NFOA MEMBERS FORUM
General Categories => Newsworthy => Topic started by: instag8tr on December 14, 2012, 10:24:09 AM
-
Get ready legislation is coming
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/reports-connecticut-police-evacuating-elementary-school-where-shooting-153815107.html (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/reports-connecticut-police-evacuating-elementary-school-where-shooting-153815107.html)
state police are entering a Connecticut elementary school after a shooting was reported there, spokesman Lt. Paul Vance told Yahoo News. Vance said the scene is still "active,' and that "every available on and off duty officer in the vicinity" is responding to the scene.
State police told the Hartford Courant that the shooter is believed to be dead . According to the newspaper, the gunman had been in the school's main office during the attack. Police said a person in one room had "numerous gunshot wounds." Three people were taken to a nearby hospital in an ambulance, according to NBC Connecticut.
-
I'm seeing reports now that at least 27 are dead.
-
We've got to get firearms into the hands of school faculty. I bet these shootings would stop all together. The villains would find softer targets.
-
Another sicko/coward who took his own life, too......
-
Our children practice fire drills and tornado all the time and in my lifetime I have never heard a report of a child dying in a school fire. Our schools provide zero security for our children.
I wonder how long this guy could have gone in an elementry school in Israel
-
I heard they are making a big deal on what the shooter was wearing.
-
We've got to get firearms into the hands of school faculty. I bet these shootings would stop all together. The villains would find softer targets.
While I am in no way against allowing armed citizens in schools, that wont stop these kinds of attacks. There simply aren't enough motivated people willing to arm and train. Teachers on this forum have stated that, even if armed, it wouldn't be their responsibility to move to the gunfire and stop the shooter.
The answer is simple (read Terror at Beslan and look at the Israeli security model). Every school should have, along with metal detectors and limited ingress and egress, a dedicated, armed security team. A team whose job is to move to the sound of gunfire and stop an active shooter.
But of course the anti gun far left will protest. The nut job far right will also cry foul and protest state sponsored military style security in state run schools and the tax increase that would pay for it.
In the end nothing meaningfull will be done at all and children and adults will continue to die in these types of attacks.
- Shawn
-
As the spouse of a teacher, I'd love it if my husband could carry while on the job. However, I don't like the idea of him being responsible for the sheeple who won't carry and take responsibility for themselves. I just want him to be able to protect himself if some nut-job decided to open fire in his part of the building.
-
]No tinfoil but:
CBS news Update at 1325 hrs:
Carney (white house spokesman) stated that The president may be making some hard decisions in the coming days about our 2nd Amendment right, and that some Americans may not support his decision.[
-
We have to at least give them the option! I have read of the Terror at Beslan and preach the lessons we SHOULD have learned from it. But we, as a society, continue to live in denial.
Maybe this hits home a little harder because a few years back my kids' mom wanted to move to Connecticut where here new husband is from, only a little ways from this school. What if... What if they would have moved to a little outlying community, like Newton... What if....????????
-
While I am in no way against allowing armed citizens in schools, that wont stop these kinds of attacks. There simply aren't enough motivated people willing to arm and train. Teachers on this forum have stated that, even if armed, it wouldn't be their responsibility to move to the gunfire and stop the shooter.
The answer is simple (read Terror at Beslan and look at the Israeli security model). Every school should have, along with metal detectors and limited ingress and egress, a dedicated, armed security team. A team whose job is to move to the sound of gunfire and stop an active shooter.
But of course the anti gun far left will protest. The nut job far right will also cry foul and protest state sponsored military style security in state run schools and the tax increase that would pay for it.
In the end nothing meaningfull will be done at all and children and adults will continue to die in these types of attacks.
- Shawn
I bet that the cost of something like this would make it impossible to employ.
-
"The shooter is dead, a source with knowledge of the investigation, tells CNN’s Susan Candiotti.
Police have recovered two weapons from him, the source added.
It's not known whether police killed the alleged shooter or he took his own life. The source says one weapon recovered is a Glock and the other is a Sig Sauer."
AP Newsreel @ 11:34am
"A few more details from the White House press briefing earlier. White House spokesman Jay Carney said while today is not the day to debate gun policy, an assault weapons ban 'does remain a commitment' of President Obama."
AP Newsreel @ 1:47pm
-
"A law enforcement official in Washington said that one of the guns was a .223-caliber rifle. The official also said that New Jersey State Police were searching a location in that state in connection with the shootings."
-
And the School was Supposed to be a Secure location ....Locked doors and such
Still he was allowed to enter the location.
