|
|
Post by the light works on Feb 25, 2018 16:04:08 GMT
So, burglars are not dangerous? Don't be silly. Home invasions are a serious crime and often lead to rape or murder. But, more to the point, what difference does it make if it's one or a mass shooting? If a good guy with a gun stops the crime, that's a good thing, no? But, if you want to limit it to just possible mass shootings: Do citizens (not police officers) with guns ever stop mass shootings?First, the disclaimer from the article: The author goes on to list quite a few. Any nitpicking I'll leave as an exercise for the reader. The layered defense is best. The last resort would be the armed teacher--if a teacher is brave enough to cover his kids with his own body, to the point of getting killed, well--I'm certain we could find a few who could be trained and willing to shoot back. Again, not everyone could, but just letting it be known that the former "gun free zone" might have targets that shoot back would obviously deter some shooters--or else they'd be shooting up other areas, wouldn't they? In this case, there was such a massive failure that the "good guy with a gun", ie: the Broward Sheriff, wasn't. The four deputies that sat out in the parking lot and listened to the murders were not good guys in any stretch of the imagination. There is also a story supposedly from a responding EMT. Allegedly, the EMTs were kept from the scene by the scene commander, and as such at least one victim didn't get help for 45 minutes. The EMTs supposedly were arguing for the right to run in to evacuate the victims, as they were trained to do (even under fire), but the scene commander was insisting that they couldn't until the sheriff okayed it. If this turns out to be true, it's starting to look increasingly like gross criminal negligence by at least some of the authorities. As for keeping guns out of the hands of nutcases, do you recall that we tried banning all AR-15s and many other "assault weapons" for 10 years? The result: No change in crimes committed with these guns. Besides, rifles (of any type) are only used in about 2% of gun crimes--handguns are the usual choice, followed by shotguns, last I checked. In California, it's now the law that a CHP (California Highway Patrol) officer is assigned to each road crew working on the highways. If we can afford that, we can afford beefed up security (including officers) at the schools. Note: It is my opinion that Broward County Sheriffs need not apply. burglars are not entering with the intention to cause as much carnage as they can before they are killed. saying a good guy with a gun stopping a burglar is relevant to a mass shooter is like saying stopping an aggressive stray dog by smacking it upside the head is relevant to a grizzly bear. as far as the delayed rescue is concerned, that sounds like a snafu where the broward county sheriff's department came up short. our sheriff will deploy a tactical team armed with AR-15s and one or two canine "meat missiles." they will immediately make a combat entry into the area and neutralize - by which they mean shoot - anyone they see with a gun. as soon as they are comfortable that an area is reasonably safe, they will begin escorting rescue personnel in, to do patient care. do you see the flaw in the idea of having civilians trying to get in position to engage the shooter? and we did not ban all ar-15 and many other assault weapons. we banned import or manufacture of weapons with specific features, including folding stocks, flash suppressors, bayonet lugs, and separate pistol grips. I know, because that was the time period in which I bought and dressed out my L1A1 (SLR) it is fully compliant with the 1994 ban. there is a strap between the pistol grip and the stock, and it has a recoil compensator instead of a flash suppressor. so let's go over the tactical considerations in dealing with a mass shooter: 1: he wants to shoot as many people as he can. 2: he usually intends to die at the end of his rampage. 3: he will begin his rampage at the time of his own choosing. 4: he will choose any priority targets before he begins his rampage. 5: outside of his priority targets, all he cares about is numbers. - though there have been rumors of some shooters choosing not to shoot certain targets for their own reasons. so, the only deterrent effect of an armed teacher is the potential for the teacher to cut the rampage short, and the solution is to make any teacher suspected of being armed a priority target. the key question is, does the benefit: I.E. the chance of the teacher being in a position to ambush the shooter once the shooter begins shooting; outweigh the risks: I.E. the location is no longer a gun free zone, so the shoot on sight rules of engagement are no longer valid, the presence of an armed faculty member automatically makes all faculty members potential priority targets. |
|
|
|
Post by Lokifan on Feb 26, 2018 5:33:59 GMT
That's not right, and not actually what happens (or happened, in Florida).
No, the shooter doesn't hunt down threats. If that were true, the Broward deputy would have been an obvious target--and he wasn't.
Shooters just want to kill and not be stopped, so they avoid armed resistance. That's why they like "gun free zones"--they like targets that don't shoot back.
