Monday, June 27, 2016

Flip the "switch"

A history of legislation, the Republican party, and racism:

Republican party was founded in 1854 as the anti-slavery party.
Ku Klux Klan was founded in 1866 as a pro-slavery, pro-segregation, and white power organization. (Coincidence?)
Founded in 1866, the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) extended into almost every southern state by 1870 and became a vehicle for white southern resistance to the Republican Party’s Reconstruction-era policies aimed at establishing political and economic equality for blacks. - History Channel

The Dred Scott decision was in 1857. President-elect Buchanan (a Democrat) wrote to Supreme Court Justice John Catron (a Democrat) about settling the case before his inauguration. Chief Justice Taney (also a Democrat) delivered the Court's opinion that a slave could not be a citizen of the United States.

The Republican Abraham Lincoln was elected President in 1861.

Friday, June 17, 2016

More Than One Shooter In Orlando?

Target practice is only a small part of what it takes to be a proficient tactical shooter. Low light compensation, learning to avoid the noise distraction, intercepting moving targets under stress, and intimately knowing and handling your weapon, all while experiencing a massive adrenaline dump are things that only hundreds if not thousands of hours of training can perfect.

Of course this all assumes that you have the physical attributes to be tactically proficient. Attributes you would need to be a great athlete in any other sport.

Yet there is no indication that the terrorist possessed that level of athleticism or ever even visited a shooting range. And he only purchased the guns used a short time before the shooting. He was not very familiar with them. In terms of accepted and recognized training doctrine, he was a step one beginner.

We need to also look at the weapons and ammunition he carried into the nightclub on that deadly Sunday morning.
I’m Former NYPD: Here’s Why I Suspect There Was More Than One Shooter In Orlando

John Cardillo is a former NYPD officer, and the host of The John Cardillo Show on Salem's WZAB 880 "The Biz" in Miami, FL. You can find him on Twitter @johncardillo or www.johncardillo.com


the above opinion piece made me do the math to possibly refute it... i was surprised what i saw as a result... something does seem fishy about the Orlando shooting, but i'm not going to posit what it might be.


there were 49 victims killed... there were 53 separate victims hospitalized...
49+53=102 casualties

several were hit by multiple rounds... some might have been one... some are known to be hit three... 2.0 average

102*2.0=204 rounds hit targets

of the two guns used, their magazine capacities would inform us on how many reloads were required...
Sig Sauer MCX magazine = 30
Glock 17 magazine = 17

the terrorist had only recently purchased both weapons... he was not an expert... he had no specialized training...
assume 50% accuracy

we have to assume his weapon of choice was the Sig Sauer, as it was probably the more accurate of the two, plus it had a larger magazine capacity...
assume 1 reload of the Glock per 2 Sig reloads

assume "x" equals the number of reloads on the Glock 17...
204/0.5 = 2x(30) + x(17)
408 = 60x + 17x
408 = 77x
x = 408/77
x = 5.3

first magazine was already loaded, and last magazine was not emptied...

5 Glock reloads
10 Sig reloads


so... that's a lot of ammunition.

Tuesday, June 14, 2016

Deliver up your arms said Xerxes

Once again, I see so many posts about gun control following a tragedy. The emotional reaction is understandable, but the failure to think logically is not. We want to protect the defenseless from those who would do them harm. But the emotional reaction is to remove the tool from the would-be attacker's hand, never getting to the logical conclusion that you also remove the same tool from the hands of the defender.

In an emotional state, we want to remove "assault weapons" from violent criminals. "Assault weapons" sound very dangerous, so on an emotional level, it seems to make sense to remove them from reach of criminals. But if we do, the criminal either obtains the weapon illegally, or they simply choose another weapon. The defender has become defenseless against such a person unless they too become criminals.

But who needs an assault weapon to defend themselves?