but that still leaves the question, what were you trying to say?
I thought that would be pretty clear. He didn't go to the first two places because he saw the heavily armed security. He did not see that at the Pulse Night Club.
Gun Control Laws do not stop people who plan to shoot other people. They only disarm honest law respecting people. They create an area where the people who DO plan to commit crimes know that the only people who can defend themselves from them are law enforcement who typically have a pretty long response time. Definitely usually much longer than it takes for them to shoot, rob, etc. people.
Gun Control Laws ONLY hurt law abiding citizens. They don't protect them.
Pulse night club example was an example of the shooter NOT going somewhere he knew someone armed was there to shoot back.
Did he plan to kill people? Most definitely. That I do not dispute.
Did he use a gun? Most definitely.
Would gun control have stopped that? Typically not at all. It actually makes it easier.
Criminals don't give a damn about gun control laws.
It does however disarm people that might be able to defend themselves and others.
why is this a good example for your argument? he purchased his guns legally and others with guns engaged him very quickly.
i was hoping for more talk about algorithms, honestly.
Yes. He purchased them legally. He wanted to shoot people. Shooting people is illegal. Do you actually think he would be stopped by gun control laws?
What would you like to know about algorithms?
Do you wish me to clarify why I brought up gun control or specifically what would you like to know?
I think if you actually wanted to know how Gun Control was remotely relevant that would have been a good question.