I think I saw something very interesting on an ABC special with Diane Sawyer

N

nocturnal

New member
I was running out on an errand and missed the show, however I caught a few minutes of it. And just a few minutes left me speechless...

Apparently the gun used in the recent middle school shooting in Connecticut is capable of, "firing 6 rounds per second" according to Gabrielle Giffords...

And there was an older man there, an astronaut. Who said that he believes that criminals will not be able to acquire weapons illegally...
Was that not disproved by the Conn shooter?

Another thing, Diane Sawyer mentioned worldwide, 5,000 children died due to gun violence worldwide last year; (forgot the exact wording) and that 85% of those shootings happened in America


Any comments?
Did anyone see the rest of the show?

Again, I missed most of the show, just wondering if anyone saw it and had comments



here's a link to an article I found if it helps (or I am supposed to link you all)

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/arizona-marks-years-giffords-shooting-18158673
 
The astronaut is her hubby. I hate when people argue things They lack knowledge of. I can shoot pretty fast but I would not hit much.
 
The (former) astronaut is Gabby Giffords' husband, Mark Kelly. Dunno what he was before his wife got shot, but in recent memory he has been an ardent and vocal gun grabber. The fact that he knows nothing about gun laws doesn't appear to bother him. Why should it? He knows he's right -- just ask him.

The theoretical maximum rate of fire for a full-auto M16 is 800 rounds per minute, which works out to 13.3 rounds per second. A more realistic rate of fire, again on full auto, is 650 to 750 rounds per minute, which is 10.8 to 12.5 rounds per second.

On semi-auto ... which, of course, is the only mode available on a civilian Bushmaster ... the rate of fire is solely dependent on how fast the shooter can pull the trigger. I think six rounds per second is probably not realistic, and certainly not for a sustained burst. But even if someone can do 6 rounds per second -- he has a 30-round magazine. 5 seconds and he's empty. Gotta reload.

As to Sandy Hook, ALL the survivor accounts reported hearing a "pop ... pop ... pop" sound. Individual shots. Six rounds per second is 360 rounds per minute, which is a bit short of M2 .50 caliber "Ma Deuce" rate of fire. Nobody (whose report I have read) has mentioned anything sounding like a machine gun. Also, the Connecticut State Police have now revealed that the shooter didn't empty ANY of his magazines. Most, in fact, were only have used. The official speculation is that he was so accustomed to combat games and doing "tactical" reloads when transiting between rooms that he did the same thing in the school. (They also reported that he was wearing ear plugs.)

Beware of that statistic. That 5,000 "children" killed by gun homicides very likely includes felons up to the age of 18 who were killed by police officers in the line of duty. Remember ... ANY death by human agency is a "homicide," but not all homicides are "murders."
 
Last edited:
That 5,000 "children" killed by gun homicides very likely includes felons up to the age of 18
Click to expand...
Actually, that would be up to age 25 if they're using the same DoJ statistics the VPC does. If they're using the CDC's NVSS, then they'd have to be including the 15-19 and 19-24 age groups to get that number.

A note about Giffords: the lady was shot in the head by a deranged gunman. She had to go through a long and undoubtedly arduous recovery process. We can attack the message, but let's be respectful to the messenger.
 
A note about Giffords: the lady was shot in the head by a deranged gunman. She had to go through a long and undoubtedly arduous recovery process. We can attack the message, but let's be respectful to the messenger.
Click to expand...

I agree absolutely. But it is also what makes her message so powerful. She is poised to be the next Sarah Brady. Sarah's husband was shot and so that made her a sympathetic victim whom we were supposed to listen to. But then her position evolved from victim's wife to somebody with a paid full time job as a lobbyist.

The Giffords also get to claim additional credibility by saying that she supported gun rights before she was shot. And the part that REALLY bugs me, they are trying to sell themselves as "typical gun owners" because "we own a couple of guns locked up in a safe back home." I'm sorry, but that doesn't mean you speak for me. Or that I even consider you "real gun people." Two guns? Locked in a safe somewhere else? You might as well tell me you are a serious reader because you own two books. Locked in a safe somewhere!

