Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

flamin lib

(14,559 posts)
Wed Feb 21, 2018, 04:34 PM Feb 2018

I once worked to prevent gun violence. No more.

After every event the gun rights people point out that "that wouldn't have prevented" choose your preferred tragedy.

And they are right. We cannot prevent every act of every mad gunner no matter what laws we pass.

So now I'm working to just reduce the carnage.

To do that the only answer is to reduce the lethality of the equipment available to mad gunners.

If the most lethal weapon that the mad gunners at Columbine had was a bolt action rifle with 5 rounds or a revolver with six rounds, how much would that have reduced the body count?

If the most lethal weapon available to the mad gunner at New town was a six shooter how many fewer children would have died there?

If the most lethal weapon that the Las Vegas mad gunner could buy was a bolt action rifle that had to re-loaded one round at a time through the breach, how many of the victims wouldn't actually be victims?

If the mad gunman in the Pulse nightclub had to sneak a rifle that was 50 inches long and only held five rounds or had to carry one handgun for every six people he wanted to kill how many of those killed or wounded would be whole today?

If the Parkland mad gunner had to re-load after each six rounds could he have been rushed and the carnage ended?

If any of these mad gunners had to stop and reload one round at a time after every five or six shots how many lives would have been saved and how many life changing injuries would have been prevented?

Did you know that the Pentagon is now asking for design options to replace current battle rifles because they aren't lethal enough? Do you realize that when that gun is developed and adopted for military use a civilian version will be immediately available to the public?

So from now on I'm not working to reduce gun violence, I'll settle for reducing the kill rate.

I dedicate myself from this time forward to making all semi automatic guns with removable magazines illegal to possess. Follow the Australian model. Make them illegal to own, offer a one year buy back option and after that lock up every mother fucking son of a bitch that still has one. For a long time.

If some intermediate measures pass I'll take it. But I'll not stop until every one of the guns designed for mass murder and maximum kill rate is gone from our country.



1 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I once worked to prevent gun violence. No more. (Original Post) flamin lib Feb 2018 OP
I'm thinking about telling them to have at it. sarah FAILIN Feb 2018 #1

sarah FAILIN

(2,857 posts)
1. I'm thinking about telling them to have at it.
Wed Feb 21, 2018, 04:39 PM
Feb 2018

They can't get enough of the killing. If we tell them all to get guns, maybe they will blow each other up and we can shovel up the remains after they are gone. I'm just sick of fighting them.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»I once worked to prevent ...