Page 11 of 115 FirstFirst ... 9101112132161111 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 1142

Thread: Parkland Florida School Shooting

  1. #101
    Site Supporter Hambo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Behind the Photonic Curtain
    Quote Originally Posted by TAZ View Post
    This situation is no different than any other violent encounter. Use of a gun, knife... is a LAST resort. Avoid, disengage... come first for the general public. However, once we reach the time when there are no other options to run, hide,... you need to have something else other than eat a bullet.

    I agree that most teachers aren’t going to do it or even do it well, but those that want to should be enabled to carry

    Last resort thinking though. We would be better served with more proactive security at schools.

    Every secure business I’ve worked at had revolving doors activated by badge access or something similar. Every student has an RFID badge they use for lunch and snacks. Why not use that to gain entry into the facility. In the AM the doors are wide open for these secured campuses. Our school has the kids and parents walk through the office to enter the campus. Guess what? Nobody is EVER there to see who comes and goes. At least pretend. Just one more step to have to take for a nut job to gain entry.

    More importantly, why are kids who are behavior issues allowed to get anywhere near a school, much less attend even though they were expelled? This is mind boggling to me. Education is a privilege, not a right. Your access to education is a right. Screw it up and tough titties IMO.

    We keep putting people at risk to accommodate the bad apples. 90% of the time that risk is loss of educational experience cause teachers are farting around with the retards. The others it’s violence or other serious issues. What makes their rights more imports than the others’?
    Older Florida schools had a very open campus style: just covered sidewalks and one door into a classroom. Even newer designs aren't anywhere near as secure as what you're talking about. Going to the office to sign in is more or less voluntary. I doubt there was any way to know this guy was even on campus.

    I reported a kid last year for posting online threats. He was arrested and taken for involuntary psych eval. He faced the possibility of criminal charges which were not filed, and was expelled. There are two choices: online home school program, or attend a school with all the other problem kids. Since he was in middle school I doubt he's expelled forever.
    Last edited by Hambo; 02-15-2018 at 11:20 AM.
    "Gunfighting is a thinking man's game. So we might want to bring thinking back into it."-MDFA

  2. #102
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    The Sticks
    Quote Originally Posted by Stephanie B View Post
    Point; missed.
    Please explain..I'm all ears
    Last edited by ralph; 02-15-2018 at 11:14 AM.

  3. #103
    Site Supporter Totem Polar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    PacNW
    May as well throw my .02 in.

    This is every bit a 1A problem as a 2A, if not more so. The rate of school shootings from, say, 1900 to 1995, compared to 1995 to 2005, compared to 2005-2015 and from 2015 to Q1 of 2018 indicates that something is going on besides firearms, period.

    My wife thinks it’s a complex cocktail, but one *clearly* catalyzed by social media. I agree. If anti-firearms folks think that the founding fathers "couldn’t have predicted modern weapons" (debatable, but another subject), then I counter that this isn’t anything compared to modern social media. If the founders could have predicted the most popular of those platforms, and the access they’d give the deranged, the 1A may well have been different. I’m totally serious.

    Embracing controls on what information can be disseminated by corporate media—and I’m including the corporations owning FB, YT, Twitter, et al. Would cut down on both copycatting, and the ability of upcoming active killers to research the methods of their forebearers. Are we willing to go there with the 1A? I don’t know. I know that I sure do get greeted with a lot of silence when I bring up 1A control concepts in response to shootings in academic circles.

    Speaking of, I spend a good amount of my time, and make over half my income, acting as an educator. Today, I will be on campus for 8 hours, in open buildings with no security. I’ve given this issue some thought.

    One: there is no way that schools should be taking on more administrative load trying to manage an armed staff in any formal capacity. The reasons are all in the article posted by @Rich_Jenkins, upthread. Bluntly; American educational admin can barely hold it together figuring how to meet accreditation, manage budgets, and plan for the future of education. Threat management, and use of force liability is something so far outside of any BOT’s collective lane (scattered random individual rare exceptions aside) as to be absurd.