Gregg
 
On one of the threads recently, I read a long article through a link that talked about why/why not we should have more/less gun control. Fabulous article and the statistic that really jumped out at me was that we have had more accidental drownings already in this year, than we have had murdered by mass shootings in the past (I don't remember the time frame but it was rather large, like a decade). But yet, no one wants to ban swimming pools. The other number that stuck out to me was 170 million. The number of people who have been slaughtered worldwide by their governments after confiscation of guns. They didn't believe or follow the governemnt and were rounded up and exterminated. That one was put out there by Dr. Ignatius Piazza from Front Sight.

http://kontradictions.wordpress.com...ew-the-assault-weapons-ban-well-ill-tell-you/
 
Last edited:
The cyclic rate of fire of a fully automatic AR-15 is six or seven hundred rounds a minute. That would work out to ten or so rounds a second. If he had said ten per second, I would say he was warping the time it takes to cycle the action - around a tenth of a second - into a cyclic rate of fire for a weapon that doesn't really have one. But I don't get six per second.
 
Giffords and her husband are both gun owners. They are supporting some additional gun control but not nearly as radical anti gun as Sarah Brady or Carolyn McCarthy. From what I've seen on the local TV she's pushing for a magazine size limit and closure of the so called gun show loop holes.

Not necessary, but certainly not as much as most oof the other anti gunners seem to want.
 
Isn't idiotic to design a gun purity test? If you don't own more than two guns you are unworthy?

Give that up. A person who buys a Glock 19 for self protection and practices with it is just fine in my book.

I can claim you are not a gun person if you just shoot paper and haven't trained as extensively as some. Just shooting at cans with Gramps - well, gosh darn - you ain't a gun person.

If you disagree with her on the content of her argument, that's fine. But we don''t need some purity standard.
 
I think we need to be clear that this is not Gabby Giffords' campaign, this is her husband's campaign. Gabby Giffords has come a long way, but she has NOT recovered. Her "speech" is pretty much limited to one-word responses. We can only speculate as to the extent to which her internal mental processes have returned, or may have been damaged. We also don't know if it is only her speech that is affected. For example, while she can only speak single words, can she write coherent, full and complete sentences?
 
By Nocturnal: Another thing, Diane Sawyer mentioned worldwide, 5,000 children died due to gun violence worldwide last year; (forgot the exact wording) and that 85% of those shootings happened in America
Click to expand...

I know you did say you weren't sure of the exact wording. But if she said "America" instead of "United States", that would include Mexico. They have very strict gun laws, and ownership is forbidden (unless you belong to the drug cartel).

Last year Mexico had 20,000 gun homicides, and a large proportion of them were children. That would make her statement a very sneaky untruth. :confused:
 
I agree with Glenn that we don't need to have a purity test, i.e. number of guns owned, but we also should cry foul when someone who has a .410 and a Marlin .22 in the closet presumes to be an expert on ARs, AKs, Glocks, etc. Seeing one once does not an expert make.

I toured the Space Shuttle once, and flew in an airplane a few times, a helicopter once. Should they interview me as an aviation expert the next time a plane crashes? Of course not.
 
That's the point - expertise on criminological, psychological, constitutional or whatever issues doesn't come from owning a set number of guns or shooting paper or birdies.

The skeet shooter with a rack of shotguns isn't a criminologist.

The actual ignorance of facts in this debate is astounding. However, ignorance is a characteristic of most legislators of both parties.
 
This is more in the realm of strategy. I can impart the knowledge that a 223 hits harder than the 30.06/7mm used on bambi (Offense) faster than you can counter it (Defense). Most of what you see or hear has less to do with the competence or incompetence of the speaker but the determination of what has impact on a disinterested audience.

We are seeing 2 actors in play to advance gun control this time around

1. "Ban all guns" guy
2. "I/We own guns but are responsible gun owners who believe in safety and reasonable restrictions."

