This is what CNN is reporting he used in the shooting:
-- AR15 assault rifle: A rifle that commonly fires bullets .223 millimeters in diameter. Originally manufactured by Colt before its patent ran out, but now also made by others. Cost: around $900 and up. Its military version is a machine gun, which allows a shooter to fire constantly by holding the trigger down. The nonmilitary AR-15 is a semi-automatic which shoots one bullet at a time, with each squeeze of the trigger. Ammunition magazines for the AR-15 commonly hold five to 15 rounds.
-- 870 Remington 12-gauge shotgun: One of the most popular shotguns in history. It can be modified to have a short or long barrel.
-- .40-caliber Glock handgun: Common weapon for police. Too big to put in pants pockets, but not too big to stick inside a waistband.
Here is the article:
Theater offers 'perfect killing' zone, expert says
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is what CNN is reporting he used in the shooting:
-- AR15 assault rifle: A rifle that commonly fires bullets .223 millimeters in diameter. Originally manufactured by Colt before its patent ran out, but now also made by others. Cost: around $900 and up. Its military version is a machine gun, which allows a shooter to fire constantly by holding the trigger down. The nonmilitary AR-15 is a semi-automatic which shoots one bullet at a time, with each squeeze of the trigger. Ammunition magazines for the AR-15 commonly hold five to 15 rounds.
-- 870 Remington 12-gauge shotgun: One of the most popular shotguns in history. It can be modified to have a short or long barrel.
-- .40-caliber Glock handgun: Common weapon for police. Too big to put in pants pockets, but not too big to stick inside a waistband.
Here is the article:
Theater offers 'perfect killing' zone, expert says
This is an excellent example of the the grossly inaccurate information that the media spews as content expertise.
Assault rifles by definition have select fire capability.
A semiautomatic AR pattern rifle is definitively NOT an assault rifle.
If the rifle is semiauto then claiming that it is a select fire assault rifle is either a deliberate falsehood or shocking ignorance.
Hundred round drums are not unusual in the least for AR family rifles.
The list goes on.
I guess it's just setting the bar too high to expect the media experts to have the faintest idea what they are talking about.
PS I know you're just citing the article so this isn't directed at you rather it's directed at what passes for journalism now days.
There are all kinds of call-in shows and talking heads saying the same things we always hear when these things happen.
Then we forget about it. Then it happens again.
|
The Military M-16 fires single or a 3 round burst not automatic full on rock and roll.
This version of the M-16 was put into use in 1980 and it is the M-16 version i trained on. The military will tell you that a weapon is less effective if you fire off 20 rounds in a matter of a few seconds compared to 1 or 3 at 1 time.
While training in the army they actually never wanted you to use anything but single shot and the 3 round burst was a do or die only thing to do.
Now the M-60 we trained with is a full on rock and roll full on auto machine gun. Even then they train to do a 2 - 3 second burst, it is far more effective, does not heat of the barrel as bad, saves ammo and makes for truer targeting.
The Military M-16 fires single or a 3 round burst not automatic full on rock and roll.
This version of the M-16 was put into use in 1980 and it is the M-16 version i trained on. The military will tell you that a weapon is less effective if you fire off 20 rounds in a matter of a few seconds compared to 1 or 3 at 1 time.
While training in the army they actually never wanted you to use anything but single shot and the 3 round burst was a do or die only thing to do.
Now the M-60 we trained with is a full on rock and roll full on auto machine gun. Even then they train to do a 2 - 3 second burst, it is far more effective, does not heat of the barrel as bad, saves ammo and makes for truer targeting.
The M16 A1 was semi or full auto; The A2 went to the 3 round burst. The M4 family is pretty diverse and has options in the current inventory for full auto and burst.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
See, when I hear people talk about blatant misinformation spew about a topic like this, I think they're probably talking about some gross mischaracterization of the suspect and his motives, or wildly overestimating casualties. Not minutiae about the weapon he used. That doesn't really bug me.
I'm far more interested in hearing who this guy is and what his motives were (which we likely won't know for quite some time, if ever) or about the victims and their families.
Interesting to see that roll call of mass murderers, it missed one of ours (Julian Knight) but was otherwise a generally accurate.
The last mass-killer in Australia was Bryant who actually spent a whole day killing people, starting with an elderly couple from whom he then took their gun collection before hijacking a few cars (just kill the driver and take it) and then finishing his afternoon with a range of weapons at a tourist attraction. In all it was a huge bodycount.
