The assault rifle used in Orlando

When Omar Mateen entered an Orlando, Florida, nightclub on Sunday to carry out the deadliest mass shooting in US history, he wielded a weapon that has been used in massacres from California to Connecticut: a military-inspired semi-automatic rifle.

Though so-called assault rifles account for a small fraction of the United States’ 30,000 annual gun deaths, they have been used in at least 10 mass shootings since 2011, according to a database compiled by Mother Jones magazine.

Hmm.

The AR-15 was developed from the US military’s M-16 rifle, used in the Vietnam War in the 1960s. Unlike the military version, the AR-15 is not fully automatic, meaning users must pull the trigger each time they want to fire a shot. Like the military version, many AR-15s combine light weight with a relatively modest recoil.

OK:

An assault rifle is a fully automatic selective-fire rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine.

So it’s not an assault weapon then?

139 thoughts on “The assault rifle used in Orlando”

  1. No, it *is* an ‘assault weapon’.

    Its just not an ‘assault rifle’.

    Those are two different things. The latter is a term of art referring to a specific class of firearms. The former is a political term designed to confuse the uneducated into conflating small caliber semi-automatic rifles used for target shooting and small game (and occasionally defense) with a scary full-auto death machine used solely to kill people.

    A lot of people will say ‘you don’t need an automatic weapon’ and if they think AR-15’s are automatics its easier to get them banned.

  2. The term AR is used to distinguish these weapons from the earlier ‘Battle Rifles’ – large caliber, high powered rifles like the UK’s L1.

  3. Notice how reference to the killer’s, um, motives is branded politicisation of a tragedy, whilst reference to the availability of firearms is apparently neutral fair comment.

  4. So Much For Subtlety

    In American politics an “assault rifle” is one that looks mean and that the government would like to ban. It is a meaningless term.

    The M16 is now not fully automatic either. The US Army does not trust its soldiers to exercise fire discipline. So now it has three options – safe, single shot, and a three round burst.

  5. So Much For Subtlety

    Though so-called assault rifles account for a small fraction of the United States’ 30,000 annual gun deaths

    That is, long rifles are usually owned by people in the countryside who hunt. You know, White people. Most murders in the US are committed by people in the inner cities. You know, Black people.

    You don’t see many people carrying an AR-15 through Compton. A bit hard to hide. A total ban on “assault rifles” would essentially do nothing to America’s crime rate.

  6. So Much For Subtlety

    monoi – “They used AK47s in Paris, and I’m pretty sure they’re banned…”

    They had a f**king RPG. On what planet aren’t they banned? There is no legal use whatsoever. You can neither buy one nor import one.

    But it is a good thing France has those gun laws, right?

    JuliaM – “It’s a dog whistle.”

    I assume that when Obama and the BBC call it “hate” what they mean is that he had the poor taste to attack people with the superior sort of citizenship. You know, not White heterosexual people but people who matter.

  7. A massacre by one of the friends of peace has already taken place at Ft Hood. A program of killings undertaken by an official state thug.

    The military personnel were disarmed by Fedscum fiat so the killer had an easy time of it. It seems Uncle Scum doesn’t even trust his own men.

    This time out it was a private security guard. It could just as easily have been a cop. They hire low IQ dross for the job as they want bluebottles who will do what they are told without question.

    The anti-gun freaks are played out. Their deceitful squawk ie ” gun control. gun control, gun control” to drown out the still small voice “Another imported muslim nutter” isn’t working.

  8. So Much For Subtlety

    “You don’t see many people carrying an AR-15 through Compton. A bit hard to hide. A total ban on “assault rifles” would essentially do nothing to America’s crime rate.”

    Its not intended too. People who own AR-15 tend to be law abiding lower & middle class men who don’t get a lot of sympathy in the media. The idea group to persecute for some easy sound-bites.

  9. So Much For Subtlety

    So yet another outrage. Yet another hashtag.

    Precisely how many Chibok girls were rescued by all those hashtags? How did Michelle Obama’s heart-tugging little piece of drama help?

    Gay nightclubs are protected by men with guns. The Chibok girls will be rescued by men with guns. Mainly heterosexual men too. Mainly White in America. Mainly lower and lower middle class. The sort of people Obama thinks are the problem.

  10. I think that the gay community, taken for granted by the Dems, has just taken a massive hit in the game of victimhood poker.

    And, aside from the obvious outrage over the deaths, something has particularly irked me: a registered Dem islamist kills a bunch of gay people, and it’s all the fault of the Repubs’ opposition to gay marriage, the NRA and so on. The blind refusal to look the reality that gay hatred is a mainstream Muslim viewpoint so as to blame the RNC is just shocking.

  11. “An assault rifle is a fully automatic selective-fire rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine”

    That definition’s straight from the gun advocates in the US. Irrelevant here.

    As for ‘assault weapons’ in general, what the hell else is a (n anti-personnel) weapon for but to assault someone?

  12. Dave: “As for ‘assault weapons’ in general, what the hell else is a (n anti-personnel) weapon for but to assault someone?”

    Well, there’s target shooting, hunting, clubbing some idiot who really needs clubbing (not sure why that popped into my head when I saw your monicker, Dave, but there you go…).

  13. The blind refusal to look the reality that gay hatred is a mainstream Muslim viewpoint so as to blame the RNC is just shocking.

    No, completely standard. They do it ALL THE TIME. They have to, otherwise they would go mad. Or at least madder.

    When pretty much your entire worldview is an inversion of reality, reality must be shunned.

  14. Anyway, look at the gun. Look at the gun! Don’t look at the shooter, LOOK AT THE GUN! THE GUN!!!

    GAHHH, THE BAPTISTS!

  15. I think the term “assault” comes from WW2 when at the beginning most infantryman carried a rifle that you had to manually cock each round, so it was very difficult to run at the enemy and keep firing, i.e. “assault” them.

    Later, the Germans made a self-loading rifle so you could run at the enemy and just keep pulling and releasing the trigger, so keeping both hands on the weapon.

    We used SLRs in the Falklands and they weren’t fully automatic, but I’m sure they’d have been called assault rifles.

  16. No, the correct terminology for the SLR is “battle rifle”. Firstly, they shoot a full-power cartridge, secondly, not full automatic.

    The terminology mentioned above is the encyclopaedia definition (select-fire, intermediate cartridge).

  17. So Much For Subtlety

    Dave – “As for ‘assault weapons’ in general, what the hell else is a (n anti-personnel) weapon for but to assault someone?”

    Who gives a sh!t? That is the wrong question. The right question is how does having an AK-47 in my cupboard threaten anyone? It doesn’t. Therefore there is no reason why it should be a crime. Assault rifle owners are generally law abiding and well behaved people. America has had a concealed carry revolution with hundreds of thousands of people being allowed to carry their guns wherever they go. It has not caused any problems at all.

    Guns don’t cause crime. Criminals do. We need to concentrate on punishing criminals. Not law abiding people who happen to want to own an M-16.

    I increasingly see no reason for any gun control at all. Up to and including machine guns. Why should we have any such laws?

  18. “I think the term “assault” comes from WW2 when at the beginning most infantryman carried a rifle that you had to manually cock each round, so it was very difficult to run at the enemy and keep firing, i.e. “assault” them.”

    I’m pretty sure it’s a literal translation of the German ‘Sturmgewehr’. The StG44 being the first actual assault rifle. Anyway, the left will continue to deny the bleedin’ obvious and demand tighter gun controls for White, Christian Men.

    Trump2016

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StG_44

  19. Dave: “As for ‘assault weapons’ in general, what the hell else is a (n anti-personnel) weapon for but to assault someone?”

    We need lots of them because the state’s costumed thugs have plenty.

  20. AR-15 is an assault style rifle, but often known as a tactical carbine in military/police use.

    Apart from the fact that you can achieve almost as high a rate of fire on semi-auto as full auto (especially when using certain double trigger setups) fairly minimal modification to the bolt and pin mechanisms can make it essentially a full-auto by enabling hammer follow.

