Should churches change security in wake of recent events?

[LSUmiss]

Just to comment on the "handgun vs automatic assault rifle". See, part of the issue with these discussions is the fact so few understand there is VERY little difference in these two weapons. 90+% of all handguns sold in the US are semiautomatic and use detachable magazines that permit rapid reloading - exactly like an assault-style rifle. Moreover, at close range, handgun rounds are just as effective. Our military special ops forces actually prefer handguns for close quarter missions (like the bin Laden raid).

The other thing is the power level of an "assault rifle" is about 1/3 the power level of the battle rifles our soldiers carried in WWI and WWII, and just as importantly, 1/3 the power level of the typical deer rifle.

And as long as the people who write gun-restriction legislation don't have the basic knowledge of the guns they're trying to regulate (and those they say we can keep), this will go nowhere.

Perhaps this is true & I don’t know enough to debate your points. But, my question would be then why do many of these shooters not just choose semi-auto handguns if they’re just as or more effective? This last shooter was a former military person so it seems he would know the most effective weapon?

 

[mnrose]

Pray tell, how is the picture of a living individual who is accurately identified "fake news?" That blatantly over-used term has just become the favorite ploy of those who dislike something they read and then reach for a quick, lazy throw-away means to try (unsuccesfuly in almost all cases) to diminish it.

LOL. Nice attempt to quote something out of context, but let me help you since you are
being deliberately obtuse and missing the point. You posted a picture of a bearded individual, claiming he was the shooter AND (very important AND) that he was a recent Muslim convert. This latter bit was fake news when you posted it, and remains fake news. The picture is not what I was complaining about. But, nice try.

 

[Hikergirl]

Your first comment would become too political I’m sure to continue discuss... but I guess your implying that we should be allowed to have any guns b/c the constitution allows? So, you would think it’s ok to own machine guns that are currently banned?

I don’t need to learn about guns that I don’t see any use for. I still haven’t heard a valid use from anyone either. I only mentioned that I am American b/c the pp implied that the other poster shouldn’t have an opinion b/c he/she isn’t American. Well, I am & I do. I mentioned that I own guns b/c often it seems the arguments are from extremes on both sides: those that say no guns at all & those that say any gun for anyone at any cost. And what about the no fly list thing? Again, I think “gun control” hasn’t gotten so politicized they ppl don’t think logically sometimes, they just go with whatever “their side” tells them to.

And, I said high powered, but I guess I meant those with high magazine capacity that can do a lot of damage quickly.

That is your assumption, I was only asking a question.

So many people are quick to say do something, you need gun control, etc. Without mentioning exactly what they are talking about it makes those statements pretty meaningless. They do nothing for the discussion they feel should be taking place.

 

[LSUmiss]

Yes, and you won't find anywhere in the US that allows certifiably insane people to legally own firearms.

Unless they buy a gun from a gun show (in some states) & their mental health issues are unknown.

 

[Bianca and Bernard]

All the shootings have one thing in common, high capacity removable magazines, which have no legitimate purpose for the general public. Just a thought where we could start. California has tried to ban them all but a judge stepped in and removed the ban.

Not all shootings use the high capacity magazines. It just means the guy carries 4 magazines instead of 2.

Yet consider that the Virginia Tech shooter managed to kill 32 people with only two handguns with standard capacity magazines. He fired hundreds of rounds and was able to reload multiple times during the killing spree.

Semi-Automatic Pistol vs. Single Action Revolver

10 year old

 

[Geoff_M]

Unless they buy a gun from a gun show (in some states) & their mental health issues are unknown.

Can you point out some of the notorious mass killers that legally acquired their weapons from gun shows?

 

[LYSE]

Your first comment would become too political I’m sure to continue discuss... but I guess your implying that we should be allowed to have any guns b/c the constitution allows? So, you would think it’s ok to own machine guns that are currently banned?

I don’t need to learn about guns that I don’t see any use for. I still haven’t heard a valid use from anyone either. I only mentioned that I am American b/c the pp implied that the other poster shouldn’t have an opinion b/c he/she isn’t American. Well, I am & I do. I mentioned that I own guns b/c often it seems the arguments are from extremes on both sides: those that say no guns at all & those that say any gun for anyone at any cost. And what about the no fly list thing? Again, I think “gun control” hasn’t gotten so politicized they ppl don’t think logically sometimes, they just go with whatever “their side” tells them to.

And, I said high powered, but I guess I meant those with high magazine capacity that can do a lot of damage quickly.