Rather than worry about teachers that will "ambush" the shooter, why not consider how this fits in with current policies.
The current policy being taught to teachers is "Run-Hide-Fight", or it's politically correct but identical version "Avoid-Deny-Defend".
1. Run: Get your students out of the area as fast and as safely as possible.
2. Hide: Lock and/or barricade yourself and your students somewhere safe. Be silent and wait for police.
3. Fight: Attack the shooter with anything you have if they get past the barricade and pose an active threat. Don't cower and wait for mercy--you won't get it. Throw books, use brooms, or try to wrestle the gun away from the shooter.
Yes, that's the official policy, and there are training videos based on it. Here are two:
Given that, wouldn't it be better giving a trained teacher a firearm than hoping they can find a broom or fire extinguisher?
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Feb 26, 2018 8:02:54 GMT
So, burglars are not dangerous? Lets start with the confrontation bit. Good mate of mine who was a big lad had a home invasion and threw bodily the burglar back out the door he came in on, and then sat on him until police arrived, said burglar received three broken ribs, if he had had a gun, that would have been a dead burglar?.. [/quote]Don't be silly. Home invasions are a serious crime and often lead to rape or murder. But, more to the point, what difference does it make if it's one or a mass shooting? If a good guy with a gun stops the crime, that's a good thing, no? But, if you want to limit it to just possible mass shootings: Do citizens (not police officers) with guns ever stop mass shootings?First, the disclaimer from the article: [/quote] And there is the problem, it happens most when you are not expecting it, and where mostly you feel "safe", if there is one place where you feel you dont need to be armed, thats where a mass shooting will happen, because the cowards dont want return fire now do they before they finished?. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Feb 26, 2018 8:04:49 GMT
burglars are not entering with the intention to cause as much carnage as they can before they are killed. saying a good guy with a gun stopping a burglar is relevant to a mass shooter is like saying stopping an aggressive stray dog by smacking it upside the head is relevant to a grizzly bear. as far as the delayed rescue is concerned, that sounds like a snafu where the broward county sheriff's department came up short. our sheriff will deploy a tactical team armed with AR-15s and one or two canine "meat missiles." they will immediately make a combat entry into the area and neutralize - by which they mean shoot - anyone they see with a gun. as soon as they are comfortable that an area is reasonably safe, they will begin escorting rescue personnel in, to do patient care. do you see the flaw in the idea of having civilians trying to get in position to engage the shooter? and we did not ban all ar-15 and many other assault weapons. we banned import or manufacture of weapons with specific features, including folding stocks, flash suppressors, bayonet lugs, and separate pistol grips. I know, because that was the time period in which I bought and dressed out my L1A1 (SLR) it is fully compliant with the 1994 ban. there is a strap between the pistol grip and the stock, and it has a recoil compensator instead of a flash suppressor. so let's go over the tactical considerations in dealing with a mass shooter: 1: he wants to shoot as many people as he can. 2: he usually intends to die at the end of his rampage. 3: he will begin his rampage at the time of his own choosing. 4: he will choose any priority targets before he begins his rampage. 5: outside of his priority targets, all he cares about is numbers. - though there have been rumors of some shooters choosing not to shoot certain targets for their own reasons. so, the only deterrent effect of an armed teacher is the potential for the teacher to cut the rampage short, and the solution is to make any teacher suspected of being armed a priority target. the key question is, does the benefit: I.E. the chance of the teacher being in a position to ambush the shooter once the shooter begins shooting; outweigh the risks: I.E. the location is no longer a gun free zone, so the shoot on sight rules of engagement are no longer valid, the presence of an armed faculty member automatically makes all faculty members potential priority targets. The armed burglar is there trying to defend themself and make a quick getaway, they are cowards. The mass shooting is a predetermined cowards method of shooting as many people as possible whilst on a rampage, armed teacher will not solve this, especially if they have their back to the class, and the shooter is wise to them being armed and is staying out of their way, also you have "The playground" before and after school, if teachers are armed, the shooter will pick a time when teachers are safely back in their staff room. |
|
|
|
Post by Lokifan on Feb 26, 2018 9:25:42 GMT
You're ignoring the forest for the trees, and the differences here as well.
About a million burglaries with people in the home happen here each year. 27% of them result in someone becoming a victim of a violent crime.
