Why so many weapons?
Every weapon he drug up there provided an opportunity for someone to catch him.
I understand that the barrel can get hot.
Two of the rifles have bipods.
One doesn’t. Why not?
Here’s a question for the reporters,
“How many of the weapons were fired?”
Why so many weapons?
Every weapon he drug up there provided an opportunity for someone to catch him.
I understand that the barrel can get hot.
Two of the rifles have bipods.
One doesn’t. Why not?
Nothing illegal about him having those firearms in his room. What would “getting caught” mean when he had done nothing illegal, yet?
Two with bipods are better for long distance work. The one without might be what he fired through the door.
He brought up more guns than were needed. Why wouldn’t he?
It makes perfect sense if he wanted to discredit the Second Amendment. At Columbine, the shooters were strongly for more “gun control”.
“Why so many weapons?”
No, they get REALLY hot. 400-500 rounds fast and it is really hot. Swapping out for a fresh rifle makes very good sense.
And also, if you are gonna put that number of rounds downrange, you really need a few spares.
Can you imagine how awkward and embarrassing it would be if you had one break an extractor or leave a casing stuck in the barrel?
There you are, window broken out, and after the first burst, everyone looking at you, and there you are... breaking down the rifle and getting out a broken shell extractor? And the band breaks out in a rendition of “the loser”, No thanks...