    The simplest solution here is for schools to admit it, and abdicate; fall back into the arms of the state. Let CCW be CCW, state-by-state. You live in MA, maybe less armed folks. You live in Utah, probably someone armed on campus, under this model. This in no way implies that teachers and janitors have any rights or responsibilities beyond the basic legal right for lawful defense of self and others as if they were in any public location.

    In other words, treat schools like grocery stores, no more, no less, and let the messy chips fall where they will.

    In the same way that a rare toddler grabs mom’s purse gun and shoots her from the shopping card booster chair, we may see a random accident, or negligence issue (eg. Gun left in a bathroom to be found by students), but in all, I trust people to do the right thing. Frankly, if we can’t rely on 51 out of 100 American kids to turn in a lost weapon found in the restroom, then we’ve got bigger problems than school shootings, as a whole.

    I also like @blues LEOSA idea. Nothing saying that expanding state CCW and volunteer service by retired LEO is mutually exclusive.

    Ultimately, as has been noted around here before, shootings like this are just part of having a free and open society. Boiling down the gun control side of the debate moves us to a place where the state fights with organized crime to split the monopoly on control of violence. We know what that looks like thanks to places from Mexico to Somolia.

    The 1A argument is more compelling, in part because the state is already fighting corporations for control of media. I’m not so sure that ‘the people’ would lose much by the enactment of rigid controls over the reporting of the worst degrees of base psychopathy. Germany may have their issues, but laws against free speech applied to Nazi symbolism doesn’t appear to be one of them.

    Or we do nothing, and eat the shootings as a cost of doing business as a constitutional republic.

    "Mental health" isn’t going to be an answer (without draconian reforms) and "gun control" isn’t going to be the answer (without draconian reforms).

    The simplest reforms are probably going to be those that return some responsibility back to the populace (eg. Janitors with CCW, but they’re on their own liability-wise if they cock it up).

    JMO, not that I have any more easy answers than anyone.
    Last edited by Totem Polar; 02-15-2018 at 11:53 AM. Reason: *Somalia*

  4. #104
    Quote Originally Posted by Hambo View Post
    Older Florida schools had a very open campus style: just covered sidewalks and one door into a classroom. Even newer designs aren't anywhere near as secure as what you're talking about. Going to the office to sign in is more or less voluntary. I doubt there was any way to know this guy was even on campus.

    I reported a kid last year for posting online threats. He was arrested and taken for involuntary psych eval. He faced the possibility of criminal charges which were not filed, and was expelled. There are two choices: online home school program, or attend a school with all the other problem kids. Since he was in middle school I doubt he's expelled forever.
    After Sandy Hook the schools in my area adopted the security recommendations of locking the campus during school hours. Before school begins or after school it’s a free for all though. My sons middle school has everyone cut through the office all day. Doors straight into the facility are locked from exterior access. You walk in through one set of doors and are faved with locked plate glass doors to the main facility. This creates a hallway leading to the office. Door to office is open and rarely is anyone there to insure adults don’t go in and bypass the locked second doors. You could easily coverts the exterior doors to revolving doors only people with badges can go through. Others would have to be granted access by someone in the office. The door to the office could be remotely locked as well. Anyone trying to sneak through the revolving doors could be snagged inside a plate glass cell or ejected by reversing the motors. Anyone making it through the doors could be locked in a plate glass hallway if someone was paying attention. These are temporary as any long gun would penetrate and you’d be able to get through, but would give time for teachers and students to lock themselves into class rooms. Well built structures with serious doors would be hard to get through. All giving people time to hide better, police to get there and if needed set up an ambush should the classroom doors get breached. Preferably an armed ambush if a teacher was so inclined.

