Jan 3 2013: Agreed, many of us have fear.
Agreed, many of us are violent against our fellow man, sometimes using a gun.
And there are probably more factors involved in mass gun violence.
Joe Biden is heading a group assigned to prepare a report of ideas to reduce gun violence.
Is that correct?
I'm not saying the NTSB will solve these problems.
What I'm saying is this:
The NTSB seems to have a good track record of investigating events and identifying the factors.
They seem to be realistic when making recommendations for improvement.
And so we have safer travel these days.
There are countless ways to analyze problems.
I'm suggesting that the NTSB could provide some guidance in this area.
Dec 29 2012: @edward long: Altho it's off-topic slightly, thanks for mentioning this incident that I and many others had not known.
The 1927 Bath school disaster caused many student deaths.
The main weapons were dynamite, pyrotol, and firebombs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster
But wouldn't you agree that guns are more popular in our day?
Seems to me, it's easier to obtain, transport, and operate a gun than explosives.
A technical mistake with explosives could "end it" prematurely, not producing the desired result.
Gun technology is the subject of this Conversation, but I'm interested in your statement:
"The greatest destruction of innocent human lives does not involve guns and is legal."
Please explain.
Dec 29 2012: The State Police reported that the main weapon was a Bushmaster .223 semi-automatic.
In the Piers Morgan Tonight show last week, he had been calling the weapon a "military-style assault rifle".
It may have had a high-capacity magazine and looked like an M16.
On Thursday 12/20, he kept asking a guest "How many rounds can the AR-15 shoot in one second?" This implies automatic fire.
Do you know of any final police reports that the rifle may have been converted to have "automatic fire"?
If yes, this raises another issue that people should be aware of. Just a few years ago, it was stated that "automatic fire" was impossible for semi-automatic firearms.
If the weapon did not have an option for automatic fire, Piers Morgan Tonight and other reports were giving a false picture.
Dec 29 2012: Guns (even M16 weapons) do not kill other people!
However, the federal government recognizes that they're more lethal.
Why are weapons such as M16 rifles considered to be more dangerous?
Is it because they look scary?
Would it be beneficial to ask the federal government who invented "Class 3":
Why are the M16 and "M16-like weapons" a problem?
To what extent should citizens be permitted to bear arms?
Should citizen Joe be allowed to own a grenade launcher, or a Gatling gun?
Should billionaire citizen Bob be allowed to build a small nuclear bomb?
Dec 29 2012: No, guns don't kill people - by themselves.
Guns must be utilized by people.
And the classification of people using guns to destroy innocent lives seems to be increasing.
However, the AWB also includes a ban on weapons that have certain *cosmetic* features of a machine gun, such as a pistol grip and high-capacity magazines. Therefore, AWB would have an effect…
But then there’s the issue of guns stolen from the owner. AWB would Not have an effect…
Note: If you agree with the AWB to provide some effect (it’s not perfect), do you see it needs to address newer products or devices (e.g. SSAR-15) that result in a weapon capable of rapid automatic fire, as in a machine gun? Certainly these weapons provide an advantage similar to a Gatling gun. Should the BATF retract its approval of SSAR-15, or require Class 3 license?
Dec 26 2012: In general, I tend to be more technical, looking for details about how things work.
For example, I’m truly amazed at the process of “genes to proteins”.
When I heard the tragic news from Sandy Hook, of course I felt very sad for the loss of those children and teachers.
But as time passed and hearing reports of a Bushmaster .223 weapon, I learned what “semi-automatic” operation looks like in a firearm. The “six-guns” used by cowboys were the predecessor; they could shoot six times by merely pulling the trigger six times (“double-action”). Then someone invented magazines (“clips”) to store more rounds and make it easier to reload.
If a criminal from the days of Roy Rogers days wanted to kill a bunch of people, he could fire 12 rounds, using both hands. Then he would need to reload.
Or he could get a Gatling gun that enabled rapid fire.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gatling_gun
Here’s a question.
Did the shooter at Sandy Hook have a gun that operated like a “six-gun” revolver used by Roy Rogers?
Or did the gun operate more like a Gatling gun?
Many news programs claim that it was a “military assault rifle” that could shoot many rounds per second.
The website “Federal Assault Weapons Ban” says:
“The Act addressed only semi-automatic firearms, that is, firearms that fire one shot each time the trigger is pulled. Neither the AWB nor its expiration changed the legal status of fully automatic firearms, which fire more than one round with a single trigger-pull; these have been regulated by the National Firearms Act of 1934 and Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986.”
This statement is misleading. In the Sandy Hook example:
The news reports say a semi-automatic gun was used. (weapon covered by AWB)
But automatic fire was used. Weapon Not covered by AWB; therefore, the AWB would have no effect on the crime…
Dec 26 2012: In the movie "The End of Poverty?", I sorta remember that the World Bank is given a bad rap, enforcing that third world countries stay in poverty. Has that changed?