So locked doors and set security procedures in place are not the answer if they aren't followed or don't work.
Just as Removing guns from law abiding citzens isn't the answer either.
Arming everyone might be a answer.
The .223-caliber rifle if actually is one
was in the shooters car outside the school It shouldn't even be part of this ....it could have been locked in his home or still at the gun store for all it matters.
Later maybe it will have a bearing but for now it's just the Media feeding frenzy.
-
As the spouse of a teacher, I'd love it if my husband could carry while on the job. However, I don't like the idea of him being responsible for the sheeple who won't carry and take responsibility for themselves. I just want him to be able to protect himself if some nut-job decided to open fire in his part of the building.
I bet that the cost of something like this would make it impossible to employ.
My points exactly.
Arming teachers alone wont stop these types of attacks. Teachers aren't an active shooter response team. Even if we allowed teachers to be armed starting tomorrow, the odds of an active shooter running into one would be as good as winning the lottery.
And its "too expensive". How do you know? What do you base that statement on? What is the actual cost of hiring a full time 2-4 man active shooter response team? What would be the average tax increase per household to fund it? Will it be expensive? Yep, but I bet the money could be found if we, as a society, believed that it was important enough.
This just makes me so g-damn angry. We are one of the richest nations on earth and today we had a classroom full of children shot to death because we are too f`ing cheap and too much in denial to fund a proper security detail.
- Shawn
-
Connecticut has some of the most restrictive guns laws in the nation - how can it not be clear to the libertards that gun laws just dont work?
-
In other words, the "news" services are being as accurate as they normally are, i.e. they aren't at all.
No matter what:
1) This is a terrible thing
2) It will stimulate a HUGE emotional (read: non-thinking) response in a lot of people
3) It will certainly garner a huge anti-gun backlast
...and with those put together, my STRONG suggestion to folks is to stay calm when arguing with people who are about to start shouting for gun control. When people get emotional, they stop thinking, and when that happens, not only do they say stupid things that they don't mean (or even that they do mean) it also means that if someone responds to them with similar anger (whether justified or not) it will simply make them MORE likely to dig in and keep not-thinking.
Yes, we are going to have a fight on our hands because of this. We all know it. Make sure you fight smart. Not angry. Even at idiots who will take this as an excuse to wave the bloody flag to try to stop the rest of us from being able to defend ourselves and the people we love.
With regard to what Shawn said:
While I am in no way against allowing armed citizens in schools, that wont stop these kinds of attacks. There simply aren't enough motivated people willing to arm and train. Teachers on this forum have stated that, even if armed, it wouldn't be their responsibility to move to the gunfire and stop the shooter.
That wasn't quite what was said, nor was it the context in which it was said.
For example: I'm a school teacher. I wish I could carry in school. And if the state would pay to send me to an active shooter response class, I'd go in a heartbeat and take on that responsibility. I know several others who would. Many? No---because these people are teachers, not necessarily fighters. But some would go.
For people who haven't had that training, we'd probably be told that we shouldn't respond in that fashion---which doesn't change the fact that it would certainly be true that there would suddenly be areas of the school in which it was much more likely that students would survive.
Saying "there aren't enough motivated people" is nonsense, in my opinion. After all, there generally aren't enough people who will run towards gunfire in ANY given situation.
And again, if nothing else, we would certainly note that in my room, at least, students would have a better chance.
As I said way back, when we discussed guns in schools in the first place:
"Let's see: active shooter in the school. Choice is a 1) armed teacher with extra training, 2) an armed teacher with basic training, or 3) unarmed victims. Of course we'd pick #1, given that choice---but why in the world do people seem to think that #2 isn't any better than #3?"
The answer is simple (read Terror at Beslan and look at the Israeli security model). Every school should have, along with metal detectors and limited ingress and egress, a dedicated, armed security team. A team whose job is to move to the sound of gunfire and stop an active shooter.
But of course the anti gun far left will protest. The nut job far right will also cry foul and protest state sponsored military style security in state run schools and the tax increase that would pay for it.
In the end nothing meaningfull will be done at all and children and adults will continue to die in these types of attacks.
I don't see any chance of this happening. Let's see---how many police departments (in small towns) have to share their SWAT teams? (How many don't even have SWAT teams?) And you want a team in each school? My district has four schools (larger districts have many more). You want a team in each building? How about LPS---how many buildings is that?
Never going to happen.
And if you are saying "one per district" then you aren't talking any better of a response time than local police. (Probably worse, unless you were planning on making the security team sit in the ready room all day.)
