Gun Control & RKBA
Related: About this forumIt's "Justa" . . .
Last edited Mon Oct 2, 2023, 04:49 PM - Edit history (1)
I'm not familiar with the Justa gun company but I hear about it a lot from gun rights activists. You know, it's Justa modern sporting rifle.
In the case of the Justa AR-15 it's also just the choice of mass shooters. Oh! The Gunner says, but pistols kill more people than rifles, in fact hammers are used as often as rifles! The same they say is true of mass shootings; only 30% of mass shootings are done with the Justa AR-15.
Well if you take into account all mass shootings going back to 1984 that's true. But when these shootings are examined by time line that's not the case. In the decade from 2010-2020 the Justa AR-15 was used in 34% of such shooting sprees. However in the years since 2020 that percentage rose to 59%. The Justa is now the defacto killing machine of choice.
Not only has the number of Justas increased but the leathality of the Justa is 2.7 times that of other weapons used in mass shootings.
There was a ban on Justas from 1994 to 2004 and amazingly the number of mass shootings fell by 37%, amazingly close to the percentage of shootings committed with Justas. Gunners will eagerly point out that the ban was ineffective because the exact same rifle was still available without the military pretties like flash suppressors and bayonet mounts. But still mass shootings decreased?
Hmmm, so why did mass shootings decrease? Could it be that the marketing of the Justa is aimed at military wannabes and when the ugly black gun was off the market they lost interest? Might it just be that the way gun makers market their Justas actually generate mass shootings? We don't know because research into gun violence has been forbidden for so long. Maybe in another decade there will be enough data to find out.
I don't want to ban Justas. I'd like to have them put under the 1934 NFA that governs machine guns. I'd be willing to forego the $200 stamp to own one, just undergo the same background check it takes to buy a machine gun and have it registered to the owner with the ATF. I wonder if it's the background check or the registration that makes Gunners all butt hurt?
All the hoopla aside, forget the 2nd and the gun grabbers. The Justa is a slightly degraded military grade weapon designed to a Pentagon RFQ to be used in warfare. The marketing of the Justa is concentrated on its military ancestry and the incredible leathality it has. The people who the advertising is designed to appeal to are exactly the people we don't want to have a Justa.
Que the gunners to say, "Mass shootings are only a tiny % of all shootings!" True but they are the only source of reasonably accurate data becaue the media reports it, not the CDC or FBI.
Information from the Gunviolence archive, Statistica.com and The Trace.
CaliforniaPeggy
(152,069 posts)Thank you for showing us so clearly just how lethal and horrible this gun actually is.
Military grade weapons have no place in the civilian population. None.
TexasDem69
(2,317 posts)If thats the standard for banning private ownership of firearms it should be easily discernible.
CaliforniaPeggy
(152,069 posts)TexasDem69
(2,317 posts)Though I find that super vague.
yagotme
(3,816 posts)Capable of fully automatic fire. The AWB had nothing to do with full auto weapons, which are already highly regulated, as of 1934.
TexasDem69
(2,317 posts)Like all other semiautomatic weaponsprivate ownership protected by the 2d Amendment subject to reasonable restrictions. The statistics you cite show they are rarely used in mass shootings, but thats not the test in any event.
And I suspect youre simply wrong about the prevalence of semiautomatic rifles in mass shootings since 2020, unless weve changed the definition of mass shootings. Any support?
AndyS
(14,559 posts)Justas are used in 59% of mass shootings since 2020. 59% does not equate to rarely.
Suspect all you wish but don't ask me to give additional support while doing so.
TexasDem69
(2,317 posts)Have been used in 59% of all mass shootings since 2020. Ill review that and respond.
On edit, heres some FBI stats. The FBI says that in 2022 a bit less than half of mass shootings involved rifles. https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/active-shooter-incidents-in-the-us-2022-042623.pdf
AndyS
(14,559 posts)gun humpers only to be ignored. Google is your friend, that's how I found it. I said in the OP where my information came from.
Act_of_Reparation
(9,116 posts)TexasDem69
(2,317 posts)You attempted to make a point while including a single graph that doesnt support your position and then referencing three different sources, without providing any link to what those sources actually say. If you cant provide a source that supports your point then just say so. I could be wrong, and if you provide evidence then Ill concede the point, but telling me to do my own research is pretty damming.
AndyS
(14,559 posts)your drive by posts. Guess we're even on that one. If asking you to support your own position is damming (sic) so be it.
Only I did, just not to your liking.
AndyS
(14,559 posts)There's a difference. There's also a difference between the FBI definition of mass shooting and the accepted definition, that being the FBI only recognizes four or more KILLED and everybody else sees four or more shot in a single incident. The FBI refers to a mass murder, not a mass shooting.
Jeez I get tired of educating you gunners . . .
TexasDem69
(2,317 posts)Hope you are feeling better and good to see you here.
discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,576 posts)Not with restriction fans since they probably don't want loads more machine guns on the market.
Not with current full-auto owners who would take a hit in market value.
Last I read the Gun Violence Archive defined mass shootings as 4 or more victims.
Justa question for you: if a non-AR15 style rifle (like a Ruger mini-14) is converted to "look like" an AR-15 with parts bought via the internet or wherever (no background check) does it get deadlier?
AndyS
(14,559 posts)The mini 14 costs a lot more than the AR-15 so it's a non issue although it's one of the competitors in the Pentagon RFQ.
