Restricting the type of firearms available to civilians will reduce gun death

Rifles: A. Being more lethal than another gun has nothing to do with those 325 deaths. If rifles were completely un-available at the time of those murders, how can you say that they wouldn't have happened with a different weapon? I'm just going to drop the letter B because shifting everything would be too confusing at this point. C. You're (1.) is no source to consult for "features of a gun that make it more deadly". It was posted by someone who provides no sources to any of their claims and doesn't even claim to know what they're talking about. The whole thing is the un-informed opinion of one person that doesn't reflect fact. A pistol grip doesn't make a gun faster or more accurate or more deadly. A gun without those features can still be used effectively to kill people en masse quickly. Note my usage of shotguns in previous points. Watch the video to see what I mean. Barrel shrouds are a necessity to everyone who owns one. The barrel heats up regardless of how fast you shoot it. No one wants to be impeded because their hands are burning. Silencers are NFA Class 3 items and are not available to the public as a whole (1.) A flash suppressor doesn't increase accuracy. It does reduce flash. Flash suppressors do have legitimate place in the law abiding citizen's possession. (i.e Home invasions at night-time). Stealth wasn't really necessary for those shootings since anyone in the immediate vicinity was unable to fire back or dead. No difference would have been made if the people could've seen where he was. It was my understanding the DC sniper was highly mobile. As far as outpacing every other weapon, that's not necessarily accurate, as every other type of gun is just as capable of killing people as a semi-automatic rifle. You're no more dead when shot with a rifle than with a handgun or shotgun. D. No, that's not what I said. Sure they're likely to use them. But if you ban them, there are other options to kill people with, namely, handguns and shotguns. E. For the last time. It isn't fully automatic fire. Sure it looks like it. But so does pulling the trigger really fast if you have a competition grade trigger. Heck, the same mindless spraying effect can be created by bump firing.Any semi-automatic gun is capable of bump firing. Even semi-auto hunting shotguns. And if they're so awful, why hasn't anyone used them in a mass shooting? Magazines. They are a problem for decent people who have to defend themselves against people who may have a gun. They're not a problem for people with no regard for the law and will kill people who can't defend themselves. It's an undue burden on the law abiding whereas the criminal will bring more guns, modified magazines, or illegal magazines. Normal people obey they law, so they won't have illegal magazines. Requiring citizens to be burdened with having to reload on a 2 way range is Malarkey when a mass shooter will just slightly modify his load and be just as effective on a 1 way range. If you know what I mean. A1. No, the law doesn't exist because like I stated earlier, it creates an undue burden when you have to defend yourself. But if you're shooting people who aren't shooting you, there's no difference. A2. Registration and universal background checks are another topic which wasn't part of the resolution but am willing to debate you on later if you want. The vast majority of people who make it a habit to commit crimes are part of gangs. Gangs have organisations similar to the mob, to an extent. Engaging in the black market is how gang get drugs. Guns and magazines can be acquired in the same manner. A3. Well there's other factors as well to consider. Is the family night owls or early risers? Do they have a dog? Do they have an alarm? You're 5 implicity lists "Justifiable homicides". Not significant injuries. A4. No, you mishandled the point. If Cop Joe has a 20% hit ratio, then that means, with 10 rounds, he will miss 8. With 50 he will miss 40. With 100, he will miss 80. Magazines size doesn't have anything to do with it. Because a 20% hit ratio means only 20% of rounds fired will hit what he's aiming at. You're 3 doesn't make sense. Defending your home puts you in more danger, than why does your own 5 quote over 300,000 uses of a gun in self defence, but so little gun crime? What's up with that. And on the note of stealing, stealing is also a method by which criminals can procure rifles unavailable to the public, but ones bought before were grandfathered in. My II. of last round also disregards your 3 and 5. On another note, can we make R5 closing statement since I won't have the chance to further rebut? 1.http://www.atf.gov... 2. http://www.youtube.com... 3.http://www.youtube.com...