The public outrage at the event was huge.
It also heralded the end of semi-automatic rifle ownership in this country and a significant change to the gun ownership laws.
Never again.
Interesting to see that roll call of mass murderers, it missed one of ours (Julian Knight) but was otherwise a generally accurate.
The last mass-killer in Australia was Bryant who actually spent a whole day killing people, starting with an elderly couple from whom he then took their gun collection before hijacking a few cars (just kill the driver and take it) and then finishing his afternoon with a range of weapons at a tourist attraction. In all it was a huge bodycount.
The public outrage at the event was huge.
It also heralded the end of semi-automatic rifle ownership in this country and a significant change to the gun ownership laws.
Never again.
Oh yeah, Knight is in the book I have as well. Must have skipped over him when I was pulling out the non-Americans.
"Everybody stop
Hey, what's that sound?
Everybody look
What's going down"
I feel so bad for the families of the victims, as well as the ones who survived. I wish I could do more than that for them.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And yet again I learn: don't quote people you disagree when you respond to them, your post will just get deleted too.
I have nothing but sympathy for the survivors. It's way to early say anything more than that.
See, when I hear people talk about blatant misinformation spew about a topic like this, I think they're probably talking about some gross mischaracterization of the suspect and his motives, or wildly overestimating casualties. Not minutiae about the weapon he used. That doesn't really bug me.
I'm far more interested in hearing who this guy is and what his motives were (which we likely won't know for quite some time, if ever) or about the victims and their families.
I think the facts matter, and I don't think that decades of federal felonies are minutia, but we obviously feel differently about the value of accurate reporting. Numerous media outlets are reporting that the shooter used an assault weapon, and that assault weapons can be purchased at any Walmart or gun store. This is a blatant falsehood.
The media is misreporting many other things as well, but that's what media tends to do.
I wished your attitude surprised me, but it's fairly typical.
Numerous media outlets are reporting that the shooter used an assault weapon, and that assault weapons can be purchased at any Walmart or gun store. This is a blatant falsehood.
Sloppy journalism, its all the rage.
I think the facts matter, and I don't think that decades of federal felonies are minutia, but we obviously feel differently about the value of accurate reporting
I think you're at best trying to insist on a very specific nomenclature to general parlance (like when someone calls a chimpanzee a monkey or a Pteranodon a dinosaur) or at worst trying to apply one technical term/definition for something that doesn't have agreed upon technical term and multiple definitions.
The media can only repeat what they're told, and so far it isn't much. They've been interviewing people who were there, and talking up a storm about the usual issues surrounding it.
The cops are still trying to sort it all out. We still don't have a lot of facts, just a lot of talk, while the usual pundits look for political advantage.
Just like last time.
Numerous media outlets are reporting that the shooter used an assault weapon, and that assault weapons can be purchased at any Walmart or gun store. This is a blatant falsehood.
Sloppy journalism, its all the rage.
Sadly true.
See, when I hear people talk about blatant misinformation spew about a topic like this, I think they're probably talking about some gross mischaracterization of the suspect and his motives, or wildly overestimating casualties. Not minutiae about the weapon he used. That doesn't really bug me.
I'm far more interested in hearing who this guy is and what his motives were (which we likely won't know for quite some time, if ever) or about the victims and their families.
I think the facts matter, and I don't think that decades of federal felonies are minutia, but we obviously feel differently about the value of accurate reporting. Numerous media outlets are reporting that the shooter used an assault weapon, and that assault weapons can be purchased at any Walmart or gun store. This is a blatant falsehood.
The media is misreporting many other things as well, but that's what media tends to do.
I wished your attitude surprised me, but it's fairly typical.
Correction: assault rifle not assault weapon.
So this thread is turning into, "It's so sad the way a dozen people were killed, but the media doesn't even know which guns they're talking about!"
Shifty, BT: the difference between fully automatic and semi automatic, and which of those should actually be called an assault weapon is just about the least important part of what happened.
I think the facts matter, and I don't think that decades of federal felonies are minutia, but we obviously feel differently about the value of accurate reportingI think you're at best trying to insist on a very specific nomenclature to general parlance (like when someone calls a chimpanzee a monkey or a Pteranodon a dinosaur) or at worst trying to apply one technical term/definition for something that doesn't have agreed upon technical term and multiple definitions.