    So a bit of a moot point what type of weapon you call it really.

  21. Of course, it’s not even close to being the largest mass shooting event in U.S. History. Various massacres of Native Americans by the U.S. Cavalry, militias and settlers have exceeded this death toll, e.g. the Sand Creek Massacre.

  22. Dave – irrelevant here because Britain has the most anally retentive and fascistic gun control laws in the world.

    But highly relevant in the US where the outrage took place.

    What are they for? shooting at things – mostly targets, occsionally deer and in the hands of crazed adherents of the ROP, queers.

  23. Jim

    The conspiracy theorist in me thought it might be a convoluted ISIS plot to get Trump elected…..

  24. To be really pedantic, the first “assault rifle” – with hindsight – was the Federov Avtomat, developed and fielded in smallish numbers in Russia in the 1920s.

    The Germans developed the concept, probably independently, based on battlefield research: the rifle calibres of the time (such as the German 7.92mm x 57 or the Russian 7.62mm x 54R – first number is the bullet’s calibre, second is the case length, both in millimetres) were designed to shoot out to a thousand yards or more, based on early Boer War and previous experience of troops in close formation and brightly-coloured uniforms standing in the open to be shot at: achieving this range made the ammunition heavy and the recoil substantial, so at best a four-kilogram rifle could fire semi-automatic.

    The Germans fielded a selective-fire rifle for their paratroops in full-size 7.92mm Mauser (the FG42), but while single shots were fine and the weapon well-engineered, the recoil meant automatic fire was only a menace to birds overhead. If you wanted usable automatic fire in those calibres, you ended up with a Bren Gun – ten kilograms and fired from a bipod. The lesson went unlearned for a long time – the 1950s generation of “battle rifles” such as the M14, G3 and FN-FAL all fired full-power ammunition, all featured automatic fire and all were just wasting ammunition when using it (the US quickly disabled the giggle switch on its M14s, the UK bought the FN-FAL without full-auto).

    The MP43 (later renamed StG44, hence ‘assault rifle’) concept used a shorter cartridge case (7.92mm x 33) and accepted a lower muzzle velocity, lighter bullet and shorter effective range, since in reality it proved very hard to even see an enemy soldier at 400m, let alone hit them with rifle fire. This meant the weapon and ammunition could both be lighter, allowing a soldier to carry many more rounds; it also made full-automatic fire more practical, though it’s surprisingly rarely used.

    The Soviets immediately followed with the SKS and then the AK-47, both in 7.62mm x 39 calibre (the SKS was semi-auto only and looked more traditional – you can start a good argument between firearm enthusiasts as to whether the SKS is, or can be made into, an assault rifle).

    The US shortened the case of their .30-06″ by a quarter of an inch, leaving the ballistics the same, and created 7.62mm NATO (sidelining the very capable .280″ Enfield developed in the UK) which had all the issues of the old, full-power calibres; just as NATO were standardising, the US leapt on the 5.56mm x 45 cartridge and Eugene Stoner’s AR-15 rifle.

    They then spent forty years complaining that the round was undersized and lacked lethality and the M16 a flimsy, unreliable beast, and have spent a decade dancing around a 7mm bullet of 150 grains weight or so, fired at around 2,550fps… an almost exact ringer for the .280 Enfield the US worked hard to eliminate from contention back in 1948. Ho hum.

    https://xkcd.com/303/

  25. “Apart from the fact that you can achieve almost as high a rate of fire on semi-auto as full auto (especially when using certain double trigger setups) fairly minimal modification to the bolt and pin mechanisms can make it essentially a full-auto by enabling hammer follow.”

    Not the case. Otherwise ATF would consider them “machine guns”. Hammer follow will not cause a strike hard enough to detonate a primer – first-hand experience.

  26. Bloke in North Dorset

    You don’t want fully automatic on a rifle, especially one with little recoil, as you can end up emptying a magazine in to one person. If there is a heavy recoil then, depending on how the rifle kicks, you can empty the mag in to the ceiling or floor.

    Also, you only need to hit once with a high velocity round, if the impact doesn’t kill they will be stopped and soon bleed out. In a crowded room you may get lucky and take out 2 or 3 people with the same round at close range.

    With fully automatic weapons you fire in bursts of 3 rounds or so and move on. If its a long barrelled and accurate weapon its for the same reason, no point in killing someone 3 times. If its a personal short barrelled weapon these are less accurate and lower velocity – the idea is that you may need 2 rounds to stop someone and the inaccuracy may get you a hit. (hence double tapping pistols).

    Or at least that was the thinking when I was in training 40 years ago.

  27. So Much For Subtlety

    Bloke in North Dorset – “You don’t want fully automatic on a rifle, especially one with little recoil, as you can end up emptying a magazine in to one person. If there is a heavy recoil then, depending on how the rifle kicks, you can empty the mag in to the ceiling or floor.”

    Back when the Indian police were fighting the Sikh separatists I remember reading a study about how a turning point was when the police abandoned their bolt action Lee Enfield rifles for AK-47s and the like. Because it meant that they could step into a village hut, empty the entire magazine and be gone in under five minutes. Having, of course, killed everyone in the room.

    It meant that the police death squads were more efficient killers than the terrorists. And then they could be gone before the neighbours were even looking out their windows.

  28. Strict gun controls (much stricter than in the US, at least) have not prevented Islamic terrorist attacks in Paris twice in the last 18 months. Terrorists (and other deranged attackers) will use whatever weapons are available to them – if we could somehow remove all guns from the planet, they would simply resort to other means to achieve their evil ends. It’s not difficult to build a device capable of killing 50 people from materials available in your local DIY store.

  29. ‘I increasingly see no reason for any gun control at all. Up to and including machine guns. Why should we have any such laws?’

    Agreed, SMFS. I say repeal the NFA 1934. Silencers are becoming ubiquitous. Short-barreled rifles and shotguns are no menace. Full auto fire is of little tactical value, except for home defense. What better home defense gun could there be than a Thompson or MP5? And what fun they’d be at the range.*

    *My range bans them as unsafe. For the neighbors.

  30. Jonathan is correct, assault rifle comes from Sturmgewehr. Confusion arises over the AR designation. It actually comes from the trademarked names of rifles from the Armalite Corporation, such as AR-10®.

  31. So Much For Subtlety

    Chris Miller – “It’s not difficult to build a device capable of killing 50 people from materials available in your local DIY store.”

    The Chechen refugees who attacked the Boston marathon used a pressure cooker.

    The facts are simple – crime is caused by criminals. Terror is the result of terrorists. The way to have no terrorism is to have no Communists and no Muslims.

    (For very small values of “no”)

  32. Good point, DocBud.

    One should never forget the Mountain Meadows Massacre, where the Mormons killed 120 people.

  33. So Much For Subtlety

    Someone has just raised the obvious question – what were the police doing for three hours?

    https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2016/06/12/when-seconds-counted-the-police-were-only-three-hours-away/

    This is off topic, but there is an aspect of the news reports regarding the terror attack on the gay nightclub in Florida which doesn’t add up. According to the available reports:

    The terrorist called 911 and pledged allegiance to ISIS just before he began the attack.
    At 2:02 AM the terrorist engaged in a firefight with an off duty police officer providing security for the club. Two more officers quickly showed up and joined the firefight.
    The terrorist (re?)entered the club and started shooting. At first the patrons of the club didn’t understand what was happening; they thought the gunfire was part of the music.
    Three hours later at or around 5:00 AM, the police breeched the building and killed the terrorist.

    Some time between when the shooting started at 2:02 AM and when the police finally entered the building around 5:00 AM, the terrorist shot 103 people (50 killed, 53 wounded).

    So what were they doing for three hours? The British police are unlikely to be any faster. The obvious solution is to trust people to defend themselves.

