Washington post documents unique destructive capabilities of

[pulmonarymd]

www.washingtonpost.com/nation/interactive/2023/ar-15-damage-to-human-body/

 This article details the injuries that were inflicted on 2 victims of school shootings. This describes its unique destructive effects on the body, and why injuries are more likely to be fatal. This is also meant to refute the nonsense posted on this board and in right wing media that the AR-15 is "just another gun". The injuries are qualitatively different from other guns, far more destructive, and less likely to be survivable. Why anyone should be allowed to possess such a destructive weapon is beyond me.

[Tennesseer]

PMD-Wondering if you have a subscription to the Washington Post. I do. I can read the entire article as long as I sign in. Just wondering if you had to sign into the Washington Post to read it or is this a free article for anyone to read, even without a subscription.

[pulmonarymd]

I do not have a Washington post subscription. This came up on my phone news feed as a free article. I believe it is free to read as I was able access it from my laptop without a subscription

[Tennesseer]

May 7, 2024 12:58:45 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

I do not have a Washington post subscription. This came up on my phone news feed as a free article. I believe it is free to read as I was able access it from my laptop without a subscription

Thanks. Everyone should read it.

[busymom]

Yup, our local news went in depth about how horrible the injuries are from an AR-15.  Some of those little kids in the school shootings have literally had their heads blown off, which is really difficult to comprehend.  I agree that those types of weapons should not be made available to the public.  


As a side note, DH took the dogs outside after working the late shift one night, and he could hear semi-automatic gunfire from a distance.  There is a gun range within 5 miles of our home, but it was kind of late for that place to be open, so we're more than a little concerned about what he heard. It was NOT fireworks. 

[soupandstew]

May 7, 2024 14:40:38 GMT -5 busymom said:

Yup, our local news went in depth about how horrible the injuries are from an AR-15.  Some of those little kids in the school shootings have literally had their heads blown off, which is really difficult to comprehend.  I agree that those types of weapons should not be made available to the public.  


As a side note, DH took the dogs outside after working the late shift one night, and he could hear semi-automatic gunfire from a distance.  There is a gun range within 5 miles of our home, but it was kind of late for that place to be open, so we're more than a little concerned about what he heard. It was NOT fireworks. 

Yes, sadly, over time we can discern the difference.  The sound of automated rifles is unique, somehow smaller, quicker.  Yet so much worse.  

[scgal]

Sounds like another liberal asshat who doesn't know anything about a gun or ammunition. The AR-15 does not cause more damage than any other weapon firing the same ammunition.  Do I need to repeat myself for the any idiot liberals.  This is about as smart as saying a Glock 9mm will cause more damage than Sig-Sauer 9mm. 

Oh and I know why people own them because they fucking can. 

[pulmonarymd]

May 9, 2024 19:33:43 GMT -5 scgal said:

Sounds like another liberal asshat who doesn't know anything about a gun or ammunition. The AR-15 does not cause more damage than any other weapon firing the same ammunition.  Do I need to repeat myself for the any idiot liberals.  This is about as smart as saying a Glock 9mm will cause more damage than Sig-Sauer 9mm. 

Oh and I know why people own them because they fucking can. 

So the people doing autopsies are wrong? WTF is wrong with you. You cannot fake these find. But you are so far up the ass of the gun lobby that you refuse to accept anything but your beliefs. You may think you know about firearms, but you nothing about the human body. The damage is evident when the bodies are examined by pathologists. But you apparently think you know more about this the doctors. And you wonder why you get treated like you do

[Tennesseer]

May 9, 2024 19:40:07 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

May 9, 2024 19:33:43 GMT -5 scgal said:

Sounds like another liberal asshat who doesn't know anything about a gun or ammunition. The AR-15 does not cause more damage than any other weapon firing the same ammunition.  Do I need to repeat myself for the any idiot liberals.  This is about as smart as saying a Glock 9mm will cause more damage than Sig-Sauer 9mm. 

Oh and I know why people own them because they fucking can. 

So the people doing autopsies are wrong? WTF is wrong with you. You cannot fake these find. But you are so far up the ass of the gun lobby that you refuse to accept anything but your beliefs. You may think you know about firearms, but you nothing about the human body. The damage is evident when the bodies are examined by pathologists. But you apparently think you know more about this the doctors. And you wonder why you get treated like you do

Did you really have to ask?

[seriousthistime]

May 9, 2024 19:40:07 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

May 9, 2024 19:33:43 GMT -5 scgal said:

Sounds like another liberal asshat who doesn't know anything about a gun or ammunition. The AR-15 does not cause more damage than any other weapon firing the same ammunition.  Do I need to repeat myself for the any idiot liberals.  This is about as smart as saying a Glock 9mm will cause more damage than Sig-Sauer 9mm. 

Oh and I know why people own them because they fucking can. 

So the people doing autopsies are wrong? WTF is wrong with you. You cannot fake these find. But you are so far up the ass of the gun lobby that you refuse to accept anything but your beliefs. You may think you know about firearms, but you nothing about the human body. The damage is evident when the bodies are examined by pathologists. But you apparently think you know more about this the doctors. And you wonder why you get treated like you do

Yes, she's wrong.  

And in true Trump fashion, she seems to believe that saying the same BS over and over turns a falsehood into a fact.  She's confident in her delusions. 

[scgal]

May 9, 2024 19:40:07 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

May 9, 2024 19:33:43 GMT -5 scgal said:

Sounds like another liberal asshat who doesn't know anything about a gun or ammunition. The AR-15 does not cause more damage than any other weapon firing the same ammunition.  Do I need to repeat myself for the any idiot liberals.  This is about as smart as saying a Glock 9mm will cause more damage than Sig-Sauer 9mm. 

Oh and I know why people own them because they fucking can. 

So the people doing autopsies are wrong? WTF is wrong with you. You cannot fake these find. But you are so far up the ass of the gun lobby that you refuse to accept anything but your beliefs. You may think you know about firearms, but you nothing about the human body. The damage is evident when the bodies are examined by pathologists. But you apparently think you know more about this the doctors. And you wonder why you get treated like you do

There you go again attacking me getting all the rest to follow. Once anyone says anything about a gun the liberals start their fucking ranting and attacking just showing how uninformed and stupid they are. Bunch of college educated idiots.

Yes they are wrong not in the sense of the damage that they are seeing in  the body, rather than what caused the damage. 

An AR-15 is only a type of gun that can fire a range of ammunition from a 22 cal to 556 and even 12ga shotgun shell. To say that the AR caused any damage to the body is just plain stupid. 

If you want an education of what different projectiles do to the body I'll give you a lesson doubt you would understand it. 

[pulmonarymd]

May 10, 2024 10:01:26 GMT -5 scgal said:

May 9, 2024 19:40:07 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

So the people doing autopsies are wrong? WTF is wrong with you. You cannot fake these find. But you are so far up the ass of the gun lobby that you refuse to accept anything but your beliefs. You may think you know about firearms, but you nothing about the human body. The damage is evident when the bodies are examined by pathologists. But you apparently think you know more about this the doctors. And you wonder why you get treated like you do

There you go again attacking me getting all the rest to follow. Once anyone says anything about a gun the liberals start their fucking ranting and attacking just showing how uninformed and stupid they are. Bunch of college educated idiots.

Yes they are wrong not in the sense of the damage that they are seeing in  the body, rather than what caused the damage. 

An AR-15 is only a type of gun that can fire a range of ammunition from a 22 cal to 556 and even 12ga shotgun shell. To say that the AR caused any damage to the body is just plain stupid. 

If you want an education of what different projectiles do to the body I'll give you a lesson doubt you would understand it. 

So the damage isn't there?
The Pathologist is wrong?
Something else caused the damage?

Which is it? The child was shot by an AR-15. There is clear damage to multiple organs. SO what happened? Your post is nonsensical, because something caused the damage, unless you are claiming it is not there.

[scgal]

May 10, 2024 10:13:17 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

May 10, 2024 10:01:26 GMT -5 scgal said:

There you go again attacking me getting all the rest to follow. Once anyone says anything about a gun the liberals start their fucking ranting and attacking just showing how uninformed and stupid they are. Bunch of college educated idiots.

Yes they are wrong not in the sense of the damage that they are seeing in  the body, rather than what caused the damage. 

An AR-15 is only a type of gun that can fire a range of ammunition from a 22 cal to 556 and even 12ga shotgun shell. To say that the AR caused any damage to the body is just plain stupid. 