Here's the definition of assault rifle. It took less than 60 seconds to find. I'm not asking a lot from the lazy sloppy dipsticks in the media. This is hardly an issue limited to firearms. The media is painfully illiterate when reporting on science and technical issues as well. I think they are either dishonest or very intellectually lazy.
"The term assault rifle is a translation of the German word Sturmgewehr (literally "storm rifle", as in "to storm a position"). The name was coined by Adolf Hitler[3] to describe the Maschinenpistole 43, subsequently renamed Sturmgewehr 44, the firearm generally considered the first assault rifle that served to popularise the concept and form the basis for today's modern assault rifles.
The translation assault rifle gradually became the common term for similar firearms sharing the same technical definition as the StG 44. In a strict definition, a firearm must have at least the following characteristics to be considered an assault rifle:[4][5][6]
It must be an individual weapon with provision to fire from the shoulder (i.e. a buttstock);
It must be capable of selective fire;
It must have an intermediate-power cartridge: more power than a pistol but less than a standard rifle or battle rifle;
Its ammunition must be supplied from a detachable magazine rather than a feed-belt.
And it should at least have a firing range of 300 meters (1000 feet)
Rifles that meet most of these criteria, but not all, are technically not assault rifles despite frequently being considered as such. For example, semi-automatic-only rifles like the AR-15 (which the M16 rifle is based on) that share designs with assault rifles are not assault rifles, as they are not capable of switching to automatic fire and thus are not selective fire capable. Belt-fed weapons or rifles with fixed magazines are likewise not assault rifles because they do not have detachable box magazines." Wiki
OK and 'm with you that definitions are important, however I now ask what difference it makes to the average member of the public if they refer to it as an assault rifle or machine gun etc?
At the end of the day the average person will see 'man with rifle able to shoot really fast and with heaps of ammo kills heaps of people', differentiating the specifics would mean what?
HD Actually the whole thing becomes important, because to answer the question I just posed 'The definition becomes important in the subsequent wider debate about gun control. That debate should surely follow this incident as night follows day'.
Half truths and inaccurate information means that subsequent debate mires down in myths and misunderstandings, which serves no one.
So this thread is turning into, "It's so sad the way a dozen people were killed, but the media doesn't even know which guns they're talking about!"
Shifty, BT: the difference between fully automatic and semi automatic, and which of those should actually be called an assault weapon is just about the least important part of what happened.
So when your side lies I'm just nit picking when I suggest that the truth might be more informative to the debate, and that makes me shifty. Typical.
Nothing srong with being Shifty BT :)
So when you side lies I'm just nit picking when I suggest that the truth might be more informative to the debate, and that makes me shifty. Typical.So this thread is turning into, "It's so sad the way a dozen people were killed, but the media doesn't even know which guns they're talking about!"
Shifty, BT: the difference between fully automatic and semi automatic, and which of those should actually be called an assault weapon is just about the least important part of what happened.
I'm pretty sure there aren't even sides in the conversation yet. I was talking to you and Shifty, not calling you a name.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd be certain that there are sides, as the debate has been going on for years and with clearly defined camps; they just haven't started the inevitable fight over their issues in light of THIS incident...yet.
The call will go out on gun control shortly, and then the sides will put up their banners and begin butting heads. Actually having accurate information becomes crucial at that point, so best the information and facts get straightened out BEFORE people get into debates formed on ill advice.
I'm pretty sure there aren't even sides in the conversation yet. I was talking to you and Shifty, not calling you a name.So when you side lies I'm just nit picking when I suggest that the truth might be more informative to the debate, and that makes me shifty. Typical.So this thread is turning into, "It's so sad the way a dozen people were killed, but the media doesn't even know which guns they're talking about!"
Shifty, BT: the difference between fully automatic and semi automatic, and which of those should actually be called an assault weapon is just about the least important part of what happened.
Whoops. I read that as an accusation, but the other reading makes more sense now. That wasn't especially charitable of me.
I still maintain that the facts are relevant. I think the truth matters, and the news seems more useful to me when it contains the truth.
And there are definitely sides already.
I'd be certain that there are sides, as the debate has been going on for years and with clearly defined camps; they just haven't started the inevitable fight over their issues in light of THIS incident...yet.
The call will go out on gun control shortly, and then the sides will put up their banners and begin butting heads. Actually having accurate information becomes crucial at that point, so best the information and facts get straightened out BEFORE people get into debates formed on ill advice.
