It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What I Saw Treating the Victims From Parkland Should Change the Debate on Guns- Heather Sheer-AP

page: 2
8
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 11:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: vor78

originally posted by: research100
...the point was the AR15's do much more damage and you need much less accuracy than a regular gun....we are truly doomed


And yet this is a falsehood. The AR-15 will do more damage than a handgun, but so will any ordinary hunting rifle round, and the fact is, the vast majority of hunting rifle rounds are significantly more powerful than the standard AR-15 round.


That's truly a falsehood. The 5.56 round is designed as a high velocity round with a tendency to cause more damage once penetration is achieved...via deflection or as stated in another post as "yawing."




posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 11:35 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Dude, you are on a roll today with your catch phrases and buzzwords.

I LOVE IT!!!!



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 11:35 AM
link   
a reply to: DAVID64
Yep.

Want to see the blueprint?

Research the government's war on drugs.

Guarantee it won't have you dying laughing.

It is all about control. Guns are in the cross hairs right now, but allow them to go down this path and all your liberties will follow. Might want to start a checklist of banned and restricted items. You can start with these.

Cigarettes (Regular and E)
Drugs (Prescription and Over The Counter). Anybody remember Sudafed?

I won't add Dodge Ball, Raw Milk or real Apple Cider.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 11:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: research100
a reply to: Edumakated

good lord THAT is your response...the point was the AR15's do much more damage and you need much less accuracy than a regular gun....we are truly doomed


ARs do no more damage than any other rifle. A rifle wound is going to be horrific. Any gun shot wound is liable to be horrific. Some people die from one shot whereas some people can survive getting shot 10 times. It just depends.

The point is injuries are horrific. Period. Simply saying something should be banned because injuries are horrific is illogical. 30,000 people die every year in car crashes. Again, go over the bestgore and look at some of the videos and pictures of people mashed up... heads flattened. Guts hanging out of their mouths from being squished. We don't say let's ban cars because the injuries are horrific in some car accidents do we?

Rifles are used in less than 5% of gun murders. 5%. Less than 350 people are killed each year with a rifle. More people are beat to death each year.

Handguns are responsible for the vast majority of gun deaths.

It makes ZERO sense to be focusing on rifles in the scheme of gun violence as they are clearly not a huge issue. Any death is tragic, but logically, rifles are not the problem.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 11:42 AM
link   
It would be helpful to the author's cause if she correctly understood the terminology she is misusing. A "bullet" is the metal tip which is fired from the gun out of the brass cartridge (shell casing) which has a primer and gunpowder. Bullets come in many different types and if she was familiar as she says she is with gunshot wounds she should have come across the different variants at some time or another over 13 years. The fact she hasn't speaks to the near zero chance of becoming a victim of the very gun she is pleading to be banned!

What she is referring to is actually due to the flight characteristics of the of the .223 round which was designed to begin tumbling before it hits the target. Designed for war, the bullet does not however tumble until it's gone several dozen yards - something NOT happening in school shootings which have all been at extreme close range. This makes her comparison a faulty one that has no bearing on the Parkland shooting or with nearly any mass shootings involving AR 15 rifles.

Many of us believe many of the school shootings have to be deep state operations because the odds of them ALL being carried out using the same weapon are about nil. This can only be a deliberate campaign to remove AR 15s and other semi automatic weapons from the public. While every other type of shooting uses handguns about 90% of the time what are the odds every school shooter would choose an AR 15? I'm not challenging whether kids died or not, just that "lone nut" gunmen using AR rifles were the ones doing them.

Eta: according to the CDC handguns are used in 72% of US domestic shootings.
edit on 22-2-2018 by Asktheanimals because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

I think you raise a number of valid points. In fact I think everyone who has posted also raise equally valid points that relate to them and their own experience and perspective.

From my very limited point of view (as I am not a US citizen I have no right to dictate anything relating to US gun laws).

I do see very strong arguments from all sides of the table. This is not a simple cut and dry issue by any means and I do not for one minute think that there will be any easy answers.

I do hope though, that whatever action if any is taken, that they are not knee jerk reactions that unfairly discriminate against or worse reduce any citizens constitutional rights.

I haven't a clue if limiting the velocity at which a gun can fire or removing these types of weapons will make any difference at all.
As a retired law enforcement officer myself, I fully appreciate the consequences of removing one type of weapon from the law abiding, only to see criminals use them illegally against the law abiding.
I personally would not want to be on the receiving end of a criminal armed with such a weapon, yet all I have is a handgun to defend myself and my family.

So even if what the Doctor was saying in some sense is right, practically it would make little difference as criminals will always continue to use power over peashooters, so to speak.

I don't envy you Guys over the pond. It seems that every time some nut case goes on a killing spree, your constitutional rights are laid bare for all to rip apart. Which of course can't be a good thing for those who are careful, trained and law abiding Firearms holders who would never choose to kill other than to protect.

