I was waiting for that. Incorrect though. In most of the biggest casualty events, multiple guns were used. The Vegas shooter had multiple weapons, cameras in his Vegas motel room, mufflers(silencers) , bump stocks, and was even alleged to have been targeting nearby jet fuel containers (the articles I read said he seemed to target them in hopes of a massive explosion, in addition to the other planned chaos.) He also was firing from a elevated, and far away spot. A total anomaly in most cases of mass shooters… He didn’t buy ban AR from Walmart and just walk into a school. His planning, and execution were far more relevant to the casualty count, than a single gun type being available…
9/11 was guys with utility knives. Over 2,000 people are dead. So are utility knives a weapon of mass destruction?..
Not to mention that these are really anomalous occurrences really. If you factor in the amount of guns in circulation. The amount of “mass” shootings (let’s say 4 or more dead,) the statistics show that it’s highly unlikely that the vast majority of guns won’t be the ones involved in violent crime. In fact. Speaking with experience in law enforcement, many of the guns used in crimes were used by multiple people, multiple times, and were acquired legally in many cases only because of lax gun laws. In my state, you can sell a gun to anyone, and you don’t need anything. If you meet a guy at a gun range who says, I’ll give you $500 bucks for that gun of yours. You can sell it to them legally, with NO background check, or anything. THAT’S RETARDED!
Making some very simple, and obviously smart changes in gun control, could make big differences in gun crime. Banning ARs isn’t going to reduce street sales, or straw purchases, or crime. As I’ve said a million times, most gun crimes are committed with handguns. Like exponentially more…