In one of the examples listed previously, the perpetrators broke into an apartment, and announced "we are about to have sex with these girls, then we are going to kill them all".
That's what can happen in a home invasion.
He was shot attempting to rape a victim, by the way. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy, as far as I'm concerned.
Now, that's a bit different from the story you related, isn't it? I'm seriously happy that your friend triumphed, but not everyone is so lucky, are they? We can't all be gorillas facing 98 pound weaklings.
I know two CCW permit holders. Both are women. One has been a victim previously, and the other lives in a remote area that has seen a violent invasion. Both are determined not to be victims of the next criminal or madmen--it makes no difference if the scum are there for the money, the rape, or the murder--these women won't put up with being a target of anyone for any reason.
By the way, they are both highly educated and intelligent people. One's got a master's degree in marketing, and the other is CEO of a tech incubator. You'd never notice that they carry a weapon, because they take it seriously. They don't brandish it at random, and the only way I found out about it is that they told me. Oh, I once saw one slipping her pistol into her purse when my wife and I picked her up at her home, but besides that, they simply don't feel it's something to be advertised.
Also, I get the idea they do things differently in schools over there--we have teacher's lounges here, but they never have all the teachers in them. Teachers tend to spend a lot of time in their classrooms, even during lunch. Communication is usually via email, intercom, or visits to the office.
Could a madman plan out a "perfect" crime? Maybe. But so far, they haven't--they just want their body count. The quicker it looks like they can't get the count, the faster it's over. The average mass shooting only lasts about 12 minutes, especially now since the police are trained to chase down the shooter first, before "securing" the grounds. Most importantly, they aren't master criminals planning the perfect crime--they're usually just rage filled narcissistic jerks lashing out, for the most part. Drugs often play a role as well.
Here's the thing: Once the shooting starts, the shooter knows he'll be famous. He knows everyone will be finally paying attention to his grievances. He knows his face will be plastered all over the net and television for days or even weeks. He'll be a legend--and, in the case of the Boston Bomber, a rockstar with his picture on the cover of Rolling Stone...
If he can't be sure he can start shooting safely, then what's the point? The risk of being shot before being famous MAY not be worth it.
And that's what we want them to learn.
One of the best things we could do to prevent future shootings is to take away the "fame" element by all agreeing not to publicize these jerks, thus depriving them of a major motivation (but that's another subject).
The biggest point for letting a teacher be armed was obvious in the training videos--did you watch either of them? One told the teacher to attack the gunman with a broom. Wouldn't it be better to bring a gun to a gunfight, and not rely on a broom?
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Feb 26, 2018 15:21:03 GMT
You're ignoring the forest for the trees, and the differences here as well. About a million burglaries with people in the home happen here each year. 27% of them result in someone becoming a victim of a violent crime. In one of the examples listed previously, the perpetrators broke into an apartment, and announced "we are about to have sex with these girls, then we are going to kill them all". That's what can happen in a home invasion. He was shot attempting to rape a victim, by the way. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy, as far as I'm concerned. Now, that's a bit different from the story you related, isn't it? I'm seriously happy that your friend triumphed, but not everyone is so lucky, are they? We can't all be gorillas facing 98 pound weaklings. I know two CCW permit holders. Both are women. One has been a victim previously, and the other lives in a remote area that has seen a violent invasion. Both are determined not to be victims of the next criminal or madmen--it makes no difference if the scum are there for the money, the rape, or the murder--these women won't put up with being a target of anyone for any reason. By the way, they are both highly educated and intelligent people. One's got a master's degree in marketing, and the other is CEO of a tech incubator. You'd never notice that they carry a weapon, because they take it seriously. They don't brandish it at random, and the only way I found out about it is that they told me. Oh, I once saw one slipping her pistol into her purse when my wife and I picked her up at her home, but besides that, they simply don't feel it's something to be advertised. Also, I get the idea they do things differently in schools over there--we have teacher's lounges here, but they never have all the teachers in them. Teachers tend to spend a lot of time in their classrooms, even during lunch. Communication is usually via email, intercom, or visits to the office. Could a madman plan out a "perfect" crime? Maybe. But so far, they haven't--they just want their body count. The quicker it looks like they can't get the count, the faster it's over. The average mass shooting only lasts about 