Yeah, that's what I'm saying. (To everyone, myself included.) Let's not start ranting about anything before we know what we're talking about. I don't care if the guy had an assault weapon, a black powder revolver or an ice pick. I just think it's sad that he went to a crowded public place and tried to kill everyone in sight.
Nothing srong with being Shifty BT :)
Yup. I was a little slow on that one.
I'm pretty sure there aren't even sides in the conversation yet. I was talking to you and Shifty, not calling you a name.So when you side lies I'm just nit picking when I suggest that the truth might be more informative to the debate, and that makes me shifty. Typical.So this thread is turning into, "It's so sad the way a dozen people were killed, but the media doesn't even know which guns they're talking about!"
Shifty, BT: the difference between fully automatic and semi automatic, and which of those should actually be called an assault weapon is just about the least important part of what happened.
Whoops. I read that as an accusation, but the other reading makes more sense now. That wasn't especially charitable of me.
I still maintain that the facts are relevant. I think the truth matters, and the news seems more useful to me when it contains the truth.
And there are definitely sides already.
I think truth matters too, but relevant information is exactly the kind of thing we have to wait a week or two to even define.
I don't think there are clear sides; I own guns and support gun control.
I promise you this though BT: no one is trying to take your guns away.
Well seems we are in general accord, however I am always ready to rant about it if I feel inaccurate info is being spread.
I'd just prefer a little rigour was used by the journalists in their reporting. If they don't know something then they should say 'it is unclear at this point', rather than report gossip/hearsay or just plain make stuff up.
Getting in early with the 'scoop' is all good and well, but the news has a significance in society and accuracy is vitally important; look at the mess and fallout from the wild speculation they were fuelling in the Florida incident.
I'm sure this will get me called a liberal, but I've been listening to NPR's reporting and they've been distinctly non-alarmist, if that's even a word.
Mind you, the infotainment news networks should just cite their sources.
Here's the definition of assault rifle. It took less than 60 seconds to find.
But there's more than one definition out there to find.
An assault rifle is an automatic rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine.[1] (wiki quoting encyclopedia britanica)
automatic: An automatic firearm is a firearm that loads another round mechanically after the first round has been fired.
an intermediate cartridge is a military assault rifle cartridge that is less powerful than typical full power battle rifle cartridges such as the 7.62x51mm NATO or US .30-06 Springfield, but still significantly more powerful than pistol cartridges.[1]
I think that fits
Hearts and prayers going to the families.
I encourage everyone who prays to do the same. For those of you who don't believe, perhaps Karma or the Dice gods could lend some luck to those surviving and those who will deal with the terror the rest of their lives.
/d
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My feeling, and I could be totally wrong, but I believe he did it out of a desire for Herostratic fame.
I remember a case study when I was in Law about Herostratus, a man who burned down the temple of Artemis in ancient Greece, solely to become infamous, and in response the Greeks executed him and tried to erase him from history. We can see how well that turned out since we, presumably, know his name but there was an interesting discussion about what to do about fame-killers.
The general consensus ended up being that the killers would have their names presented as part of newspaper articles and court documents but then changed to something generic and that it should be illegal for anyone to use, or refer to them in any way that could be construed as capitalizing on their infamy to mitigate their impact on history with the goal of people forgetting about "Lee Harvey Oswald" who would then become "ABVVVX111FD-33#4-ZXX32" of which we'd end up knowing nothing about except "XXX assassinated YYY". This, of course, presented a problem with the whole "freedom of speech" thing and then the consensus went bye-bye, but it is still an interesting idea as part of the punishment.
You want to go down in history? Tough. Your victims will be mourned and remembered but you will not. You no longer have a name. You never existed. You're just a long, complex serial number that few people will ever be able to associate with a face.
I'm pretty sure there aren't even sides in the conversation yet. I was talking to you and Shifty, not calling you a name.So when you side lies I'm just nit picking when I suggest that the truth might be more informative to the debate, and that makes me shifty. Typical.So this thread is turning into, "It's so sad the way a dozen people were killed, but the media doesn't even know which guns they're talking about!"
Shifty, BT: the difference between fully automatic and semi automatic, and which of those should actually be called an assault weapon is just about the least important part of what happened.
Whoops. I read that as an accusation, but the other reading makes more sense now. That wasn't especially charitable of me.
I still maintain that the facts are relevant. I think the truth matters, and the news seems more useful to me when it contains the truth.
And there are definitely sides already.
I think truth matters too, but relevant information is exactly the kind of thing we have to wait a week or two to even define.
