Some interesting statistics regarding mass shootings & the AWB

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Girodin, Dec 20, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Girodin

    Girodin Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Messages:
    5,601
    I am in the process of doing research about past incidents of mass shootings. I am examining the weapons used, the death and injury totals, etc so that I can have facts to rationally discuss the how certain types of weapons relate to mass shootings. I am trying to work quickly on it as the the issue is a pressing one.

    A very interesting statistic is the number of mass shootings from 1984 until 1994 when the AWB was passed and the number of mass shootings from 1994 until 2004 when it expired. In '84-94 there were 16 such shootings. From 94-2004 there were 16 mass shootings. It would seem the AWB did absolutely nothing to reduce the number of such incidents.

    There were 7 such shootings this year. The most during the AWB in a single year was in 1999 when there were 5 such shootings. Overall the frequency during that period seems to be roughly comparable.

    I'm totaling the numbers still but so called assault weapons do not appear to be the most commonly used guns. Rather handguns appear to be used nearly three times as often. Revolvers in particular have been used almost as often as anything one could categorize as an "assault weapon."

    A very large number of the shooters armed themselves with multiple weapons. This ability to simply switch to the next gun suggests that 10 round magazine limits would be of little practical value (to say nothing of the ability to reload).

    I'm still compiling numbers on the deadliness of the attacks and how it relates to the weapons used, however one of the deadliest attacks was the shooting at Luby's Cafeteria in which 24 people were killed and 20 more injured. The shooter had a Glock 17 and a Ruger P94. Neither gun hold 44+ rounds indicating that this shooter had time to simply reload and/or switch guns and then simply keep shooting people. Below is the powerful testimony of one of the victims present discussing the need for CCW and why gun control is not the answer.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvTO-y-B2YM

    Again, I need to do more research and tally the numbers but a trend that seems to be emerging is that the number of deaths and injuries seems to be correlated to number of people present in the immediate area and the amount of time before the shooter is confronted with response as much as anything else.

    The research thus far has left me even more convinced that there is little in the way of rational arguments for instituting an AWB as a response to some of the recent tragedies.
     
  2. 2nd 41

    2nd 41 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2007
    Messages:
    731
  3. Girodin

    Girodin Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Messages:
    5,601
    I had not found that one yet, thanks for pointing it out. It does change the numbers to 17 in the decade before and 16 in the decade following but the underlying point still remains valid.
     
  4. Hurricane

    Hurricane Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2010
    Messages:
    120
    Location:
    USA
    I was reading about Columbine the other night, and I was actually disgusted with what I had found out. I never knew the details of that shooting, but here are some of the more disturbing points that I was previously unaware of:

    They detonated a bomb in a field far off from the school so as to draw away emergency personnel. They planted bombs in the cafeteria and were planning on shooting kids as they came running out.

    They had sawed-off shotguns, one of which was fired 46 times, so you can imagine how many reloads that required. One guy had a 9mm carbine with 10 round magazines and he got off 96 shots. They had also made 99 bombs, including two 20lb. propane tanks.

    This was during an assault weapons ban and without high-capacity magazines. And it was one of the worst shootings in history at that point. The guy in Virginia Tech had 10 round magazines.

    This is why I don't understand the call for legislation that clearly wouldn't have prevented anything, given 2 of the more heinous incidents that have occurred were without the means given in the proposed legislation.

    A concerned parent had already contacted the police about one of the guys, saying he was dangerous. The kid had a blog that showed how to make bombs and he used to show his contempt with society.

    I don't see how another ban would prevent anything. And what's worse is that when they pass their ban and this happens again, then what?
     
  5. Girodin

    Girodin Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Messages:
    5,601
    Then they are in a position to argue for more stringent controls. There are two kinds of people. Those that know these measures would have no effect yet favor gun control for what it really is people control and a means to make people more subservient to the government. The second type are people who out of ignorance think these measures actually would prevent these instances or at even just mitigate the harm done during them. The second type we can hope to influence with the types of facts you have shared and I am currently trying to gather and analyze. Its not hard to see why someone totally unfamiliar with guns would think having a 30-40 round mag really was more dangerous than a ten round one. We need to through reasoned discussion try to educate those people.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice