What impact would it have on mass shootings if all firearms were restricted to single shot weapons

single shot pistols, single shot rifles, single shot shotguns, etc
would the time required to reload give victims enough time to flee?
would it reduce the numbers of dead?

Attached: 775336-Henry_Single_Shot_Rifle_308_Win_7_62_Break_Open_Rifle_Brown-H015-308[1].jpg (2300x2300, 136.29K)

people would be getting picked off from 300m with a fuddy-06 durr rifle.

it would help a lot. Only the military needs semi-automatic rifles. And NO civilian should be allowed to purchase any kind of handgun.

>What impact would it have on mass shootings if all firearms were restricted to single shot weapons
Probably would be harder to hit the active shooter using an AR when law abiding citizens are priming their flash pans.

Chink? Moshe? Plebbit Tranny? Doesn't matter you're a nigger. You're a faggot. And you'll never be a real woman.

None, because the cops aren't coming in to save you.

Does there really have to be a million threads about gun control? I don't care about this topic. Stop spamming this shit.

Attached: 1652644815192.png (707x920, 251.82K)

not muzzle loaders
there are plenty of modern rifles that are single shot, no magazines, tubes, etc

Probably not. It seems like it would be a fairly straight forwards solution but you need to consider the following:

A single shot, breech loading rifle has a rate of fire of around 8 rnds per minute on the lowest end and above 12 rnds per minute on the higher end.
Shooters would be incentivised to used rifles with larger and larger calibers meaning that instead of someone being hit with say a 115gr 9mm or a 55gr 5.56 round, now they're being hit with something like a 300gr .45-70 or possibly even a break action single shot 12 gauge firing buckshot into a crowd. The individual bullets used will become more fatal.

It might make a small difference in tight, enclosed spaces where people might be able to run around a corner and break line of sight, but anyone that the shooter does hit will most certainly die and the number of wounded will drop in shootings.

American's are talking here, nigger.
GTFO

Exactly, they'd be using large caliber hunting rifles that impart so much energy it would just liquify the targets' insides and punch a softball-sized hole through them.

a shooter with a 30 round magazine can empty that magazine in what? I'm sure it's under 30 seconds.
you said a single shot can fire an average of 10 rounds per minute. at most someone with a single shot could kill 4 people as they're all running away from him

Are we gonna walk around with breach loading Derringers or single shot long guns?
The point of my post is that criminals will still be using modern weaponry. It is impossible remove all guns currently in circulation.

Yes mass shootings would be less however people would be less safe in a self defense scenario.

People would just go on mass stabbing sprees. It already happens in shitholes like China. That or just drive a big rig into a crowd and you can easily triple a mass shooters high score.

Single shot before reload: check
Rifle: check
I would like to order one recreational challenger 2

Attached: 1200px-Challenger_2_Main_Battle_Tank_patrolling_outside_Basra,_Iraq_MOD_45148325.jpg (1199x798, 251.13K)

Shooters would learn to carry 30 rifles.

Attached: 1654182419829.gif (354x232, 1.99M)

Nerf the guns down to caveman level and they'll just switch to knives and clubs duh

Remember those two niggers that was picking people off at gas stations? We will get more of that and deaths in larger numbers.

60,000 more people die a year from opioids than attacks with a gun involved

130,000 more die from alcohol related incidents.
So, maybe focus on something more important?

The criminals would all have high capacity weapons and pistols.

it isn't really possible. the only hard part of a firearm to make is the chambered barrel. that is the only part that takes tools and skill. if you want to regulate guns, the only sensible thing to regulate is barrel size, diameter, and chamber pressure. that's it. all your gun control can be trivially defeated at home with basic tools (drill, pliers, hammer, punch, wrench) by any criminal undected by law enforcement.

if you want to stop people getting killed by guns, the only way is to limit slug weight and velocity. you could regulate barrel and chamber wall thickness. that's it.

With flintlocks youd just carry a few that are ready to fire.
I could make a few blunderbusses and clear out a goddamn building faggot

Did you miss the shooting in west Virginia where a woman stopped a man who tried to shoot up a party with his rifle?
He was a felon and shouldn't have even had the thing.
Funny how the law doesn't stop criminals

And will all federal agents and the politicians' private security corps also be armed with said single actions?
Doubtful.
The king's banned plebs from owning swords as a means to prevent anyone from banding together to cut off his fucking head when he stared abusing his own people.
Have you ever studied basic history of govenrment? Or are you a disingenuous Juden for the sake of showing your shill?
Either way, you know where I live, nigger.

> at most someone with a single shot could kill 4 people as they're all running away from him
What if they're ten year children locked in a class room with him? You know like what actually happened in Texas the other day that put gun control on your mind.

How would things have turned out differently if the shooter in Texas had the single shot weapon you think is the solution ?

Shut up niggerfaggot, your opinions are shit, you're gay and retarded.

They would make a silencer, kill a single person, move elsewhere, etc