12 minutes, especially now since the police are trained to chase down the shooter first, before "securing" the grounds. Most importantly, they aren't master criminals planning the perfect crime--they're usually just rage filled narcissistic jerks lashing out, for the most part. Drugs often play a role as well. Here's the thing: Once the shooting starts, the shooter knows he'll be famous. He knows everyone will be finally paying attention to his grievances. He knows his face will be plastered all over the net and television for days or even weeks. He'll be a legend--and, in the case of the Boston Bomber, a rockstar with his picture on the cover of Rolling Stone... If he can't be sure he can start shooting safely, then what's the point? The risk of being shot before being famous MAY not be worth it. And that's what we want them to learn. One of the best things we could do to prevent future shootings is to take away the "fame" element by all agreeing not to publicize these jerks, thus depriving them of a major motivation (but that's another subject). The biggest point for letting a teacher be armed was obvious in the training videos--did you watch either of them? One told the teacher to attack the gunman with a broom. Wouldn't it be better to bring a gun to a gunfight, and not rely on a broom? and now here's the difference. Nikolas Cruz came into the school and said " BANG BANG blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam and if the deputy had been in the room he would have SHOT HIM, FIRST. if a school shooter knows a teacher is likely to be armed, he won't say "oh, I guess I won't become a mass killer." he'll SHOOT THE TEACHER FIRST. and meanwhile, when the police show up, they aren't going to be strolling around the school saying "we're the good guys, here we come, so no teachers should shoot us" they're going to be sneaking around the school as quietly as possible and if they see somebody with a gun, they'll SHOOT HIM FIRST. note what the spokesman say is the first priority. |
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Feb 26, 2018 15:34:13 GMT
Hide in a closet and then, if necessary, beat him with a broom. I don't think so.
Let's not equate prevention with self-defense. While I wouldn't argue that arming some teachers will completely eliminate mass shooting incidents at schools, I have no doubt that having some teachers or other school employees equipped to defend themselves and their students could reduce the number of victims of such an incident. And I'm not talking about equipping them to defend themselves with brooms.
|
|
|
|
Post by ironhold on Feb 26, 2018 20:49:24 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Feb 26, 2018 21:27:51 GMT
nope did more than "hint" about it. He flat out said that's what he wanted to do during his CPAC speech last week. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Feb 27, 2018 1:21:24 GMT
nope did more than "hint" about it. He flat out said that's what he wanted to do during his CPAC speech last week. has anyone told him it was GW Bush that made that rule, not Obama? |
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Feb 27, 2018 2:13:00 GMT
nope did more than "hint" about it. He flat out said that's what he wanted to do during his CPAC speech last week. has anyone told him it was GW Bush that made that rule, not Obama? I don't think he doesn't like the rule because of who implemented it. There seems to be plenty he disagreed with Bush about. In fact, if you look at his record (and tweets), nope has "gone after" just as many Republican leaders as he has Democratic. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Feb 27, 2018 2:43:45 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Feb 27, 2018 2:45:32 GMT
has anyone told him it was GW Bush that made that rule, not Obama? I don't think he doesn't like the rule because of who implemented it. There seems to be plenty he disagreed with Bush about. In fact, if you look at his record (and tweets), nope has "gone after" just as many Republican leaders as he has Democratic. if you look at his tweets, nope goes after anyone who he thinks is in his way. |
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Feb 27, 2018 3:24:18 GMT
I don't think he doesn't like the rule because of who implemented it. There seems to be plenty he disagreed with Bush about. In fact, if you look at his record (and tweets), nope has "gone after" just as many Republican leaders as he has Democratic. if you look at his tweets, nope goes after anyone who he thinks is in his way. It's not just in "his" way. He feels that it's also in the way of the people that elected him. nope clearly communicated his intentions before he was elected and if someone now tries to block that agenda, he is going to call them out. No one is above nopes tweets, neither R's or D's nor even foreign leaders. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Feb 27, 2018 6:57:07 GMT