Giffords et al is representing type (2) here. Coincidentally, both types happen to support the same restrictions, a ban on mags and AR15s.

Going by the degree to which the type (2) gunowner is being touted in the media, one may see a pattern that does not match reality. The same way that going by CNN most people with NRA membership are cutting them up in disgunt, and that their membership is currently dropping.
 
This is more in the realm of strategy
Click to expand...

Yes, as is the "immediacy" of passing new law, so that the emotional hobby horses don't tire out.

Gen. McCrystal's comments reflect his lack of understanding 2A, why it is what it is and what it means, not an unfamiliarity with all kinds of arms. He is as in the dark as other media commentators, such as the gentleman who thinks there are no gun laws in Chicago, promoting the carnage there. Or that British fellow...

Favoring "gun-control" is now "hip". Victor Davis Hansen wrote a great article about it (being "hip" and its ironies) today. Like with many fads and other "hip" causes, reality isn't the issue.
 
I wouldn't discount the impact of this man's campaign. If you recall, the spouse of another injured politician used his sad situation to curtail some of our firearms freedoms before, a Mrs. Brady i believe she was.
 
The comments about 85% of the children killed around the world are here in the US is pure unadulterated BS. The media will just throw numbers around and expect people to believe them, and ironically, a lot of people do. Just remember when Katie Couric said on the "news" that 800 guns a day were crossing the border into Mexico. That was pure BS. Where she got the number from I never found out.
As to Mrs. Gifford, I truly feel bad about her circumstances and how she got where she is, but the same could just as easily have happened to any one of us on the forum. I don't consider one person's life any more valuable than another's, regardless of who they are, what they do, or how much money they have. The press is eager to circulate anything that goes along with their twisted "progressive" ideas. I can guarantee that, had they stood up for gun rights, she and her husband would have gotten exactly zero air time, except for a few lines in some of the conservative circles.
 
Don't get me wrong, no disrespect for Giffords or Kelly...and I found what I was looking for:

video link included for all you
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVgZuvmZPcg

I do not agree with their stances on high-capacity magazines, etc...but here is the source so that you all can judge for yourselves

Kelly: "I bought a gun at Walmart recently, and I went through a background check...why can't we just make it more difficult?"
Diane: "But the NRA would say that they (criminals, shooters, etc) can get them (firearms) illegally"
Kelly: "I don't agree with that, the Gun Lobby even opposes a gun purchaser being checked against the terrorist watch list."

This is something I do not like to hear...
When they use a "fact" that a six-rounds-fired-per-second gun was used at the Sandy Hook Elementary School incident, why don't they bring up the FACT that the guns used in said crime were illegally obtained by the shooter?

We all know that the media is a big part of people's everyday lives, and that the media groups cater to their backers...and not always the truth.
However; we also know that it reaches a lot of people that may be on the fence about gun-control issues. Those are the true swing voters, the ones that need a bit of gentle education...I feel like they may be the truly decisive factor in all this present storm of anti-gun vs gun.
In regards to upcoming legislature and elections we need to be encouraging and in many situations, patient towards those on the fence.

I know this message put out by ABC and Diane Sawyer reached many ears the other night. Let us be tactful as well as patient and we can use this as a good bridge of conversation to our friends and family that are on-the-fencers.


I am surprised by the quantity of responses here, keep up the good conversation. Let us steer this towards regarding the video source and possible ways to reach other people.

Again, let me encourage everyone to not use this opportunity to bash or throw mud at the opposition. That only worsens our uphill climb and discredits ourselves in the upcoming days/months/years.

Emotions are powerful motivators, just watch the video. It is tragic and very sad about what happened to Giffords however; I personally feel like she is being used as an emotional crutch in support of more legislature. And that may be the most sobering aspect of all.

Keep up the good work!
 
Last edited:
why don't they bring up the FACT that the guns used in said crime were illegally obtained by the shooter?
Click to expand...
They don't bring it up because it doesn't help their case. Why introduce facts that would cause the audience to understand that the criminal is the issue as opposed to all gun owners or the NRA?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top