As far as I know, the mechanical movements going on in a semi-automatic during the process of chambering a round can affect the accuracy of the shot. This may no longer be an issue with modern weapons but I'm pretty sure it used to be.
All of this coming from the standpoint of someone whose interest in guns is purely as machines, not a gun owner and certainly not a specialist.
Maybe semi-automatics are more prone to jam?
Granted, I don't have any particular reason for this suggestion beyond "more moving parts = more chances for stuff to go wrong".
For handguns, revolvers are the only thing made that isn't semi-automatic and those are indeed mostly made for reasons of historical interest. Revolvers are considered more reliable by some, but I think that is maybe a disappearing prejudice.
Also, revolvers are for people who like to shoot really big fucking bullets.
From the wikipedia Sniper Rifle entry:
For a given cartridge, a bolt-action rifle is cheaper to build and maintain, more reliable, and lighter, due to fewer moving parts in the mechanism.
and
A bolt action is most commonly used in both military and police roles due to its higher accuracy and ease of maintenance.
For shotguns, semi-auto wasn't common last time I was around gun people, but I think that may have changed. Still, the kick throws off your aim after one shot and, for hunting, your gun can't hold more than three shells anyway. Some of the double-barreled gun have different chokes on the barrels such that the first barrel to first is better suited for close shots and the second for shooting at something further away. The idea is that birds tend to move away after you shoot at them.
But do you know the difference between gas-operated and delayed blowback? No? Then you clearly have no business discussing the topic of gun control. /shifting goalposts will shift
Obviously, if the birds decided to gang-up and rush the hunter, you'd need more than two shells.
What I don't quite understand is why not-even-semiautomatic guns exist anymore, mostly.
Roughly the same reasons that not-even-fully-automatic transmissions still exist on automobiles. Cost, complexity, reliability, personal preferences.
I always liked that part of the When Animals Attack! teaser when the deer starts kicking the shit out of the hunter.
Which ones are going to be artisanally produced once we ban the other kinds?
Single-shot weapons are also usually safer for the user. A non-trivial number of people die each year from "I-was-sure-the gun-wasn't-loaded." If you remove the magazine from a semi-auto after chambering a round, that round is still in the chamber and able to be fired. With single-shot, you can see that there is no round in the chamber more easily.
(Aside: You'd think that there wouldn't be any constitutional problem in requiring guns to have a safety feature such that they would not fire without a magazine.)
Roughly the same reasons that not-even-fully-automatic transmissions still exist on automobiles. Cost, complexity, reliability, personal preferences.
I neither drive nor shoot, but aren't manual transmissions supposed to be more efficient than automatics?
||
No more masturbating to Robert Bork.
|>
12 Also fun!
I've said it elsewhere and I'll say it here: A breech loading .577/450 Martini-Henry is all the rifle anyone needs. And you can even have a bayonet too.
I neither drive nor shoot
So I take it you were never even issued a Man Card to be revoked?
15: If it was good enough for Young Michael Caine, it's good enough for you.
17 He carried that rifle in at least two separate campaigns movies.
14: See, liberals fucked up back in the day. Obama would have another justice to appoint.
17: Come on, Moby, put it away. You know you're not going to use it.
Bunch of small moving parts often means less strength and rigidity in the platform. The semi autos have seen a lot of improvement in the last few years but bolt actions are still the champions when it comes to long range precision and you're usually spending quite a bit to get a semi auto capable of the kind of long range accuracy of even bog standard bolt action rifle. And with autos the tight fit to achieve that kind of accuracy does come at a reliability cost. Less play in the fit means just a little bit of dirt or whatever can jam things up easier.
With handguns the single actions (by those I mean the revolvers you associate with the old west) persist because of historical and personal interest but also because of strength and accuracy along with power. They're kind of the bolt actions of handguns for guys who handload and want to shoot at distance with handguns and/or hunt with a handgun. The original .45 Colts a hundred years ago were all running loads under 20K PSI but the heavier built modern Rugers will run 30 or 32K PSI loads no problem. Have it fit with a custom cylinder or shell out the bucks for a Freedom Arms and you can run a .45 Colt at 40 or 50K PSI. Likewise the Rossi lever action I have is fun as a machine and as it turns out that Winchester 1892 action design with modern steels will also handle 50K PSI loads. For comparison the Glock 9mm I carry for duty is using .356 inch diameter bullets 124 grains in weight at about 1000 feet per second. The .45 Colts are well, .45 in diameter and while you can shoot plinker or light target rounds, good handloads or high end factory loads can run a bullet of 300-335 grains at 1100-1300 feet per second. You can (and people do) hunt elk with that kind of thing.
