(May 13, 2023 at 2:15 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:(May 11, 2023 at 10:59 am)FlatAssembler Wrote: Why exactly would you need some high-tech weapon to commit mass shooting? I understand why you would need a high-tech weapon, which can shoot very fast and with high precision, to stop a mass shooting: if the weapon you are trying to stop the shooting (by injuring the shooter) with is not precise, you might harm innocent people while trying to do that.
You don't need a "high-tech" weapon to commit mass-murder. The AR platform is sixty years old as a design, and utilizes nothing more than machined metal, the same as guns of the preceding 80 or so years (i.e. going back to 1880 with the Maxim). And a weapon can be highly accurate without being modern; indeed, American snipers in WWII often preferred the Springfield 1903 to the M-1 Garand precisely because the older weapon was indeed more precise.
Additionally, it should be pointed out that in a mass-shooting, the crucial point is not whether the shooter has more-modern weaponry than the responding units. The fact is that no matter how "modern" the ARs in the trunks of cop cars are, they are still going to be three or four minutes later than the opening shots. You can give the cops the best weapons in the world, but they will always be later than your putative mass-shooter. Their Boyd loop is already interrupted before it's started to work at all, because a mass-murderer holds the initiative of choice of time and place.
I mean, until we get the boys in blue some Jewish space lasers and whatnot.
Which is basically what I said.
