New Sandy Hook Shooting Details

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by rdowns, Mar 15, 2013.

  1. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #1
    The Hartford Current has some new details on the shooting.

    152 shots in under 5 minutes is a pretty good argument to limit magazine sizes to me.

    I assume from the comments on the gun vault that it was not broken into.

     
  2. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #2
    From your linked article [bolding mine] ...

    More indications that restricting high capacity magazines is a wise move.
     
  3. MuddyPaws1 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2012
    #3
    MEh.... Seung-Hui Cho killed 32 people and wounded 17 others and he didn't have any high capacity magazines. He just reloaded. And who determines what high capacity means?
     
  4. FrankieTDouglas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    #4
    Awesome, then ban reloadable guns, too.
     
  5. eric/ Guest

    eric/

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Location:
    Ohio, United States
  6. Doc750 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
  7. FrankieTDouglas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    #7
    Okay, but seriously, this is possibly the worst gun control response I've ever seen. It's almost as if you're LESS IMPRESSED with the Sandy Hook guy because he used high capacity clips, and respect the VA Tech guy more because of the skill required. Pretty pathetic on all counts. Your statement, juxtaposed against your signature, say volumes in representation for the gun fanatics.
     
  8. Moyank24 macrumors 601

    Moyank24

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Location:
    in a New York State of mind
    #8
    You're given evidence that could possibly prove that changing magazines saved the lives of 6 children and you say Meh??

    You are the reason nobody has any sympathy for gun nuts. People like Ted Nugent agree with you, I'm sure. And that's pretty pathetic.
     
  9. MuddyPaws1 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2012
    #9
    Why am I a "gun fanatic" if I support gun rights?

    It is absolutely OBSCENE of you to imply that I respect a murderer and it offends me. I never once said anything like that. Your comment is typical of the moronic comments that anti's say when they are confronted with something they can't respond to.

    I think it's ignorant to think that banning high capacity mags is going to solve anything. It will make no difference at all.

    The Hi-Point model 995 carbine that was used in Columbine wasn't an "assault rifle" with a 30 round mag either. It was a 10 shot. And 2 of the weapons used in Columbine were already illegal and one only held 2 shots.

    ----------

    There is no evidence that anything saved anyone. And banning mags won't save anyone. Have you guys missed the fact that the mag makers can't keep up with demand? There are millions of them in the hands of the public already. Are you suggesting that they go door to door and search houses to remove them?

    The problem is not magazines. It's mental cases.

    Shouldn't your socialistic side be getting them free care?
     
  10. hayesk macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 20, 2003
    #10
    The problem is complex. Trying to reduce it to one thing is why these silly debates rage on.

    I see two obvious problems
    - mental problems go undiagnosed. The reason for that is also complex.
    - these shooters generally have easy access to guns.

    The solutions to these problems are very difficult. Why not try to solve the problem from more than one angle?
     
  11. Moyank24 macrumors 601

    Moyank24

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Location:
    in a New York State of mind
    #11
    There's evidence that either the gun jammed or he had troubles reloading. And that saved 6 children. I'm not sure I agree with banning them or not, but I took issue with your response. Why are you getting so defensive? If reloading saved 6 children one time then, to me, it's worth taking a look at.

    And frankly, I think it's the mental cases that are pushing the demand up. The problem is a mixture of the guns and the mental cases. Stop burying your head in the sand, and stop being so defensive and face freaking reality.

    The continued use of socialism as some kind of insult is laughable. Especially from people who I'm sure have benefitted from public education and a multitude of other public services. I'm sure all of you would refuse to call the fire department if something catches on fire....

    It's no secret that we have to change the way we treat, medically and socially, the mentally ill in this country. Our healthcare system has pandered so much to the drug companies that doctor's are ok with sticking a pill in someone's mouth and sending them out the door. We should all be screaming for change.

    And frankly, if those guns were not in that house, we may not be having this discussion. The fact that those guns were so readily available to someone who was obviously mentally ill was a tragic mistake. And, unfortunately there are enough "tragic mistakes" in this country to make me think that guns are too easily accessed by the wrong people. And I'm not just talking about criminals. This week some idiot was cleaning a gun in a hotel room with 3 kids. He ended up shooting and killing a 10 month old. Accidents like that shouldn't happen. How can we fix it?
     
  12. rd261 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2007
    #12
    To each his or her own. I believe that whoever needs more than a simple handgun to feel safe has some sort issue, in which case they shouldn't have a gun to begin with. When the constitution was written there was no such thing as automatic and semiautomatic riffles. Politicians have taken the constitution and interpreted it to their advantage.
     