I was pointing out that it's the bill of rights not the bill of wants or needs, you do not have to demonstrate a need to exercise a right. Since you asked I am aginst the current ban on making new machine guns and aginist the tax stamp requirement for pre ban machines guns ..but am okay with the ATF paperwork and checks before issuing the stamps / permit.

I think that if your going to say we should ban something you should learn about it.

The problem with the no fly list is that people are put on it without due process and you just can't take away civil rights without due process.

As for standard capacity magazines I have already pointed out uses.

*sorry for the typos damn phone.

 

[LSUmiss]

You can ban guns, but the people who are doing these shootings are mostly purchasing the guns illegally. Do people honestly think that if you pass a law banning guns, these people will go "oh, well I was gonna buy that .45 off of Bob, but since that law was passed banning .45s, I won't get it."??? No, they will just continue to go underground...buy those Russian AKs that seem to stream in along with the cocaine from other countries. Just like they do now.

Machine guns are banned now & are difficult to get so very few crimes are committed with them now. I don’t suggest banning all guns at all, but if certain types of guns are banned, they’ll be harder & harder to get. Most of these shooters are opportunists. They’ll still commit these types of crimes, but the hope is that they won’t be able to inflict as much damage as quickly.

 

[Geoff_M]

Perhaps this is true & I don’t know enough to debate your points. But, my question would be then why do many of these shooters not just choose semi-auto handguns if they’re just as or more effective? This last shooter was a former military person so it seems he would know the most effective weapon?

You have to understand that the primary difference between a handgun and a rifle pretty much boils down to one thing: accuracy over distance. A rifle is more effective when you are not in close proximity to your target while a handgun is designed for when your target is closer to you. This is why you don't normally deer hunt with a handgun. The military also has a long history of using BOTH styles of firearms. Militarily, sidearms traditionally have been a closer contact weapon. Handguns are also often more practical inside buildings and other non-open where they can be wielded more easily than a rifle.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Perhaps this is true & I don’t know enough to debate your points. But, my question would be then why do many of these shooters not just choose semi-auto handguns if they’re just as or more effective? This last shooter was a former military person so it seems he would know the most effective weapon?

The short answer is, they don't. The number of homicides committed by "hands and feet" in the US exceeds all rifle deaths combined. And the vast majority of firearms homicides in the US are committed with handguns.

As for this most recent guy, he likely chose a weapon that made him comfortable - similar to what he would have carried in the service.

Now, the Vegas shooter would not have been effective with a handgun due to the extreme range. The assault rifle does provide a significant improvement over a handgun when the victims are at a distance. OTOH, that shooter was not limited to assault rifles. He also had several full-power battle rifles. And we really don't yet know which caliber he used most.

The assault weapon has always been a compromise for the militaries that utilize them. They are not quite as nimble as sub-machine guns (which are smaller & fire handgun ammunition), but they are lighter than battle rifles. And because the ammo is lighter than battle rifle ammo, soldiers can carry more of it. The downside is the reduced power which wasn't really an issue in Vietnam where soldiers were using "suppressive fire" to push back an often unseen enemy. But, in Afghanistan, our soldiers used a higher number of full-power battle & sniper rifles to shoot at longer distances. And our military is currently evaluating new cartridges that are more powerful than the current standard 5.56/.223.

 

[LSUmiss]

Can you point out some of the notorious mass killers that legally acquired their weapons from gun shows?

The discussion I replied to was whether we all agree that ppl who are “certifiable” shouldn’t have access to guns. Pp said we do all agree on that. Well, that’s nice, if we do, but there are still loopholes that allow ppl like this to access guns. So just b/c they haven’t used it in mass shootings I guess we should be ok with them killing themselves, their families or others as long as it’s not “mass” & they just take out a few at a time. It’s unrelated to this current situation, but my point is it’s just more of the illogical discussions centering around gun control. Ppl act like gun control is all or nothing b/c it’s become a political talking point. Most ppl agree mentally ill ppl shouldn’t have guns or ppl on the no fly list shouldn’t, but then refuse to get on board with any type of gun control. To me, that’s illogical.

 

[LSUmiss]

I was pointing out that it's the bill of rights not the bill of wants or needs, you do not have to demonstrate a need to exercise a right. Since you asked I am aginst the current ban on making new machine guns and aginist the tax stamp requirement for pre ban machines guns ..but am okay with the ATF paperwork and checks before issuing the stamps / permit.

I think that if your going to say we should ban something you should learn about it.

The problem with the no fly list is that people are put on it without due process and you just can't take away civil rights without due process.

As for standard capacity magazines I have already pointed out uses.

*sorry for the typos damn phone.