  34. VP – “The conspiracy theorist in me thought it might be a convoluted ISIS plot to get Trump elected…..”

    Its more simple than that – think of the parable of the scorpion and the frog…

  35. “o what were they doing for three hours? The British police are unlikely to be any faster. The obvious solution is to trust people to defend themselves.”

    The police do not protect, they just weep up afterwards.

  36. Btw has anyone seen Owen Jones meltdown on Sky last night?

    Apparently straight people don’t understand Orlando because it was LGBT people that were targeted.

    Just like we don’t understand Paris cos we’re not French etc.

    Its more like Owen Jones and his ilk dealing with the cognitive dissonance of being pro LGBT and pro-Islam.

  37. ‘So what were they doing for three hours?’ – SMFS

    One of the lessons from the Columbine shooting was that ‘modern’ law enforcement has a fatal flaw. Police generally are not good shooters (annual qualification is a killer of careers!), even though the public mistakenly thinks that’s what their job is. When confronted with a shooting situation, they are to secure the perimeter and call for the real shooters, the SWAT team.

    The problem is that an active shooter will keep shooting while this happy horseshit is going on. Three hours at Orlando is suspiciously long, but 20 minutes is not unusual at all.

    Post Columbine, some departments began active shooter training, to make patrol officers better shooters.

  38. ‘they would simply resort to other means to achieve their evil ends.’ – Chris Miller

    True. The Bath School Massacre in 1927 was a bombing.

  39. What better home defense gun could there be than a Thompson or MP5?

    I actually got to fire both last year. The FBI MP5/10 variant of the latter. Both very nice. Although the Tommygun was showing it’s age and the .45″ was a bit overkill.

  40. One of the lessons from the Columbine shooting was that ‘modern’ law enforcement has a fatal flaw. Police generally are not good shooters (annual qualification is a killer of careers!), even though the public mistakenly thinks that’s what their job is. When confronted with a shooting situation, they are to secure the perimeter and call for the real shooters, the SWAT team.

    The problem is that an active shooter will keep shooting while this happy horseshit is going on. Three hours at Orlando is suspiciously long, but 20 minutes is not unusual at all.

    “Suspiciously long”? Bullshit. You’re talking out your ass.

    The police, whether they be beat cops or SWAT, cannot act without reliable information. When the dust settles on this tragedy and the facts analyzed, what will most likely become clear is that the length of time between the initial reports to the police and the final takedown of the suspect hinged on when certain facts and perceptions of the situation became clear.

    Remember: This wasn’t just a mass shooting… It was also hostage situation with a shooter who had an explosive device on him. Maybe you’d charge into the middle of that with guns blazing (if you actually own and know how to use them, that is), but professionals don’t.

    If you want to second-guess the police in this situation, be my guest… Just to get offended when I point out you’re untrained citizen running your mouth, while the police involved are trained professionals working the actual situation.

    Cowboy it up to whatever extent you like, but all you’re doing is making an ass of yourself.

  41. ‘If you want to second-guess the police in this situation, be my guest… Just to get offended when I point out you’re untrained citizen running your mouth, while the police involved are trained professionals working the actual situation.’

    50 died while the professionals handled it.

  42. What better home defense gun could there be than a Thompson or MP5?

    It depends how many of your neighbors you want to kill as the full metal jacket bullets slice through your walls on the exit and then slice through their walls to make an entrance. Full metal jacket 9mm (MP5) and .45 ACP (Thompson) will travel through just about anything short of a brick or concrete wall and keep going, retaining plenty of lethality as it does.

    Amongst those who actually understand self-defense via a handgun, when using anything larger than .22lr round, you only use a weapon that will reliably fire self-defense (hollow point) rounds.

  43. 50 died while the professionals handled it.

    Spoken like a true amateur.

    I won’t even bother asking if you’ve ever worked in law enforcement. But answer me this: Ever fired a handgun, tough guy?

  44. I wouldn’t get too carried away Dennis. Pretty sure I’ev seen gamecock saying he’s licenced for open carry.

  45. So Dennis, why the hostility?

    I would rather die accidentally at the hands of a poorly trained ally and friend trying to defend me than be butchered by murderers.

  46. There are as many as 8.2 million AR-15 and similar weapons legally owned in the USA, as part of the 200 million ++ legally owned weapons.

    If legal gun owners were a real problem, you’d know it.

  47. Full metal jacket 9mm (MP5) and .45 ACP (Thompson) will travel through just about anything short of a brick or concrete wall and keep going, retaining plenty of lethality as it does.

    ….

    you only use a weapon that will reliably fire self-defense (hollow point) rounds.

    Although hollow points are not the only solution to this problem, this is the primary difference between police and military ammunition. Police ammunition is designed to stop and stop in what they hit, not going any further.

    Military ammunition is designed for longish to long range range and, because of the Hague Convention, isn’t allowed to be “expanding” in any form – which is what the hollow point and similar do: greater harm in the body and a significant degree of splat against any reasonably solid wall (obviously, not plasterboard or similar.)

    Hunting ammunition is often a precarious balance between the two – you need the range but you also want the stopping power.

    Police snipers have similar issues – needing range and therefore much greater accuracy – but wanting the stopping power and the “not going through in to the next room / house / neighbourhood”.

  48. JohhnyDub

    Good point on the parable – I did see the childish throwing of his toys out by the appalling Owen Jones (who might just be worse than Murphy actually) – The good news is the various trolls (another one who uses the term as a codeword for ‘people who disagree with me’) who plague his existence will be able to tell him not to pontificate on any matter not related to middle class Gay luvvies. So he can say nothing on ‘working class’ people, nothing on heterosexuals, nothing on ethnic minorities, nothing on religious people – it’s a glorious petard to see him hoisted by.

  49. @ abcab

    Depends a lot on what ammo you use – SAAMI or NATO. Some AR15’s suffer from hammer follow even when unmodified. I’ve experienced this problem first hand – typically on more worn weapons the gun “burps” out a few rounds then jams with the receiver forward. You can also get slamfire malfunctions on some versions – a problem common to some early SA80s and especially the L85 Cadet GP. I always used to scare the devil out of cadets by cocking the L85 and then banging the rifle butt on the ground – causing the weapon to “fire” – as a means of illustrating the importance of checking the weapon is clear.

    Doesn’t make them automatic though in technical terms – and of course modifying the weapon to make them automatic is illegal even in the good ol US of A.

  50. “50 died while the professionals handled it.

    Spoken like a true amateur.”

    Indeed, since he had the time to shoot 103 people.

    103.

    I’m an amateur too, but at which point do professionals look like rank amateur?

  51. So Dennis, why the hostility?

    I see it more as ruthless honesty.

    He talked bullshit and I called him on it. He has no education, training or experience that would qualify him to pass an informed judgment on the Orlando situation… And what facts he has comes for sitting on his ass looking at a computer screen reading news articles… Which means he has no first-hand knowledge of the actual situation.

    If that ain’t Richard Murphy Methodology, I don’t know what is.

  52. Tim –

    OK, so he has an open carry license.

    Big deal.

    I have a concealed carry license… That doesn’t make me qualified to pass judgment on police procedures and tactics on a situation that’s occurred 960 or so miles from where I am, now does it?

  53. I’m an amateur too, but at which point do professionals look like rank amateur?

    What would make a professional look like a rank amateur? When they try to pass off uninformed judgments on the actions of others as knowledgeable opinion. You know, what you’re doing…

  54. http://crimewatchdaily.com/2016/04/20/active-shooter-training-evolves-from-lessons-learned-at-columbine/

    ‘”Columbine was really a watershed event. Surround and contain while people are being shot and killed doesn’t work,” said L.A. County Sheriff’s Tactics Instructor James Grady. “Time is life.”‘

    ‘”The tactics that we employ today, they’re vastly different from the era of Columbine,” said L.A. County Sheriff’s Deputy Fernando Gonzalez. “Simply locking down a location and waiting for a special weapons team isn’t going to cut it anymore.”‘

  55. Lessons learned, Jihadi: wear something that looks like an explosive devise, it will paralyze the police and they will leave you alone while you shoot your captives.

