Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mike Irwin
"If Cho had used an assault rifle in Virginia Tech instead of two handguns, the death toll would have been astronomically higher."
Your proof of that statement is... what?
That's called a supposition. There's no basis in fact for making that claim, only your supposition of what might have happened.
Also, Cho would not have had an "assault rifle." He would have had a semi-automatic rifle. True assault rifles are military hardware capable of firing fully automatic or in bursts. To date, only one legally owned automatic weapon has been used in the commission of a crime since 1934.
|
Hi Mike,
I just want to reiterate that I am just using arguements I have heard from anti-gun people. I am NOT one of them. I think I should have started another thread... One to deal talking to anti-gun people and another covering the 11 year old shooting the pregnant woman. I will probably have to do that so we don't blur this thread.
I do find it difficult to believe that you would argue that a "assault-style rifle" (semi-automatic) would not be more lethal than a hand gun. First of all, the rounds are much nigher powered. If you take the energy of a .223 vs. the 9mm and .22 LR, the .223 has more than twice the power. The 7.62 x 39 typically fired from an AK-47 is also much more powerful than a 9mm or a .22 lr. There are high capacity magazines readily available for both military style weapons, which reduces the need for reloads. More frequent reloads means more opportunities to attack the shooter.
I'm going to start a new thread for ways to "reason" with an anti-gun person and let this thread focus on the 11 year old shooting the pregnant woman.