Dec 25 2012: Colleen,
As I mentioned initially, even one round from a gun is an assault on the victim.
Rifles used in 1776 inflicted fatal wounds as modern “semi-automatic” guns do today. The effect is the same. As you say, the person is dead.
In this case, it was the news reports and programs that reported the “number of rounds” information and concluded that a military assault rifle was used, implying automatic fire. And that’s a problem, because we’re told that the shooter’s gun was a semi-automatic.
The difference between semi-automatic and automatic operation is explained and demonstrated here:
"The Truth About Semi-Auto Firearms" (Uploaded on Jan 8, 2007)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysf8x477c30
At 3:22, the retired police officer says the “automatic rifle” is sold only to policemen and law enforcement.
Towards the end, they say it's impossible to convert a semi-automatic to automatic operation.
Has something changed since 2007?
Why do Piers Morgan and other people report that a (military) automatic firearm was utilized at Sandy Hook?
What was the police evidence?
Dec 25 2012: Despite the information being “on line”, I’m curious about the misinformation on news programs. For example, “Piers Morgan Tonight” has been talking about the dreadful event at Sandy Hook. I think it was the Thursday program (12/20) in which Piers asked a guest several times: “How many rounds a second can an AR-15 fire?” – giving the impression of a military machine gun. For some reason, the guest did not answer.
The next day, Piers started the show with a video showing operation of an AR-15-type with “automatic” fire.
But when you see a person shooting a semi-automatic rifle at target practice (accuracy most important), he/she pulls the trigger to fire one round. It appears to take one second for the body to absorb the shock and get ready for another attempt. From the factory, the semi-automatic AR-15 apparently enables only that operation. Am I incorrect on that?
(My only personal experience with guns is with a .22 rifle my dad and older brother used for hunting, some 60 years ago.)
When I found information about the SSAR-15, a light came on. It explained how a semi-automatic rifle could be transformed into another kind of weapon. Perhaps there are other ways to do it. There is evidence from Sandy Hook that automatic fire was used (many rounds in each victim). During a murder trial, details are exposed by ballistics experts and eye-witnesses. But when the perpetrator commits suicide, there is no trial. Apparently the type of gun is an important issue. Shouldn’t we know if the semi-automatic rifle was a modified version?
I find it difficult to understand:
>> The SSAR-15 product is approved by the BATF, the resultant weapon having a “machine gun” operation.
>> Nobody talks about it.
TEDCred score: +0.70 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.
A comment on Conversation: How would the NTSB tackle the gun violence problem?
Agreed, many of us are violent against our fellow man, sometimes using a gun.
And there are probably more factors involved in mass gun violence.
Joe Biden is heading a group assigned to prepare a report of ideas to reduce gun violence.
Is that correct?
I'm not saying the NTSB will solve these problems.
What I'm saying is this:
The NTSB seems to have a good track record of investigating events and identifying the factors.
They seem to be realistic when making recommendations for improvement.
And so we have safer travel these days.
There are countless ways to analyze problems.
I'm suggesting that the NTSB could provide some guidance in this area.
A comment on Conversation: Clarification of Gun Terms: Semi-automatic, Assault, Machine gun
The 1927 Bath school disaster caused many student deaths.
The main weapons were dynamite, pyrotol, and firebombs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster
But wouldn't you agree that guns are more popular in our day?
Seems to me, it's easier to obtain, transport, and operate a gun than explosives.
A technical mistake with explosives could "end it" prematurely, not producing the desired result.
Gun technology is the subject of this Conversation, but I'm interested in your statement:
"The greatest destruction of innocent human lives does not involve guns and is legal."
Please explain.
A reply on Conversation: Clarification of Gun Terms: Semi-automatic, Assault, Machine gun
In the Piers Morgan Tonight show last week, he had been calling the weapon a "military-style assault rifle".
It may have had a high-capacity magazine and looked like an M16.
On Thursday 12/20, he kept asking a guest "How many rounds can the AR-15 shoot in one second?" This implies automatic fire.
Do you know of any final police reports that the rifle may have been converted to have "automatic fire"?
If yes, this raises another issue that people should be aware of. Just a few years ago, it was stated that "automatic fire" was impossible for semi-automatic firearms.
If the weapon did not have an option for automatic fire, Piers Morgan Tonight and other reports were giving a false picture.
A reply on Conversation: Clarification of Gun Terms: Semi-automatic, Assault, Machine gun
However, the federal government recognizes that they're more lethal.
Why are weapons such as M16 rifles considered to be more dangerous?
Is it because they look scary?
Would it be beneficial to ask the federal government who invented "Class 3":
Why are the M16 and "M16-like weapons" a problem?
To what extent should citizens be permitted to bear arms?
Should citizen Joe be allowed to own a grenade launcher, or a Gatling gun?