7: Obviously, if the birds decided to gang-up and rush the hunter, you'd need more than two shells.
It's like they're not even familiar with Alfred Hitchcock's body of work.
For shotguns, semi-auto wasn't common last time I was around gun people, but I think that may have changed.
A bit, but the pumps are still popular. A lot cheaper and less finicky about what they'll cycle.
a safety feature such that they would not fire without a magazine
Already fairly common in handguns.
24.last: I want it required by law on all new guns with magazines.
I'm not familiar with this "Man Card". Is it some sort of consolation prize for an inability to get laid?
They use bolt-action rifles for target shooting in the biathlon. There's an application where you only shoot one bullet at a time, weight is important, and you are shooting in an environment (snow and ice) where jamming can be an issue.
I want it required by law on all new guns with magazines.
Why do you hate natural selection?
They use skis instead of a snowmobile. That whole sport is strange.
What has natural selection done for us lately?
Not much, probably because Moby and his ilk keep trying to thwart it.
28: Up the road a bit a toddler died a couple of weeks ago when his dad put the gun the in car.
My new law involves outlawing the sale of new semi-automatics altogether. Really, the second amendment should only cover everyone's right to own a musket.
I think my sister has a Ruger of some kind, for predictably stupid reasons. She's wrong about needing it for self-defense, but if she were right, she wouldn't need anything more than that.
Up the road a bit a toddler died a couple of weeks ago when his dad put the gun the in car.
Jesus christ. Did he have it loose or something? Anyone with sense is a fanatic about having a holster covering the trigger guard and even then you still don't have that thing pointed at people.
It was loose. He'd been trying to sell it, not carry it.
Really, the second amendment should only cover everyone's right to own a musket.
And a horse, goddamit! This fucking city has regulations on horse ownership (minimum acreage requirements, etc.). How the hell am I supposed to defend myself against tyranny without a horse to ride? The second amendment says "arms", not "guns". I think the founding fathers would have understood that to include a military steed.
I think my sister has a Ruger of some kind
Heh, "a Ruger" could mean anything from a cowboy style to an AR. They're not a niche maker.
So he was carrying it around loaded?
He'd been trying to sell it, not carry it.
Gah. Keep the actions open everyone. Remove all doubt.
Apparently, the boy was older than I recall. See here. Obviously, the dad should have been much more careful, but not mandating a cheap fix that could protect against a lapse of judgement like that wouldn't happen for something other than guns.
togolosh is right - it's accuracy and cost, mainly. And, it should be pointed out, legal requirements in some countries. You can own a bolt-action rifle or a break-action shotgun legally in the UK, but you pretty much can't own a semi-automatic rifle or shotgun. Not since 1986.
38: I know it's a handgun and she has her concealed carry permit. Probably something along the lines of what you said once that your wife has?
who handload and want to . . . hunt with a handgun
Why? Is it supposed to be more interesting in some way?
It's more of a challenge because you've got to get closer and it is harder to hit.
42- And look at what it's done to their society- they're still ruled by monarchs!
If it was good enough for Young Michael Caine, it's good enough for you.
As my gun nut/army type friends point out regularly, most of the soldiers in "Zulu" are carrying Lee-Enfields, rather than the correct Martini-Henrys.
46: single aimed shots were good enough for the Duke of Wellington, and they should be good enough for you.
47: There's got to be a lot more Lee-Enfields laying around.
Probably something along the lines of what you said once that your wife has?
Ah. My wife doesn't carry and she has a 4'' .357 that fairly large and heavy. I'd guess your sister is carrying one of the smaller models.
