Quote from: foggyb on July 05, 2013, 08:50:24 PM

Quote from: tacoman71 on July 05, 2013, 05:23:18 PM

If you were going to kill a bunch of kids in a school, what would be your weapon of choice? A knife? A shotgun? A pistol? A piece of wood? Maybe something that can spit out the most projectiles per second? i.e. An assault rifle?

Fully automatic rifles were not mainly made for shooting more people more quickly. The vast majority of bullets fired in war never hit anyone. They are fired in order to make the enemy keep their heads down and allow friendly forces to advance and flank the enemy in order to win with minimum loss of life on BOTH SIDES. This is called 'suppressive fire' and the more bullets fired the better.

Fully automatic rifles fired in full auto mode are MUCH less accurate than single shot semi-automatics because each shot's recoil moves the following shots off target.

Conclusion:

The weapon a ~~logical criminal~~ sicko would choose for killing lots of unarmed people efficiently in a small space is the semi-automatic rifle.

While it is true that in a war, single, well-aimed shots are the most effective, and that full-auto in military use is mainly used for covering fire to keep the enemies head down, in a civilian population, say a crowd at a concert or a movie, a full-auto can take out more people more quickly.
That being said, I don't think full-auto weapons should be banned.