If you want an education of what different projectiles do to the body I'll give you a lesson doubt you would understand it. 

So the damage isn't there?
The Pathologist is wrong?
Something else caused the damage?

Which is it? The child was shot by an AR-15. There is clear damage to multiple organs. SO what happened? Your post is nonsensical, because something caused the damage, unless you are claiming it is not there.

Oh brother. Did you even read what I wrote. I agreed there was damage to the body. I agree the AR-15 was the gun used. What I disagree with is that the AR-15 iis the big bad wolf that needs to be banned. It fires the same ammunition that many other hunting rifles do that can still cause the exact same damage when a person is shot. Did I dumb it down enough for you.

[pulmonarymd]

May 10, 2024 13:44:42 GMT -5 scgal said:

May 10, 2024 10:13:17 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

So the damage isn't there?
The Pathologist is wrong?
Something else caused the damage?

Which is it? The child was shot by an AR-15. There is clear damage to multiple organs. SO what happened? Your post is nonsensical, because something caused the damage, unless you are claiming it is not there.

Oh brother. Did you even read what I wrote. I agreed there was damage to the body. I agree the AR-15 was the gun used. What I disagree with is that the AR-15 iis the big bad wolf that needs to be banned. It fires the same ammunition that many other hunting rifles do that can still cause the exact same damage when a person is shot. Did I dumb it down enough for you.

I do not need you to explain anything to me. You didn't even read the article. The degree of damage from an AR-15 is completely unlike the injuries from a handgun. One is survivable; one is not. The injuries described as the result of an AR-15 are gruesome. But you continue to ignore it and downplay it because it interferes with the narrative you want to opine. The people who deal with the result of you masturabation with an AR-15 tell us that the injuries that it causes are completely unlike anything else they see. You tell us they are wrong. In what universe do you have the expertise to opine about the injuries they see. Unless your daughter is telling you all this, since she obviously is an expert.

[scgal]

May 10, 2024 13:53:08 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

May 10, 2024 13:44:42 GMT -5 scgal said:

Oh brother. Did you even read what I wrote. I agreed there was damage to the body. I agree the AR-15 was the gun used. What I disagree with is that the AR-15 iis the big bad wolf that needs to be banned. It fires the same ammunition that many other hunting rifles do that can still cause the exact same damage when a person is shot. Did I dumb it down enough for you.

I do not need you to explain anything to me. You didn't even read the article. The degree of damage from an AR-15 is completely unlike the injuries from a handgun. One is survivable; one is not. The injuries described as the result of an AR-15 are gruesome. But you continue to ignore it and downplay it because it interferes with the narrative you want to opine. The people who deal with the result of you masturabation with an AR-15 tell us that the injuries that it causes are completely unlike anything else they see. You tell us they are wrong. In what universe do you have the expertise to opine about the injuries they see. Unless your daughter is telling you all this, since she obviously is an expert.

Well obviously I do need to explain it to you and any other medical know it all. 
I'm not comparing the AR-15 to a handgun Although I do posses a handgun that could rival the carnage. I'm saying that for a medical professional saying the damage they see from an AR-15 that the AR-15 is to blame. That is wrong Ruger makes a ranch rifle that uses the same cartridge as the AR-15 does, but it looks just like a normal hunting rifle. If fired into a person the damage would be the same. I think the reason why the medical universe is so uninformed about this is because the AR is the firearm that people like to use. It is not the firearm it is the type of cartridge being used. Ultimately it is the user. You just cannot get over yourself that if a medical professional says something it must be absolute. In this and probably in most instances involving firearms anyone in my family is more informed than the medical industry. Hell I would put my 9 year old grandson against anyone on here firearm knowledge. 

[pulmonarymd]

May 10, 2024 16:32:24 GMT -5 scgal said:

May 10, 2024 13:53:08 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

I do not need you to explain anything to me. You didn't even read the article. The degree of damage from an AR-15 is completely unlike the injuries from a handgun. One is survivable; one is not. The injuries described as the result of an AR-15 are gruesome. But you continue to ignore it and downplay it because it interferes with the narrative you want to opine. The people who deal with the result of you masturabation with an AR-15 tell us that the injuries that it causes are completely unlike anything else they see. You tell us they are wrong. In what universe do you have the expertise to opine about the injuries they see. Unless your daughter is telling you all this, since she obviously is an expert.