  56. ‘will travel through just about anything short of a brick or concrete wall and keep going, retaining plenty of lethality as it does.’

    Pistol rounds are notoriously lousy for defense. Pros use rifles or shotguns if they expect trouble. It is impossible to retain the lethality they never had. Additionally, anyone familiar with self defense would know that lethality is a bogus concept. The objective is to stop the threat. Lethality is irrelevant.

    Ballistic personal defense weapons work by penetration. Limiting penetration by using hollow points is foolish, until you get over .40 caliber, then it doesn’t much matter. Magic bullets, that penetrate a bad guy but not a wall, haven’t been invented yet.

  57. Bloke in North Dorset

    smfs,

    Maybe that works for police where they know that there no chance of a fight back. But you don’t really want to have an unexpected empty mag when there ‘s a chance someone could fight back. Even in these terror situations if the terrorist looks confused because he’s just run out of ammo that could give those under siege the opportunity.

  58. Ballistic personal defense weapons work by penetration.

    Only up to a very limited point, Lord Copper. They work by doing damage – by simple transfer of kinetic energy or by damaging or destroying body organs. It is why soldiers shot in their body armour often drop – although there is little or no penetration, a shot to the chest plate transfers to a shock to the lungs. And you drop. As if you had been punched in the chest.

    Limiting penetration by using hollow points is foolish

    Only if you expect your target to be armoured. Normal clothing and skin don’t retard even wimpy bullets that much. Hell, I wouldn’t volunteer to be shot with a .22LR. Which, I note, are often used as close range weapons for European gang / organised crime killings (I presume any USian ganger who tooled up with a .22 would be shot on sight for letting the side down.)

  59. Pistol rounds are notoriously lousy for defense. Pros use rifles or shotguns if they expect trouble. It is impossible to retain the lethality they never had. Additionally, anyone familiar with self defense would know that lethality is a bogus concept. The objective is to stop the threat. Lethality is irrelevant.

    Ballistic personal defense weapons work by penetration. Limiting penetration by using hollow points is foolish, until you get over .40 caliber, then it doesn’t much matter. Magic bullets, that penetrate a bad guy but not a wall, haven’t been invented yet.

    Well, Gamecock, you’ve confirmed the worst of what I’ve opined about you… You are equal parts bluster and bullshit, and it would be laughable if the subject was less serious..

    In the U.S., we call guys like you Mall Ninjas. And we usually do that right after we’ve read about you shooting yourself in the leg trying to quick-draw out of a holster. Or some such nonsense.

    And by the way, lethality is very important when you are discussing discharging a firearm when and where there is possibility of innocent bystanders being around. If you knew your ass from your elbow, you’d know that. The fact that you consider the lethality of the weapon you are using to be unimportant simply demonstrates just how unqualified you are to be in possession of a firearm of any kind.

    I misspoke: You are the Richard Murphy of firearms users.

  60. The Four Rules

    •All guns are always loaded. (Treat them so!)
    •Never point the gun at anything you are not willing to destroy.
    •Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on target (and you have made the decision to shoot).
    Be sure of your target and what is beyond it.

    With regards to Rule 4, that means this: Bullets can go through – and beyond – your intended target. Knowing what’s behind your target is an essential step to safety and responsibility. Knowing what your firearm is capable of doing is also an essential step to safety and responsibility.

    Gamecock –

    You haven’t even mastered the basics of firearm safety. Not even the Four Golden Rules. But you’ve got special weapons and tactics all figured out.

    Right.

  61. DtP–So at what point would these “professionals” be forced to move? Say he starts shooting one hostage a minute. Are thecops still going to wait outside gathering info for three hours til there is no one left to kill and then get him?

    The fact is it should have been the victims shooting back. Despite the occasional bout of cop competence and heroics they mostly draw chalk outlines and make things worse for those who have defended themselves.

    When they are not tasering and beating the shit out of anybody (anybody non-connected of course) that they feel like victimising or running assorted $revenue enhancing$ scams.

  62. Mr. Ecks –

    You’re in a crowded gay bar one night. It’s got a couple hundred patrons and it is relatively dark, save the flashing lights that accompanying the Village People tracks the DJ is laying down, and it’s loud.

    Then there are gunshots. You don’t actually see who fired the first shot because you were trying to pick up a cross-eyed fatty named Bruno at the bar and the gunfire is coming from across the room. The loud, dark room all the louder for the sounds of panicked patrons.

    Fearlessly, you and 9 other Mall Ninjas pull out your Glock 19s, assume self-defense stances and begin scanning the room.

    Who do you shoot?

    Well, since you didn’t see the original shooter, you have a 1 in 10 chance of shooting the correct man.

    So who do you shoot?

    Well, in reality, you’re going to attempt to shoot the first guy you see with a gun. You’re going to do that in no small part because he’s getting ready to shoot you… Because (a) he didn’t see the original shooter either, and (b) he’s (correctly) assuming you’ll shoot him if he doesn’t shoot you first.

    So what we got is 10 Mall Ninjas sending 15+1 rounds of 9mm at each other, and, perhaps, the actual terrorist. If any of them hit the actual terrorist, it will be a happy accident… None of the Mall Ninjas actually saw the first shot.

    And this assuming that you do everything correctly (rules 1 through 4) in a crowded, dark, loud bar full or panicked patrons while you are under the stress induced by a potential deadly encounter.

    If you empty your Glock at the first target you see, chances are you’re going to hit a lot more than a terrorist or another Mall Ninja.

    Except that you’re different from the other half-trained yahoos out there trying to compensate for a 3″ penis with a 5″ barrel… You binge watched all of the Die Hard movies last week and you know what you’re doing.

    Now if you don’t see the stupidity of it, there’s nothing else to be said.

  63. DtP is partially right – if you go charging in to this sort of situation it is a recipe for chaos, including shooting hostages, having your own men shot, and so on (and I do know whereof I speak – I know people who did this night after night after night in Baghdad, never mind Orlando nightclubs).

    He’s also right that it is a very silly idea to discharge weapons inside most modern domestic property unless in extremis – internal walls and even external walls can be gone through quite easily. A nice sub sonic large calibre round with the nose filed down, that’s the way to go. Or better still, and a lot more realistically, a shotgun.

    (Fucking machine guns, someone says? You can literally take a house down with a machine gun.)

    However, DtP is IMO wrong if he thinks three hours, in Orlando, is in any way acceptable. This was one man (albeit that initial reports could well have been confused). A larger team or, worse, multiple shooters at multiple locations, would make it easier to understand, but I would expect (even in the UK) the police or the military (depending where it happened) to act a great deal more quickly than this. (Getting there in the first place would be the initial issue.)

    Part of the deal when you join up, esp military, is that you accept you will put your own life on the line, and waiting for the guy to run out of rounds or get bored does not equate to that. It’s interesting how tactics will evolve to deal with this kind of thing, and they will have to do so. The public will not long put up with 50 dead and 50 injured while the cops hang around outside. I would expect an uptick in armed security guards in the US – maybe those SF wannabes from the Blackwater days will be back in business…

    He’s also a bit wrong in his response to Ecks. If it happens like he describes it (loud music, ten blokes with Glocks) then he has a point, but we know that it didn’t all happen quite like that. People were hiding in toilets texting their mums – at some point, the guy came through that door and shot them. It is very easy to walk through a door and kill unarmed people in the room next door, but it is not easy at all to go through doors and kill armed people in another room. These entry points are known as ‘murder holes’ for a reason.

    Of course, contra the above, clubbers off their heads on coke and ecstasy and armed with guns is a bad thing in other ways. I’m not sure what the answer is, I do know it’s not simple. It’s probably not even amenable to ‘an’ answer.

