14 Children and Teacher Killed in Texas Elementary School Shooting

[Gustoo]

Originally Posted by Reiwa [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Why wouldn't the logic apply to other settings?

No logic is necessary. Evidence abounds. See Mexico, See 1994-2004 USA (assault weapons ban era), real life evidence that indicates that strict weapons restrictions do not increase public safety.

To indulge in the divergence of the military versus school shooter scenario, in the military an auto loading weapon serves as a "force multiplier" where through sheer volume of fire a force of a given size is able to have a higher % of success. In the modern setting a sophisticated optic is a "force multiplier" because of the same small % increase of success. The auto loading weapon in a military setting is also supported by supply chains.

Children don't shoot back and there are no supply chains. The % increase in murder effectiveness in this scenario would be statistically insignificant. There is no evidence available anywhere that indicates that 14 kids and 1 teacher would not be dead today if the shooter was using a pump action shotgun and a revolver.

Ceding power to an authoritarian government based on a mere idea is foolhardy at best. Logical approaches to increasing safety should be the prominent point of discussion. The fact that evidence based approaches to reducing mental health crisis that result in mass murder are not at the forefront of discussion is indication that these shootings are used to further an authoritarian agenda with no concern for public safety. Senators kids don't go to public schools. They give no fucks.

[unsunghero]

Originally Posted by Gustoo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No logic is necessary. Evidence abounds. See Mexico, See 1994-2004 USA (assault weapons ban era), real life evidence that indicates that strict weapons restrictions do not increase public safety.

To indulge in the divergence of the military versus school shooter scenario, in the military an auto loading weapon serves as a "force multiplier" where through sheer volume of fire a force of a given size is able to have a higher % of success. In the modern setting a sophisticated optic is a "force multiplier" because of the same small % increase of success. The auto loading weapon in a military setting is also supported by supply chains.

Children don't shoot back and there are no supply chains. The % increase in murder effectiveness in this scenario would be statistically insignificant. There is no evidence available anywhere that indicates that 14 kids and 1 teacher would not be dead today if the shooter was using a pump action shotgun and a revolver.

Yeah the reason the body count was so high wasn’t the style of gun, it was the fact police hid outside for a full hour while he killed

How any kid survived from that classroom is beyond me. If your shooter is getting bored and running out of targets in a contained setting, your police sucks

But let’s rely on only police to save us though

[Reiwa]

Originally Posted by Gustoo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No logic is necessary. Evidence abounds. See Mexico, See 1994-2004 USA (assault weapons ban era), real life evidence that indicates that strict weapons restrictions do not increase public safety.

To indulge in the divergence of the military versus school shooter scenario, in the military an auto loading weapon serves as a "force multiplier" where through sheer volume of fire a force of a given size is able to have a higher % of success. In the modern setting a sophisticated optic is a "force multiplier" because of the same small % increase of success. The auto loading weapon in a military setting is also supported by supply chains.

Children don't shoot back and there are no supply chains. The % increase in murder effectiveness in this scenario would be statistically insignificant. There is no evidence available anywhere that indicates that 14 kids and 1 teacher would not be dead today if the shooter was using a pump action shotgun and a revolver.

Ceding power to an authoritarian government based on a mere idea is foolhardy at best. Logical approaches to increasing safety should be the prominent point of discussion. The fact that evidence based approaches to reducing mental health crisis that result in mass murder is indication that these shootings are used to further an authoritarian agenda.

Is there evidence it wouldn't have? Why isn't there any evidence either way?

Or is logic enough for thee but not for me? [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

And you wouldn't be getting in firefights with a superior enemy that has fucking tanks dude. You'd be fragging officer heads into pink mist from a distance and retreating. Don't need autoloader for that.