That's why don't choose sides in your countries very personal debate.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 11:44 AM
link   
a reply to: kelbtalfenek

That's weird, because this link is to a gentleman who served in the military going into a little personal detail regarding the .223 ammunition most commonly chambered in the AR-15.

Cliff notes:
The rounds are for Vermin and smaller animals. People need to be hit multiple times before being brought down. Anything (including 22LR) can be dangerous and lethal if fired correctly.

Also to counter your point - the same "deflection" will happen with handgun rounds, if chambered in FMJ; However, most handgun ammunition (when used in real life situations) is hollow point, whereas most .223 (5.56) is FMJ


www.thetruthaboutguns.com...
edit on 22-2-2018 by dothedew because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 11:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: dothedew
a reply to: neo96

Dude, you are on a roll today with your catch phrases and buzzwords.

I LOVE IT!!!!


It's not actually my saying.

I just use it in the correct sense.




posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 11:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

As im sure you are well aware a 22 usually richochets in a body causing as much or more damage than a round that penetrates through.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 11:48 AM
link   
a reply to: studio500

Guns are guns and some are useful-but some are unnecessary.

If you want to kill varmints attacking your flock of poultry? sure, get a bolt action rifle. If you want to protect your family? get a .45-but Military grade weapons? those are meant to be utilized in a war zone, not at a high school or college.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 11:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: kelbtalfenek

originally posted by: vor78

originally posted by: research100
...the point was the AR15's do much more damage and you need much less accuracy than a regular gun....we are truly doomed


And yet this is a falsehood. The AR-15 will do more damage than a handgun, but so will any ordinary hunting rifle round, and the fact is, the vast majority of hunting rifle rounds are significantly more powerful than the standard AR-15 round.


That's truly a falsehood. The 5.56 round is designed as a high velocity round with a tendency to cause more damage once penetration is achieved...via deflection or as stated in another post as "yawing."


The normal velocity for a 5.56 round is going to be somewhere around 3,000-3,200 FPS. You're going to find that an awful lot of hunting rifle rounds are in the same ballpark and that some will exceed it, and all will produce the same type of cavitation effect at those velocities that the .223/5.56 will.

gunnersden.com...

Note that the 7.62x39 used in the AK-47 is actually on the very low end of muzzle velocity for a centerfire rifle round, similar to the old .30-30.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 12:01 PM
link   
a reply to: studio500

With the amount of malpractice in this country it's become obvious doctors opinions are a danger to our society, we should subsequently consider revoking their right to opinion.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 12:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: kelbtalfenek

originally posted by: vor78

originally posted by: research100
...the point was the AR15's do much more damage and you need much less accuracy than a regular gun....we are truly doomed


And yet this is a falsehood. The AR-15 will do more damage than a handgun, but so will any ordinary hunting rifle round, and the fact is, the vast majority of hunting rifle rounds are significantly more powerful than the standard AR-15 round.


That's truly a falsehood. The 5.56 round is designed as a high velocity round with a tendency to cause more damage once penetration is achieved...via deflection or as stated in another post as "yawing."


Fortunately, there is research that debunks this kind of disinformation.

PDF Download

This is a summary of research conducted by Providence - Washington. It makes it pretty clear that the 5.56 NATO round and the .223 that is based on it were designed to wound, not kill, per international law. They were designed that way to reduce the deaths seen in wars, and because an injured soldier is actually more valuable to an opposing army than a dead soldier is. When you kill an enemy soldier, you reduce their fighting force by 1. When you wound one, you reduce their fighting force by more than 1 as his buddies try to drag him out of danger to get medical attention. You also increase the amount of time, resources, and money the opposing army has to spend recovering, transporting, caring for and further transporting wounded soldiers back home.

And there is data to support this is true. The ballistics support this. Since they are full metal jacket and traveling at such high speed, they have a tendency to go right through you. While this obviously creates two wounds, entry and exit, as long as the bullet didn't strike an artery you're unlikely to bleed to death. None of this matters of course if the bullet strikes a bone and deflects into the body or strikes a vital organ. Pretty much any bullet is going to be lethal if it strikes your heart or a critical part of the brain.

On the other hand, self defense handgun rounds are designed to expand open when they strike the body, increasing the diameter of the wound channel and slowing down the bullet, making it much more likely to deflect, stay in the body, and disrupt vital organs or strike arteries.