  64. He’s also a bit wrong in his response to Ecks. If it happens like he describes it (loud music, ten blokes with Glocks) then he has a point, but we know that it didn’t all happen quite like that.

    Very true. But it could have just as easily happened the way I described it… Especially if Ecks had his way. I’m just looking for a reasonable hypothetical answer to a reasonable hypothetical question.

  65. However, DtP is IMO wrong if he thinks three hours, in Orlando, is in any way acceptable. This was one man (albeit that initial reports could well have been confused). A larger team or, worse, multiple shooters at multiple locations, would make it easier to understand, but I would expect (even in the UK) the police or the military (depending where it happened) to act a great deal more quickly than this. (Getting there in the first place would be the initial issue.)

    Until we know, in accurate detail, what the police knew (and didn’t know) and what their thought and decision making processes where throughout the operation – also in accurate detail – we CANNOT draw an accurate conclusion or render an informed opinion about what should or should not have been done.

    Until we have all the facts available, any conclusion as to whether the police botched the operation is UNINFORMED SPECULATION. And as such, I reserve the right to keep calling bullshit when I see it.

    The fact that 3 hours passed before the situation was ended is an ISOLATED fact. From it we cannot draw an informed conclusion. Anyone who suggests otherwise at this time is, at best, seriously misguided.

  66. Dennis – to an extent all is speculation and you’re speculating just as hard that there’s some reason the cops didn’t go in.
    There are unknowns, but there always will be.
    You always have to act on imperfect knowledge, and there will be arguments about when the time to act comes, and more than one right answer, but three hours is always going to be too long.
    The fact – and this is a fact – is that if you spend three hours outside a building when people are being shot inside and don’t at least send scouts in you are failing in your duty.
    I don’t care if there are a dozen guys in there, at some point the man in charge has to point to the door and say you, you, you and you, in there.
    Even if it’s just to get eyes on and discover what is going on – rather than sitting outside speculating (to use your word).
    If he (or she) hasn’t got the balls, find someone who has.
    If the blokes haven’t got the balls, find blokes who have – there’s actually no shortage of them, there are people who love doing this sort of stuff.
    Yes, you are asking people to risk their lives. They are paid to do that.

  67. ^’you’re speculating just as hard that there’s some *legitimate* reason the cops didn’t go in’, I should have said.

    The more I think about it the more I find your attitude reprehensible. You are suggesting that armed police in head to toe kevlar (which will stop an AK round) and shields and the like can legit sit outside while people are being murdered inside?
    No way. They can get plans, they can listen in, they can try to get cameras inside, but ultimately they are always going to have to send people in to the unknown, so once the basics are known waiting just costs more lives.
    This is their job FFS.

  68. I read a saying after the attempt on the train near Amiens foiled by US military on leave:
    “Run away from a knife, run towards a gun”
    Is this still good advice if you’re prepared to take one for the good of your friends?

  69. It’s not difficult to build a device capable of killing 50 people from materials available in your local DIY store.

    Must be close to zero terrorists in the UK, then.

  70. DtP–Since it seems we have an expert in weapons and tactics gracing us with his presence–what prey tell was anybody supposed to do? Apart from get killed and or held hostage. Or don’t go to any sort of fucking nightclub. And if the place had been full of armed off-duty coppers the same result would have ensued from your scenario.

    The “professionals” bullshit doesn’t cut it. Many times in life there is no good answer only bad news and “professional” just means a fancy funeral at public expense. The chances are that someone would have got the bastard–or at least pinned him down–sooner or later. Armed citizens still beat “wait for the cops ” .

    Also anybody with the brains of a gnat owning a firearm would get the best training they can afford in using a gun for self-protection. New training will likely be devised–so far as it can be devised–for future situations like Orlando .

    Americas costumed thugs under orders are every bit as big a danger to its people as are jihadists. As others have pointed out this is only the second largest private massacre in US history. And nowhere near the one day record for the Fedscum. Maybe, while they were waiting, the cops should have driven all the nearby locals out of their houses with their hands over their heads like they did after the Boston Bombing

  71. Although I have fired a couple handguns and a 22LR I admit I am by no way qualified to have had a gun in this situation. That doesn’t prevent me from asking an obvious question.

    How much of the timeline do we actually know?

    So far I know that shooting began at 2:02 am. I also know that this turned into a hostage situation. For all I know the hostage portion could have been 2 hours and 40 minutes. I need more information before I can begin to armchair SWAT team this one.

    Based on this conversation DtP is the person I trust most to be carrying in a nightclub. If, dog forbid, I was to end up in this situation the last thing I would want is to see dozens of guns when I have no clue who the shooter is.

    Once I know the details I can critique law enforcement. Today I mourn for the 103 casualties and their families. I also remember Christina Grimmie and the less newsworthy victims of the weekend.

  72. You are suggesting that armed police in head to toe kevlar (which will stop an AK round) and shields and the like can legit sit outside while people are being murdered inside?

    If you received that suggestion, you got it from the little voices in your head, not me. I haven’t stated – or suggested – that the police operation was appropriate. I haven’t stated – or suggested – it was inappropriate. What I stated was the following:

    1) We don’t have enough facts (fully established as accurate) to draw an informed conclusion as to whether the police operation was appropriate or not.
    2) No one at this site, including myself, has the necessary training or experience to pass judgment as to whether the police operation was appropriate or not, especially given how little we know about the details of the operation.

    Both of those statements are true. Certainly Gamecock has proved #2 beyond all doubt… He said enough in this thread alone to prove he can’t even handle a firearm safely.

    Neither of the above statements are an endorsement of what the police did or didn’t do in Orlando. I’m not a big fan of the police, but I’m even less a fan of rank amateurs trying to pass off their ignorance as worthwhile commentary within 24 hours of a national tragedy.

    And you know what? There are worse things than keeping your trap shut until the facts are known and the experts have had a chance to analyze them.

    Especially, Interested, when the present analysis is coming from some big-talking keyboard commando who can’t wait for someone else to step up and take the bullet for him.

    Then again, you could lay out your vitae right here and prove me wrong with all your military and/or law enforcement experience and hostage negotiation expertise and special weapons and tactics training. I’m curious to know what live fire experience you have, and how many men you’ve shot at.

    But I’m not holding my breath.

    Me, I’m betting you’re something more along the lines of an overweight assistant district manager who couldn’t run 20 yards before collapsing with chest pains.

  73. One of the givens of this life is that you will get –from “officials” –only ever as much as they want you to know. And a large part of it will probably be lies. So don’t hold your breath for the official version.

  74. Based on this conversation DtP is the person I trust most to be carrying in a nightclub.

    I appreciate the vote of confidence, but I do not carry and never will. I got my concealed carry permit as a matter or training… One can never have enough training. I keep a loaded pistol (safety on) in the nightstand in case of home invasion, but that’s it.

    I will not carry for the following reasons:

    1) If I feel I need a firearm to be safe in a certain place, I do not go to that place. Period.
    2) If I feel I don’t need a firearm to be safe in a certain place, then I don’t take it. Period.
    3) The best way to survive a gunfight is to not get into a gunfight.
    4) An appropriate level of situational awareness and good judgment almost always trumps being armed.

  75. One of the givens of this life is that you will get –from “officials” –only ever as much as they want you to know. And a large part of it will probably be lies. So don’t hold your breath for the official version.

    What a sad, paranoid little man you are.

  76. ‘They work by doing damage – by simple transfer of kinetic energy or by damaging or destroying body organs.’

    No. Transfer of kinetic energy – hydostatic shock – works only at rifle velocities.

  77. So Much For Subtlety

    Dennis the Peasant – “I haven’t stated – or suggested – that the police operation was appropriate. I haven’t stated – or suggested – it was inappropriate.”

    No. What you have done is come looking for a fight. To get it you have started off throwing absurd personal abuse around with glee. I don’t know what is going on at your end but as a serious fan of your former blog I am disappointed. Saddened even.