Should billionaire citizen Bob be allowed to build a small nuclear bomb?
A reply on Conversation: Clarification of Gun Terms: Semi-automatic, Assault, Machine gun
Guns must be utilized by people.
And the classification of people using guns to destroy innocent lives seems to be increasing.
A comment on Conversation: Clarification of Gun Terms: Semi-automatic, Assault, Machine gun
However, the AWB also includes a ban on weapons that have certain *cosmetic* features of a machine gun, such as a pistol grip and high-capacity magazines. Therefore, AWB would have an effect…
But then there’s the issue of guns stolen from the owner. AWB would Not have an effect…
Note: If you agree with the AWB to provide some effect (it’s not perfect), do you see it needs to address newer products or devices (e.g. SSAR-15) that result in a weapon capable of rapid automatic fire, as in a machine gun? Certainly these weapons provide an advantage similar to a Gatling gun. Should the BATF retract its approval of SSAR-15, or require Class 3 license?
A comment on Conversation: Clarification of Gun Terms: Semi-automatic, Assault, Machine gun
For example, I’m truly amazed at the process of “genes to proteins”.
When I heard the tragic news from Sandy Hook, of course I felt very sad for the loss of those children and teachers.
But as time passed and hearing reports of a Bushmaster .223 weapon, I learned what “semi-automatic” operation looks like in a firearm. The “six-guns” used by cowboys were the predecessor; they could shoot six times by merely pulling the trigger six times (“double-action”). Then someone invented magazines (“clips”) to store more rounds and make it easier to reload.
If a criminal from the days of Roy Rogers days wanted to kill a bunch of people, he could fire 12 rounds, using both hands. Then he would need to reload.
Or he could get a Gatling gun that enabled rapid fire.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gatling_gun
Here’s a question.
Did the shooter at Sandy Hook have a gun that operated like a “six-gun” revolver used by Roy Rogers?
Or did the gun operate more like a Gatling gun?
Many news programs claim that it was a “military assault rifle” that could shoot many rounds per second.
The website “Federal Assault Weapons Ban” says:
“The Act addressed only semi-automatic firearms, that is, firearms that fire one shot each time the trigger is pulled. Neither the AWB nor its expiration changed the legal status of fully automatic firearms, which fire more than one round with a single trigger-pull; these have been regulated by the National Firearms Act of 1934 and Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986.”
This statement is misleading. In the Sandy Hook example:
The news reports say a semi-automatic gun was used. (weapon covered by AWB)
But automatic fire was used. Weapon Not covered by AWB; therefore, the AWB would have no effect on the crime…
(continued)
A comment on Talk: Sanjay Pradhan: How open data is changing international aid
A reply on Conversation: Clarification of Gun Terms: Semi-automatic, Assault, Machine gun
As I mentioned initially, even one round from a gun is an assault on the victim.
Rifles used in 1776 inflicted fatal wounds as modern “semi-automatic” guns do today. The effect is the same. As you say, the person is dead.
In this case, it was the news reports and programs that reported the “number of rounds” information and concluded that a military assault rifle was used, implying automatic fire. And that’s a problem, because we’re told that the shooter’s gun was a semi-automatic.
The difference between semi-automatic and automatic operation is explained and demonstrated here:
"The Truth About Semi-Auto Firearms" (Uploaded on Jan 8, 2007)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysf8x477c30
At 3:22, the retired police officer says the “automatic rifle” is sold only to policemen and law enforcement.
Towards the end, they say it's impossible to convert a semi-automatic to automatic operation.
Has something changed since 2007?
Why do Piers Morgan and other people report that a (military) automatic firearm was utilized at Sandy Hook?
What was the police evidence?
A reply on Conversation: Clarification of Gun Terms: Semi-automatic, Assault, Machine gun
The next day, Piers started the show with a video showing operation of an AR-15-type with “automatic” fire.
But when you see a person shooting a semi-automatic rifle at target practice (accuracy most important), he/she pulls the trigger to fire one round. It appears to take one second for the body to absorb the shock and get ready for another attempt. From the factory, the semi-automatic AR-15 apparently enables only that operation. Am I incorrect on that?
(My only personal experience with guns is with a .22 rifle my dad and older brother used for hunting, some 60 years ago.)
When I found information about the SSAR-15, a light came on. It explained how a semi-automatic rifle could be transformed into another kind of weapon. Perhaps there are other ways to do it. There is evidence from Sandy Hook that automatic fire was used (many rounds in each victim). During a murder trial, details are exposed by ballistics experts and eye-witnesses. But when the perpetrator commits suicide, there is no trial. Apparently the type of gun is an important issue. Shouldn’t we know if the semi-automatic rifle was a modified version?
I find it difficult to understand:
>> The SSAR-15 product is approved by the BATF, the resultant weapon having a “machine gun” operation.
>> Nobody talks about it.