    Not rocket surgery. We put up these layers of security for our celebrities, politicians, certain financial institutions, but for our children we post signs. Fucked in the head is what that is.

  5. #105
    Site Supporter 41magfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by JodyH View Post
    BTW: I'm disappointed in some of the attitudes towards an armed citizenry in this thread. I'm picking up a vibe of "I'm the only one professional/trained/good enough...".
    Virtually ALL of the higher ups and perhaps half of the rank and file LEO's I worked with for 30 years had this attitude .... it's pervasive.
    The path of least resistance will seldom get you where you need to be.

  6. #106
    Quote Originally Posted by 41magfan View Post
    Virtually ALL of the higher ups and perhaps half of the rank and file LEO's I worked with for 30 years had this attitude .... it's pervasive.
    I've noticed something around the Atlanta area.. City police (though certainly there are exceptions #notallcitypolice ) would prefer only they have guns. County Sheriffs/Deputies are exactly the opposite. It could be the more rural/semi-rural nature and the pro-2a upbringing of those who tend to go into the Sheriff's dept in their area, lower crime rates in general, whatever, but there is an apparent difference in mentality between our local jurisdictions.
    You will more often be attacked for what others think you believe than what you actually believe. Expect misrepresentation, misunderstanding, and projection as the modern normal default setting. ~ Quintus Curtius

  7. #107
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    the Deep South
    I'm a native of Mississippi and after living away for about half my life, I was finally able to move home a couple of years ago. While Mississippi is at the bottom of most lists, we lead the nation in childhood vaccination rates and have some of the most permissive firearms carry laws in the country. If a permit holder takes the "instructor course," the number of NPEs the permit hold has to recognize drops dramatically. Wanna be the parent reader in your daughter's kindergarten class next Friday? No problem, don't forget your Glock 19. I would need to double check this next point, but I think Mississippi's stand your ground law shields the shooter from civil suits if the shooting is ruled justifiable. It seems to me that adopting these policies in other states is an easy first step. Obviously they are not a complete solution, but even marginally decreasing the attractiveness of soft targets would likely yield some benefit, however difficult to measure.

    As far as teachers carrying, Glenn's point about an accidental shooting being a greater tragedy than an intentional one has always puzzled me. For instance, what if yesterday Timmie Taurus and Julie J-frame (as mentioned several posts ago) responded and accidentally killed six students while Evil Shooter also killed six students before Julie finally landed a good shot. The death of those 12 students is obviously a mathematical improvement over the deaths of 17 students, but the tone of the larger conversation (not just this thread) is that the deaths of the six students that were accidentally killed completely outweigh the deaths of the 17.

    Lastly, as for politicizing the event, if I were a gun control proponent, I would exploit every single mass shooting event to its fullest potential to achieve my goal of reducing the number of firearms in circulation. Our side's feigned outrage at amplifying the gun control exhortations "before the bodies are even cold" has always puzzled me. My assumption is that this tactic was originally the NRA's attempt to suppress the gun control argument for a couple of news cycles until shock of the news of the shooting wears off. Based on what happened in Australia, I'm all for employing this approach as a tactic to stifle the pro gun control arguments, but I view it very clearly as a tactic and not a moral imperative.

  8. #108
    Site Supporter dontshakepandas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    I generally try to stay out of conversations like this, but since we keep seeing events like this my thoughts are starting to pile up and I need to clear my head. I feel like this is probably the best place since I think it may be one of the last communities on Earth where the average IQ is high enough to tie a pair of shoes. Sorry in advance for the length. I’ll do my best not to ramble.

    Any time something like this happens, people start pointing fingers at the one thing that they think is to blame. The left says we have too many guns and the right says we don’t have enough guns. The reality is that our system is failing in multiple different ways that all compound to create this result. Some are specific to school killings, and others apply to all types of mass killings.

    As a society, the first thing we need to look at is what, other than terrorism, makes people want to commit mass killings. Some of these factors are going to be specific to the individual such as perceived wrongs or mental illness, but other factors seem to encourage that type of violence across the board.