I respect this doctor's experience, but it's not based on an extensive study of different gunshot wounds in comparison to caliber and it's not based on ballistics, it's basically just her on-the-fly observations while she was doing surgery. That's no way to conduct science, and it shouldn't be regarded as science. There is science on this subject, and it says that 5.56 and .223 aren't the uber-lethal super rounds that people think they are. Half the people this guy shot survived. In Las Vegas, the shooter hit 480 people. Only 58 of them died. That's a mortality rate of 12%. There are other examples where the rate was much higher. In Newtown the mortality rate of those shot was almost 100%. There are a lot of factors that go into it, where they were hit, the distance the bullet traveled, it's not simply a function of caliber. But there's no data to suggest AR-15s fire a super-lethal bullet. That's just unsubstantiated gun-control propaganda.

In a school shooting, at such close distances and with many targets in close proximity, a handgun can be just as effective. What we can all agree on is that we need to keep guns out of the hands of maniacs. Banning one particular type of gun simply won't do that. Everyone advocating that is actually wasting time and dragging focus away from solving the real issue.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 12:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
a reply to: studio500

Guns are guns and some are useful-but some are unnecessary.

If you want to kill varmints attacking your flock of poultry? sure, get a bolt action rifle. If you want to protect your family? get a .45-but Military grade weapons? those are meant to be utilized in a war zone, not at a high school or college.


The .45 caliber was developed for the military to stop charging Philippino tribesmen, thus the Colt .45 was born.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 12:23 PM
link   
a reply to: TheLead
You would think she would be a bit more cautious, since the government has already impinged heavily on a doctor's ability to practice medicine. Or at least to be reimbursed for their services. The billing and treatment is being reduced to an algorithm determined by a software program and the insurance companies.

It looks like she is allowing herself to get caught up in the lies again.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 12:27 PM
link   
a reply to: studio500
I would only say look to the NDAA 2017:

“Identifying current and emerging trends in… information obtained from print, broadcast, online and social media, support for third-party outlets such as think tanks, political parties, and nongovernmental organizations… and the use of covert or clandestine special operators and agents to influence targeted populations and governments…”
— §1259C, b4

AUTHORITY FOR GRANTS.—The Center is authorized to provide grants or contracts of financial support to civil society groups, journalists, nongovernmental organizations, federally-funded research and development centers, private companies, or academic institutions for the following purposes:

to influence the policies and social and political stability of the United States


You can thank the Russian interference story for creating this monster. A domestic propaganda agency was codified into law as a result on Obama's way out. And what a foot in the door that was. Now they create partnerships with professionals, academics, NGO's journalists and all kinds of institutions and utilize covert or clandestine special operators to manufacture these attacks against the constitution, and everybody pretends that such fabrications was not signed into law by a previous president. Now being utilized by the same intelligence apparatus that has clearly been at odds with the sitting president.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Mandroid7

Nah, I don't think so. Watch a few episodes of "Sons of Anarchy"; the illicit drug trade and illegal firearms go hand in hand. Smuggled firearms, explosives, etc.; serial numbers conveniently removed, etc. Its all about "black market" type stuff, mules transporting crates of illicit firearms.

That's really the reason that tighter gun controls aren't going to do much good except to insure that only those who've done time in the big house, or who are imminently willing to do so will have firearms, leaving the rest of the population at their mercy. Sad situation, but that's the big picture of the problem.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 01:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: Mandroid7

Nah, I don't think so. Watch a few episodes of "Sons of Anarchy"; the illicit drug trade and illegal firearms go hand in hand. Smuggled firearms, explosives, etc.; serial numbers conveniently removed, etc. Its all about "black market" type stuff, mules transporting crates of illicit firearms.

That's really the reason that tighter gun controls aren't going to do much good except to insure that only those who've done time in the big house, or who are imminently willing to do so will have firearms, leaving the rest of the population at their mercy. Sad situation, but that's the big picture of the problem.


Unfortunately you're right. Despite gun control propaganda that leads people to believe criminals can easily get guns through "loopholes" at gun shows or online, most criminals acquire their guns through illegal means. Straw purchases are the most common method, so now matter how illegal you make it for them to get a gun they can still have someone they know get it for them. This is already illegal. Are we gonna make it illegaler?



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 01:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
a reply to: studio500

Guns are guns and some are useful-but some are unnecessary.

If you want to kill varmints attacking your flock of poultry? sure, get a bolt action rifle. If you want to protect your family? get a .45-but Military grade weapons? those are meant to be utilized in a war zone, not at a high school or college.


what weapon should be used as a high school?



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: vor78

But those same rounds are designed to be stable, not to tumble and yaw. There's a huge difference between a heavy projectile with that velocity and a smaller tumbling projectile...with respect to what they do after the round penetrates. With due respect, that's what it was designed to do and the reason it was adopted by the US military.

From some of my VN vet buddies I heard stories of an M16 round going into a leg and being found in the torso, or into the torso and exit wound in a toe. Same wound with a 7.62 might take the leg off and splinter bone, but won't cause injuries to vital organs.




top topics



 
8
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join