Let's be blunt: by their very nature, schools are open, soft targets. Unless you completely change the nature of the school far above what has already been mentioned (adding metal detectors which some schools already have and which the students have already figured out how to get stuff past; limited ingress and egress which many schools already do except kids don't do security well so people get in and out all the time, and armed guards in the hallways which is a little cost-prohibitive for most schools, though using local police as a "school resource officer" seems to work well for many places to at least get someone in the school part-time) it is going to stay that way.
Just as malls are wide-open, soft targets---so are schools. That isn't going to change. They can both be tightened up a bit, but I'd be interested to hear any comments from people on actual economically-feasible things that would have a real (not imagined emotional) effect.
-
While this is a very sad and heartbreaking situation, many millions of school-children did not die today.
More children die in school bus accidents each year than from shootings at schools. How will more gun control laws help them?
-
.
-
I guess we can go on discussing arming teachers, even though we all know this will never happen and there will never be enough willing participants to have a real effect on school shootings. Talk about denial and an imagined emotional effect....
Properly trained and armed school security personell...I get it...nobody wants to pay for it. I already know this. Nobody wants to see an increase in their taxes and schools will fight any attempt to cut their budgets. That is why nothing meaningful is going to come of this tragedy. Tomorrow will be business as usual.
- Shawn
-
An armed teacher doesn't have to run to the sound of the guns. They can stay and protect their classroom. These kids were grouped together. It would have been like shooting penned cattle if the shooter had gone into their rooms.
-
Active Shooter II - Get in the FIGHT! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prS_QpGIB8Q#ws)
-
I guess we can go on discussing arming teachers, even though we all know this will never happen and there will never be enough willing participants to have a real effect on school shootings. Talk about denial and an imagined emotional effect....
Properly trained and armed school security personell...I get it...nobody wants to pay for it. I already know this. Nobody wants to see an increase in their taxes and schools will fight any attempt to cut their budgets. That is why nothing meaningful is going to come of this tragedy. Tomorrow will be business as usual.
- Shawn
Teachers carrying, whether it will happen or not, will cause exactly the same effect as individuals carrying for their own self-defense. We generally consider this a good thing. As to "never have a real effect on school shootings" this is obviously true unless you can get multiple armed people into a vast majority of schools---unless, of course, you didn't mean to set up a strawman and instead were thinking about specific schools with specific people. As police know quite clearly, having someone able to react immediately can make a difference.
Not will make a difference. But can, at least.
And again, certainly better than no one.
Speaking personally, I'm not trying to keep everyone in the U.S. safe. I'd be happy to keep just my students safe.
The idea that this is "about denial and an imagined emotional effect...." is quite odd, actually. Don't you train people for CCW? To defend themselves? Do you tell them that you'll train them, but it is really only for emotional effect?
Properly trained and armed school security personell...I get it...nobody wants to pay for it. I already know this. Nobody wants to see an increase in their taxes and schools will fight any attempt to cut their budgets.
This amuses me on many levels.
Let's just take Omaha Public Schools. There are over 80 school buildings just in OPS. I assume you want a security team in each one, since a centralized team would have a response time that would make it useless.
So---80 response teams. Considering that these schools are NOT small (and many are over 1000) I assume that you are planning for at least a 3-man security team for each school. (Obviously it should be higher, but let's attempt to load this in your favor.) Since this is a high-risk job, requiring significant amounts of continual training, let's assume we can hire each person for a bargain price of $40,000 a year (That won't happen, if you want them trained and competent, but again, let's try to load this in your favor). So, you've just added $9,600,000 to the OPS budget, IF you can hire them (and keep them trained) for that little salary AND you only need 3-man teams for each school.
Do you have any concept of how much money school systems have, use, and are given?
In my school district, we only have 4 buildings, and thus would only need to add $480,000 to our yearly budget for the 12 security folks. Granted, at the high school we currently have a building budget that literally is smaller than our budget 11 years ago (that is in absolute dollars, not in adjusted-for-inflation dollars, by the way) while our student population is 150% of what it was back then. So, you ARE correct, we don't really want to cut any more of our budget for anything.
I note that amount of money ($480,000) isn't actually realistic, because of course it doesn't take into account actual security requirements such as equipment, gear, training, space for security, additional security adjustments for building infrastructure itself, etc.
Again, I mention: small towns can't even create for themselves SWAT teams. Matter of fact, small towns normally have barely enough police to cover all shifts. And you are saying it would be feasible to have a highly-trained security team in each school building?
That seems a little unlikely.
Have you thought about what type of tax increase (and infrastructure increase) it would take to make that a reality?
