Mass Shootings in the US

I thought these were banned under the Geneva convention.
I think because farmers use them therefore a civilian so armed cannot be considered a terrorist.
I could easily be way out of touch here.
I think you are actually referring to the Hague Convention not the Geneva. But no, it prohibited the use of arms or ammunition that is designed to cause unnecessary or excessive harm or injury (paraphrased). This does not include shotguns, even though the Germans tried to claim that it did in WW1.
 
By your logic most mass shooting in, say the USA, would have been committed with a fully automatic machine gun.
If fully automatic machine guns were readily available then yes, I would. Since they are not then it's a bit of a non starter. Semi-automatic rifles are readily available and do tend to be used in mass shootings.

I take it you have never had anything to do with firearm procurement for the Armed Forces?
No.

So you accept that suggesting the September 11th deaths were caused by box cutters was a bit intellectually dishonest?
 
When you wear a badge you have obligations.
So, in the cop's case cowardice is a crime but if you are a crooked coward you become POTUS.
 
If fully automatic machine guns were readily available then yes, I would. Since they are not then it's a bit of a non starter. Semi-automatic rifles are readily available and do tend to be used in mass shootings.
But fully automatic firearms are, you just need to live one one of the many states that allow them and pay the required tax stamp. I take it you have never spent any length of time living in the USA?


So you accept that suggesting the September 11th deaths were caused by box cutters was a bit intellectually dishonest?
On the contrary, I was suggesting that your opinion that it wasn't, was an attempt at a wind up. The hijackers achieved their aim by being armed with nothing more than box cutters. Which demonstrates that it is not the weapon that is used, but the intent and motivation of those using it.

I would have thought that would have been completely obvious?

In addition as it appears that the pump action shotgun used was in fact all ready banned by the Australian authorities, it has completely destroyed your augment, that banning such weapons works.

Where did I suggest banning shotguns? I was pointing out that this nutter didn't have access to semi-automatic rifles as a result of Aussie gun laws. Consequently the number of victims is almost certainly smaller than it would have been if he did have an AR15 or SLR.
 
n the contrary, I was suggesting that your opinion that it wasn't, was an attempt at a wind up. The hijackers achieved their aim by being armed with nothing more than box cutters. Which demonstrates that it is not the weapon that is used, but the intent and motivation of those using it.
I would suggest that the reason more mass killings in the US are carried using firearms is that fewer people have access to hijackable airliners.

Which demonstrates that access to particular weapons is a contributing factor in the scale of casualties.
 
I would suggest that the reason more mass killings in the US are carried using firearms is that fewer people have access to hijackable airliners.

Which demonstrates that access to particular weapons is a contributing factor in the scale of casualties.
Which leads to the choice of weapon is based upon the motivation and intent of the perpetrator: a LVBIED, Biological, Chemical, radiologogical etc. It has been repeatedly demonstrated that these muppets will find a way to achieve their aims.

If there was a direct relation to availability of firearms and mass shootings the events in the USA would have been replicated all over the world where there is an equal or greater availability. The problem is with the perpetrators

download.jpg


Although it sounds nice, looks good to the uneducated and makes great sound bites, there is no evidence whatsoever that stricter firearms controls have any effect on their criminal use.
 
So, in the cop's case cowardice is a crime but if you are a crooked coward you become POTUS.
Anybody can become POTUS, service is not a requirement.

The Deputy had a duty to engage the shooter and did not. He decided his retirement was more important then the lives of the school kids he should have been trying to save. He should have engaged and killed or incapacitated the shooter, or absorbed lead and bought time for other responders to arrive. Hell most citizens with a CCW permit would take the risk and go in.
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top