I served on the jury for a case where one of the charges hinged on whether the defendant had helped someone else hide a gun. It was evident that none of us on the jury knew one single thing about guns we hadn't learned on "Law & Order" or "Bonanza." (Adjust the latter to your generation as appropriate. Everyone will already always have been watching "Law & Order.")
Why? Is it supposed to be more interesting in some way?
What Moby said. Some of the same appeal as bowhunting and muzzleloader hunting. Out here in the open west 200-400 yard rifle shots aren't uncommon. With a handgun you're much more likely to be taking a shot at 50 yards or less.
Instead of getting weaker weapons, people should try hunting small game when they want a challenge. Bagging a swallow with a rifle would be something to brag about.
Where I grew up deer hunting with guns is illegal, only bow hunting allowed.
53: I still treasure the time I sat down in a new dentist's waiting room, leafed through the magazines on the table, and found a copy of Varmint Hunter.
The only gun I ever had up close and personal dealings with was a Lee-Enfield. I'd rather be behind it than in front of it, even if it is a hundred years old.
55: Were there ads for taxidermied squirrels in funny poses?
only bow hunting allowed
If that includes crossbows, they might as well allow single shot rifles for all the good the prohibition is going to do.
I'd rather be behind it than in front of it, even if it is a hundred years old.
It turns out this is generally true for weapons of all sorts dating back to time immemorial.
But to summarize answers to the original question, aside from historical interest and legal restrictions, revolvers and bolt-action rifles are more accurate at any given price point, and the cost difference for a given degree of accuracy is significant enough to make them worth continuing to manufacture.
Have I got that straight?
s/b "more accurate than semi-automatics"
Bagging a swallow with a rifle blowpipe would be something to brag about.
59: Except for the Katyusha, which you should stand beside.
Since the beginning of time, mankind has preferred yielding weapons over being targeted by weapon-yielders.
A question was asked and answered with little ambiguity within 50 comments. Is the blog over?
Bagging a swallow with a rifle blowpipe by remaining motionless until it landed in your open hand would be something to brag about.
I assume you're all talking about bagging a swallow in some different sense than a man bragging to his friends would talk about bagging a young lady he brought home last night.
58- Long bow. And googling it, you have to pass a test each season, hitting a 9 inch target at 25 yards 3 times out of 3 to be able to enter the lottery for one of the available permits.
(Because otherwise bagging a swallow with a rifle just sounds sick.)
(Whereas murdering a swallow with a gun for entertainment is perfectly sane.)
On the veldt, men often used hunting terminology to describe sexual conquests.
revolvers and bolt-action rifles are more accurate at any given price point
And what Moby said in 3. If you want length and girth than revolvers are the way to go.
66. Oh, hi, Kevin. Didn't notice you there.
bagging a swallow with a rifle just sounds sick
But genuinely novel!
72: "I meant what I said and I said what I meant: St. Kevin is faithful, one hundred percent!"
Bagging a swallow with a rifle would be something to brag about.
There is little to do in this warehouse, so I get to shooting at rats with my .45. After a while I am good enough that I can hit a running rat five times out of five, and I am even good enough that I can hit it in the left eye or the right eye as I choose, though it is difficult afterwards to tell where you hit a rat with a .45, because you seem to hit him all over.
Sorry, 77 is Damon Runyon (more or less, from memory).
rifles are accurate and hunting with automatics is like playing basketball on 6 foot rims.
Is the blog over?
We still haven't established if this is a food thread or a sex thread.
We still haven't established if this is a food thread or a sex thread.
It's obviously a bike thread.
Fired a Luger and a big-ass 45 revolver;carried a Saturday night special and a 22 LR target pistol, but the only gun I have ever had any interest in was Quigley's Sharp. Hitting a target a 500 yds+ looks like fun.
77: "Aim between the eyes. Sometimes they charge when they're wounded."
Caption of a Bill Mauldin cartoon that I frustratingly cannot find online. Picture is Willie and Joe bedded down with one holding a revolver inches away from a rat illuminated by flashlight.
My uncle went hunting rats one time and shot himself in the leg.
Oh, hi, Kevin honey. Didn't notice you there.
I once shot a rat in Reno, just to watch it die.
