It's truly frightening.
Jim Jones truly was cut from the canvas that Democrats are cut from. Not a pretty sight. Jones rehearsed their drinking the poison. They had many previous times been told to drink the kool aid. It had never harmed them. That is how Democrats operate.
Perhaps we could instead ask the charactetistics OF MASS KILLERS. This would allow us to observe that usually mass killers use guns to do their killing. And usually the guns they choose to use are automatic weapons.
Hilarious. The only thing wrong with your brief description is you would think those who were waiting in line and hadn't been served yet would have caught on when they started watching the ones who had been served start dying. Note the comparison. https://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=67658
So it was funny. I kind of expected that to come from a Democrat. They did die a kind of slower death. Not at all instantly. Sure the followers saw them die. But Jones was a magician in group psychology. Kind of like the Democrats are.
You can do a hell of a lot with a semi automatic weapon that has enough ammo in it. When humans are fired upon, they must decide where the fire is coming from. Echos and such can deceive one. They may see the flash at the muzzle. Then they unfreeze and run to cover. A lot of them escape being shot. A problem with the larger bore automatic weapons is they seriously recoil. When I fired the M-14 Army rifle, the barrel jolted up. We had to work on our skill to try to hold down the lurching barrel. Also the weapon had a switch to change it to semi automatic. Also the magazine was around 20 rounds as near as I recall. The Vietnam era rifle was small bore to counter the loss of aiming by the larger bore weapons. The small bore rounds by being smaller seem to me to be less lethal. I have read reports denying they are less lethal but I am not one that used the small bore on active duty. I did fire one though and it did not recoil very much. Fear in combat causes many shooters to miss the target. The man wants to hide and it takes a unique man to poke up his head when he is being shot at by other automatic weapons. It is not like the movies people.
there has not been a single mass killing in the USA by a private citizen using an automatic weapon in 80 years
calling those things an assault weapon is inherently dishonest. the term assault when applied to rifles is based on the military strategy of "assaulting" a fixed position by riflemen using FULLY AUTOMATIC FIRE to suppress defensive return fire so to allow engineers to destroy the fixed position with satchel charges, flamethrowers or bazookas. When gun banners like the group you cite, use the term "assault" its designed to make slow witted individuals think of CRIMINAL ASSAULT.
you need to learn what an automatic weapon is. a bump fire attachment does not convert a semi auto weapon into a fully automatic weapon
This betrays your ignorance on the subject, you think you found one example but you did not, much less prove your blatantly false claim, posted below the line ========================== " And usually the guns they choose to use are automatic weapons."
almost always-anti gun posters are ignorant about how firearms work. I bet he also doesn't know you can fire a semi auto just as fast without a bump fire attachment and in the Las Vegas massacre-due to his protected position and the thousands massed together-the casualty rates would not have been any different. Several experts noted that if he had NOT used a bump stock but rather had AIMED he might have killed even more.
Except i did not say fully automatic weapon In any case, you are illustrating your weakness by relying upon rhetorical quibling. We both know that the general meaning of the word automatic is that things happen “automatically”. ... such as automatic reloading. We also both know that your side will argue the other side as a matter of conenience... explaining how little difference in true firing rate for a proficient shooter with a semi auto vs a shooter with a full auto. And how this therefore means that laws against full auto are as ridiculous as banning “assault weapons”. Which point was illustrated in las vegas. Basically we both know that the lethality in las vegas did not depend upon your silly distinction between full auto and semi auto
Aside from those of us being able to bumpfire without any device assistance, using a weapon like a bolt action WWII Lee Enfield shooting .303 FMJ, where each round could penetrate more than one body the casualty rate could have been as high, if not higher. Then again, He was a pilot. Had he chosen to fly a small private plane into the crowd, he’d killed even more.