early in his presidency gwb allowed the ban on the sale of assault rifles (introduced by his predecessor, president clinton) to expire.
robert hawkins used an assault rifle for his day's work at the mall. it maximised his kill potential (assault rifles are designed for that job).
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7130364.stm
president bush now tells us that he is praying for the nebraskan victims.
robert hawkins would almost certainly have killed fewer people with a handgun or a sports-rifle. would it have been better if president bush had kept the assault-rifle ban and spared his prayers?
or do believers prefer the empty gesture?
2007-12-06 17:47:44 · 6 answers · asked by synopsis 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Not true, take the VT killer for instance and the weaponry he used? 2 handguns took out alot more than one A.K., so the ending result is who was a better shot and who planned the situation better. Who was looking for more kills and who was looking for a way out... I do agree it a bad coincidence that Bush uplift the assault rifle ban but as for killing less people that always depends apon the shooter. I hate Bush btw, so don't think I plan to defend that slightly evolved chimp.
2007-12-06 18:09:55 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The murderer could have achieved the same results with a butcher knife or axe. The 9/11 hijackers used box cutters to commandeer the airplanes.
He used a semi-automatic weapon, i.e. a single shot is fired each time the trigger is pulled. That technology has been around for decades. Most handguns and sporting rifles are semi-automatic. He did not have a full automatic assault rifle that would fire multiple shots with a single trigger pull. Some of the media have played the 911 tapes. You can hear the single shots.
As for laws: he stole the gun, he committed several acts of murder, he committed assaults with a deadly weapon, he attemped several more murders, he disturbed the peace.
2007-12-07 02:18:22 · answer #2 · answered by hamrrfan 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
While I do think GWB is a turbo moron who prays instead of acting, I don't believe gun control laws do crap.
The assault rifle definition was a terrible vague political definition anyway. Not only can you STILL get it through many means, there are tons of other guns that you can use as a replacement, legally.
2007-12-07 02:45:49 · answer #3 · answered by Moo 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Would it have been better if science had not led to the creation of assault rifles?
2007-12-07 01:57:29 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
maybe if the the ban was still in place, he would have used a bomb.
2007-12-07 01:52:35 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Both are BS!!!
We save ourselves!!!
2007-12-07 01:56:06 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