Reply to 20 victims reported at Annunciation Catholic School in Minneapolis

Forum Index » Off-Topic

Reply to " 20 victims reported at Annunciation Catholic School in Minneapolis"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]
This particular deranged murderer made a lot of noise and managed to kill (I think) just two people. The very list of knife events you reject demonstrates how quickly the body count can rise with a committed knife attacker. Bladed weapons were responsible for industrial-strength slaughter for millennia.  [/quote]
Besides the two dead, there were 17 injured including 14 children.    Many of these (especially among those classified as being in critical condition) will likely be crippled for life.

Also note that the murderer shot at the children through the Church windows.      This is something that could not be done with a knife.      Yes, a committed knife attacker can kill multiple people, but it is much, much easier done with a gun.[/quote]

Also BFR. If you were shopping at Target with your kids and a crazy violent person came into the store, would you rather they have an AR-15 or a knife? … there is only one sane answer here [/quote]
An ER doctor wrote an oped about the damage that an AR15 does to the body compared to a single shot pistol.  He stated that  most victims of one shot gun shot wounds can be saved, but the damage to a victim from an AR15 was basically like a blender came through the insides of the person.

There is no reason for an AR15, that's for sure.  [/quote]

The terminal ballistics of a 5.56 rifle bullet are relatively unpredictable and depend on, among other things, the weight and jacket material of the bullet, its design, the propellant used, and the length and twist rate of the barrel, as well as the range from which the wound is inflicted, and the build and clothing of the individual struck. Even when all else is equal, two different 5.56 wounds can vary from a small through and through wound to one with greater tissue destruction. The AR15 is popular but it is not the only firearm that uses 5.56 ammunition. And not all AR15’s use that round.[b] The idea that a bullet wound is ever “like a blender came through a person” is simply ridiculous hyperbole. [/b][/quote]

Not hyperbole when it hits a child.

-RN[/quote]

From your alleged sample size of?[/quote]
I trust the experts more than some ammosexual anonymous poster.
[quote]
"Instead of just being sort of point on straight through, there's more erratic passage of the bullet through the victim so the extent of tissue damage is greater," Shapiro explained.

What's more, assault weapons can cause a process called cavitation to occur, meaning it creates a large cavity in the body, destroying tissues and organs.

"The difference with high velocity bullets and military-grade weapons...is the damage they inflict on the human body and our internal organs are much more gruesome and tend to have what is known as a blast effect, because that bullet is carrying so much energy with it as it enters the human body," Griggs said. "Instead of, for example, if the bullet traveled through the lung, instead of a hole in the lung, we're looking at an exploded lung."

Griggs explained that the same holds true if a bullet hits a human bone. A bullet from a handgun that hits a bone might fracture the bone, but a bullet from a semi-automatic rifle might shatter the bone due to the high velocity.

[b]"Children, their organs are a lot more compact, and they have a lot less fat surrounding their vital organs," Griggs said. "And so, you can imagine that a bullet that is causing a blast effect inside their body, inside their abdomen or their torso or their chest, it's not just going to explode, or tear apart, their lung, but also their heart. Not just going to completely shatter their liver, but also their spleen, causing catastrophic fatal bleeding."

"When we see a child who has been shot with an AR-15-style rifle, there is often very little hope -- depending on where the bullet has hit them in their body -- that we can save their life even if they make it to the hospital," she said. "And devastatingly, the children who were shot in Nashville were dead on arrival to the hospital. There's nothing that trauma surgery team could do and that is very classic of what we have come to see as the norm."[/b]
[/quote]

https://abc7.com/post/why-ar15-semi-automatic-weapons-dangerous/13051721/

You ammosexuals have a mental illness.[/quote]

Name calling is so puerile, and the sure sign of insecure belief in a weak argument.

“Military grade” is another rhetorical buzzword without meaning.

The 5.56 cartridge was developed to hunt “varmints” like prairie dogs and only later adopted by the military.

Grandpa’s old hunting rifle very likely was chambered in a military cartridge and may even have been a “sporterixed” ex-military “weapon of war.”

Focuding on inanimate objects is a waste of time driven by magical thinking. [/quote]

Typical response, touting technical gun details. Not that PP, but you absolutely know more than me about technical gun specifics. Gold star for that.

Now stop with the distraction and deflection and focus on the actual issues at hand. Research shows that restrictive gun law states have lower pediatric gun deaths. There is plenty of published research on this or that impact of gun control laws within 2a. But I may surmise that you only cherry pick the highly disputed good guy with a gun research of Locke and ignore anything that contradicts it?

Can we prevent every child from being murdered or accidentally shooting themself or committing suicide? No. Can we reduce it statistically? Yes. Is that worth it to me, a mother? YES. Is it worth it to you? Apparently not.

Do not tell me about mental illness or video games or whatever that many other countries in the world have, because that argument is BS.

Ever comforted someone who attended a funeral of a child who died in a school shooting and talked about how tiny the casket was? I have.

Stop with the technical detail to brag about your gun knowledge. It does not matter. [/quote]

DP it absolutely matters.  Technical features are what you would have to ban. Otherwise they get deisgned around like with the 1990s assualt weapons ban.

You can't just ban "ar-15"s, unless you have a definition of one.[/quote]

The “technical features” typically targeted by attempted “bans” are largely cosmetic and demonstrate both the futility of such “bans” and the magical thinking that underlies them. [/quote]

Waiting periods, increase the age to 21, crack down on straw purchases that are largely done in red states who make illegal straw purchases ridiculously easy, ammunition limits, close loopholes on background checks there are things that can be done.

The Second Amendment is “not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”
-Scalia[/quote]

Waiting periods were invented to allow time for background checks back in the horse and buggy days. They make no sense in the present day of instant background checks. Particularly where, as here, an individual already owns one or more firearms so that any supposed “cooling off period” would be immaterial.

“Ammunition limits” are inherently arbitrary and would have no meaningful on criminality. It is unlikely that any of these deranged shooters used up more than a box or two of ammunition. Legitimate firearm users need ammunition both for their hobby and to become and remain competent with their firearm.

All of the “loopholes” and “age changes” and “straw purchase” sloganeering is great rhetoric but the need for it does not seem to be borne out in the demographics of these psychopaths. [/quote]

So because you subjectively think gun laws won’t work the rest of the country just has to accept the status quo and we shouldn’t even *try* to see if we can reduce shooting deaths?

I mean if you declare that these laws “make no sense” and “would be arbitrary” then it must be decidedly so.

I think the reality is republicans know that harsher national gun laws would reduce deaths and then they’d have to admit they’ve allowed kids to die for decades in order to avoid minor inconveniences.[/quote]

Actually, what “we’ve” been trying for decades is the same tired and ineffectual set of infringements to distract from the root causes of criminal violence, because addressing those would be unpopular with certain politically useful groups. [/quote]

Ah yes like forcing Christianity on us? If only we went to church more? Or repealed the 19th like Hegseth's church leaders want?

Gee thanks

-Law abiding atheist. [/quote]

I'm obviously being provocative with this statement and correlation is not causation:

We had less mass shootings and less violence when there was no 19th amendment or when organized religion was a larger part of Americans lives.[/quote]

This was also before there were movie theaters, splash pads, big box stores, etc. Perhaps the issue is that guns are continually being manufactured so that year after year after year there are even more guns for people to access combined with denser areas creating more soft mass shooting targets.

Most atheists I know are liberal and pro gun reform. It’s the Bible thumpers who love them some guns. [/quote]

I would stop. By virtue of that post, they are a misogynist ala Doug Wilson type. Not even worth the time. Also, very far right fringe with that comment. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics