Theoretical Lethality Index

The left sees everything through the lens of proving their biases. Enter the TLI which proves the need for AR-15 control. The left sees everything through the lens of proving their biases. Enter the TLI, which proves the need for AR-15 control. Only it does the exact opposite if you think deeper than Jessica Simpson. ℹ️ Info           ~ Aristotle Sabouni Created: 2022-11-02

• Far lefties argue that the TLI should be used to validate gun control Duke law professor Darrell A.H. Miller and Wesleyan history professor Jennifer Tucker argue that gun control laws should vary based on the dangerousness of the firearm, and that the TLI is a good way to do that.

• Like most Gun Controllers, they aren't doing 1+1 The problems are:
  1. TLI was a metric developed in the early 1960s by military history analyst Trevor Dupuy, and is useless for civilian measurement.
  2. If it was a valid metric, it shows that the relative threat of an AR-15 is insignificantly higher than other guns, so it shouldn't be controlled.

• Their papers point is relative danger And they use a comparison of a Revolutionary War Flintlock (TLI: 43), to that of a 20th Century Springfield rifle( TLI: 495), and conclude that the latter is 11 times worse. See, we need gun control.

🗒️ Note:
The formula for TLI is pretty straightforward: rate of fire x targets/strike x failure rate x range x accuracy x odds of taking someone out of a fight. An AR-15 has a higher rate of fire, but less range and accuracy and lethality/effectiveness on a hit over a Springfield. Thus it would have a lower score.

• However... If you have a triple-digit IQ, you would know that medicine and responses have advanced as well, so that 11x advantage was offset by advances in medicine that don't rely on leeches and bloodletting. Obviating much of that difference. Not to mention, if their logical fallacy was the basis of civil rights, then the 1A wouldn't apply to cell phones, and 4A/5A protections wouldn't protect your from spy cameras, microphones or wiretaps. So that's obviously, not how liberty (and protection from government intrusion) works.

• Lethality The far left tries to pretend that an AR-15 is as dangerous (or more so) than a WWI machine gun, but it isn't fully automatic... (rate of fire much slower), even if it was, it is still slower, and can't sustain it as long, and has a smaller/lighter bullet, shorter range. the AR's advantage is weight, not firepower. So those uses the terms, either are too dumb to understand them, or too dishonest to admit what they mean. In the end, the differences between an AR-15 and a Springfield rifle are nominal at best.

• But wait So if an AR-15 and a Springfield rifle are close to the same TLI, it proves the opposite of what the authors intend. The TLI didn't change from the early 1900's, when we had NO gun control, and few problems... so why would we need gun control now? And if we do, that's not a problem caused by the tool, but by the culture. What's changed, other than the rise of progressivism to cause our current issues?

Conclusion

Anyone quoting the "study" by a historian and a polemic, to conclude modern weapons are dozens or hundreds of times more lethal than muskets are an idiot or a polemic. And they don't understand the history or evolution of weapons. And if they are dumb/dishonest enough to try to use it to advocate for Gun Control? You are smarter for ignoring them, or anyone that cites them.

---

🔗 More

Terms We need to agree on what terms mean. This used to be easy, before SJW's/Marxists started Orwelling our language.

AR-15 All about the AR-15 (Armalite 15 Rifle).

🔗 Links

• Bearing Arms: AR-15 Lethality and the TLI
• Reason: The Theoretical Lethality Index is useful for military history but not for gun control policy

Tags: Terms  AR-15