Machine guns on the market? Have you kept up with the number of modified ARs being recovered at crime scenes? Apparently not. For as little as $30 any AR becomes full auto.
As for the value of machine guns why, exactly, should I give a shit about some gunner's investment?
discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,576 posts)Feel free to do the same and have nice evening.
TexasDem69
(2,317 posts)Are being used in crimes that regularly. Last one I recall is the shootout in north Hollywood in the 90s. Hell, I live in Texas and would think there are some examples here among the 20 million gun owners.
AndyS
(14,559 posts)AndyS
(14,559 posts)https://www.thetrace.org/2022/03/auto-sear-gun-chip-glock-switch-automatic-conversion/
There, I spoon fed you. Complete with link.
discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,576 posts)IIRC there has been one or two others since the Bank of America incident you mentioned. -shrug-
discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,576 posts)hack89
(39,179 posts)I would disagree with you about the effectiveness of AWBs.
All you need to know is that Adam Lanzas rifle was perfectly legal despite CT having the strictest AWB in the nation. It was not an assault weapon.
AndyS
(14,559 posts)hack89
(39,179 posts)Dont really know. The only thing I know for certain is that the first federal AWB was so poorly written and so easy to circumvent that there were AWB compliant AR-15s on the shelves before the ink was dry.
AndyS
(14,559 posts)does it necessarily have to decrease gun sales?
I would count saving lives as success, you?
hack89
(39,179 posts)So it would appear that the AWB was irrelevant to the conversation.
AndyS
(14,559 posts)Well if mass shootings went down during the AWB I wouldn't say it was irrelevant. There appears to be a correlation between the AWB and mass shootings. Shootings went down during the AWB and increased after. From this evidence I'd say the AWB was a good thing and I'd like to have something like it again. Something like putting all semi auto under the 1934 NFA would do the trick I believe. Anyone can have one but they have to undergo a REAL background check and register it with the ATF.
Asking again, I count decreasing deaths a good thing, you?
hack89
(39,179 posts)AR-15s were still perfectly legal. And their sales skyrocketed.
If AWBs are so effective, why didnt it stop Sandy Hook? Youve seen pictures of Adam Lanzas rifle - that rifle was perfectly legal during the federal AWB as it was under CTs even tougher AWB.
AndyS
(14,559 posts)In the decade the AWB was in effect mass shootings went down. In the decade after it expired they increased. Mass shootings higher, mass shootings lower, mass shootings higher. I do not know the mechanism but I do know they went down. I postulated a possibility in the OP but really don't know why, only that it happened.
As for Sandy Hook I get reallllllly tired of the gunner reasoning that says, "If you can't stop every motherfucking one of God damn gun deaths with a single fucking law you don't need to do ANYTHING!" Don't do that anymore, it makes you look callous and less than caring. And yeah, that's what you just did.
One more time, no AWB mass shootings HIGHER, AWB mass shootings LOWER, no AWB mass shootings HIGHER.
I think saving lives is a good thing, do you?
hack89
(39,179 posts)Got it.
You completely (and deliberately) misconstrued my Sandy Hook argument. My point is that the AWB did not actually ban assault weapons - a point you refuse to acknowledge.
AndyS
(14,559 posts)at passing a gun law of any kind. Maybe you didn't mean it that way, but it's what the gun culture replys with.
That said I surrender to your obviously superior intelllect. It's a shame that you can't choke out the words that saving lives is a good thing tho . . .
hack89
(39,179 posts)No disagreement here.
It is just that the federal AWB didnt save lives. Unless you think more AR 15s on the street resulted in fewer mass shootings. Which you apparently do.
hack89
(39,179 posts)How many rifles did the AWB take off the street? How many were turned in/confiscated/destroyed?
Just curious if you have a number.
AndyS
(14,559 posts)Gunz is special ya' know.
All I know is mass shootings went down under the AWB.
hack89
(39,179 posts)Sound possible to you?
AndyS
(14,559 posts)All I know is that mass shootings went down in the 10 years the AWB was in effect. There is data to support that and I shared it with you.
hack89
(39,179 posts)That is the black and white text of the law, correct?
Mass shootings fell ~30% during the AWB. Have I mentioned that? I thought I'd mentioned that . . .
hack89
(39,179 posts)That's what you refuse to explain
AndyS
(14,559 posts)Another item of interest in the graph was that while shootings decreased ~30% deaths decreased almost 50%. Hmmm, considering that ARs used in mass shooting kill 2.7x more than other types of weapons could it be that fewer ARs were used in those shootings?
Beyond that I don't need to explain anything to you, so just get over yourself.
By the way did I mention that mass shootings went down during the AWB ban? You may have missed that . . .
yagotme
(3,816 posts)Wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States
Counting incidents from 1974-1983, I get 18 incidents, 5 or more killed, and a total of 116 killed. Perhaps a general decrease was already happening, and just cycled over into the AWB.
discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,576 posts)...by whatever number of deaths (6 or more) we use as a criterion, we accept that gun massacres decreased during the federal AWB.
Where do we go from here?
Maybe we just restart the AWB:
Ban the sale of:
Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and has two or more of the following:
-Folding or telescoping stock
-Pistol grip
-Bayonet mount
-Flash hider or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
-Grenade launcher (I think the actual text was more like grenade launcher mounts)
Do we bring this back?