Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
If there was no such thing as an AR-15 type, would slick looking hand guns (which are semi-automatic and can shoot at the same rate of speed as an AR15) fuel the fantasies of the deranged folks you speak of? If those folks kill because their fantasies are fueled by AR-15s, are we to assume they would not go on killing sprees if there were no AR-15s?
|
I'd think that to fire at that rate and hit anything at much distance would take a lot more skill with a handgun than an AR-15. But a big issue here is simply muzzle velocity, capacity and the ability for victims to survive. The AR-15 was designed for war, not hunting or home protection. This is the opinion of so many military leaders and veteran doctors. A high velocity wound is very deadly.
Handguns certainly have their own cool factor, but it doesn't seem to be much of an influence for the worst mass shootings.
As I've said before, shooting for sport is fun, hunting (most of it) is good and home defense is a real thing. Doesn't mean we need nearly instant access to near military grade weapons.
Threaded Mode