    “1) We don’t have enough facts (fully established as accurate) to draw an informed conclusion as to whether the police operation was appropriate or not.”

    I don’t see a lot of people saying it wasn’t. I do see people saying that there is something odd about that time line.

    Personally I think police procedure is based on dealing with professional criminals. Pre-9-11 thinking. The passengers on those planes did what the government told them to – they sat and waited for the professionals to negotiate a solution. That did not work on 9-11. The police seem stuck in a mind set that the hostage taker will negotiate. For most criminals that might be true. For Jihadis less so.

    “2) No one at this site, including myself, has the necessary training or experience to pass judgment as to whether the police operation was appropriate or not, especially given how little we know about the details of the operation.”

    You have no idea what people here do or do not know. Not that it has stopped you taking the low road at the first opportunity.

    “Me, I’m betting you’re something more along the lines of an overweight assistant district manager who couldn’t run 20 yards before collapsing with chest pains.”

    See what I mean?

  78. Another leftist victory in the culture war. We’re attacked by the Jihad and the discussion is about guns.

  79. So Much For Subtlety

    Liberal Yank – “Based on this conversation DtP is the person I trust most to be carrying in a nightclub. If, dog forbid, I was to end up in this situation the last thing I would want is to see dozens of guns when I have no clue who the shooter is.”

    Yeah but notice that he has to rely on an absolutely absurd caricature of what was being suggested. The idea that a dozen people would draw and begin shooting without seeing what they are shooting at. At the situation stands today in the US, people with carry permits are incredibly law abiding. They do not commit crimes. They do not blaze away with glee. They are, for the vast majority not just most of them, responsible gun users.

    Which leads to what DtP has not addressed – Interested point about being trapped in the toilets. If one of them had a gun, the shooter would have had problems coming through that door. In the end it looks like the SWAT team did get him as he came through a gap in the wall. As none of the patrons did have a gun, he had three hours to wander around shooting as many people as he liked.

    The tl;dr version? There is no reason to take a cartoonish version of concealed carry seriously.

  80. Gamecock –

    Just keep talkin’ there, Bud.

    Hydrostatic shock is not the transfer of kinetic energy.

    Hydrostatic shock is a phenomenon that produces certain forms of ballistic trauma.

    To quote Wikipedia: “Hydrostatic shock or hydraulic shock is a term which describes the observation that a penetrating projectile can produce remote wounding and incapacitating effects in living targets through a hydraulic effect in their liquid-filled tissues, in addition to local effects in tissue caused by direct impact.”

    That ain’t ‘transfer of kinetic energy’, moron.

    Once again you prove beyond a doubt that you don’t know what you are talking about.

  81. So Much For Subtlety

    Dennis the Peasant – “Remember: This wasn’t just a mass shooting… It was also hostage situation with a shooter who had an explosive device on him. Maybe you’d charge into the middle of that with guns blazing (if you actually own and know how to use them, that is), but professionals don’t.”

    I am sure professionals don’t. That seems to be kind of the problem. We have made a deal that has a trade off. We agree not to use force – or even own the means to exert any force – and in return the State promises to protect us.

    The State is getting worse and worse at upholding their end of the deal. They will not punish criminals. They will not protect the borders. They will charge us if we use force to protect ourselves.

    So this leads to an inevitable re-thinking of that deal. Why should we honour our half the deal if the government won’t honour their half? And again, you are erecting a strawman. The question is not whether police should have entered into a situation with a potential suicide bomber with hostages and a semi-automatic rifle. The question is whether it is sensible to make sure that the *victims*, who have no choice about being thrown in to that situation, should be able to do something about it or not. Once you are in that situation what should you do? Waiting for three hours, like sitting in your airplane seat on the way to the Pentagon, doesn’t look very appealing.

  82. So Much For Subtlety

    Dennis the Peasant – “Hydrostatic shock is not the transfer of kinetic energy. …. That ain’t ‘transfer of kinetic energy’, moron.”

    Dennis, seriously? You might want to rethink that claim.

  83. Which leads to what DtP has not addressed – Interested point about being trapped in the toilets. If one of them had a gun, the shooter would have had problems coming through that door.

    I didn’t address for obvious reasons: If one of them had had a gun, they probably wouldn’t have been allowed in the Night Club in the first place. For liability reasons alone, most night clubs don’t allow firearms on the premises. I’m betting the one in Orlando barred firearms, as most sane folk understand that guns and alcohol don’t mix.

    And by the way, if the club didn’t allow firearms on the premises, then that person in the toilet shooting away at the terrorist committed a felony upon entering the establishment. So much for the law abiding citizen angle under that circumstance, eh?

  84. So Much For Subtlety

    Dennis the Peasant – “For liability reasons alone, most night clubs don’t allow firearms on the premises.”

    As someone else has already pointed out. Who was that? Oh. It was Gamecock.

    “And by the way, if the club didn’t allow firearms on the premises, then that person in the toilet shooting away at the terrorist committed a felony upon entering the establishment. So much for the law abiding citizen angle under that circumstance, eh?”

    Sure. I would be interested to see what a jury had to say but that still misses the point. We have a general agreement to leave all law enforcement to the police. That includes laws like these. People can’t be trusted with guns especially when they have been drinking. But as these attacks continue, and as the state continues to fail to protect us, I would expect these laws will gradually fade away. Israelis openly carry their assault rifles around town. Even I believe to bars.

  85. LY:‘Based on this conversation DtP is the person I trust most to be carrying in a nightclub.’

    Pretty sure if trapped in a nightclub with obnoxious blowhard DtP holding forth, I’d pray for an Islamic whackjob to come in and put me out of my misery…

  86. I can’t see many people wanting to go clubbing while carrying. It’s just not very practical.

    The sad reality is that if the killer is prepared to die, then all sorts of mayhem becomes possible. It’s the difference between 9/11 and the hijackings that happened prior.

  87. Pretty sure if trapped in a nightclub with obnoxious blowhard DtP holding forth, I’d pray for an Islamic whackjob to come in and put me out of my misery…

    Wouldn’t we all.

    And don’t kid us Julia, you wouldn’t visit any nightclub that allowed non-white people inside.

  88. So Much For Subtlety

    Dennis the Peasant – “The transfer of kinetic energy produces hydrostatic shock. It’s cause and effect.”

    Which is what Gamecock said, no? As opposed to anyone who said that hydrostatic shock was not the transfer of kinetic energy.

  89. But as these attacks continue, and as the state continues to fail to protect us

    I’m not sure this is fair at all. Consider the vast array of possibilities for the wannabee martyr, and you have to conclude that things could be even and considerably worse.

  90. We have a general agreement to leave all law enforcement to the police.

    And properly so. You seem to be confusing personal defense with law enforcement. They are two completely different things.

    Kinda like personal defense training and the sort of training needed to successfully cope with a heavily armed terrorist in a hostage situation are two different things.

  91. There are nightclubs that break equality & diversity laws, DtP? Do tell…

    I knew that’d peak your interest… Never know when the next Trayon Martin might cross your path, right?

  92. No. Transfer of kinetic energy – hydostatic shock – works only at rifle velocities.

    No. Hydrostatic shock only happens where the shockwave is above the speed of sound in the relative liquid. It is a particular, and quite damaging, effect. Because we are mostly water.

    However, damaging transfer of kinetic energy can happen at much lower velocities. Or are you volunteering to let me hit you in the face with my lead fencing sledgehammer?

    No, you’re not. Because that would be silly. Because the hammer would have enough kinetic energy to severely rearrange your skull even if it didn’t snap your neck. Despite being really quite slow.

    Bullets travel faster. Well, mostly. And they transfer some or all of their kinetic energy to whatever they hit depending on whether they penetrate not at all, partially or fully.

  93. What you have done is come looking for a fight. To get it you have started off throwing absurd personal abuse around with glee. I don’t know what is going on at your end but as a serious fan of your former blog I am disappointed. Saddened even.

