full auto is for suppressive fire...using it the way he did maybe actually saved lives b/c it's less accurate and controllablehttps://twitter.com/NGrossman81/status/915563663666417665 …
-
-
Replying to @TheJeffBurkett
Maybe if people were dispersed. But he fired into a big crowd. That makes rate of fire correlate with number of people shot.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @NGrossman81
crowd did disperse / take cover, too many unknowns, you're also firing full auto from 300+ meters...ignoring he's also missing at that rate
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @TheJeffBurkett @NGrossman81
regardless, a person can kill just as many people with semi-auto as full auto at that distance...ppl that want to kill will find a way
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @TheJeffBurkett
Can kill many, no doubt. But not as many as quickly.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NGrossman81
you're fighting the wrong battle anyway, ppl that want to do this will use any means...does it really matter what the object they use is?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @TheJeffBurkett
Yes. Some objects facilitate more violence than others. Ex. Boston Marathon pressure cooker bombs would've killed many more with RDX.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NGrossman81
yet you're not pushing for pressure cooker reforms...
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Of course not. They're not nearly as dangerous and have clear non-murderous uses.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.