could have not been shot to death with a semi auto rifle here in the US if a similar ban had been passed after one of our multi massacres. And I'm just talking like the .223 semi auto rifle. Not the semi auto pistols or any of that. It's gotta be a Yuge number. Hard to argue that Australia has not had a lot of repeats to this event since they don't have the guns in the first place.
Personally, I've got almost 15 grand worth of guns, pistols, all that shit. An NRA'er I'm not, but I support groups like TU, NWTF, RMEF, and my states hunting an fishing programs. No matter which side of the 2nd amendment argument you are on, there is not a lot of logic to the argument that the average joe needs an semi auto rifle that holds 30 rounds of high powered ammo. IMHO-- Modified on 4/27/2016 5:25:27 PM
I think there is a politics forum on here.
Semi-Auto rifles (AR's and the like) are way down on the list. My guesstimate to your question is maybe a few hundred. I bet reactions to aspirin has directly killed more people in the past 20 years than semi-auto rifles in mass shootings.
I hate it when these shootings occur, and I hate the logic and arguments BOTH sides put up in the wake of these things. I don't have an answer nor a suggestion, but I see a big issue with enacting a ban and that's the millions and millions of AR's and AK's and the like that are already out there.
You're simply not gonna get them back and if you try, there's going to be a big fight. Pandora's box was opened a long time ago.
So, knowing there are already a few hundred million firearms out there in our homes and many of those owners are willing to die to keep their right to keep them, especially in the face of a government seeking to disarm them, what will a ban on any or all of them do?