  13. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #13
    We have evidence that it made a difference in the Arizona mass shooting and in Sandy Hook.

    You say, ""It will make no difference at all."

    Just one survivor disproves your contention.

    That's pretty poor reasoning on your part.
     
  14. SLC Flyfishing Suspended

    SLC Flyfishing

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #14
    152 rounds in 5 minutes averages out to one shot every 2 seconds. You do realize that right?

    What has that got to do with high capacity magazines anyway? Seems to me this still would have required multiple magazines no matter what.
     
  15. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #15
    If the gun jammed would fewer rounds help or hurt. It would mean he would have more clips to use with less chance of jamming. Is going from 30 to 10 rounds making it easier for him in the long term, how quick could he drop a clip and reload vs the gun jamming and slowing him down. There is a lot at fault here. The mother for not locking her guns away, the state for not taking the kid out of the house sooner since it was reported that she was trying to get him help months before the shooting.
     
  16. Peace macrumors Core

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #17
    There's only one thing at fault here.

    The dude that murdered 30 kids with a lot of bullets.
     
  17. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #18
    Really?

    Thats obviously not true. Because this case didn't happen in isolation. The guy didn't just wake up one day and decide to go on a rampage.

    If you read the linked article he researched how other mass killings were carried out. And it seems possible, at the very least, that he was inspired by previous mass killings.

    Then we've got to ask ourselves just why a 45-something divorcee living in suburban Connecticut had stocked her house with a semi-automatic assault rifle. Is it possible that the people selling guns play on the fears and insecurities of people like this woman?

    Lastly, we need to ask ourselves why people like Adam Lanza, whatever his personal problems were, felt that mindless violence followed by suicide was the best solution. He obviously got the idea from somewhere.

    But before you start saying we need to ban violent movies, or video games, or comic books, consider this: They have all those same things in countries like Britain and Japan. But in those places they don't a regular school massacres.

    The problem, as I see it, is that we live in a culture where violence is glorified AND we have millions of closets stocked with the means to carry it out.
     
  18. needfx macrumors 68040

    needfx

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    macrumors apparently
    #19
    Automatic weapons will never be banned in the states, no matter how many innocents are killed. lobbyists have a firm grasp over congress & legislation. as if automatic weapons are really needed for self-protection. I call that major BS.

    Our thoughts & hearts are with the victims & their families once again.

    Greece
     
  19. eric/ Guest

    eric/

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Location:
    Ohio, United States
    #20
    The weapons used were semi-automatic. Fully automatic weapons were banned from sale a long time ago. You can obtain one with a lot of paperwork, and about $10,000, but only a previously owned one.
     
  20. rdowns thread starter macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #21

    Well, with 152 shots fired out of a 30 round magazine, he'd have to reload 4 times. If he had 10 round magazines, he'd have to reload 15 times. 11 more times for an error to occur or giving victims time to run away.
     
  21. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #22
    Three times the number of magazines to hold on one's body, or carry in some way. It's not just about loading, it's about carrying, accessing, and concealing as well as reloading. High capacity magazines make all of those easier.
     
  22. SLC Flyfishing Suspended

    SLC Flyfishing

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #23
    No, with a 30 round magazine he'd have to reload 6 times to get to 152 rounds fired. And at a rate of fire of one shot every two seconds he was neither shooting fast, nor in a way that would require quick reloading. An average shooter could probably fire that many shots from 10 round magazines in 5 minutes. I guess I'm just trying to say that the number of shots fired is a poor reason to use for justification for magazine size limitations because this shooter fired so slowly that the size of the magazine probably played a very small role.

    And your entire basis for even saying it relies on the idea that people would have the courage and presence of mind to actually realize that a shooter is reloading, giving them a short time to try and run. In such a stressful situation I can't imagine many people doing that. Especially not young children and the teachers who have a duty to protect them. I don't care if the reloading occurs every 10 rounds or every 50 rounds, people are still going to freeze up and just do their best to hide in a situation such as this.
     
  23. eric/ Guest

    eric/

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Location:
    Ohio, United States
    #24
    Or he could have just been more selective with his shots.
     
  24. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #25
    Those six kids figured it out.

    Shooter has stopped shooting, I'm getting out of here.

    ----------

    Mass shooters are known for their selectivity.

    :rolleyes:
     

Share This Page