Well obviously I do need to explain it to you and any other medical know it all. 
I'm not comparing the AR-15 to a handgun Although I do posses a handgun that could rival the carnage. I'm saying that for a medical professional saying the damage they see from an AR-15 that the AR-15 is to blame. That is wrong Ruger makes a ranch rifle that uses the same cartridge as the AR-15 does, but it looks just like a normal hunting rifle. If fired into a person the damage would be the same. I think the reason why the medical universe is so uninformed about this is because the AR is the firearm that people like to use. It is not the firearm it is the type of cartridge being used. Ultimately it is the user. You just cannot get over yourself that if a medical professional says something it must be absolute. In this and probably in most instances involving firearms anyone in my family is more informed than the medical industry. Hell I would put my 9 year old grandson against anyone on here firearm knowledge. 

So the medical professionals are wrong? These children were shot with an AR-15. What else cause the injuries they saw? You cannot seriously be saying that something else caused their injuries. These professionals see the carnage from all kinds of firearms. You cannot seriously say they cannot tell the difference between the type of injuries they see? Your assertions are laughable.

You claim that I take the word of media professionals as absolute. Well, you are claiming to have absolute knowledge about firearm injuries deff do put not being a physician. Pot, meet kettle

[scgal]

May 10, 2024 16:59:52 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

May 10, 2024 16:32:24 GMT -5 scgal said:

Well obviously I do need to explain it to you and any other medical know it all. 
I'm not comparing the AR-15 to a handgun Although I do posses a handgun that could rival the carnage. I'm saying that for a medical professional saying the damage they see from an AR-15 that the AR-15 is to blame. That is wrong Ruger makes a ranch rifle that uses the same cartridge as the AR-15 does, but it looks just like a normal hunting rifle. If fired into a person the damage would be the same. I think the reason why the medical universe is so uninformed about this is because the AR is the firearm that people like to use. It is not the firearm it is the type of cartridge being used. Ultimately it is the user. You just cannot get over yourself that if a medical professional says something it must be absolute. In this and probably in most instances involving firearms anyone in my family is more informed than the medical industry. Hell I would put my 9 year old grandson against anyone on here firearm knowledge. 

So the medical professionals are wrong? These children were shot with an AR-15. What else cause the injuries they saw? You cannot seriously be saying that something else caused their injuries. These professionals see the carnage from all kinds of firearms. You cannot seriously say they cannot tell the difference between the type of injuries they see? Your assertions are laughable.

You claim that I take the word of media professionals as absolute. Well, you are claiming to have absolute knowledge about firearm injuries deff do put not being a physician. Pot, meet kettle

Yes that is exactly what I'm saying. The dr's would not know what high powered cartridge did the damage if no one told them.They wouldn't know if the damage was caused by a 223 or a 556 both are the most common used for the AR but they also can be fired from several different firearms.  There is only a few people in the country who would one being my husband hence why he is called to testify in court cases and lecture all over the country. Your medical professionals are not firearm or ballistic experts. It is very foolish to think any medical professional could tell what size cartridge caused the damage the best they could do is determine a handgun, high-power rifle or shotgun

[Opti]

May 10, 2024 13:44:42 GMT -5 scgal said:

May 10, 2024 10:13:17 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

So the damage isn't there?
The Pathologist is wrong?
Something else caused the damage?

Which is it? The child was shot by an AR-15. There is clear damage to multiple organs. SO what happened? Your post is nonsensical, because something caused the damage, unless you are claiming it is not there.

Oh brother. Did you even read what I wrote. I agreed there was damage to the body. I agree the AR-15 was the gun used. What I disagree with is that the AR-15 iis the big bad wolf that needs to be banned. It fires the same ammunition that many other hunting rifles do that can still cause the exact same damage when a person is shot. Did I dumb it down enough for you.

So we need to expand the ban then.

[billisonboard]

May 11, 2024 4:07:55 GMT -5 scgal said:

May 10, 2024 16:59:52 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

So the medical professionals are wrong? These children were shot with an AR-15. What else cause the injuries they saw? You cannot seriously be saying that something else caused their injuries. These professionals see the carnage from all kinds of firearms. You cannot seriously say they cannot tell the difference between the type of injuries they see? Your assertions are laughable.