What I think is crazy is that ppl will say that about “no due process” as far as not allowing ppl to have guns on the no fly list but shouldn’t there be equal outrage then that they’re not allowed to fly?? But some on “that side” are actually for more civil liberties restrictions w/o due process for ppl who are deemed a danger, yet we draw the lines at gun ownership?

 

[sam_gordon]

What I think is crazy is that ppl will say that about “no due process” as far as not allowing ppl to have guns on the no fly list but shouldn’t there be equal outrage then that they’re not allowed to fly?? But some on “that side” are actually for more civil liberties restrictions w/o due process for ppl who are deemed a danger, yet we draw the lines at gun ownership?

Flying is not a right.

 

[LYSE]

What I think is crazy is that ppl will say that about “no due process” as far as not allowing ppl to have guns on the no fly list but shouldn’t there be equal outrage then that they’re not allowed to fly?? But some on “that side” are actually for more civil liberties restrictions w/o due process for ppl who are deemed a danger, yet we draw the lines at gun ownership?

That is a problem with the no fly list, it's been a nightmare for some..however the method of transportation is not a constitutional right.

 

[LSUmiss]

You have to understand that the primary difference between a handgun and a rifle pretty much boils down to one thing: accuracy over distance. A rifle is more effective when you are not in close proximity to your target while a handgun is designed for when your target is closer to you. This is why you don't normally deer hunt with a handgun. The military also has a long history of using BOTH styles of firearms. Militarily, sidearms traditionally have been a closer contact weapon. Handguns are also often more practical inside buildings and other non-open where they can be wielded more easily than a rifle.

Ok so that’s my point then. High capacity magazine rifles CAN inflict more harm faster than handguns or less capacity rifles typically used in hunting. So why does anyone need that?!

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Just to comment on the "handgun vs automatic assault rifle". See, part of the issue with these discussions is the fact so few understand there is VERY little difference in these two weapons. 90+% of all handguns sold in the US are semiautomatic and use detachable magazines that permit rapid reloading - exactly like an assault-style rifle. Moreover, at close range, handgun rounds are just as effective. Our military special ops forces actually prefer handguns for close quarter missions (like the bin Laden raid).

The other thing is the power level of an "assault rifle" is about 1/3 the power level of the battle rifles our soldiers carried in WWI and WWII, and just as importantly, 1/3 the power level of the typical deer rifle.

And as long as the people who write gun-restriction legislation don't have the basic knowledge of the guns they're trying to regulate (and those they say we can keep), this will go nowhere.

Reloading wasn't necessarily what I was referring to. A handgun is typically used in closer fashion. You aren't using a handgun for instance while up on the 32nd floor of Mandalay Bay to shoot down upon people. While he did have a handgun that's not what he used to inflict the large amount of damage that he did.

The shooter in TX used a Ruger AR-556 rifle. I couldn't say for sure but the damage may not have been as much if a handgun was used.

That's more or less what my statement was about in regards to saying "Guns kill with far more efficiency than cars" The type of vehicle being used can have a direct impact on the amount of damage inflicted.

ETA: I do appreciate your information you put in

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Unless they buy a gun from a gun show (in some states) & their mental health issues are unknown.

While private party sales ARE a way of bypassing the background check, such purchases are in fact illegal if you've been banned from firearm ownership.

 

[LSUmiss]

Flying is not a right.

No, but right to life, LIBERTY, & property are. It restricts their civil liberty without due process.

 

[Geoff_M]

The discussion I replied to was whether we all agree that ppl who are “certifiable” shouldn’t have access to guns. Pp said we do all agree on that. Well, that’s nice, if we do, but there are still loopholes that allow ppl like this to access guns. So just b/c they haven’t used it in mass shootings I guess we should be ok with them killing themselves, their families or others as long as it’s not “mass” & they just take out a few at a time. It’s unrelated to this current situation, but my point is it’s just more of the illogical discussions centering around gun control. Ppl act like gun control is all or nothing b/c it’s become a political talking point. Most ppl agree mentally ill ppl shouldn’t have guns or ppl on the no fly list shouldn’t, but then refuse to get on board with any type of gun control. To me, that’s illogical.

It's not an "all or nothing" proposition. The "illogics" also works in both directions. Closing the often-misrepresented "gun show loophole" also suffers from the same flaw because the venue isn't the crux of the issue as private sales can happen anywhere.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Ok so that’s my point then. High capacity magazine rifles CAN inflict more harm faster than handguns or less capacity rifles typically used in hunting. So why does anyone need that?!

Just to clarify, handguns can also be equipped with high capacity magazines.