bulletproof schoolbags

[Jason]

You are correct, I have not read it yet. It is fairly expensive at $40. Do you think you could see clear to sharing your copy with me?

Google is your friend.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/blog/Kleck_Patterson.pdf

Unfortunately it's a PDF, slow to load, but it's the full article.

Thank you

[JimC]

What's so egregious about "assault rifles?"

They fucking kill people - and loads at a time.

Not much more than a rifle from world war 2. I fail to see the critical distinction. Would you please expand?

Typical rifles from WW2 were bolt action, with around 10 shot magazines.

M1 Garand was a very common rifle and it was semi-automatic with an 8 round magazine. It could be reloaded very quickly and put down a solid base of fire.

There were also the SVT-40 and the Gewehr 43. Both semi-automatics.

I actually owned an M1 - it was fun to shoot, but somewhat heavier than the current crop. But, in WW2 and the immediate time after, it (or civilian copies) were not available in any quantities for anybody to use. The argument is really about a comparison between societies with easy access to assault rifles, and those where they are comparatively rare...

[laklak]

I had a 1944 M1 carbine years ago, Dad liberated it from the Army.

[Animavore]

Meanwhile in Ireland.

[Brian Peacock]

Who's that patron Saint of school clothing?

[Jason]

So... you are willing to admit that guns are not the cause of the violence that kills so many?

Guns are not the cause of violence. They are the reason why so many are killed, though.

Well I think guns are a 'linear' factor in the equation, but the reason why so many are killed is something yet to be uncovered and addressed.

[Jason]

Do you suppose that if guns were to suddenly vanish by some deus ex machina, or whatever, from the United States that the violence would suddenly cease?

Have you ever heard anyone argue that?

Don't you think banning assault style rifles and side arms might be worthwhile if it saves the lives of, say, 2000 of the 11,000 (2016 figure) American citizens that are killed by firearms and another few thousand of the 27,000 who commit suicide by firearm every year?

It really comes down to a principle - I believe that everyone should have the right to defend themselves effectively and that means using effective tools.

Also, bandying about the label 'assault rifle' denigrates your position. So-called 'assault rifles' are no more deadly than weapons available 70 years ago.

[Jason]

What's so egregious about "assault rifles?"

They fucking kill people - and loads at a time.

Not much more than a rifle from world war 2. I fail to see the critical distinction. Would you please expand?

Typical rifles from WW2 were bolt action, with around 10 shot magazines.

The M1 Garand was the standard issue rifle of the US Army for WW2, and was adopted in 1938. As far as magazine capacity goes, that's a complete canard. A moderately capable shooter can reload and resume firing very quickly.

[Hermit]

Also, bandying about the label 'assault rifle' denigrates your position. So-called 'assault rifles' are no more deadly than weapons available 70 years ago.

Way to miss the point. To repeat: "The word "assault" should serve as a bit of a hint. Sure, the version of the AR-15 that the public can buy is not a true assault rifle because it is only semi automatic unless you fit it (legally) with a bump stock, but it is definitely not a sports rifle nor a hunting rifle. In many countries its inhabitants are happy to leave weapons designed to kill humans to soldiers, and smaller weapons designed to kill people, pistols and revolvers, to the police."

[Hermit]

So... you are willing to admit that guns are not the cause of the violence that kills so many?

Guns are not the cause of violence. They are the reason why so many are killed, though.

Well I think guns are a 'linear' factor in the equation, but the reason why so many are killed is something yet to be uncovered and addressed.

You're on drugs now, aren't you? The reason why so many are killed is crystal clear. Firearms make killing easy. I provided empirical evidence that more guns means more murder. Here it is again:

[laklak]

There are states with very high ownership rates with very low homicide rates. Others with very low ownership rates and very high homicide rates. You can spin this any way you choose.

[Jason]

So... you are willing to admit that guns are not the cause of the violence that kills so many?

Guns are not the cause of violence. They are the reason why so many are killed, though.

Well I think guns are a 'linear' factor in the equation, but the reason why so many are killed is something yet to be uncovered and addressed.

You're on drugs now, aren't you? The reason why so many are killed is crystal clear. Firearms make killing easy. I provided empirical evidence that more guns means more murder. Here it is again:

Your R2 is ridiculously low.

[JimC]

Do you suppose that if guns were to suddenly vanish by some deus ex machina, or whatever, from the United States that the violence would suddenly cease?

Have you ever heard anyone argue that?

Don't you think banning assault style rifles and side arms might be worthwhile if it saves the lives of, say, 2000 of the 11,000 (2016 figure) American citizens that are killed by firearms and another few thousand of the 27,000 who commit suicide by firearm every year?

It really comes down to a principle - I believe that everyone should have the right to defend themselves effectively and that means using effective tools.

Also, bandying about the label 'assault rifle' denigrates your position. So-called 'assault rifles' are no more deadly than weapons available 70 years ago.

Sorry, Siva, but that is absolute nonsense. The ones freely available to US citizens are closely modelled on modern infantry rifles, simply without the full auto function. Infantry rifles are designed to kill humans, and the modern versions have evolved considerably. They are lighter, easier to use, have less recoil, and have higher magazine capacities than before. Sure, a hit from a previous rifle would be just as deadly as a hit from a modern one, but your crazed mall shooter has a much better chance of hitting more targets with a modern weapon. An army equipped with modern infantry rifles would be at a distinct advantage if facing the WW2 equivalent.

(and I already mentioned in a previous post that Hermit's R squared value is sadly lacking... )

[laklak]

Look, both Batman and Godzilla can fuck you up, but Batman is more up close and personal.

Speaking of personal defense, what do you think of a traditional Zulu shield and spear? Asking for a friend. Seriously. Ignore the dude.

[Hermit]

There are states with very high ownership rates with very low homicide rates. Others with very low ownership rates and very high homicide rates. You can spin this any way you choose.

Not when you look at all of them.