Let's not forget if there are multiple shooters and they stagger their rounds.

 

I'll use the Paris attacks at the Batlican for example, due to the fact there wereultiple shooters. So say one shooter enters and fires a few rounds right away, second shooter begins firing and after a few rounds, the third shooter starts firing. Remember, they are firing on defensless people.

 

So with no opposition, what happenes? Once the first shooter emoties his clippers #2 and #3 are still firing. Then #2 empties his clip, #1 has reloaded so him and #3 are firing. Once #3 empties his clip, #1 and #2 are firing. Then it comes down to rinse and repeat.

 

At some point this breaks down and the bayonets charge.

 

Hell make these nuts at least plan it out. CURRENTLY mash the trigger is the only thought process.

You probably argue with your dog when you're done here for the evening.

 

Running out of ammo?

Yes, this guy is a pro, but it shows how fast one can reload, you don't miss a step.

 

At some point this breaks down and the bayonets charge.

 

Hell make these nuts at least plan it out. CURRENTLY mash the trigger is the only thought process.

 

They bayonets charge? They have been told to run, hide, then fight. I doubt many of the unarmed will be charging.

 

They have been planning it out, for years, that's part of the problem. Mashing on the trigger is not what they are doing. If they did that with an AR they would only be able to fire a single round.

Yes, this guy is a pro, but it shows how fast one can reload, you don't miss a step.

 

 

Do I need to post Odell-Beckham vids or John Wall or any other professional? Fact is some shooters will walk in totally prepared but those that don't will allow their victims an opportunity to escape to safety unless we continue to allow them to take the easiest path of just mashing the trigger REPEATEDELY.

They bayonets charge? They have been told to run, hide, then fight. I doubt many of the unarmed will be charging.

 

They have been planning it out, for years, that's part of the problem. Mashing on the trigger is not what they are doing. If they did that with an AR they would only be able to fire a single round.

 

Being facetious. What you described sounded like a group of red coats?

 

REPEATEDLY mashing the trigger.

Yep and I asked some qualifying questions you didn't answer. I answered JD that I don't like either weapons since they both are semis. Fact is they are extremely dangerous weapons to put in the hands of just anybody. They fire too fast and are too easily modified for no sporting purpose.

 

Seriously if you shooting a deer with that you need to stay on the couch.

 

I hate to break this to you but to claim you're pro gun all the while claiming you don't like semi autos just doesn't work. Working where I do I've got to meet a lot of people that are sportsman, police officers, military, hunters, gun store owners, gun manufacturers, gun industry representatives, gun enthusiasts, concealed carry instructors, shooting industry press and just everyday pro gun people and I have to say out of all of them that I spoke to over the past 34 years I have never heard any of these pro gun people say that they are not comfortable with or do not like semi auto firearms. In fact they would think anyone that would make a statement such as that would be on the anti-gun, pro gun control side of the aisle.

Being facetious. What you described sounded like a group of red coats?

 

REPEATEDLY mashing the trigger.

 

That doesn't change much if they are armed and we are not.

 

By the way, red coats had bayonets. Assault rifles i suppose.

I hate to break this to you but to claim you're pro gun all the while claiming you don't like semi autos just doesn't work. Working where I do I've got to meet a lot of people that are sportsman, police officers, military, hunters, gun store owners, gun manufacturers, gun industry representatives, gun enthusiasts, concealed carry instructors, shooting industry press and just everyday pro gun people and I have to say out of all of them that I spoke to over the past 34 years I have never heard any of these pro gun people say that they are not comfortable with or do not like semi auto firearms. In fact they would think anyone that would make a statement such as that would be on the anti-gun, pro gun control side of the aisle.

 

Ok. I got big shoulders I think I can deal with your label.

 

Maybe working where you do is a conflict of interest. Sound off all you want, but solving gun violence problems is not a part of your "business."

That doesn't change much if they are armed and we are not.

 

By the way, red coats had bayonets. Assault rifles i suppose.

 

 

really?!

 

I would think it changes a lot.

Ok. I got big shoulders I think I can deal with your label.

 

Maybe working where you do is a conflict of interest. Sound off all you want, but solving gun violence problems is not a part of your "business."

 

I never claimed it was and you aren't solving anything either. Following party line rhetoric the way you and a few others here do does nothing to help anyone. And there's no conflict of interest on my part since I was very pro gun long before I ever started working where I do. I just think it's completely illogical to blame an object instead of the person behind the object. Calling for bans and limitations will do nothing to address crazy people or those that just want to inflict as much harm on others as they possibly can. We've been through this every time there's been a shooting, and no one is changing anyone's mind I think that's obvious. I can tell you one thing for sure, based on gun sales over the past several years any kind of ban or any presumed attack on the 2nd amendment will be strongly challenged by the majority in this country. Maybe that's because they know the problem isn't the gun

I never claimed it was and you aren't solving anything either. Following party line rhetoric the way you and a few others here do does nothing to help anyone. And there's no conflict of interest on my part since I was very pro gun long before I ever started working where I do. I just think it's completely illogical to blame an object instead of the person behind the object. Calling for bans and limitations will do nothing to address crazy people or those that just want to inflict as much harm on others as they possibly can. We've been through this every time there's been a shooting, and no one is changing anyone's mind I think that's obvious. I can tell you one thing for sure, based on gun sales over the past several years any kind of ban or any presumed attack on the 2nd amendment will be strongly challenged by the majority in this country. Maybe that's because they know the problem isn't the gun

 

People stocked up on cigarettes in the late 90's because of a feared a ban. That wasn't proof cigarettes don't expedite cancer-causing cells.

 

We agree crazy people do not need to own guns. That needs to be on the list of ways to absolve gun violence; however, many won't agree on "crazy." Heck, we can't get Congress (more conflict of interest) to keep no-fly listers from buying guns because they are so wound around the fingers of the gun lobbies.

 

Muslims scare most of you people to death, yet you ignore what we do to ourselves. If radical Muslims were smart they would tinker with our ignorance, get us armed to the teeth, and laugh as we systematically killed OURSELVES.

really?!

 

I would think it changes a lot.

 

What would it change if they are still the only one with a firearm?

What would it change if they are still the only one with a firearm?

 

So you would rather face someone with a 30 round magazine than 3 10 round magazines?

 

They both are :poop: sandwiches.

So you would rather face someone with a 30 round magazine than 3 10 round magazines?

 

It wouldn't make a difference to me.

 

 

They both are :poop: sandwiches.

 

Exactly it wouldn't make a difference to me

 

That's why I'm having a hard time understanding your point, given the fact that I would be unarmed in your scenario...