Now he obsessively hunts for a great white rat.
People working on my house have seen rats recently. I have deployed rat poison and moved the bird feeder to the back of the yard.
I am unhappy about all of the above.
89 brought to mind a very recent Frankie Boyle tweet (via C. Stross).
I had sex on a beach once, it seemed like the kindest thing to do after I failed to get the whale back into the sea.
90.1: Saw them outside at least. No evidence of internal incursion to date.
You could get a .22, some beers, and a rocker. Then sit on the porch plinking rats.
Our basement flooded a couple months ago and we were taking bags of clothes that had gotten wet out into the yard to sort, and there was squeaking coming from one, found eight 1-2 day old baby rats in the bag nested in some chewed clothes. Obviously I need a semiautomatic to deal with that many.
I sat down in a new dentist's waiting room, leafed through the magazines on the table, and found a copy of Varmint Hunter.
Was Mitt Romney on the cover?
I would add to the already pretty thorough answers to the question in the OP that the action in a semi-automatic is powered by the explosion of the propellant in the barrel (i.e. the same force that is propelling the bullet forward), so you are siphoning off a little bit of oomph and sacrificing a little bit of muzzle velocity.
93: Maybe even shoot a few of them ("plink" = "bag", right?).
55: Varmint Hunter
Now this is a poignant cover.
I'm glad somebody is trying to shoot that, whatever it is.
OT: It turns out that there is an assistant secretary of state for diplomatic security and that person is responsible for security of diplomats. The ambassador to the U.N. probably does something else.
It's adorable. Does anyone know if porcupines have the same confidence and calmness that makes wild skunks so completely charming?
Buck claims to have befriended a porcupine as a boy. (Sort of. It had a den in a cave in the woods behind his house. He started hanging out in the cave, and the porcupine decided that his presence wasn't a barrier to hanging out there as well. They weren't braiding each other's hair or anything.)
Is that a fretful porpentine? I mean, I would be fretful, too, if on the cover of a magazine with that name. But it's SWEET
100: My (not extensive) experience with them is that they are rather unflappable.
Varmint is on Wikipedia's list of American words not widely used in the U.K. It's a list that really turns out to be not as interesting as I first thought it might.
My dad's family used to spend summers up in the Sierras near Lassen in a cabin his father built right after WWII. When he was a teenager and tying his own flies he once spotted a porcupine walking near the cabin and decided to try and get some of the quills for fly tying. He grabbed a sweatshirt and ran up and swung it at the porcupine thinking he'd get a couple dozen quills or so. He was a bit dismayed at having to spend a couple hours pulling hundreds of them out of that sweatshirt.
It probably took even longer for the porcupine to regrow the quills.
Porcupines are a lot bigger than you'd think. Also they smell like an unwashed armpit.
105: A friend had to cut short a Sierra backpack trip when he randomly (no encounter) managed to get a quill in his leg and it became infected.
My favorite encounter was when one took shelter behind my British hiking companion's pack in the Canadian Rockies. He went to pick it up the pack and suddenly retreated yelling about "some bloody beast". It took a good while for him to convince it to move along while I provided running commentary on his lack of porcupine-moving-along form.
A friend had to cut short a Sierra backpack trip when he randomly (no encounter) managed to get a quill in his leg and it became infected.
Better than having to cut short his leg...
Varmint is on Wikipedia's list of American words not widely used in the U.K.
This is what happens when a culture is deprived of Yosemite Sam.
OK, so Paul Waldman just linked this piece from Harper's a couple years ago, and now I'm really annoyed and wanting to talk about it.
It's basically written by a self-described liberal Democrat/gun lover who decides to start carrying concealed, and it's about his experiences and his conclusions. And by the end, there's just a staggering blindness to how much he's absorbed all of this gun culture bullshit. I mean, he describes how the 2 required training courses were much more about indoctrination than about, you know, safe gun practices, and he quotes fellow gun nuts saying self-evidently moronic things, but when he has to list the reasons he thinks people object to more guns in general, and concealed carry in particular, his list is pretty much what you'd read in the NRA magazine. Nothing about the fact that people who actually live in houses with guns are many, many more times likely to be wounded and killed*; nothing about the enormous likelihood of injury and death to innocent bystanders (cops do a bad job with this; in what universe would paranoid civilians do better?); nothing about the fact that drawing a gun on a mugger is not, in fact, a sane response. Just a lot of fantasies about how, even with the crime rate down, life on the streets is so fantastically dangerous that carrying a firearm all the time (note: dude lives in Boulder) is sensible self-defense.
