Calm down hoyt I'm not a rabid gunnut; my underlying point was my last sentence in the paragraph:
Thus, had lanza, imo, had a rifle with a larger bullet he'd have had to compensate for the recoil upwards, & this would've made him more inaccurate. The ar15 with little recoil meant he could keep the rifle low & more accurately focussed on his .... targets.
I am arguing for banning the ar15 in part on the grounds that it can kill people quicker & just about as lethal as any legal rifle today, up close. And the lack of recoil contributes to it being able to hit targets more accurately since the rifle remains moreso where the shooter is trying to aim it, easier to control - a contributing reason it should be banned.
Note the OP gave the guy's link as ar15 something dot com - the reason I wanted to point out that the rifle he had wasn't an ar15 but an ak47. I don't think some cursory knowledge of guns is a bad thing for gun control advocates.
I fully agreed with what joe biden said to the real gunnut with his pathetic concern & I hope you don't now consider me on the same plane. I supported biden for president when he ran against hc & obama in 2008, to a point tho, after about a few months I realized it wasn't going to go so I stopped contributing to his campaign after about 60$, not wanting to become a cash cow to a campaign to nowhere. I went to a rally he gave under a susquehanna river bridge, gives a good rousing speech; actually he once lived about 20 miles away.
(also see 'I renounce my 2nd A right' thread for further info about my views)
= new reply since forum marked as read