You claim that I take the word of media professionals as absolute. Well, you are claiming to have absolute knowledge about firearm injuries deff do put not being a physician. Pot, meet kettle

Yes that is exactly what I'm saying. The dr's would not know what high powered cartridge did the damage if no one told them.They wouldn't know if the damage was caused by a 223 or a 556 both are the most common used for the AR but they also can be fired from several different firearms.  There is only a few people in the country who would one being my husband hence why he is called to testify in court cases and lecture all over the country. Your medical professionals are not firearm or ballistic experts. It is very foolish to think any medical professional could tell what size cartridge caused the damage the best they could do is determine a handgun, high-power rifle or shotgun

For whom and to whom? For hire experts have a financial interest in providing a particular desired opinion.

[pulmonarymd]

May 11, 2024 11:56:21 GMT -5 Opti said:

May 10, 2024 13:44:42 GMT -5 scgal said:

Oh brother. Did you even read what I wrote. I agreed there was damage to the body. I agree the AR-15 was the gun used. What I disagree with is that the AR-15 iis the big bad wolf that needs to be banned. It fires the same ammunition that many other hunting rifles do that can still cause the exact same damage when a person is shot. Did I dumb it down enough for you.

So we need to expand the ban then.

Exactly right. The idea that physicians cannot tell the difference between the wounds from an AR-15, or AR-15 like weapon from a handgun is ludicrous. If the ballistic characteristics are the same, then the wounds are similar, and if they are similarly destructive, should be banned. Easy way to legislate a ban.

This argument is just ridiculous. I can tell a narcotic overdose by the symptoms. Which opiate can only be determined from more history or testing. Same as the case for acute respiratory infections. They have similar symptoms, so which virus is the cause can only be determined by further testing. But because scgal has a bug up her ass about me and physicians in general, she needs to insult us and our knowledge. Just because she claims her husband is a ballistics expert does not mean he knows anything about treating these injuries, but yet she wants to claim he is better than a physician

[seriousthistime]

I may be repeating myself, but one of my kids is an emergency physician.  First few days of residency the residents and their attending physician took a bunch of firearms and some sides of meat to a shooting range. They shot the meat using various types of guns.  Then they had a close look at the different types of tissue damage that the various firearms caused.  

The attending physician who arranged this exercise for new residents was far from a "liberal asshat."  He was former law enforcement and a gun collector/sportsman.  Considering the number of high-profile shootings they saw there, I imagine the attending physician thought the information gained would be useful in the residents' treatment of patients. 

ETA: Thank you for posting a link to the article.  It is difficult to read and makes me more convinced that no civilian has any need to possess this weapon.  

[scgal]

May 11, 2024 12:30:04 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

May 11, 2024 4:07:55 GMT -5 scgal said:

Yes that is exactly what I'm saying. The dr's would not know what high powered cartridge did the damage if no one told them.They wouldn't know if the damage was caused by a 223 or a 556 both are the most common used for the AR but they also can be fired from several different firearms.  There is only a few people in the country who would one being my husband hence why he is called to testify in court cases and lecture all over the country. Your medical professionals are not firearm or ballistic experts. It is very foolish to think any medical professional could tell what size cartridge caused the damage the best they could do is determine a handgun, high-power rifle or shotgun

For whom and to whom? For hire experts have a financial interest in providing a particular desired opinion.

Sometimes there is a financial compensation. Most times not. 

[scgal]

May 11, 2024 14:40:22 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

May 11, 2024 11:56:21 GMT -5 Opti said:

So we need to expand the ban then.

Exactly right. The idea that physicians cannot tell the difference between the wounds from an AR-15, or AR-15 like weapon from a handgun is ludicrous. If the ballistic characteristics are the same, then the wounds are similar, and if they are similarly destructive, should be banned. Easy way to legislate a ban.

This argument is just ridiculous. I can tell a narcotic overdose by the symptoms. Which opiate can only be determined from more history or testing. Same as the case for acute respiratory infections. They have similar symptoms, so which virus is the cause can only be determined by further testing. But because scgal has a bug up her ass about me and physicians in general, she needs to insult us and our knowledge. Just because she claims her husband is a ballistics expert does not mean he knows anything about treating these injuries, but yet she wants to claim he is better than a physician

Wrong again. I do not have a bug in my ass about physicians only the ones who think they are holier than thou. My husband does not know how to treat gun shot injuries. He will know what weapon and to a certain degree the cartridge and how the cartridge was made that caused that injury which is something no physician would know in that detail. 