I don't think there are clear sides; I own guns and support gun control.
I promise you this though BT: no one is trying to take your guns away.
I have to disagree with your last point, but I would rather not see this thread turn into the next gun control debate thread.
My larger point remains that the reporting is predictably abysmal. People want information and there is very little to be had so the TV media fills air space with talking heads making vacant and insipid speculation. All of the coverage I've watched from MSNBC to FNC to PBS has been basically the same.
I pray for the familys and everyone touched by this..i pray for all of us
BT, can I ask if you're talking about your local PBS reporting or national shows? All I saw on PBS (I'm sure I don't have to tell you, but PBS and NPR are two different things) tonight was Washington Week, and all they said was that the police/swat teams/bombs squad still hadn't entered the dude's apartment for fear of booby traps.
I mean, given the training of most bomb squads, that's probably a wise decision. I'm going to wait at least forty-eight hours before I start politicizing the issue, y'know?
Here's the definition of assault rifle. It took less than 60 seconds to find.But there's more than one definition out there to find.
An assault rifle is an automatic rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine.[1] (wiki quoting encyclopedia britanica)
automatic: An automatic firearm is a firearm that loads another round mechanically after the first round has been fired.
an intermediate cartridge is a military assault rifle cartridge that is less powerful than typical full power battle rifle cartridges such as the 7.62x51mm NATO or US .30-06 Springfield, but still significantly more powerful than pistol cartridges.[1]
I think that fits
If automatic meant select fire it would be accurate, but it would be incomplete. Shoulder fired and detachable magazines are included in the definition for important and well established reasons. These definitions are well established and long standing. They really aren't in dispute among military, law enforcement, and shooting professionals. Politicians and the media literally make up terms like "assault weapon" to mislead people and influence policy. It started as a willful Orwellian abuse of the language, and now the misuse and ignorance has been very well propagated by the media. Even FNC commonly misuses terms like assault weapon and assault rifle.
I really think the use of language by communication professionals should have some self discipline and intellectual honesty.
I truly don't think I'm picking nits here. People, especially those who consider themselves journalists, should probably avoid using specific technical/legal terms if they don't have the faintest idea what they mean.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So this thread is turning into, "It's so sad the way a dozen people were killed, but the media doesn't even know which guns they're talking about!"
Shifty, BT: the difference between fully automatic and semi automatic, and which of those should actually be called an assault weapon is just about the least important part of what happened.
Actually, Facts are supposed to be the very heart of journalism. If the can't get the type of firearm correct, which they rarely do, how can you be sure the rest of what they are reporting is accurate?
Kevlar doesn't cover the entire body. And if someone in the audience did have a gun, then they theoretically could have taken out the gunman. But you have to remember a few things:
1: Dark theater. You'd need a tack-light or a laser sight to get a good shot. Those with a conceal carry permit are taught to never shoot unless you have a clear shot.
2: The gunman used tear gas, according to witnesses. Civilians are not trained to fight its effects.
3: The fact that he shot up the place during a gunfight in the movie. Many of those witnesses claim to have heard the gunfire and at first thought it was part of the movie.
Plus, Spree Killers (or any killer for that matter) tend to pick places where there is a strong likelihood of getting a lot of victims before someone is able to put a stop to them. A theater is about the worst place to fall victim to a crime. It's too dark and there are too few exits. Many people are tuned in to the show rather than what is going on around them. A civilian who is carrying in a park or a fair is going to have a much easier time putting a stop to a Spree Killer.
Also the fact that most people just aren't trained for these kinds of situations. Just because you may have a gun doesn't mean you'd be calm enough to hit your target, and in a crowded theater full of panicked people running everywhere, a person shooting back at the gunman could just as easily kill more innocents by accident.
BT, can I ask if you're talking about your local PBS reporting or national shows? All I saw on PBS (I'm sure I don't have to tell you, but PBS and NPR are two different things) tonight was Washington Week, and all they said was that the police/swat teams/bombs squad still hadn't entered the dude's apartment for fear of booby traps.
I mean, given the training of most bomb squads, that's probably a wise decision. I'm going to wait at least forty-eight hours before I start politicizing the issue, y'know?
I caught the News Hour, the Mcglauclin group (sp?), and some local shows. With the exception of the News Hour they are all basically Op Ed panels, but I was not at all impressed with the News Hour's coverage either.
I love how they have the panels ask question of the reporter on the scene who basically doesn't have any information either.