[ma0641]

Rather than put this under other topics, I reread all the postings about the Orlando killings. Remember how so many people jumped on the "Ban the AR" band wagon?
According to the Orlando police report, the weapon of choice was not an AR 15 but a Sig Sauer that used the same magazine and ammunution. While this certainly does not diminish the tragedy, it shows you how uninformed people jumped on the AR, vented their wrath and were mistaken.

[Wondergirl]

Doesn't the Sig Sauer MCX look a lot like the AR? I think that is why the mixup -- the first impressions, first glimpses before the rifle was confiscated by police. Plus, both accomplish the same thing, are built to kill people.

[ScottGem]

it shows you how uninformed people jumped on the AR, vented their wrath and were mistaken.

Seriously? People jumped on the AR-15 for two reasons; 1) because that was what news stories said was used and 2) more importantly because it is a weapon designed to spew bullets at a fast pace. It really doesn't matter one bit what specific brand and model was used. The ire expressed by many people was based on the type and capabilities of the weapon, not the specific brand and model. If the news stories had correctly identified the weapon as the Sig Sauer MCX, there would have not been any difference in the reaction either way.

The Washington Post commented 4 days ago:
Yet while the weapon is different, the MCX and the AR-15 share the same design purpose: providing a highly portable, customizable, easy to operate and accurate rifle for the individual who possesses it.

Also:
Sig Sauer bills the MCX as "an innovative weapon system built around a battle-proven core." It has a military-spec trigger and a magazine capacity of 30 rounds.

In another story I read that audio captured outside Pulse showed 24 rounds being fired in 9 seconds! There is only one purpose for such a weapon; indiscriminately killing or wounding lots of people. And that is what has raised the ire of many.

The Bandwagon that people jumped on was banning ANY weapon like the AR-15, not just the AR-15 itself. People vented their wrath that such a weapon was so easily obtainable. The AR-15 was mentioned only because early news reports identified it as the weapon involved. To suggest that people were uninformed because they believed the initial news reports is ridiculous. To suggest that people vented their wrath specifically against the AR-15 and not against all similar weapons is just as ridiculous.

[catonsville]

Want to blame anyone for Orlando, I think you can blame the FBI for a poor job, I can also blame the "Gun Free Zone" laws. Want to do a stretch, I can even blame Obama for bringing in undocumented people from countries who hate us just for starters. How many people might have been saved if there were people in the Club with a gun? Speaking as a Former Hunter, Former Military and Former Law Enforcement Officer. Just to make it clear, I think the government is "looking at the wrong end of the stick with the poop on it".

[ScottGem]

How many people might have been saved if there were people in the Club with a gun?

There is certainly sufficient blame to go around here. There were a lot of points were this tragedy could have been stopped. If a reasonable waiting period with background checks were in place, he might not have been able to get the weapons used. If the FBI had not passed on him twice, he might not have been able to get the guns. If his ex-wife hadn't been so scared of him she might have reported the possibility. And so on and so on.

But are you really advocating having armed people in a situation were liquor is served? Even the NRA doesn't go that far!

[catonsville]

No, are you considering that just because people go to a club they are drinking? What about a designated driver? What about "Bouncers" being armed, are you opposed to that too? Also I am opposed to people waltzing around carrying beer bottles. I am more concerned about saving lives and putting the blame where it belongs. I am also sure the survivors would have been very happy if someone had a gun as well as those who passed.

[Wondergirl]

No, are you considering that just because people go to a club they are drinking? What about a designated driver? What about "Bouncers" being armed, are you opposed to that too? Also I am opposed to people waltzing around carrying beer bottles. I am more concerned about saving lives and putting the blame where it belongs. I am also sure the survivors would have been very happy if someone had a gun as well as those who passed.

It was dark in the club. A "good guy with a gun" shooting in the dark would have produced collateral damage. In fact, the security guard and responders may have killed and wounded clubgoers with "friendly fire."

[smoothy]

A good guy with a gun would have done done far more good than waiting for the police to show up, which yet again proves, not only that gun free zones guarantee a criminal will not find any armed law abiding citizens to stop them, and that there is never a cop around when you need one, they were probably out giving tickets to people driving 3 MPH over the limit which many places seems to be the priority. After all revenue collection is what they exist for.

[cdad]

I cant believe how much misinformation is being handed out by those that oppose the AR15 platform. It is used in hunting all the time. It is designated as a varmint rifle. The fact that it is semi auto doesn't mean it is bad it just means you don't have to reload after every round by manual means. The AR platform carries with it interchangeability that allows the owner to shoot many platforms and not just 223/556.

As far as the NRA goes they have no problem with a carry permit holder being in a bar but there is no drinking allowed.

On the subject of shooting in the dark. Many handguns have night sights. What they do is illuminate the sights even in total darkness allowing you to aim your shot.

Education is the key to a good argument and it seems that many are lacking in the basics and practices of modern weapons.

