Mass shooting in the middle school Vladislav Ribnikar in Belgrade

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Should I toss that one back so you can move the words around and make an ounce of sense?  I'd love to be able to answer your question I'm just not sure what you're asking.  Like..theoretically, do you really need an ar for a mass shooting?  OFC not, any number of weapons will do, and ofc in the general there's always bombing - which they also employ?  Here in the us, the black rifle is just their thing, the same way an ak has shown up on so many republics flags.  To restrict it is to restrict both their most effective tool in direct terrorist action...and a symbol of their counter-cultural identity.

My point is that banning high-tech guns (which can shoot with high precision) would disable the people who can potentially stop a mass shooting much more than potential mass shooters. To injure a mass shooter before he kills many people, you need to shoot very quickly and with high precision. That's way easier to do with high-tech guns than with regular guns. And mass shooting can just as easily be done with a regular gun.

Given the number of privately held firearm in the US, it seems reasonable that at least some of those are the ‘high-tech/precision’ guns you’re talking about. It also seems reasonable that a percentage of those weapons are in the hands of people trained to use them (a gun - no matter how high tech - in the hands of someone untrained in its use is little better than a club).

That being the case, why aren’t more mass shooters being stopped by armed civilians?

Boru