    I feel the biggest, and likely most obvious, of these is the fame given to the murderers after the event. Our media puts their picture on every TV screen and website and says their name over and over. This encourages future similar acts by making it seem like committing that type of violence is a path from being nobody to somebody, or a way to be remembered. We shouldn’t publicize these people, we shouldn’t show their face, and we shouldn’t say their names.

    You would think this would be relatively easy, but while the media has no problem asking people to give up their rights for the illusion of safety, they aren’t as willing to give up a few dollars for something that could make a real difference. It is also a lot harder for them to push their agenda and spread fear without plastering the shooters face on every screen they possibly can. The First Amendment protects the freedom of the press, but that doesn’t mean that the People shouldn’t hold them accountable for what they do.
    I think another factor that is more specific to school killings is that “zero tolerance policies” have taken away other options for kids to resolve conflict. Sometimes things aren’t going to be resolved with a calm conversation, and we’ve taken away the ability for things to be resolved with a fist fight. I grew up on the starting edge of this, but it has devolved to a situation where it seems like common sense is no longer allowed to be applied.

    These days even defending yourself in a fist fight results in a suspension. Kids are also told that any type of incident like this will go on their permanent record and could affect college admissions and their entire future. Some kids don’t care about that type of thing, but for others it can be another escalating factor. They are getting bullied and picked on every day, and think that if they fight back it could ruin their entire future so they continue to hold it in until they reach a breaking point and at that point they may feel like they won’t have a future either way so they may as well escalate past just a fight.

    That said, some people are just evil and want to do bad things. The world is a dangerous place and there is no amount of laws we can pass that will change that. I think this is something that people refuse to accept. It is actually pretty remarkable how much safer our society is than any other place or time on Earth, but that doesn’t give people the right to walk around like a complete moron and just expect to be safe.

    One example that jumps to mind is the people at Disney World who let their child play by the water and when the kid was attacked by an alligator they sued Disney World because there wasn’t a sign saying there were alligators. This is still Earth, and nature still exists, and it is on you and only you to keep yourself and your loved ones safe because nobody can get rid of every possible risk for you. The fact that people have that expectation and are unwilling to take responsibility for themselves is a huge cause for concern. I’m not willing to trade my rights for more laws that give people the illusion of safety, and you shouldn’t be either.

    While we are on the topic of laws, the entire gun control debate is completely out of control and has gotten to a point where it is absurd. People on both sides often say they support commons sense gun laws, but I’d argue that at this point there is no such thing. This topic may be where I stray from the typical gun enthusiast mindset a little bit.
    Neither side has any trust for the other at this point, and are too set on the extremes to really consider a compromise at this point. I think that does all of us a disservice. We can use the bump stock conversation as an example of this. I feel like bump stocks are completely useless, and actually encourage less safety by giving people less control over each round fired, and I know that many people agree with this. So what happens when they try to pass legislation to ban them?

    Many people on the right are completely against even having the conversation just because it is gun related and therefore absolutely protected, even though it is useless. The people on the left who are writing the legislation do everything they can to make it vague and try to outlaw “rate increasing devices” so that they can potentially attack things, such as better triggers, and work towards their extreme agenda of banning everything. This doesn’t leave much room in the middle for actual common sense compromise, and we end up accomplishing nothing.

    I think we can all agree that guns, or even bump stocks, aren’t the problem here. Our goal should be to keep all guns from specific people instead of specific guns from all people. Identifying those people isn’t always easy because sometimes the warning signs are hard to see, but sometimes they aren’t. In this specific case there were all kinds of warning signs. Lots of people saying they expected this and that he has made threats before.