    Please don’t patronize me. If you’d actually paid attention to my blog, you’d have noticed that what I did was call people on their bullshit. That’s just about all I did. And if I was known for anything, it was that I didn’t take prisoners while doing so.

    Actually, it’s how Mr. Worstall and I became acquainted… I called out Michelle Malkin, Daily KOS and a bunch of so-called professional journalists when they attempted to mischaracterize the sale of Peninsular and Oriental to Dubai Ports World as selling U.S. docks to “The Arabs”.

    I took a ton of shit from my so-called conservative friends for gleefully abusing the vast right-wing conspiracy I was supposed to be supporting. And you know what? It didn’t matter. Bullshit is bullshit.

    The same goes for here until Mr. Worstall tells me to stop.

    If there is anything you should be sad about, it’s the fact that you feel the need to defend those who gleefully abuse law enforcement for their operational performance without a shred of fact or expertise to hang their (or your) hat on. This before the dead are even buried, much less the facts compiled and sorted.

    That’s what you should be sad about.

  94. DtP: “If there is anything you should be sad about, it’s the fact that you feel the need to defend those who gleefully abuse law enforcement for their operational performance without a shred of fact or expertise to hang their (or your) hat on.”

    Operational performance–like the dog-shooting SWAT clowns –who –when not exceeding the “greatest ever massacre” deathtolls on behalf of the Federal fucks such as at Waco are busy raiding doctors offices for over-prescribing vitamins. Or SWATing the wrong address cos they are morons . Or the right address but the wrong people cos their kill sheet hasn’t been updated in 6 months and the supposed crim is months gone. Or shooting /tasering/beating to death the homeless or the mentally ill .

    Or running one of the legion of scams and acts of scummery laid out here :

    http://freedominourtime.blogspot.co.uk/

    And while you are at it ask Kenneth Trentadue’s brother about the bullshit list of “official versions” he has had over the years about his siblings death in the kindly custody of American bluebottles.

  95. So Much For Subtlety

    Dennis the Peasant – “And properly so. You seem to be confusing personal defense with law enforcement. They are two completely different things.”

    I am not sure that is properly so. When people get charged for shooting people breaking in to their homes, the line is blurred and I am not sure it is proper. The police are, or should be, only a section of the population. Not a group of people above or superior to the rest of the people.

    Dennis the Peasant – “Please don’t patronize me.”

    It is not patronising anyone.

    “If there is anything you should be sad about, it’s the fact that you feel the need to defend those who gleefully abuse law enforcement for their operational performance without a shred of fact or expertise to hang their (or your) hat on.”

    Ecks is inclined to abuse policemen. So is BiS. But I don’t see any here. Much less gleeful abuse.

    But that doesn’t mean there aren’t occasional grounds for criticism. Tamir Rice would be alive today if police were as responsible as you seem to think they are. However what we have here is pre-9-11 thinking that is not really suitable for terrorism. While the police were making sure it was as safe as possible for them to go in, people died.

  96. So Much For Subtlety

    So we know TW reads the Daily Mail, or trawls it for ideas anyway, but does the Daily Mail read TW?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3639596/Did-delay-police-response-shooter-time.html

    SWAT set off explosives outside Pulse nightclub to blow holes in the wall
    But the devices didn’t penetrate the exterior, so they had to use a vehicle

    You got to love that. Three hours to prepare and they don’t get the wall right.

    The police seem to prove one of DtP’s points – they admit they may have shot some innocent people. High powered bullets continue until they stop. They will not be stopped by little things like interior (or even exterior) walls. Perhaps they should have listened to Gamecock and used a shotgun!

    However this is probably inevitable, it is clearly not like the Waco Biker massacre where the police seem to have shot first and continued shooting until they got bored. But those three hours are being questioned.

  97. ‘Bullets travel faster. Well, mostly. And they transfer some or all of their kinetic energy to whatever they hit depending on whether they penetrate not at all, partially or fully.’

    At pistol velocities, the transfer of kinetic energy beyond damaging what the bullet hits produces no useful work.

    FBI Handgun Wounding Factors, 1989:

    “In the case of low-velocity missiles, e.g., pistol bullets, the bullet produces a direct path of destruction with very little lateral extension within the surrounding tissues. Only a small temporary cavity is produced. To cause significant injuries to a structure, a pistol bullet must strike that structure directly. The amount of kinetic energy lost in tissue by a pistol bullet is insufficient to cause remote injuries produced by a high velocity rifle bullet.”

  98. Shorter version:

    1) Commenters declare the Orlando Massacre to be largely the product of police incompetence.
    2) Dennis asks, impolitely, for facts to back that contention.
    3) Commenters say because the incident lasted 3 hours.
    4) Dennis note, impolitely, that a single fact does not a contention sustain. Asks again for factual grounding to contention of police incompetence.
    5) Gets two responses: 1) Because 3 hours, and 2) Police suck.
    6) Dennis notes, impolitely, that both responses lack a minimum of factual grounding to sustain the contention.
    7) Commenters respond Because 3 hours.
    8) Commenters respond Police suck.
    9) Dennis notes, impolitely, that it is becoming apparent that commenters offering Response #1 and/or Response #2 don’t seem to have any facts to back initial contention.
    10) Dennis notes, impolitely, that is it apparent that commenters offering Response #1 and/or Response #2 have no training or experience in law enforcement, hostage negotiations, weapons, or tactics.
    11) Gamecock proves Dennis correct by demonstrating he doesn’t properly understand firearm safety, transfer of kinetic energy or hydrostatic shock.
    12) Mr. Ecks proves Dennis correct by convincingly demonstrating that his anger management issues need the attention of a trained mental health professional… Right now.
    13) Interested proves Dennis correct by calling all police cowards… from the safety of his keyboard.
    14) SMFS collapses into a whiney heap when Dennis suggests that fat assistant district managers can’t run 20 yards without collapsing with chest pains. Evidently Dennis hit too close to home on that one.
    15) Nobody as of yet has actually provided any sort of fact pattern of the Orlando massacre to suggest the initial contention was anything other than the uninformed and ignorant ramblings of the sort of people who probably couldn’t defend themselves properly in the first place, and, for all their blustering, are the sort that end up calling the cops to get the neighborhood kids to stop playing kickball in front of their driveways.

  99. So Much For Subtlety

    Dennis the Peasant – “1) Commenters declare the Orlando Massacre to be largely the product of police incompetence.”

    And there Dennis you go wrong. No one declared the shooting to be the product of police incompetence. I pointed out some people were asking why they waited for three hours to go in.

    Whereupon you used the opportunity to add some colour and meaning to your life by being nasty to a bunch of people you have never met before.

    “9) Dennis notes, impolitely, that it is becoming apparent that commenters offering Response #1 and/or Response #2 don’t seem to have any facts to back initial contention.”

    I do like your highly revisionist account of what you have been doing. You missed all the bits where you have repeatedly tried to change the subject from the shooting to everyone else’s manhood or whatever. Simply incoherently shouting abuse does not make for an intelligent, informative or interesting thread.

    As I said, I remember your old blog. Tragic really.

    “14) SMFS collapses into a whiney heap when Dennis suggests that fat assistant district managers can’t run 20 yards without collapsing with chest pains. Evidently Dennis hit too close to home on that one.”

    Well you could have asked. I *aspire* to be a fat assistant district managers who can’t run 20 yards without collapsing with chest pains. One day, if I keep my nose clean, Mr Ripley promises that I might get my shot.

    “15) Nobody as of yet has actually provided any sort of fact pattern of the Orlando massacre”

    As you said, it is too early to say much because the facts are not yet known. That they waited three hours looks odd. That they failed to blow in the wall and had to get a vehicle to do it – delaying their entry – looks even worse.

