Ft Hood vs Orlando, or, An Armed Society Is Dangerous
Ft Hood: 13 dead, 30 wounded.
Orlando: 1 dead, 5 wounded.
In both cases, there was a single instigator. Why were so many more killed and wounded on an army base, where so many people had access to weapons, vs the Orlando office, where so few had access?
(The title proposes a theory, but I'm not actually ready to generalize from a single example.)
Orlando: 1 dead, 5 wounded.
In both cases, there was a single instigator. Why were so many more killed and wounded on an army base, where so many people had access to weapons, vs the Orlando office, where so few had access?
(The title proposes a theory, but I'm not actually ready to generalize from a single example.)
Advertisement
Actually, weapons are incredibly tightly controlled on military bases.
The handgun the shooter used at Ft. Hood had a 20-round clip. Might that have had something to do with it?
November 7, 2009 8:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I imagine it did indeed.
I recall some news that claimed (no idea if it is true) that some of the wounded at Ft Hood were victims of what is called "friendly fire", though.
November 7, 2009 8:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
With a very high velocity armour piercing round like the shooter used, one hard enough that it resists mushrooming and thus losing its velocity when hitting armour, it is likely that some of the rounds went through people and hit second or even third people.
November 7, 2009 9:00 PM | Reply | Permalink