Well not like the following example:
Whoa, look at how fast that cheetah runs!
Dude, that's a dog.
I know, it was hyperbole...
Thoughts and Prayers
- Thread starter The Thriller
- Start date
Whoa, look at how fast that cheetah runs!
Dude, that's a dog.
I know, it was hyperbole...
Well I don't know of a gun that can kill hundreds people at a time... I know of a bomb that would do that, but not a gun.
Keefe
Well-Known Member
A hyperbole lol.
Keefe
Well-Known Member
A time is a broad term. Not literal for one second.
Well you've gotta be standing there for a long while trying to kill hundreds of people with a gun compared to a bomb.
I said it can kill hundreds of people at a time. Can a semi-auto rifle do that? You tell me, you're the expert.
I still can’t believe your wife agreed to create one Serp Jr. Now there will be three? Heaven help us all.
But, congrats!
J
JAZZGASM
Guest
M134 Minigun can shoot up to 6,000 rounds per minute. One clip can hold up to 5,000 rounds.
Would cost about $100 in ammo to fire it for 3-4 seconds.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm referring to a situation where a single gun can kill hundreds of people at a time. Name me a real life non-war situation where hundreds of people were killed by a single gun in 1 single shooting.
gandalfe
Well-Known Member
Steven Paddock came close, 58, plus about 500 injured, at least 200 of them directly shot. A few cm one way or the other, and it could have easily gone over 100. And he did that in the space of about 10 minutes. The cops too over an hour to get into his room, imagine how many more he could have taken out.
Wow, there you go. I stand corrected. It has happened. Very recently too. 2017.
Sadly more of the same now...
#GunControl
Damn, I really thought it was a hyperbole to say a gun could kill hundreds at a time, but here we have an actual event where 500 were injured by a single man last year. I obviously must have been too busy with work to have remembered it.
But... WOW.
Have you thought about the possible ramification that such a circumstance would basically start a 2nd cold war between young people and grown ups in parenting roles? I think if I was a kid right now and I was aware of the fact that my teacher was carrying a weapon, I'd be a lot more careful to test my limits and practice social behavior(which IMO is especially important in a setting that's designed for young ppl to do that and part of doing it is discussing and questioning authorities. Such unhealthy behavior is a big reason why there're kids that are frustrated to a point where they choose to pick a weapon to get back at their teachers, classmates and society in general). Do I trust my teacher to handle a weapon responsibly under all circumstances? That teacher who may have a stressful job trying to educate large groups of kids multiple hours a day...
Personally, I wouldn't wanna jeopardize trust and barriers to its limits in a place with the purpose to create and exchange opinions, observations and free speech.
In a different post you say you don't have a filter when it comes to speaking your mind. Though here you want to limit the opinions of those who may not be in favor of laws or do not know why they make sense to you. If you want to change ppl's behavior via threats ask yourself how proficient those threats by your parents were when you were young?! It's just that you are now in a different position of power and try to use that to the best of your ability like ppl have done before you.
I have a huge problem with reactionary behavior after a "trauma" because the energy is funnelled into pointing fingers, blaming others and that's what happens after every school shooting. No conflict has ever been solved that way. If this energy goes into thinking: What can I contribute so the situation for kids in at-risk situations of any kind is improved, then you're using your power responsibly, at least in my opinion, and maybe it will pay off.
From a professional standpoint I'd be interested to hear what she took away from the drill? Did she talk about the experience and her thoughts and feelings connected to that?
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
I agree with banning the AR-15. As for arming teachers, I believe that if a teacher wants to take on that responsibility and to properly train for it then they should be allowed to. In fact, the government should provide them free training. I'm not for this because I think a teacher is going to win in a stand off against an armed lunatic. I'm for it because I think the armed lunatic might think twice before attacking a target where he knows a bunch of people are packing heat.
gandalfe
Well-Known Member
Admittedly, it wasn't a single gun. I want to say 27 of them? But the point remains, if he had used handguns, he wouldn't have been able to do it. The two things that made it possible we A) the rate of fire, and B) the distance.
Looking straight logically, a single gun cannot kill a hundred people at a time. Is it possible for one guy, in the right scenario, to kill a hundred people in a shooting spree? Of course. Las Vegas basically proved that.
I’m definitely not on the side of absolutely “no gun reform”. I’m not on the side of “ban guns” either. I personally don’t think AR-15’s should be banned. That might be because I own one and wouldn’t want to give it up. But it might not be for that reason either. I haven’t figured that out yet. I am for raising the age to buy one. I am for stricter, tighter background checks. I am for making all sales go through licensed dealers. I personally wouldn’t sell a firearm to an individual. I am for banning bump stocks and other modifications to speed up rate of fire. I am for a waiting period (maybe two weeks, maybe four) to walk out of the store with a gun. It wouldn’t hard to convince me to be for limiting magazine capacity (don’t really care at this point).
I am for protecting our kids and our schools. To me, that looks differently than it does to others. I personally think every school should have all doors locked and you have to “buzzed” in by security (whether that’s nothing more than an administrator is another point to discuss). At one point I thought arming teachers was a good idea. Now, not so much. But I do think if they want to be armed, they should be allowed to, but the staff should know. I’m personally glad to know teachers can be armed in the state I live in. I’ve personally been armed while walking around a school while in session and no one knew.
I’m definitely not on the side of absolutely “no gun reform”. I’m not on the side of “ban guns” either. I personally don’t think AR-15’s should be banned. That might be because I own one and wouldn’t want to give it up. But it might not be for that reason either. I haven’t figured that out yet. I am for raising the age to buy one. I am for stricter, tighter background checks. I am for making all sales go through licensed dealers. I personally wouldn’t sell a firearm to an individual. I am for banning bump stocks and other modifications to speed up rate of fire. I am for a waiting period (maybe two weeks, maybe four) to walk out of the store with a gun. It wouldn’t hard to convince me to be for limiting magazine capacity (don’t really care at this point).
I am for protecting our kids and our schools. To me, that looks differently than it does to others. I personally think every school should have all doors locked and you have to “buzzed” in by security (whether that’s nothing more than an administrator is another point to discuss). At one point I thought arming teachers was a good idea. Now, not so much. But I do think if they want to be armed, they should be allowed to, but the staff should know. I’m personally glad to know teachers can be armed in the state I live in. I’ve personally been armed while walking around a school while in session and no one knew.