* I suppose he'd argue that carrying a gun somehow obviates this fact; it goes unstated
112: Somewhat similarly, I found it telling that the "Mission Statement" of Varmint Magazine is,
Rather than, you know, the joy of hunting and killing small things or what have you.
To preserve our 2nd Amendment Rights by introducing individuals to the shooting sports and to provide the right tools and resources. Our magazine and events do just that!!!
Nothing about the fact that people who actually live in houses with guns are many, many more times likely to be wounded and killed
To be fair, in that passage he's talking strictly about carrying a gun, not having one period. And I don't get the sense that he's blind to how much gun culture he's absorbed; in general the piece reads pretty balanced to me. (It's entirely possible that *I've* absorbed too much gun culture to see his response as unbalanced, though. I've been thinking a lot about that the past few days.)
the joy of hunting and killing small things
I see that Moby Hick finally nailed the wording on that mission statement.
We had to resist pressure from the snake-lover lobby.
Yeah, it was a relatively small mission statement so he killed it.
115: It's like you don't even see asterisks
In all seriousness, I would be shocked if having a gun in the home resulted in 5X (or whatever; it's an integer) the odds of suicide/domestic shooting/accidental death, but carrying one every day resulted in no change at all.
I thought it was fairly balanced until I got towards the end, at which point he just dismissed any possible downside to concealed carry; the fact that he doesn't seem to understand that, in a falling-crime environment, one shouldn't expect to see concealed carry resulting in rising gun deaths didn't endear his thinking to me. He basically seemed to feel that, since gun crime has declined nationwide even as concealed carry has spread, it's proof that there are NO safety-related downsides to concealed carry (he did acknowledge the fashion-related downsides, so that part was fair and balanced).
Also, and I don't really blame him for not getting/getting into this, he missed the import of the "Condition Yellow" mindset. Set aside the - massive IMO - social implications, there's the simple fact that what he describes as "exhausting" is actually longterm debilitating. We have all sorts of evidence that extended periods of that kind of vigilance/awareness are awful for mental health.
the fact that he doesn't seem to understand that, in a falling-crime environment, one shouldn't expect to see concealed carry resulting in rising gun deaths didn't endear his thinking to me.
Well, in a falling-crime environment, you'd expect domestic shootings to go down, but I'm not immediately seeing why it'd affect suicides or accidental shootings.
Totally agreed on your last paragraph, though.
I was amused that while looking for a Wayne LaPierre Quote from back in the day (see following comment), I managed to activate this message on a popup.
Searching for jack booted government thugs?
Find Retail Careers Here!
LaPierre (now NRA prez) back in 1995:
"...the semiauto-auto ban gives jack-booted government thugs more power to take away our constitutional rights, break in our doors, seize our guns, destroy our property, and even injure or kill us."This caused GHW Bush to publicly resign from the NRA.
I shot a squirrel with a rifle on thanksgiving.
How the squirrel got the rifle, I'll never know.
"How the squirrel got a rifle I have no idea, but I thought it best to shoot first and ask questions later."
Moby Hick is a confirmed poopyhead who delights in killing small things and porcupines.
I'm like an adult who is like a kid waiting for Christmas break. Not getting much done this week.
Also, the last two cases listed here, both of which happened 5 years before the guy wrote his Harper's piece, pretty much explicate the flaws in the idea that concealed carry solves any real world problems.
127: I'm like that person only things theoretically need to get done.
129: The obvious rejoinder being that "mass shootings" != "all real world problems".
But just to show I haven't been completely brainwashed, the guy does make one claim I find completely bonkers: in a post on his blog talking about the Aurora shooting he says "well, if I'd been there and had my gun and started shooting in response, it couldn't have made the situation any worse". Uh... really?
