IN THIS SITUATION his gun of choice didn't matter, that's just a simple fact. ....
That makes no sense. IN THIS SITUATION . . . he went through the trouble of lugging an assault rifle in a duffle bag (rather than a handgun in a waste band) because he wanted to make sure he killed his intended targets and he hoped there were many. IN THIS SITUATION .. . he did not kill a lot of people because he did not find a lot of his targets. "Authorities say Ciancia walked into Terminal 3, pulled a Smith & Wesson .223-caliber assault rifle from his duffel bag and fired repeatedly at point-blank range at a TSA officer identified as Gerardo I. Hernandez, 39, who was checking IDs and boarding passes at the base of the escalator leading to the main screening area.The killing was "believed to be a premeditated act of murder in the first-degree," U.S. Attorney Andre Birotte Jr. said in announcing the charges.After killing Hernandez, Ciancia fired on at least two other uniformed TSA employees and an airline passenger, who were all wounded. Airport police eventually shot him as panicked passengers cowered in stores and restaurants""they have found a note handwritten by Ciancia in which he describes his intent to kill TSA employees and “pigs,” a law enforcement official told The Associated Press. The handwritten note found in Ciancia's duffel bag and signed by him stated that he had "made the conscious decision to try to kill" multiple TSA employees and that he wanted to stir fear in them, FBI agent in charge David L. Bowdich said."So, it wasn't the gun choice that mattered, it was his intention that mattered, but it is a simple fact that he CHOSE an assault rifle and that is not surprising . . . at all. That was my point
So in other words, you can't think of anything to say regarding how the situation would have been different if a handgun were used. Got it. Why didn't you just say that? The gun used didn't matter, that's a fact. New gun laws are not only not needed, they wouldn't solve anything anyway, another fact. You'll realize one day that this argument has already been decided by common sense and logic, and you're not on the winning side.
Lol, I posted a picture with a single word headline. You took it to mean something I did not (see above) and now you're on to a second or third argument, which has NOTHING to do with my post, all the while calling me a "coward" etc. LOL. The funniest part is this comment you made:"You'll realize one day that this argument has already been decided by common sense and logic, and you're not on the winning side"You honestly don't know you're wrong about that, do you? You might try reading the US Supreme Court's DC gun ban decision. It says you are 100% WRONG . . and it was authored by a very conservative judge on behalf of a very conservative court who called on "common sense and logic."(Btw, I agreed with YOUR handgun point above, so not sure what the issue is. I was just pointing out that you're tying the results to the gun (something I did not, I was talking about the choice) but it wasn't the gun, it was the plan of the killer that dictated the results -- he had 5 or 6 magazines I believe - fyi)