As far as a ban there should be not be a ban on any firearm. The gun did not do the crime people did. 

[pulmonarymd]

May 12, 2024 7:19:25 GMT -5 scgal said:

May 11, 2024 14:40:22 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

Exactly right. The idea that physicians cannot tell the difference between the wounds from an AR-15, or AR-15 like weapon from a handgun is ludicrous. If the ballistic characteristics are the same, then the wounds are similar, and if they are similarly destructive, should be banned. Easy way to legislate a ban.

This argument is just ridiculous. I can tell a narcotic overdose by the symptoms. Which opiate can only be determined from more history or testing. Same as the case for acute respiratory infections. They have similar symptoms, so which virus is the cause can only be determined by further testing. But because scgal has a bug up her ass about me and physicians in general, she needs to insult us and our knowledge. Just because she claims her husband is a ballistics expert does not mean he knows anything about treating these injuries, but yet she wants to claim he is better than a physician

Wrong again. I do not have a bug in my ass about physicians only the ones who think they are holier than thou. My husband does not know how to treat gun shot injuries. He will know what weapon and to a certain degree the cartridge and how the cartridge was made that caused that injury which is something no physician would know in that detail. 

As far as a ban there should be not be a ban on any firearm. The gun did not do the crime people did. 

So the the description of the injuries that these children suffered is correct? The doctors are right? So all the nonsense you posted is wrong. The injuries inflicted on these children are qualitatively different than injuries from handguns, yes or no? The point of the article, not that you care, is that the damage inflicted on these bodies is so severe to not be survivable, something that physicians are quite capable of assessing.

We already know that guns are more important to you than 30 dead children. The carnage can continue as far as you are concerned. You continue to say we can’t do anything about it, and since we do nothing and nothing works, we just have to accept it. Come up with something tangible that we ca do yo stop this. If you can’t, then ban these weapons. At least we can do something then.

I may be holier than thou, but I at least care about trying to save lives. More than we can say about you

[Opti]

There are bans on things because too many people misuse an item. Its not just guns. I found good allergy med alternatives in health food stores and two of them got banned because some idiots took it to excess. Three to five times the recommended dose at least for weight loss. Since some of them managed to kill themselves, those alternatives became unavailable to all because of public health.

No surprise some humans misuse guns. No surprise that will lead to bans because of the amount of deaths. 

[scgal]

May 12, 2024 7:57:49 GMT -5 Opti said:

There are bans on things because too many people misuse an item. Its not just guns. I found good allergy med alternatives in health food stores and two of them got banned because some idiots took it to excess. Three to five times the recommended dose at least for weight loss. Since some of them managed to kill themselves, those alternatives became unavailable to all because of public health.

No surprise some humans misuse guns. No surprise that will lead to bans because of the amount of deaths. 

There is this little thing you know the 2A. It's a protected right. I hardly think allergy and weight loss is a protected right. Now if you want to ban guns get the 2a changed, and good luck with that. 

[scgal]

May 12, 2024 7:39:34 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

May 12, 2024 7:19:25 GMT -5 scgal said:

Wrong again. I do not have a bug in my ass about physicians only the ones who think they are holier than thou. My husband does not know how to treat gun shot injuries. He will know what weapon and to a certain degree the cartridge and how the cartridge was made that caused that injury which is something no physician would know in that detail. 

As far as a ban there should be not be a ban on any firearm. The gun did not do the crime people did. 

So the the description of the injuries that these children suffered is correct? The doctors are right? So all the nonsense you posted is wrong. The injuries inflicted on these children are qualitatively different than injuries from handguns, yes or no? The point of the article, not that you care, is that the damage inflicted on these bodies is so severe to not be survivable, something that physicians are quite capable of assessing.

We already know that guns are more important to you than 30 dead children. The carnage can continue as far as you are concerned. You continue to say we can’t do anything about it, and since we do nothing and nothing works, we just have to accept it. Come up with something tangible that we ca do yo stop this. If you can’t, then ban these weapons. At least we can do something then.