133: Oh sure, but there are no problems he's imagining that don't involve pulling out a gun in public and firing it, and the results don't seem to be paying off. He explicitly rejects brandishing, and he tries to keep his gun hidden, which means that the only time the gun does any good (or might as well even exist) is when it's drawn and fired. Which tends to have bad outcomes. Maybe he'd argue that joining Condition Yellow is a good that justified concealed carry but, aside from 119.last, I don't think that your* right to a security blanket extends to bringing a killing weapon within range of my vital organs. I find that I'm cognizant of my surroundings just fine, even unarmed.
I bet that an intermittent steering feature on cars would lead to much more alert drivers than we currently have.
134: Wow, that's much crazier than anything in his article, but reinforces my sense that joining the concealed carry community warped his mind.
* generic you, of course
http://news.byu.edu/archive12-mar-bearsandguns.aspx
Bear spray: Now in UC Davis-size for the ultimate protection.
105: What flies do you tie with porcupine quills? The only "quill" I know in flytying is either stripped peacock herl or stripped hackle.
It's obviously another American usage unknown here.
And no, it is not my fault that the easiest illustration for peacock herl turns out to be a fly tied by a woman that is very small and has a pink wing. That is the fault of the patriarchy.
I find that I'm cognizant of my surroundings just fine, even unarmed.
My anxiety says otherwise!
What flies do you tie with porcupine quills?
I don't think it was a specific pattern. He'd be up there for around two months and would fish every day. He did a lot of experimentation just looking around at what he'd see locally and from looking in the stomachs of the fish. (habit he has to this day, grandkids invariably find it fascinating and daughters in law usually are a bit grossed out) His tying box has stuff in it you don't see on the shelves anymore, like polar bear hair.
His tying box has stuff in it you don't see on the shelves anymore, like polar bear hair.
Tell us he collected that with a sweatshirt and I'll be impressed.
This is amusing. Seward is the school that most of my anarchist friends send their kids to. It is located in a neighborhood mostly occupied by professorial types, a couple of blocks from a big natural foods coop and an anarchist/vegetarian collective restaurant. Not that there's no crime, there was a very high-profile armed robbery that led to 3 deaths by shooting a few years ago, but during school hours? I think errant porcupines are probably the only varmints you're going to need to shoot there.
http://www.startribune.com/local/minneapolis/184147411.html
My anxiety says otherwise!
By all means, let's arm the anxious.
Varmint hunting has it's own rewards.
140: Thanks. I have a vague idea that they are buoyant and could be used for hollow bodies on large dry flies. But you remind me of my absolute favourite proto-nerd response from a fly tier, when Charles Cotton is teased about the stuff he collects for tying:
VIAT. Did ever any one see the like! What a heap of trumpery is here! certainly never an Angler in Europe has his shop half so well furnished as you have.
PISC. You, perhaps, may think now that I rake together this trumpery, as you call it, for show only; to the end that such as see it, which are not many I assure you, may think me a great master in the art of Angling; but let me tell you here are some colors, as contemptible as they seem here, that are very hard to be got; and scarce any one of them, which, if it should be lost, I should not miss, and be concerned about the loss of it too, once in the year. But look you, Sir, amongst all these I will choose out these two colors only, of which, this is bear's hair, this darker, no great matter what: but I am sure I have killed a great deal of fish with it; and with one or both of these, you shall take Trout or Grayling this very day, notwithstanding all disadvantages, or my art shall fail me.
Izaak Walton and Charles Cotton (2000-11-01). The Compleat Angler (Modern Library Classics) (Kindle Locations 3600-3607). Random House, Inc.. Kindle Edition.
84: you just knew McManus would be the Unfogged Sniper.
All the shooting I ever did was while I was in the CCF (army cadets) at school, in the 80s. Probably a fairly common experience in the UK. There was also indoor range shooting on offer: that was done with 22 Anschutz rifles, which didn't even have magazines: you definitely had to put a bullet in the thing each time. I don't think you'd want a semi-auto mechanism on something like that. You wouldn't want anything moving in there aside from the round, on its way to the target.
