This isn’t about saving children

Posted on January 27, 2013

1


This is about looking like you are doing something without actually doing something. Like enforcing seatbelt laws.

I did some calculations and they really upset me.

Things are getting pretty f’in crazy. Between the plans to ban semi-auto weapons and more than 7 bullet magazines, the average person is getting squeezed from both ends. MSM says we have an epidemic of gun killings by pointing to singular incidents. Yes multiple people died, but we’re not looking at 50 of these a day, it’s not even 1 of these a week, closer to once every 6 months. (And any number of people dying is bad … just friggin’ THINK!)

On 7 rounds not 10 round magazines – this is getting stupidly picky. Let’s say it takes 30 seconds to change a magazine, (really at most 10 seconds but for the sake of argument) and let’s say 45 seconds to unleash 7 aimed bullets. In the course of these events, most of the killings are between 5 and 30 minutes, let’s call 15 the ‘average’. A person with a 10 round magazine will take (45/7 = 6.2, 6.2 seconds per shot) 62 seconds to shoot the magazine. Now change the magazine. Add 30 seconds. 62 + 30 = 92, and she’s off again 62 more seconds for the next 10 rounds… let’s go up to the 15 minute ‘average’ .. 15 minutes = 60 * 15 =  900 seconds. Ok, 900 seconds / 92 seconds per 10 rounds (round it down to 90 for easy math) and we’re looking at 10 magazines or 100 bullets.

So we’re looking at an addition magazine change at every 7 not 10, if we use the same number of magazines, that’s 10 * 7 = 70. 70 shots vs 100 shots in 15 minutes. But it’s not 15 minutes – 6.2 x 7 = 45 seconds + 30 seconds for magazine = 7 every 75, our 10 magazines will be gone in 750 seconds. But the ‘average’ rampage is 900 seconds. So, we add (150/75) 2 extra magazines used. So 10 x 7 = 70 + 2 x 7 = 70 + 14 … 84 rounds; in 15 minutes. In all this you haven’t decreased the time of response. That’s only a 16% decrease by reducing the #of rounds by 30%*.

16% saved.
We’ve lost 84 out of 100 kids in 15 minutes. Could have been 100, right?

Now add an armed guard to the classes. Time of response across a 1/8 mile campus – let’s give 5 minutes for the fact to sink in and get to the guards, say 90 seconds for the guard to get there. Once the guard is there, children stop dying.We now have the shooter down to 6 minutes or 360 seconds. 360 seconds / 92 seconds** (10 round magazines) = 40 shots. 40 out of the previous 100. That’s a 60% decrease in deaths. 44% less kids dying than just reducing magazines. OR we’ve just more than doubled the number of kids saved.

84 kids lost  vs. 40 kids lost. 44 more dead children! (or 16 kids saved vs 60 kids saved!)

7 round magazines makes a 16% difference. For the cost of enforcing the law, arresting those who are found to have the 10 round magazines (which for some rifles is all the magazines), housing them in prison, and the cost of that, higher court costs, finding and arresting those who illegally make the 10 round magazines after the ban, we’re looking 10’s of MILLIONS of $$$ for 16%. Oh and less real crimes being adjudicated. Don’t forget the high number of 8+ magazines for pistols out there. Now we’ve gone from maybe a couple million to over 100 million magazines . For 16%.

Don’t get me wrong. 16 kids is fantastic. They deserve a chance,. But notice there is a better way. Save 60 kids.

Try the armed guard or training and arming SOME teachers. Yes, training. We aren’t gonna just hand some teacher a pistol and say “defend our kids, you’re on your own.” Sure, Millions for guns, tens of millions for training. Millions for extra pay (extra responsibility = more money.) Now we’re stopping not ONLY spree serial killers, but kids on kid deaths … if a kid is thinking of killing another kid at school, they have a good chance of being shot. So these multiple death shootings aren’t the only things stopped.

More than 60% of the kids in spree shootings saved. For  10’s, even 100’s, of millions less than the cost of banning 8+ round magazines.

Who’s side are you on? The children or yourself? If you say the children and don’t get them armed guardians? You lie. You are choosing to kill 46 more kids than you need. You kill 46 more.

* If you reduce the number of rounds in the magazine by double, you MIGHT save 32%; not likely more like 25%.

25% is NOT = 60%. 32% is not 60%. Math is easy, especially when it comes to children’s lives.

** Yes 92 does not = 90 seconds but for ease of calculations, 2 seconds out of 92 isn’t much.

Advertisements