Erik Haugen @ech@qoto.org

@Myrha I think we should keep #3 just in case.

@royal yeah, rifles vs. pistols is a meaningful distinction: rifle rounds can have a lot more energy. And like I said caliber. But I don't think AR-15s are any more deadly if they have barrel shrouds, pistol grips, and flash suppressors on them.

@SocialistStan@kolektiva.social Not surprising – they're expensive!

@Jonathanglick I don't know, I feel like there isn't going to be a lot of interoperating going on given the content moderation policies of some of the big instances. The identarian-lefties really like their echo chamber. It will be interesting to see how it plays out, or if it drives itself to the 1.5 walled-garden world Willow is talking about.

@juddlegum I appreciate you posting the complaint, that is illuminating and usually in these stories I can't find the stated reasons for objecting.

An interesting point in this case is that the parent doesn't object to children being shown the film in class. Instead, the complaint is only about what age it is appropriate for. I haven't seen the film, but maybe Conklin isn't a total nutjob for thinking 7 is too young: MPAA gave it a PG rating, meaning "Some material may not be suitable for children", commonsensemedia says 10+.

Anyway hopefully if the committee agrees with Conklin it will be shown at least to older kids, it looks like a good movie and it's important to teach this history in schools.

@Yetimon This is a testable hypothesis, I think, and trivially fails. Look at the Scientific Revolution, for example, to see it falsified.

Hitchens was a gifted speaker, but didn't always make much sense, I guess.

@AthenasOwl Do assault weapons account for the difference?

I don't really understand the assault weapons ban, or at least the way it was written – I could see banning firearms altogether, or banning certain calibers, but who cares if a mass shooter has a barrel shroud and a flash suppressor or not?

I know some mass shootings used "assault weapons", but it seems like the shooter would have murdered just as many people without them in most cases. Different features, not covered by the ban, seem more important: Bump stocks are now banned, for example.

So... I'm thinking something else changed in the last 15 years to account for more deadly mass shootings. Media coverage seems to be another common answer, but that doesn't seem convincing either.

#introduction
Greetings, I'm a Christian, husband, dad, and computer programmer in Texas, USA.

My hobbies include powerlifting, and, uh, ...

Wish I had more time for gardening, reading, photography.