However, by far the best all round rifle we got to play with was the service issue SA80 (not the cadet version). Light, user friendly and very accurate. Clearly highly optimised for shooting people. Generally, I try to think of guns the way I think of construction site tools. Sometimes needed but potentially very harmful, and isn't the sale of construction explosives tightly regulated? The associations with hunting are not helpful.
I was really bummed to look inside that Varmint Hunter Magazine issue to discover that it was actually all about guns.
138: a fly tied by a woman that is very small and has a pink wing. That is the fault of the patriarchy.
Some women are just naturally small, I don't think that's the patriarchy's fault.
No idea about the pink wing, though.
The following just appeared up in my inbox.
The primary-school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, approximately 45 miles from the Colt Arms Factory, is just another one in the long line of government psyops designed to persuade the public to allow the government to take away their guns, and their means to defend themselves against the government and the banksters that the politicians really serve.
The small children murders are designed to create hysterical emotions in women to get them to demand that guns are banned. If that doesn�t work they will continue with their evil agenda with worse and worse atrocities on younger children, until they get their way and disarm the people, so that they cannot fight back against government tyranny.
Newtown is the U.S.A.�s Dunblane, which was orchestrated in Scotland in 1996 by the British establishment, to whip up hysteria in order to ban all handguns from the U.K. It was a follow-up to the Hungerford Massacre in England in 1987, which was carried out by mind-controlled Michael Ryan, who then shot himself so he could not be questioned, and it was used to ban semi-automatic rifles and shotguns.
It�s always the same people behind it � the gun-grabbers who want the people to be defenceless against the gun-grabbers� employers � the banksters who own all of the politicians. They get their politicians to pass legislation for them, in order to remove the people�s freedoms and means of defending themselves, and enslave them in a draconian police-state, under a mountain of debt, and then exterminate the useless-eaters.
The Dunblane massacre was supposedly carried out by Thomas Hamilton, who was a paedophile and procurer of children, for a high level paedophile ring involving senior members of the Tony Blair Labour-Party shadow-cabinet and others. The massacre served two purposes, it achieved their desired handgun-ban and killed the abused children, so they could not be witnesses against the elite paedophiles. They then had the findings of the inquiry sealed for 100 years, which is proof of the above.
Like Newtown there were two shooters, Hamilton and a hit-man who shot Hamilton and made it look like Hamilton committed suicide after shooting 16 children, so that he couldn�t be questioned. Hamilton was found in the school gymnasium slumped against a wall and still gurgling, when an off-duty policeman PC Grant McCutcheon entered the gym and saw two semi-automatic pistols, one on either side of Hamilton�s body.
The autopsy revealed that Hamilton was killed with a .38 revolver. These people always slip-up with their crimes. There was no .38 revolver for him to have shot himself with. Thus, there was a second shooter who killed Hamilton.
Similarly, the first reports from Newtown were of two shooters, just like mind-controlled James Holmes in the Denver Batman Cinema massacre, the story then quickly changes to just one.
Columbine was similar, in that a team of shooters in black outfits were seen there and the two accused were on mind-altering prescription-drugs.
Wake up and see the pattern and their modus operandi and don�t fall for it. Never let them take your guns, except from your cold dead hands.
All of these are staged events to whip-up hysterical public support for banning the people from having guns. It works the same in every country � Hungerford in England, Dunblane in Scotland, Port Arthur in Australia and the list in America is endless, because of the Second Amendment and the people having a pro-gun culture. That makes it much more difficult to break the Americans� love of guns and the Second Amendment, which was put in place to protect the people from the government.
Gun bans work well for tyrants. They worked well for Hitler, Stalin and Chairman Mao, to name just three.
If you want to stop these massacres, wake-up and get rid of the banksters, their puppet-politicians and all gun-grabbers; arm teachers and ban gun-free zones.
From one who can see the pattern and hopes to enable you to see it too.
People are really the biggest impediment to problem-solving.
At least the security gun ownership brings gives people peace of mind.
People who fear people who want to keep guns from paranoid people are the luckiest people of all.
And may Gun's love be with you.
Student? Human Resources? Chancellor? Coblogger?
Nosflow.
I've actually been one of your cobloggers and one of your students all along, VW.
The e-mail came from inside the house!
