Texas: Three adults and 18 children killed in deadliest school shooting in state's history

[Zwinmar]

Body armor is really only effective against handguns and shotguns. Ammo technology has increased dramatically since the FBI decided they wanted the 10mm ( which lead to the .40) resulting in them switching back to the 9mm. 9mm ball ammo is no where near as effective as various hollow points which is still an emergent technology.

:::
Little something I wrote about this whole debacle:

Uvalde
Blam, balam, another goes down,
Bam, bam, Walkers in town,
Outside the door,
Pleading for more,
Blam, blam Susie is dead.

A Timmy, A Tommy,
A Jimmy, A Bobby,
Vicky cries out,
At chicken's loud shout,
Blam, blam, another is dead.

Away they ran,
To corners they hid,
Under desk, and table,
The kids bleed out.
Out In the hall ,
The chief did crawl,
Whining and crying,
As they lay dieing,

Smoking and joking,
Cringing and moping,
The boys in blue,
Wait while they stew
In pools of their blood.
Over an hour,
The heros did cower,
Pumping their chest,
As they fail their test,
Holding back those
Who wouldn't on laurels rest.

[Elfdart]

2.) Criminal elements across the nation (not just baltimore) are big into "no man, no witness, no crime" -- pure drivebys are rarer now -- they pursue their targets and run them down, and instead of firing a few random shots, they empty the magazine.

In Los Angeles, gangs in the 1990s often carried out drive-by shootings, which could be indiscriminate and ineffective if the intent was to kill someone in particular. In the last decade, police said, they've been getting out of the car. “You want to kill 'em, not wing 'em,” said LAPD Homicide Detective Chris Barling, describing the mentality of shooters.

Were they trained by the L.A. County Sheriff's Department?

[PainRack]

Shep. I'm kinda sick of you turning up at these and going ASKUALLY, you wrong without ponying up a single bit of evidence while making claims that's proven wrong by the scientific literature.

Because MD homicide statistics keep repeating year after year the harsh truth of gun control - it doesn't work.

As for some of your stuff, I'll humor you.

https://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/5/4/259

Your article investigates in 1999 the effect of a 1988 law in Maryland that established the Handgun Roster Board.

Effectively, what it means is that a handgun cannot be sold in MD unless it is approved by the Handgun Roster Board; so there's a lag time of about 9 to 12 months from a new handgun being introduced on the market, and it appearing in Maryland gun stores.

https://mdsp.maryland.gov/Organization/ ... oster.aspx

This is the Maryland "Banned" SNS list as of March 2022: LINK to PDF

Only 56 handguns have been banned, and the most recent is:

(56) Bearman Industries BBG9 – (9 mm), Overall Length 4 3/4", Barrel Length 2 3/4", Weight 0.8
LB (Reliability and Quality of Mfg.- Unable to chamber 9 mm cartridge in 9 mm marked barrel)
20428 / (Reliability, Quality of Mfg., and Ballistic Accuracy- When two cartridges were loaded to test
fire, both cartridges fired simultaneously. Cross-bolt safety was not functional. No rounds hit the
target.) 22002

From looking at Baltimore crime statistics:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Baltimore

1990 - SNS bill takes effect: 305 homicides, 41.4 per 100K rate.
1997 - Last year they use in your paper: 313 homicides, 43.5 per 100K rate.

It seems that the SNS bill has *increased* homicides, by forcing Baltimore criminal elements to shift from jam-o-matic pieces of crap from Jiminez in .25ACP to the Glock 9mm much faster than surrounding cities in other states.

EDIT: It also shows how much crime gun sales still occur in-state, due to the 1968 Gun Control Act regulations regarding handguns.

EDIT II: Recently, a literal saturday night special from a SNS manufacturer was actually approved by the Handgun Board here in MD. Seems the bill forced them to step up on QC.

EDIT IV, the specific SNS I'm referring to was the Phoenix Arms HP25A in .25ACP and it was approved in 2015.

1. Maryland gun statistics is 14th in US. How is that proof for or against gun control?

2. So in other words, you tried to argue because criminals tried to avoid the law or the law is narrow, it doesn't work?


Let's see the results again shall we?

