Another Shooting in the U.S..

Manic Moran

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

Your right im no expert on balistics or gunshot wounds:

http://www.ajronline.org/content/155/4/685.full.pdf

Ill draw your attention to the conclussion at the end.

What specifically am I looking for in the conclusion? I see nothing relating to the disabling effect of the typical wound. Indeed, the entire document seems primarily geared towards the concept of treating the wound, a subject the shooter doesn't particularly care about at the time.

Burglars usually go for SOFT targets. Ones where they will not be disturbed:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burglary

A burglar no more wants to meet you, than you do him.

This is generally true. From the US Dept of Justice:
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/ascii/vdhb.txt

An estimated 3.7 million household burglaries occurred each year on average from 2003 to 2007. In about 28% of these burglaries, a household member was present during the burglary. In 7% of all household burglaries, a household member experienced some form of violent victimization

So if a burglar decides to target my home, there's about a one-in-four chance I'll be home, and if I am, there's about a one in three chance that the guy will conduct violence against me. That's not odds I'm willing to bet my life on.

http://books.google.com/books?id=QeGJH48PT0kC&pg=PT1084&lpg=PT1084&dq=telegraph+burglary+rate+UK+occupied&source=bl&ots=HEG92FuOut&sig=eQP0oAOX5a_iOIBXXBgkF8oxO5A&hl=en&sa=X&ei=oMUAUfvrD4Gj2QWD84CQDw&ved=0CGwQ6AEwBw

is slightly older data (The DoJ website above points out a change in methodology accounting for the apparent increase in the 'occupied' rate in the US in this document) but states that over half UK burglaries occur when someone is home. He dares to posit that the reason that more UK burglars are willing to take the risk is that fewer UK homeowners will shoot them.

From your point of view, always shoot a burglar and always shoot him more than once.

Unless he has clearly ceased to be a threat.

Lets get away from the fanciful scenerios dreamed up by people and talk about actual events.

Why is this relevent you ask, its because of the effect pointing a gun at someone has.

Oddly, I've shot at people and been shot at myself. (We both missed, as far as I know)

There are also plenty of examples of the 'good guy' coming out the better of such a situation easily found on news websites and on Youtube.

But I'd rather have a pistol under my pillow than an AR.

I don't think an AR would fit well under my pillow. But it's a substantially more effective weapon than a pistol is for the job for anyone who has taken the effort to look into the matter.

See, for example, http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2007/09/20/carbine-vs-shotgun-vs-pistol-for-home-defense/ or http://thinkinginchrist.com/shooting/Carbine/

Manic Moran

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

If an AR is not styled on a "military assault rifle", im lost for words.

I'd say the design is a development of one, all right, but most practical firearms will share similarities with their military counterparts.

The exact same features of cost, reliability, accuracy, customisability, maintainability, ergonomics, weight and size which make anything a useful military rifle (with the arguable exception of fully automatic fire) are those which make it a useful civilian rifle. OK, maybe not the bayonet lug, but I've not heard of any drive-by bayonettings recently.

If someone today were to design an excellent rifle from the ground up for utilitarian civilian purposes, they'd probably end up with something which looks a lot like an AR-15, SIG 556, FN SCAR or the like anyway.

NTM

CollardGreens

If someone today were to design an excellent rifle from the ground up for utilitarian civilian purposes, they'd probably end up with something which looks a lot like an AR-15, SIG 556, FN SCAR or the like anyway.

All that sounds like a good combo, however there is just something I love about my Winchester 70. It shoots .308's and when I put in a hollow point in that gun it will blow a hole right through a dumpster (don't laugh, well....ok laugh, but it was at the shooting range so that makes it ok...right? [grin]). I enjoy all my guns and each has a purpose, and as fast as an ar will go, personally I like the big noise + make big hole when it comes to shooting so the 70 is my favorite. Real nice scope on it too.

The S&W .38 bodyguard with a laser is my under the pillow gun, the laser is built in, helps with hitting the target when sleepy AND makes an excellent cat toy!

JayEnnis

CollardGreens wrote: »

All that sounds like a good combo, however there is just something I love about my Winchester 70. It shoots .308's and when I put in a hollow point in that gun it will blow a hole right through a dumpster (don't laugh, well....ok laugh, but it was at the shooting range so that makes it ok...right? [grin]). I enjoy all my guns and each has a purpose, and as fast as an ar will go, personally I like the big noise + make big hole when it comes to shooting so the 70 is my favorite. Real nice scope on it too.

The S&W .38 bodyguard with a laser is my under the pillow gun, the laser is built in, helps with hitting the target when sleepy AND makes an excellent cat toy!

Hopefully not while mounted!

As for why the cultural aspects of all these shootings hasn't been mentioned puzzles me. In my eyes it says a lot about the American mental health system to be honest. And the media doesn't help, plastering these sick pups across the television 24/7 after an incident. If it wasn't for the media giving these people someone to idolize chances are they would just top themselves in their mothers basement instead of targeting (vulnerable, they never target areas where someone may be armed) civilians.

Take a look at Switzerland, Every man in that country owns a real military grade rifle that they keep after service. Result? One of the lowest rates of gun crime in the world. Guns's aren't the problem, the mindset of the people who come into contact with them is the problem.

I do think there's an agenda by the American government to disarm the general population, all the while arming the PD's even more so. The police shouldn't have AR's. That's for the National Guard/Military.