Trump offers condolences after Texas school massacre: 'So hard to think ... about anything else'

In a closed room a hand gun is best and quickest and "assault-style" rifles are rarely used anyway and are no more lethal than a "regular" rifle.

I take it from your comment you are not a citizen of the United States, is that the case?

 

By what measure? Is he a loud mouth narcasistic blowhard.......yes. I can't stand him personally, never have. But as far as policy and getting things done he certainly was better than Obama and now Biden and any of the other recent Dem candidates.

 

There were no "military weapons" used.

 

Ah…the Cruz solution of “Don’t ban guns, ban doors!” … do you really want to associate yourself with something so idiotic…??

But, I also note your “nope”……..so let me get this straight. You are prepared to see ANY number of school children slaughtered, as long as you can hold on to the weapons that kill them…..right!?

 

Oh….semantics? Weasel words? Is that what you resort to? Call them ‘military-style’, if it pleases your pedantry. Call them ‘assault weapons’ if you like. The fact remains that these weapons would be just as useful on the battlefields of Ukraine and should not be freely available to 18 year olds who want to kill school kids…!

 

The numbers suggest that you are tragically wrong….

During the 10 year ban on assault weapons introduced by the Clinton administration, mass shootings declined by 37% and the number of deaths by 43%. After the ban lapsed in 2004, mass shootings increased again by 187% and deaths by 239%..!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...assault-weapons-ban-gun-violence-experts-say/

Now, I’m too good a statistician not to realise that there might be some other confounding factors that caused those falls and then increases, so please give your explanation…?

 

It was not my term and ANY weapon would be useful on the battlefield in Ukraine but not as useful as ACTUAL military weapons which can fire in automatic modes. The M-16 is the military weapon, the AR-15 is a civilian rifle and is no more deadly than any other rifle it just happens to be a very good on lots of people prefer to own. And according to Patton it was the M-1 that won WW2 would you ban M-1's because they were used by the military. And were I to lose my mind and want to go and commit a mass murder in a confined space such as a classroom the AR-15 would not be my weapon of choice, a couple of 9mm or .45's would be.

 

No they don't .

"3) Studies show that assault weapons bans do/don't work. The University of Pennsylvania study concluded in 2004 that it was "premature" to reach conclusions about whether the assault weapons ban had worked. Volokh, who thinks gun control can't work, and Zimring, who thinks it can, agree on one thing: the research so far hasn't settled the question. Reports by the National Academies of Science and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reached the same conclusions: not enough data."
https://www.kqed.org/news/83182/four-myths-about-assault-weapons

Fact-Checking Feinstein on the Assault Weapons Ban
The senator says "the evidence is clear: the ban worked." Except there's no evidence it saved lives – and the researcher behind the key statistic Feinstein cites says it's an outdated figure that was based on a false assumption.

...A definitive study of the 1994 law – which prohibited the manufacture and sale of semiautomatic guns with "military-style features" such pistol grips or bayonet mounts as well as magazines holding more than ten rounds of ammunition – found no evidence that it had reduced overall gun crime or made shootings less lethal. "We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation's recent drop in gun violence," the Department of Justice-funded study concluded in 2004. "Should it be renewed, the ban's effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement."
https://www.propublica.org/article/fact-checking-feinstein-on-the-assault-weapons-ban