  100. So Much For Subtlety

    Incidentally the gun law debate is more interesting not only because he wasn’t on the FBI’s Watch List – and it is a funny accusation coming from someone under investigation by the FBI. Perhaps Hillary would like to list all the other legal rights she has that ought to be suspended the second the FBI starts investigating her.

    But mainly because it turns out he was not even using an AR-15. I have seen it reported he was using a SIG Sauer. Presumably their M-16 clone-ish-y gun. But still.

  101. DtP–or should we call you The Lethal Weapon?

    Never suggested that the massacre was a result of bluebottle bungling. Your insolent arrogant mixture of personal attack and cop-sucking bullshit set of my accurate and well-deserved rants about what lovely types fill the ranks of American “law enforcement”.

    As for the professionalism of coppers –here is an example of same–in a class full of kids yet.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=am-Qdx6vky0

    The fool is also quite portly–since you seem to have a marked dislike of fat people.

  102. Ah, the Mall Ninjas…

    You don’t know what you’d have done,
    And you don’t know how you’d have done it,
    But if you had known what to do,
    And if you’d actually done it,
    It’d been way better than anything the experts and trained professionals would have done,
    Because…
    You’re a Mall Ninja,
    And the only thing better than training, experience and expertise is…
    Having a keyboard and an opinion.
    We don’t have to worry. We’re safe… You’re from the internet!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBaISwLnrgo

  103. @DtP: can you point us in the direction of any terrorist atrocity/mass shooting in recent times where the police actually did anything proactive other than surround the location, and having given them lots of time to continue killing those they had held in the building, eventually manage to shoot/apprehend those responsible, often when the perpatrators have run out of ammo?

    It appears that the police (all over the world, not just in the US) have gotten into a ‘If we shoot an innocent person we’ll get the blame, and a mountain of shit piled on us, so we’re just going to sit outside until we can get a safe(ish) shot at the shooters, and if lots of the public get killed in the meantime, we won’t get the blame for that, so f*ck ’em’ mentality.

    I’m old enough to remember the SAS raid on the Iranian Embassy in London (I actually saw it as it happened, on a live news broadcast) and it seems such a response would never be allowed/considered these days.

    Its indicative of the police response that despite multiple terrorist attacks, many mass shootings, hundreds of members of the public dead, there have been very few (if any) police fatalities. It doesn’t appear that they are going out of their way to put themselves in the line of fire, rather than unarmed civilians.

  104. And you were in the thick of it were you?

    Yeah, I was the one standing behind you while you offered up sound criticism and sage advice while directing the SWAT team. Your psychiatrist was standing between the two of us, which is why you didn’t notice me.

  105. @DtP: can you point us in the direction of any terrorist atrocity/mass shooting in recent times where the police actually did anything proactive other than surround the location, and having given them lots of time to continue killing those they had held in the building, eventually manage to shoot/apprehend those responsible, often when the perpatrators have run out of ammo?

    Nope.

    But I’d be grateful if you’d point me to a copy of your detailed analysis of multi-jurisdiction tactical operations for specific scenarios such as terrorist attacks, hostage negotiation and rescue, and SWAT operations. I’m sure your analysis, with its list of recommendations for improvement in specific areas of those operations, while prove quite educational.

    Thanks in advance for a copy.

  106. As they say sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.

    But to take another old adage, I don’t have to be a chicken to criticise an egg, I can tell an off one when I see it. Pretending that people have to have a Masters in hostage negotiation and dealing with armed terrorist attacks before they can point out various inconsistencies in current police attitudes to dealing with terrorist outrages is just a blatant attempt to deflect any criticism at. After all if no-one other than the ‘experts’ can criticise your specialist field then you’re going to have considerably less people pointing out the emperor has no clothes.

    Its very noticeable that the more the police have turned themselves into a passable impression of a heavily armed military force, the less keen they are to actually put themselves in that much danger. 1970s UK bobbies faced the IRA with nothing more than a wooden truncheon, a serge uniform and a whistle. Todays SWAT teams have kevlar up the wazzoo but are even less likely to put themselves on the line to protect the public. One doesn’t have to have done 30 years in SO19 to point this out.

  107. Dennis, I’ve done things you can’t even imagine. I wasn’t calling the cops ‘cowards’, they’re generally brave individuals. However, they tend to devolve to paralysis through command failure.

    You’re right we don’t know what happened. My comments are based on three hours of them sitting around doing fuck all. If that’s correct fire the chief. If not fire the journalists.

    It’s only a blog post you soft cunt.

  108. Dennis, I’ve done things you can’t even imagine.

    That may be – and especially within the context of this thread – the single funniest line I’ve read in the last decade. I chuckled about that one most of last night. It’s one of the purest distillations of the Mall Ninja mentality I’ve ever come across.

    Anyway…

    Maybe I am a soft cunt… Actually, come to think of it, I’m pretty sure I am now, and always have been, a soft cunt. There’s no particular shame in that. As Harry Callahan once observed, a good man knows his limitations.

    But me being what I am is beside the point, and you know it.

    Soft cunt or no, what I actually am is comfortable enough in my own skin to find it unnecessary to stroke my ego (or stoke my neurotic disorder) by criticizing genuinely tough men and women doing genuinely dangerous work… Especially when I don’t have the facts or grounding to do so credibly.

    Maybe you’re a tough guy. Maybe you aren’t. I’m sure I’ll never know for sure. But I doubt it. Not based on the way you’ve carried yourself here. You might be dangerous, but genuinely tough?

    Nah.

  109. And just to be clear, Interested, I am not for a moment doubting that you’ve done things I can’t imagine. That would be the sort of uninformed speculation you’ve been indulging in.

    What made the line so funny was that you felt the need to pull it out and use it.

  110. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/06/13/final-chaotic-gun-battle-with-isis-inspired-terrorist-detailed-by-police.html?intcmp=hpbt1

    ‘Additional officers quickly responded, forcing Mateen to retreat into a bathroom with about four or five hostages while authorities rescued “dozens of injured and non-injured” from the dance floor and lounge and bar area, [Orlando Police Chief John] Mina said.’

    ‘Maybe you’d charge into the middle of that with guns blazing (if you actually own and know how to use them, that is), but professionals don’t.’

    But they did. Dumbass.

  111. ’11) Gamecock proves Dennis correct by demonstrating he doesn’t properly understand firearm safety, transfer of kinetic energy or hydrostatic shock.’

    Begging the question fallacy. We have only your assertion, no actual evidence.

  112. Boy, Gamecock, you really nailed me on that one.

    Because, as we all know…

    There is an exact equivalence between a team of highly trained SWAT officers executing a coordinated tactical response to an active shooter and hostage situation – something they’ve no doubt rehearsed repeatedly as part of their ongoing training and…

    Some big-talkin’ bozo like you – who doesn’t even understand the 4 basic rules of gun safety (I told a couple of my shooting buddies about your “lethality doesn’t matter” comment: You got one “You’re kidding”, one shake of the head and a “What a dumb fuck”. Be proud.) – let alone have any practical experience or training in law enforcement, pulling out a pistol or two and trying to play hero.

    Yep, you really got me on that one.

  113. Begging the question fallacy. We have only your assertion, no actual evidence.

    The assertion was based on the evidence.

    But you’d need to understand gun safety, transfer of kinetic energy and hydrostatic shock to spot the evidence. Hint: You wrote it all yourself.

  114. ‘Additional officers quickly responded, forcing Mateen to retreat into a bathroom with about four or five hostages while authorities rescued “dozens of injured and non-injured” from the dance floor and lounge and bar area, [Orlando Police Chief John] Mina said.’

    Kinda shoots a hole in the whole Mall Ninja narrative of the police being a bunch of Kevlar coated pussies frozen for three hours in a state of fear and indecision, doesn’t it boys?

    And now that the facts are becoming available, you’ve all flown the coop. Off to criticize and belittle and build yourselves up…

    Yeah, you’ve all done things I can’t fucking imagine…

    My ass.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *