Skip to main content

View Diary: Firearms Law and Policy - Do consumers have standing to challenge laws regulating gun sales? (72 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Thank you for this clarification (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Glen The Plumber, Smoh, WakeUpNeo

    Hello MR, thanks for dropping by.

    The Sandy Hook shooter also did not fire until empty, which is what someone does when they're utilizing suppressive fire. The Sandy Hook shooter was reloading part-way through magazines.
    Anyone who is trained to arms knows why Adam Lanza changed magazines before they were empty. For noobs, an empty magazine is the most vulnerable moment for a shooter.

    Adam had trained to be ready to deal with the police in such a way that he would be able to commit suicide in the end. His goal was to die famous, as an anti-hero. By reserving a few bullets in each magazine he was allowing for the possibility that the police could burst onto the scene at any moment and he would be able to shoot at them, to either kill them, or induce them to shoot and kill himself, or he would have the option to kill himself at the moment of his own choosing.

    Adam Lanza changed magazines before they were empty because he trained that way. He was prepared to die and was not willing to risk being caught with an empty gun in this his hands. He had plenty of ammunition, and had trained to keep his options open to the very end. His goal was to kill as many people as he could and to die by his own hand.

    Suppressive fire is used to suppress an attacker so they cannot return fire.  
    Let's unpack this for people who never fired a gun.

    First, according to Heller, the 2A covers small arms (colloquially known as "guns") for use by individuals when they exercise their right to self defense in their home.

    The competency and accuracy of the shooter matters. No one has any right under the 2A to create a menace with a gun when they exercise their right to keep and bear arms for self defense.

    It's arguable that because bullets easily punch through walls suppressive fire in a residential setting can easily injure others. For that reason, governments have a right to restrict suppressive fire in the interest of the general public's safety.

    If you can cite to any judicial opinion stating otherwise please link it; I would like to read it and write a diary on the arguments made therein.

    "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

    by LilithGardener on Mon Nov 25, 2013 at 06:26:21 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site