You're ignoring the forest for the trees, and the differences here as well. About a million burglaries with people in the home happen here each year. 27% of them result in someone becoming a victim of a violent crime. In one of the examples listed previously, the perpetrators broke into an apartment, and announced "we are about to have sex with these girls, then we are going to kill them all". That's what can happen in a home invasion. He was shot attempting to rape a victim, by the way. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy, as far as I'm concerned. Now, that's a bit different from the story you related, isn't it? I'm seriously happy that your friend triumphed, but not everyone is so lucky, are they? We can't all be gorillas facing 98 pound weaklings. I know two CCW permit holders. Both are women. One has been a victim previously, and the other lives in a remote area that has seen a violent invasion. Both are determined not to be victims of the next criminal or madmen--it makes no difference if the scum are there for the money, the rape, or the murder--these women won't put up with being a target of anyone for any reason. By the way, they are both highly educated and intelligent people. One's got a master's degree in marketing, and the other is CEO of a tech incubator. You'd never notice that they carry a weapon, because they take it seriously. They don't brandish it at random, and the only way I found out about it is that they told me. Oh, I once saw one slipping her pistol into her purse when my wife and I picked her up at her home, but besides that, they simply don't feel it's something to be advertised. Also, I get the idea they do things differently in schools over there--we have teacher's lounges here, but they never have all the teachers in them. Teachers tend to spend a lot of time in their classrooms, even during lunch. Communication is usually via email, intercom, or visits to the office. Could a madman plan out a "perfect" crime? Maybe. But so far, they haven't--they just want their body count. The quicker it looks like they can't get the count, the faster it's over. The average mass shooting only lasts about 12 minutes, especially now since the police are trained to chase down the shooter first, before "securing" the grounds. Most importantly, they aren't master criminals planning the perfect crime--they're usually just rage filled narcissistic jerks lashing out, for the most part. Drugs often play a role as well. Here's the thing: Once the shooting starts, the shooter knows he'll be famous. He knows everyone will be finally paying attention to his grievances. He knows his face will be plastered all over the net and television for days or even weeks. He'll be a legend--and, in the case of the Boston Bomber, a rockstar with his picture on the cover of Rolling Stone... If he can't be sure he can start shooting safely, then what's the point? The risk of being shot before being famous MAY not be worth it. And that's what we want them to learn. One of the best things we could do to prevent future shootings is to take away the "fame" element by all agreeing not to publicize these jerks, thus depriving them of a major motivation (but that's another subject). The biggest point for letting a teacher be armed was obvious in the training videos--did you watch either of them? One told the teacher to attack the gunman with a broom. Wouldn't it be better to bring a gun to a gunfight, and not rely on a broom? I am not ignoring the forest, nor am I ignoring the pond, the vast distances between us, and a LOT of cultural difference. Home invasion happens, attacks on the people inside happen, but "Not that much", and the outcome is not much different to USA though, because, over here, the criminals dont carry guns, and neither do the house owners, but they do know where the knives are, have walking sticks even if they dont need to use them, a short billy club, mace, home alarms with a "Panic" button, but NOT Guns. So what you are saying CAN happen in a home invasion?. We are not in any way immune, that can happen, indeed, its just that guns are not part of our culture, attempting to force sex upon the invaded is liable to get a kick in the nuts if your not holding a gun to their head, all guns do is attract MORE guns. So far, we have managed to survive without the need to carry guns. Even if you did have a CCW permit, the chances of you carrying it at all times in your own home?. Its not immunity to own a gun if you are 20 paces from it and they are 10... and they already have a gun drawn on you... The training video's, what use are they if the teacher involved doesnt have a gun then?.. a LOT of use, to disarm the kid with a broom is better than nothing at all. If the teachers start carrying, then "Some" of the kids will demand they they also be allowed to carry, for self defence, and then you have an arms escalation. What I am trying to do here is point the direction of DIS-Arming, having a strategic arms limitation, in that NO ONE be allowed inside the confines of the school property with anything more dangerous than a pencil sharpener. This is how we do it in UK. Does it work?. Well, how may school shootings do you hear about over here per 1,000,000 people per year?. Compare that with USA?.. Who is safer, statistically, comparing the 380 million people in USA and the less than just one state population of UK?. I dont care, I just know that in the confines of a school in UK, I am more liable to be kicked by the Blackpool donkey on holliday in the courtyard than be shot by one of the kids. More chance of being hit by a meteor than a school shooting in UK. Because our culture doesnt worship Guns. And anyone who builds an alter to them gods in their own home without a permit and extensive background checks is sent for evaluation at Her Majesty's detention until they prove they are not a nut-job.... Yes there is a difference, a BIG difference, we dont have a gun toting religion over here. Is there any answer to that?. I suspect not. You have past the event horizon