[Wondergirl]

A good guy with a gun would have done done far more good than waiting for the police to show up, which yet again proves, not only that gun free zones guarantee a criminal will not find any armed law abiding citizens to stop them, and that there is never a cop around when you need one, they were probably out giving tickets to people driving 3 MPH over the limit which many places seems to be the priority. After all revenue collection is what they exist for.

But there WAS "a good guy with a gun" on the premises. He was sober and an off-duty cop, trained to use a gun.

[smoothy]

But there WAS "a good guy with a gun" on the premises. He was sober and an off-duty cop, trained to use a gun.

And yet this guy managed to shoot that many people... was he sleeping in a corner?

If there had been others fewer people would have been injured or died.

[Wondergirl]

And yet this guy managed to shoot that many people... was he sleeping in a corner?

If there had been others fewer people would have been injured or died.

If there had been others (in that very crowded club), even MORE people would have been wounded or died.

[smoothy]

If there had been others (in that very crowded club), even MORE people would have been wounded or died.

Impossible, because he was essentially unimpeded with what he went there to do. He would have been stopped far sooner, and that equates to fewer victims, not more.

[Wondergirl]

Impossible, because he was essentially unimpeded with what he went there to do. He would have been stopped far sooner, and that equates to fewer victims, not more.

Why didn't the security guard kill the shooter?

[smoothy]

Why didn't the security guard kill the shooter?

Sleeping, not paying attention, outside having a smoke, but that's the million dollar question.

[Wondergirl]

Sleeping, not paying attention, outside having a smoke, but that's the million dollar question.

No, he was on active duty. Lemme research that and get back to you.

ADDED: from http://www.americansecurityforce.com...tragic-events/

WESH.com reports that an off-duty police officer was working at the club and engaged Manteen in a shootout. It was not enough to stop him and we're unsure as to the status of that police officer.

From WESH.com --

"Police said an officer working at the nightclub responded as shots rang out, and engaged Mateen in a gun battle. Mateen went deeper into the club, firing more shots."

[cdad]

No, he was on active duty. Lemme research that and get back to you.

ADDED: from Terror Shooting in Orlando: The Tragic Events – Security Guard Services | Americansecurityforce

WESH.com reports that an off-duty police officer was working at the club and engaged Manteen in a shootout. It was not enough to stop him and we’re unsure as to the status of that police officer.

From WESH.com --

"Police said an officer working at the nightclub responded as shots rang out, and engaged Mateen in a gun battle. Mateen went deeper into the club, firing more shots."

The officer involved had tough calls to make. Very similar in nature to a high speed chase. There is a factor of public safety that has to be considered that the gunman didn't have on the table as an option. That being said he did force a retreat of the gunman and at that point (in the bathroom) hostages were taken. We cant second guess the pandemonium that was breaking out nor its effect on the active shooter scenario. The officer had no idea if it was just a single shooter or as was the case in Paris multiple shooters involved. That is a lot of information to take in at one time.

[Wondergirl]

The officer involved had tough calls to make. Very similar in nature to a high speed chase. There is a factor of public safety that has to be considered that the gunman didn't have on the table as an option. That being said he did force a retreat of the gunman and at that point (in the bathroom) hostages were taken. We cant second guess the pandemonium that was breaking out nor its effect on the active shooter scenario. The officer had no idea if it was just a single shooter or as was the case in Paris multiple shooters involved. That is a lot of information to take in at one time.

I totally agree with you. I was simply showing dear Smoothy that the Pulse's security guard was truly on the job and was being "a good guy with a gun." Orlando (and other cities'?) clubs have beefed up their security, in light of this tragedy.

[J_9]

We have to stop blaming the weapon for this crime and start looking at the real problem. It was not the gun's idea to go into the nightclub and cause this. It was Mateen's. The firearm is incapable of causing such destruction on its own.

We could eliminate firearms of all kinds, but that won't stop the violence. Criminals aren't law abiding citizens. They will still get guns no matter what the laws are.

And... It's not just guns. Timothy McVeigh used fertilizer, not guns. The Boston Marathon bomber made a bond from common household items. Place blame where blame is due and it's in the human race, not the firearm.

[Catsmine]

As an avid shooter, I have to admit being less than fond of the magazine forward design, going all the way back to the "Tommy gun" of the Prohibition era. I trained with both the M16 and the M14 and I find both styles unbalanced and unstable. The forward magazine is designed to facilitate reloading, but reloading still requires losing one's aiming point, so outside of combat conditions where breaking cover can be fatal the fast reload is problematic.

In newer designs such as the Bullpup and Tavor, rear magazines place the weight of the magazine where it is supported by the shoulder, allowing more stability during semi-auto fire. Older "tube" magazines distribute the weight of the ammo, and actually increase stability as it empties.

If you want to reload fast, spend the bucks for a machine gun license so you'll need to.

The politics of gun control are entertaining but silly. Those prepared to use deadly force in self defense will continue to do so regardless of the statutes and those not prepared to do so will whine until they become victims.