    We need to have a realistic way to investigate this type of behavior and monitor and remove weapons when there is a real threat. Of course, just being the quiet weird kid isn’t enough to actually go that far, but when you have somebody who is actually making threats and nothing is getting done, the system is broken.
    The other thing that gets brought up often with school shootings is solving the problem by giving teachers guns. I think it’s already been said one hundred times in this thread alone that giving guns to people who don’t want them and aren’t prepared to use them will just make things worse. I’m surrounded by teachers in my life and most of them definitely don’t have the mindset or ability to react to stress in a way that would make that helpful in any way, and most of them wouldn’t want a gun if you gave it to them for free. However, I don’t think you should take that ability away from the people who do have the mindset and ability to provide some protection, even if its small.
    It is also unrealistic to expect the teachers who do want to carry to actually be able to stop the threat before the event is already tragic. While I do think knowing that somebody there may fight back might deter some people from committing these acts, it won’t stop them all. I think we need to see more effort put into preventing the act from occurring in the first place.

    If we actually want to protect kids we need to put some real security measures in place. I went to school in the aftermath of Columbine and had to deal with a lot of bomb threats and other things like that. As a response, my schools had metal detectors, and we weren’t allowed to bring bags that weren’t see through. Why are we not seeing that minimal amount of effort for the problems we are having today? Using doors that aren’t made of glass and having SROs near any possible entry points could help too. There are a lot of things that we could do but aren’t doing, and the current method clearly isn’t working. Posting a sign that says no guns and then trusting the honor system is not going to be a successful system because these people looking to murder people have no honor.

    People like to bring up the cost of these security measures as a reason not to do them. A lot of schools don’t have the money to implement some of the changes, but that doesn’t mean they can’t make some improvements. Other schools have more than enough money to implement any changes that they wanted, and these events aren’t always happening in poor districts. The school I went to just spent north of 70 million dollars on a football stadium, yet isn’t enforcing the same security measures that were there when I was a kid. They may have to make sacrifices in other areas to get the security they need, but that won’t happen until they make it a priority, and to them it is easier to blame the guns and try to take away our rights than take responsibility themselves.

  9. #109
    Site Supporter JodyH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    New Mexico
    Quote Originally Posted by pangloss View Post
    Lastly, as for politicizing the event, if I were a gun control proponent, I would exploit every single mass shooting event to its fullest potential to achieve my goal of reducing the number of firearms in circulation. Our side's feigned outrage at amplifying the gun control exhortations "before the bodies are even cold" has always puzzled me. My assumption is that this tactic was originally the NRA's attempt to suppress the gun control argument for a couple of news cycles until shock of the news of the shooting wears off. Based on what happened in Australia, I'm all for employing this approach as a tactic to stifle the pro gun control arguments, but I view it very clearly as a tactic and not a moral imperative.
    Exactly.
    Publicly calling for a respectful "cooling off period" is as much politicizing a tragedy as is dancing in the blood of the victims.
    "For a moment he felt good about this. A moment or two later he felt bad about feeling good about it. Then he felt good about feeling bad about feeling good about it and, satisfied, drove on into the night."
    -- Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy --

  10. #110
    Site Supporter rob_s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    SE FL
    Quote Originally Posted by Hambo View Post
    Older Florida schools had a very open campus style: just covered sidewalks and one door into a classroom. Even newer designs aren't anywhere near as secure as what you're talking about. Going to the office to sign in is more or less voluntary. I doubt there was any way to know this guy was even on campus.

    I reported a kid last year for posting online threats. He was arrested and taken for involuntary psych eval. He faced the possibility of criminal charges which were not filed, and was expelled. There are two choices: online home school program, or attend a school with all the other problem kids. Since he was in middle school I doubt he's expelled forever.
    What district are you in?

    In Palm Beach, Broward, and Dade they are all either designed new to funnel all visitors into the office first, or have been modified to do so with fences and walls. At my kids' public elementary schools in two of those counties you even had to be buzzed in to get into the office.

    Although now that I type this, I don't think the law/policy applies to high schools.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •