It wasn’t that long ago when a lot of headlines claimed that Uvalde police failed to enter Robb Elementary School due to fears over the shooter’s AR-15. This was, of course, taken as evidence that we should ban so-called assault weapons.

In Nashville, though, something different happened. While the killer also had an AR-15, the police responded very differently.

The heroic police officers who stopped a gunman at a Nashville Christian school March 28 have spoken out about their response, telling reporters they entered the school “without hesitation.”

Six people were killed when the shooter, Audrey Hale, entered The Covenant Christian school in Nashville and opened fire with two “assault-type” rifles and a handgun. Within minutes, Nashville Police entered the school and subdued the shooter, saving the lives of countless potential victims.

“We’ve trained for incidents like this for years, with the thought that if it ever happened we would not hesitate,” Nashville Metro Chief of Police John Drake told reporters. “We would go in and we would do whatever was needed for the safety of those involved.”

…

When Englebert heard gunshots, he told reporters he “couldn’t get to it fast enough” as he searched for a staircase, understanding that the shots were coming from the second floor. Englebert revealed that when he “found himself at the front of the stack” he realized he wasn’t wearing rifle-grade body armor for protection.

Now, let’s compare the shootings in Uvalde to Nashville for a second. Uvalde resulted in 21 innocent lives taken while Nashville resulted in six.

That’s six too many, we can all agree, but what a difference an appropriate police response can make, isn’t it?

And Englebert had ample reason to delay, not wearing sufficient armor, and he didn’t. He went in and put the threat down.

While many still want to fixate on the kinds of firearms used or the laws surrounding them, time and time again we see that the secret to minimizing the impact of these shootings isn’t a new law restricting people’s freedom, it’s having a quick and aggressive response.

Police were on the scene and engaged the shooter within minutes in Nashville. In Uvalde, it was 1 hour and 14 minutes. How many lives would have been saved if the cops in Uvalde had responded similarly to those in Nashville?

Yet let’s also look at a couple of other shootings that had a quick and aggressive response.

First, let’s look at White Settlement, TX.

In that instance, a killer decided to try and shoot up a church service–churches being a favorite target of these knobs for some reason–and it didn’t work out for him. A volunteer working security at the church put a round in his head within mere seconds. The death toll not counting the human-shaped filth? Two.

Then we have Greenwood Park Mall. In that case, the goblin decided to shoot up a shopping center, another popular target. The problem with that plan was that an armed citizen put the killer down quick, fast, and in a hurry. The death toll, again not counting the shooter? Three.

It seems like a quick response from the police is good, but having an armed individual there on the scene is better.

The police in Nashville should be commended for how well they did their jobs. I take nothing away from them. They did it and did it quickly.

Yet when someone is there on the scene, the death toll is greatly reduced. It’s a blip on the radar, then quickly buried by whatever celebrity news the media thinks is more important.

The issue isn’t access to guns–the Nashville shooter had a handgun and could have killed just as many people with it, for example–but having armed people in these places ready and willing to respond.