When Jeff explained how aimed fire from a semi skilled shooter, even with a bolt action rifle, would have been more efficient method he was called all sorts of names. But thats to be expected here when anyone in anyway disagrees with the premise that an AR15 is the most deadly of all rifles.View attachment 279345
"What a moron. The epidemic of one dead guy with bump stocks is over because the guy is dead. If another nutjob who thinks spraying bullets is more effective than aiming emerges, I'd hope he can get bump stocks if he's going to be shooting at me because I think aimed shots are more effective." -Tom
Now why don't you explain how a single person can fire 1100 rounds and hit 480 people in ten minutes from a distance of 490 yards and how a standard semi-automatic rifle would be more effective than one with a bump stock. Please discuss caliber, rate of fire, barrel covers, magazines, etc. What has the Borg told you that has allowed you to abandon the laws of thermodynamics?
Would aimed fire have created as many injuries? Probably not, you wouldn't have as many ricochet and bullet fragments causing injury. But from 500 yards, and all those people fenced in. Yes in 10 minutes a good shooter aiming with a scoped rifle could have killed more then 58 people.