I may be holier than thou, but I at least care about trying to save lives. More than we can say about you

No again wrong. Guns are not more important to me than 30 dead children or even 1. What is more important is the right to have and bear arms. Just because you cannot fix the actual problem does not mean you go for the next best thing that in itself would be far worse than a million people dead to firearms. It's sad you just cannot see it.

[tallguy]

May 12, 2024 12:28:40 GMT -5 scgal said:

May 12, 2024 7:57:49 GMT -5 Opti said:

There are bans on things because too many people misuse an item. Its not just guns. I found good allergy med alternatives in health food stores and two of them got banned because some idiots took it to excess. Three to five times the recommended dose at least for weight loss. Since some of them managed to kill themselves, those alternatives became unavailable to all because of public health.

No surprise some humans misuse guns. No surprise that will lead to bans because of the amount of deaths. 

There is this little thing you know the 2A. It's a protected right. I hardly think allergy and weight loss is a protected right. Now if you want to ban guns get the 2a changed, and good luck with that. 

Nobody needs to change the Second Amendment.  It just needs to be interpreted correctly.  The modern Court has failed miserably in that.  But going back to your contention that: 

As far as a ban there should be not be a ban on any firearm. The gun did not do the crime people did.

I'll go along with that.  As soon as we institute the immediate and unappealable death penalty for anyone convicted of using a gun in the commission of a crime, whether they fire it or just brandish it about.  And the immediate and permanent loss of "rights" for anyone who fails to report their gun lost or stolen, and the five-year suspension of that right for anyone who does lose physical control of their weapon.  You want "responsible" gun owners to have the right to own weapons?  Fine, prove yourselves responsible.

[Opti]

May 12, 2024 12:28:40 GMT -5 scgal said:

May 12, 2024 7:57:49 GMT -5 Opti said:

There are bans on things because too many people misuse an item. Its not just guns. I found good allergy med alternatives in health food stores and two of them got banned because some idiots took it to excess. Three to five times the recommended dose at least for weight loss. Since some of them managed to kill themselves, those alternatives became unavailable to all because of public health.

No surprise some humans misuse guns. No surprise that will lead to bans because of the amount of deaths. 

There is this little thing you know the 2A. It's a protected right. I hardly think allergy and weight loss is a protected right. Now if you want to ban guns get the 2a changed, and good luck with that. 

Practically since its ratification, Americans have debated the meaning of the Second Amendment, with vehement arguments being made on both sides.



The crux of the debate is whether the amendment protects the right of private individuals to keep and bear arms, or whether it instead protects a collective right that should be exercised only through formal militia units.



Those who argue it is a collective right point to the “well-regulated Militia” clause in the Second Amendment. They argue that the right to bear arms should be given only to organized groups, like the National Guard, a reserve military force that replaced the state militias after the Civil War.

www.history.com/topics/united-states-constitution/2nd-amendment

[pulmonarymd]

May 12, 2024 12:31:28 GMT -5 scgal said:

May 12, 2024 7:39:34 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

So the the description of the injuries that these children suffered is correct? The doctors are right? So all the nonsense you posted is wrong. The injuries inflicted on these children are qualitatively different than injuries from handguns, yes or no? The point of the article, not that you care, is that the damage inflicted on these bodies is so severe to not be survivable, something that physicians are quite capable of assessing.

We already know that guns are more important to you than 30 dead children. The carnage can continue as far as you are concerned. You continue to say we can’t do anything about it, and since we do nothing and nothing works, we just have to accept it. Come up with something tangible that we ca do yo stop this. If you can’t, then ban these weapons. At least we can do something then.

I may be holier than thou, but I at least care about trying to save lives. More than we can say about you

No again wrong. Guns are not more important to me than 30 dead children or even 1. What is more important is the right to have and bear arms. Just because you cannot fix the actual problem does not mean you go for the next best thing that in itself would be far worse than a million people dead to firearms. It's sad you just cannot see it.

There is an easy fix to the problem. Outlaw guns. No guns, no shooting deaths. Problem solved. You offer a different solution? You continue with the nonsense that this is just the way it is, and we have to accept it. So again, your rights are more important than 30 dead first andsecond graders. Might as well admit it. We all know you do not care how many children die, because you have no desire to sacrifice anything for the greater goodin any