Among crime guns, a gun banned by Maryland's law is more than twice as likely (relative risk (RR) 2.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.0 to 2.5) to be the subject of a crime gun trace request in 15 other cities combined, than in Baltimore. Among homicide guns, a crime especially relevant for public safety, a comparable difference (RR 2.1, 95% CI 1.1 to 4.2) was observed. The proportion of Baltimore's crime guns that are banned is 12 percentage points lower than would be expected based on its demographic and regional characteristics alone. Among crime guns purchased after 1990, a much smaller proportion in Baltimore are banned models than in 15 other cities

So, by comparing the gun to 15 other cities, we can show this gun is less likely to be used in a crime.

The difference was greatest for the eight cities in the northeast and south, regions that are arguably most comparable to Baltimore.

Oh no, compared to control, the gun control laws WORKED to prevent said gun from being used in crime.

Was there a shift to use substitues, which you suggest was the case?

We identified six handguns that met our definition of a substitution gun. Most numerous among these non-banned guns were the Davis P32, Davis P38, and Phoenix HP22. Others included inexpensive handgun models made by HiPoint, New England Firearms, and Stallard Arms. Taken together, the six non-banned guns were somewhat less likely (RR 0.8, 95% CI 0.7 to 0.9) to be among the crime guns in the 15 other cities (5.5% of crime guns) than in Baltimore (6.9%). If banned guns and these six non-banned guns are considered together, however, they represent 15.7% of crime guns in Baltimore, compared with 25.2% in the other 15 cities combined (RR 1.6, 95% CI 1.5 to 1.7). Thus, the reduction in the proportion of banned guns among Baltimore's crime guns is larger than any substitution effect to these six non-banned guns

Why there WAS, but guess what, reduction MORE than substitution.

Wait. Did the criminals use more powerful weapons then?

Similarly, there was no evidence of meaningful substitution to larger caliber handguns in Baltimore compared with the 15 other cities. In Baltimore, of 3757 guns for which caliber information was available 1048 (27.9%) were small caliber, 1820 (48.4%) were medium or large caliber, and 889 (23.7%) were long guns. The comparable percentages for 31 349 guns in the 15 other cities were: 24.4% small caliber, 56.0% medium or large, and 19.6% long guns.

Oh shit, no they didn't!

Note, unless somehow, criminals in Baltimore got way more competent and ONLY in Baltimore, then this study methodology would be invalid. That's bullshit assumption and we can throw that out.

But WAIT PainRack, you only proved that gun control works. Mk Sheppard is trying to argue that it doesn't reduce homicide.

Why sure. Why the motherfucking FUCK did you QUOTE the MOTHERFUCKING study on GUN Control and NOT GUN HOMICIDE?

Is this just proof that Mk didn't read my links, or he's being purposely obstuse?


I don't know. I do know that it's proof positive that I'm sick and tired of you going in Estually PainRack you wrong , not providing ANY ACTUAL EVIDENCE and STILL being wrong.


As for everyone else. Did the motto of the board somehow die
or is trolling by gun idiots allowed now ?

[PainRack]

Yes, that's the rub - gun control actually DOES work in other countries, so it might be a good idea to look into why the US is an exception.

Gun control is fantastic in the USA. All the evidence suggests that it works and the main problem is that it's being applied narrowly, not broadly. .

IF the question is if gun control reduces homicide, then the answer becomes more blurred and the answer is multifactorial. Since a lot of them becomes stuff like We need to stop Republicans from sabotaging Obamacare and etc or how gun reform was banned in Obamacare.......

Maybe ban the GOP first. Then we can address those situations such as reducing crime and etc.

It

As for gun control:
Their ideas tend to be dumber than Trump. A law is supposed to be technical and specific, as it stand right now and historically every idea proposed makes no sense. Rather than learn about firearms they just have a knee jerk reaction that ends up amounting to "it looks scary" then they put the morons in charge of the ATF and they make up rules that are nonsensical and contradictory while just changing definitions whenever they feel like it. You can not have a regulatory body that doesnt even know the thing they are supposed to be regulating.

