In response to the article:
The Las Vegas shooter was effective because he shot into a tightly packed group of people. When shooting tightly grouped packs of individuals, one must acknowledge that the majority of surface area that can be shot from above are the heads of those that are tightly packed... Most of the kills from that shooting were done early on and as people spread out, the lethality dropped exponentially... The bump stock's effectiveness can be achieved by someone who has quick fingers... Observe any competitive paintballer or FPS MLG gamer such as Grimmmz or Shroud... 3-8 lbs is all it takes to pull a trigger.

The liberal author mentions "assault weapon" and their lack of knowledge of the definition... An assault weapon is a weapon that is used to assault typically in a combat environment. A weapon only becomes a weapon when it is used against a human being. Until that point, they are not assault weapons or even weapons. They are firearms... Plain pure and simple...

Every chart posted, starting with the first one is completely based on bogus information that fails to correlate data appropriately. I can correlate the number of times the average male masterbates to the amount of sales Justin Beiber gets from each album but that doesn't make the two pieces of data relevant unless you have other pieces of data to go with it...

This is just more of the same self-admitted ignorance that the author mentions early in the article...

Lets tear apart the first two diagrams and move on from there...

#1 . . Countries on that list have a full outright ban on firearms and non-comparable numbers of total population and gun ownership... Additional data is needed in regards to number of deaths from other weapons and other types of crime as well as a normalization of the data to accurate levels that don't heavily and falsely inflate one thing over another
#2 . . In the second diagram, they are obviously including ALL incidents that even remotely involve a firearm which include suicides, accidental discharges, etc. which constitutes a VERY large majority of gun related incidents. Fact check these diagrams for yourself and you'll laugh at how twisted of a message they are trying to portray from the truth
#3 . . I don't think we need to go past here... You get the point... The whole diagram stuff is garbage...

Moving on...

Private sellers... You can't stamp out capitalism and remove the capability from the citizens... That's infringing upon rights and other things...Very first gun I ever bought myself was an AR from Tyler in the parking lot at work... Whats wrong with that? Totally a shady parking structure gun deal but it's no different than if i sold you a wood chipper... 4 (?) years later and neither I nor the AR have assaulted anyone... It's still just a firearm and unless someone threatens me and mine, it will remain as such... Sits in my closet! =-)

NICS background checks allow 7 days before you can take the firearm home but that doesn't mean you won't get a cop at your door taking it from you in the near future... I get background checks that take forever because I have a common name and lots of Anthony Harts in the US are felons and the sort... Most are instant or within the same day for clean people with unique names.

Ban guns because people use them for suicide? Tell that to Robin Williams... Oh wait... Paul Walker . . . oh wait.... Heath Ledger . . . Nope... Phillip Seymour Hoffman? Nope... Let's get to the root of the problem... Why are people committing suicide? Why do people not seek help instead of just giving up? Because society is shit... It's a garbage bath of nonsense that drives people to that point... This is the VERY SAME reason why people shoot up schools...

The same self-admitted ignorance as admitted early in the article is on display again... The very next statement says that people will commit crimes . . . to commit crimes with guns... No shit?!? It's the same reason you guys admit is why an outright ban in the first place won't work... If they can't get it themselves, they'll resort to crime to get it... Welcome to reality!

In that same paragraph he states that if we reduce the number of guns, we reduce the number of deaths... If we reduce the amount of food, do we reduce the number of people who choke to death? The argument made by the author is stupid and has no factual basis.

"The idea that good guys with guns will prevent enough crimes to outweigh all of the above is plainly contradicted by the correlational evidence..." . . . "when you look at data as jacked up as I am!!!"

(Side note: If you’re apt to shout “correlation does not equal causation” here, I would counter that “the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” HAHAHAHAHAHA Samuel L Jackson approves (He probably really does...)... This argument is complete horseshit because there is CLEARLY evidence to the contrary of what this person is claiming... "Believe my bullshit data because you're too much of a lemming to look up your own data!". A simple google search can show how inaccurate this guy's "data" is...

His information on just about everything is mal-informed nonsense spouted by someone with absolutely no experience in regards to anything related to firearms and in no way shape or form should be considered anyone worth listening to... This guy picks and chooses irrelevant pieces of information of which they themselves are not even accurate or are completely irrelevant or unrelated... Proof?: "Guns accidentally injure or kill more than 7,000 children each year (link), and suicides and homicides kill more 15–24 year-olds than car accidents (link)."... Read the articles that the person linked... He literally picked the one small point he cared most about that helped him make his point and completely disregarded EVERYTHING ELSE about all of it...

If you think making it acceptable for people to call the police and have them take away my weapons is acceptable, then you yourself are accepting that you are willing to get people killed... I have a constitutional right to my firearms and I have every right to use those firearms to defend myself against anyone who tries to take them from me... I am guaranteed these rights by the Constitution of the United States of America and anyone who tries to defy that and take those rights and liberties away from me shall suffer their consequences... I and millions of other Americans stand by this mentality... "You can have my gun when you pry it from my cold dead fingers..." (or steal it from my car like a sleazy POS)

Now, in response to everyone who for some reason are only discussing reducing the effectivity of ammunition...

Here's the problem with this that George Carlin hits on...

You can kill someone with anything. A rolled up newspaper. Plastic dinnerware. Your bare hands... At what point to we stop outlawing things that people can do things with and actually pay attention to the people and get them to stop doing things we don't want them to do?

Do you blame cars for drunk driving accidents? Do you blame your favorite tequila for why Florida has a high rate of auto accidents? No.. You blame the people who make poor decisions... Why is this situation any different and so difficult for people to acknowledge? "Guns are bad because people are malicious" is a foolish argument with no merit or backing...

Also, you're neglecting the reason why ammunition has only gotten more effective over time.

#1 . . companies love to make a profit. If your ammo works better than mine, people will buy your ammo even if it's slightly more expensive as long as they can expect it to do the job every time. Same thing happened with the auto industry, the computer industry, the cable industry, the everything else industry...
#2 . . Life has become more valuable over the years. Take working conditions of the industrial class from 250 years ago as an example compared to today.. Lives were expendable back then... Poorly made ammo with low accuracy was irrelevant because they just threw out massive amounts and expected the law of ratios and averages to bring them to victory...
#3 . . Because life is more valuable, hunting and war required more effective methods of completing the same objective but with a greater chance of survival... Ammo became more accurate and more effective upon impact as a result.
#4 . . Enter the liberal left who want all of this progress to be erased because a few people used very useful tools for malicious purposes...


Anything can be used with malicious intent. To think that something deserves to be banned because a remote few used it for something that people don't like doesn't mean that you get to take it away from anyone else. Doing so will only further serve to divide this nation and may possibly lead to civil outbreak.