where you can go backwards in USA, you have that culture, now how to deal with it, and try and move forwards, without turning your school playing fields into a battle for the Somme. In my humble position of a member of the board, I am not trying to play any blame game, or a "we do it better over here" game, I am trying to seek the ultimate answer, in the case of if I am not part of the solution, I am part of the problem, the stupid question is the one that doesnt get asked, I am asking questions and making suggestions into how you can move forwards, you may not like what I have to say, but I am at least trying to seek the solution. And part of that is the de-escalation of an arms race. And I dont believe I am alone in this.... As for hiding in a closet, the kid is not making any attempt to communicate with intended targets, he is shooting anyone he sees, so NOT being seen?. thats a priority. Either that or have it away on your toes as soon as you hear it start, "De-Ass the area with the quickness".... dont try and engage dont try to communicate dont be a hero, just get GONE. And encourage all around you to do the same. The shooter is looking for easy targets, DONT make it easy. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Feb 27, 2018 7:08:54 GMT
Six ideas put forwards by the BBC, I agree with many, but not all. 1. Don't name the shooter 2. Let teachers carry guns 3. Two doors in every classroom 4. Remove guns from people 'in crisis' 5. Airport-style security in schools 6. Repeal the Second Amendment source, www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43118865Note, the repeal of the second amendment, just like the legalisation of alcohol, does not mean you can NOT own it, it just means you need a licence to own or use. Getting rid of "The right to own" means you must have good reason to own, its not a ban on guns, its just a means of not allowing "Just anyone" to say they have a legal right to own without having to have further checks on their mental stability. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Feb 27, 2018 14:49:09 GMT
Six ideas put forwards by the BBC, I agree with many, but not all. 1. Don't name the shooter 2. Let teachers carry guns 3. Two doors in every classroom 4. Remove guns from people 'in crisis' 5. Airport-style security in schools 6. Repeal the Second Amendment source, www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43118865Note, the repeal of the second amendment, just like the legalisation of alcohol, does not mean you can NOT own it, it just means you need a licence to own or use. Getting rid of "The right to own" means you must have good reason to own, its not a ban on guns, its just a means of not allowing "Just anyone" to say they have a legal right to own without having to have further checks on their mental stability. a requirement of membership in a sanctioned militia group would be easily ruled. and keep in mind militias are, by definition, under the command of the state governor, here. after that, the militia could easily rule that there are minimum standards for training, intelligence, and sanity. |
|
|
|
Post by Lokifan on Feb 27, 2018 17:13:01 GMT
and now here's the difference. Nikolas Cruz came into the school and said <snip cut and paste exercise--let's try to keep this on an adult level, huh?> Yes, in reading reports from these incidents, have you seen who gets shot first? The teacher. Armed or not. They're already a target, wouldn't it be better to give them something besides a broom? Besides, in these shootings, the shooter often moves from room to room--so although the first teacher is surprised, the second might not be. And no, I'm not making this up. Sadly, there have been cases where the shooter checks additional rooms for further hiding victims (Columbine is an example). That's why the POLICE APPROVED response is now RUN-HIDE-FIGHT. They know that if the shooter enters the classroom, odds are many will die, so swing that broom, throw that book--do anything but sit still and wait for mercy that isn't coming... Is this a perfect solution? Of course not. It's just better than relying on a broom against a firearm. That should be obvious to anyone who pays attention. More importantly, note what the trainees are shouting when they enter: "Police! Drop your weapon!" A mass shooting site isn't a free-fire zone with cops shooting everything that moves, after all. Is it dangerous for the cops? Of course. But if it saves lives, isn't it worth it? As long as both police and teaching staff are trained, we might stop a few shooters. Establishing a protocol and training is critical. Again, this is not the first line of defense, it is quite obviously the last one. But, in giving the teachers the ability to do something more than wait to die or wave a broom, you are making it safer. |
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Feb 27, 2018 17:44:21 GMT
I can't imagine anyone saying they would rather be hiding in a room with a bunch of un-armed people waiting to be shot rather than waiting in a room with a bunch of people, some of which are not only armed, but trained in what to do in this situation. But then, I'm not that much a liberal.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lokifan on Feb 27, 2018 22:49:28 GMT
Well, given past behavior, it's not entirely unlikely. Some years ago, he halted a mugging. He confronted the man who was beating another man with a baseball bat. The man abandoned the attack. i.redd.it/45l1nkm3nmi01.png |
|