This is a MUCH better argument. Why yes. Gun control laws do tend to be dumb.

There's a much easier solution. Broaden the specifications and ignore Helen, then use a professional body to set standards

We do this ALL the time btw for other areas to prevent traffic fatalities.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationa ... 70,1970%20(Title%20II%20of%20Pub.

The NHTSB works in this way. Has broad range of powers to do a mission, then the agency works fo regulate what standards should and shouldn't be used.

The advantages of this

https://www.federalregister.gov/documen ... ol-systems

When new technology/changes happen, the body simply reacts and discard old regs.

So, the goal for example is to reduce number of rounds fired per mass shooting incident. We know this reduces fatalities and severity of fatalities.

We know rifles do more of this than pistols (most mass shooting incidents done with pistols, however majority of casualties are inflicted with RIFLES).

We know factors like more ammo capacity and rapid fire increase number of rounds fired per incident.

Based on this, we can set regs to reduce them, and when bypass like Trigger mods and etc happen, the body can change the reg as needed to address it.


But guess what ?? They only happen if people acknowledge reality, instead of going errrr I like the lies better
Such as. Gun control will never work.
.

[Ralin]

As for everyone else. Did the motto of the board somehow die

I take it you haven't actually looked at the text of the banner over the forums for awhile?

[PainRack]

As for everyone else. Did the motto of the board somehow die

I take it you haven't actually looked at the text of the banner over the forums for awhile?

Huh. Forgot about that.


Anyway. We need to differentiate gun control laws based on goals.


Is the goal intended to reduce homicide? Suicide? Gun crime or mass shootings?

That's one of the major problem for legislators because the scientific backing for various gun control initiatives varies based on impact and all evidence is relatively weak, given the lack of robust study.

The data we do have also show it could be confounding and we DO need to acknowledge that guns ownership in the US has been associated with a drop in crime (although problem of correlation not causation applies just as well)


For example

Vigdor, E. R. (2006). Do Laws Restricting Access to Firearms by Domestic Violence Offenders Prevent Intimate Partner Homicide?. Evaluation Review, 30(3), 313–346.

This study shows that

late on the expected magnitude of this effect. The other two types of law are more difficult to interpret. Having a domestic violence misdemeanor law in place is weakly associated with higher rates of rape and assault. The confiscation law is significantly associated with higher rates of assault and burglary. It is possible that these effects in part represent substitution by batterers into less lethal violence, or

Statistically, the law regarding confiscating guns at scenes of domestic violence shows little or no impact on Intimate Partner Homicide but inversely, a rise in assault and burglary cases (the study authors included such crimes as a "sanity" check on variables/cause and effect. )


Mass shooting in particular is the HARDEST to study and the HARDEST to apply principles for, due to the relative rarity and unique nature of such crimes. Las Vegas for example massively skewers all the dataset and if you actually use the FBI dataset, you get the confusing argument that unarmed people stop mass shootings more than armed people do. hilariously, one of the 4 armed civilian cases involved from 2016-2018 was the guy STOPPED the shooter first, then brought a pistol out to cover him until the police arrived, hence the case was classified as armed civilian

If Mk Sheppard wants to argue enclosed spaces are a massive cause for deaths, I await actual citations.


Meanwhile, the studies which show rifles, ammo capacity and rapid fire, large calibre rounds increase lethality of mass shooting events suggest that any attempts to limit lethalities from the gun control aspect should be aimed at those angles.


Mental health would be a good idea, but the law ALREADY exists, initially as part of Obamacare and then elsewhere

https://mhanational.org/issues/current- ... egislation

If we treat this as a public health issue though, we know the answer would be multifactorial. The Nirvana fallacy for gun control exists on BOTH sides.

[PainRack]

So, another shooting happened in Udvale, this time it's gang related.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/uvalde-police ... d=89560553

In response, Abott is going to flood more manpower in to target the gangs.


Oddly how his Open carry laws didn't result in any good guys stopping this crime.

Maybe it's because

https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/1 ... 017.304057
States which relaxed gun licensing permits with shall issue and etc has a statistical increased chance of homicide.


So clearly, more good guys with a guns did nothing. Again