Again----certain things in society are soft targets. Unless we want all schools to be small, high-security, and locked (like schools for international diplomat's children and such) that isn't going to change.
So----got any realistic possibilities for us? Or can you come up with any realistic numbers to make your ideas of security teams possible?
-
One small improvement would be to let my wife carry her gun to school when she walks to pick up the children or goes to volunteer for a few hours. She can help them spell and be there just in case....
Heck theres an answer. Let armed parents volunteer to come protect the children. Get enough volunteers you got free, highly motivated security.
-
I say allow willing teachers to be armed. I truly believe that it will create an air of uncertainty in some would-be shooters' minds. And it may deter them. Not all but some.
It's pretty obvious that "Gun Free Zones" are the whack jobs' first choice to act out their self-indulgent little fantasies.
I see nothing wrong with attempting to harden up soft targets, even if it's only a little.
Eventually one of these jack asses is going to step in front of a permit holder and get popped in the back of the head, denying them their body count and perhaps their glory. Not that it will ever happen, the media being what it is, but the ONLY picture that should ever be shown of these scumbags is one where they're lying face down in a pool of their own blood.
DO IT I say! A slim chance is better than no chance.
-
One small improvement would be to let my wife carry her gun to school when she walks to pick up the children or goes to volunteer for a few hours. She can help them spell and be there just in case....
Heck theres an answer. Let armed parents volunteer to come protect the children. Get enough volunteers you got free, highly motivated security.
I have had that very conversation with fellow Member/ Coworker/ Father. I would pay for my own enhanced training if they desired. Hell, I may even resort to buying a Glock if I had to to ease the minds.
-
Poor kids and family :(.
I'm gonna skip the rest of this conversation in fear of getting too annoyed or annoying others :).
-
I have had that very conversation with fellow Member/ Coworker/ Father. I would pay for my own enhanced training if they desired. Hell, I may even resort to buying a Glock if I had to to ease the minds.
Now THERE'S a man willing to pay any price. ;D
-
I don't have an answer other than allowing school faculty the right to carry if they have a permit. I would never expect them to run into fire, but just the idea that they may be in the right place to stop such a thing may be a deterrent. I would rather see a teacher herding kids to safety rather than leaving them only to possibly get killed leaving the kids to be easy targets.
Swat teams and armed security in schools has to be one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard of. In nearly every LEO thread, it is made perfectly clear that the police are not there for your protection, which is totally true. Why would we want to teach our kids a different story while they are in school only to learn that after they graduate, they are no longer protected? Maybe there should be other types of security, such as metal detectors for anyone entering the school. Or maybe not letting anyone in without some type of ID that was given them by the school.
The perfect answer is not here for me, but maybe it will come.
-
I am saddened by the loss of life.
My prayers go out to all the families affected by this.
I see two main issues here, but everyone is focusing on only one of them.
1. Allow law abiding citizens to legally carry nearly everywhere. This includes schools. If a teacher can legally carry concealed, then let them do that at school. Students used to be able to have rifles in their vehicles for hunting after school with their friends. Now grade school kids get expelled because they pretend their finger is a gun when playing, or because when they sign their name and it looks like they are making a gun with their finger.
2. A large number of children are no longer being taught right from wrong, or how to deal with failure. 2 + 2 doesn't have to be 4. We can't hurt a child's feelings. Everyone gets a trophy. No keeping score during games. There are many examples around.
Kids do not know how to deal with the real world. Their feelings get hurt, or they lose in a competitive game and they can't deal with it because they have never been taught to.
The media and politicians will use this and other recent events to try to take away everyone's gun rights. There will be an outcry that GUNS are the problem, not the PERSON who committed multiple crimes.
The media should also stop promoting the killer. They give the bad guy notoriety, repeat his name and show his picture everywhere. Other demented criminals see this and also want to be famous.
-
As the spouse of a teacher, I'd love it if my husband could carry while on the job. However, I don't like the idea of him being responsible for the sheeple who won't carry and take responsibility for themselves. I just want him to be able to protect himself if some nut-job decided to open fire in his part of the building.
As a teacher myself... this.
-
Connecticut has some of the most restrictive guns laws in the nation - how can it not be clear to the libertards that gun laws just dont work?
Because they think they can 'tighten up' the mythical loopholes... and magically confiscate every firearm ever produced.
-
Thereis an web based interactive map showing the locations of school shootings around the world since 1999. There have been 31 in the USA and 14 in the rest of the world. Anti-gun proponents are making hay with that graphic.
http://o.canada.com/2012/12/14/interactive-mass-shootings-around-the-world-since-1996/ (http://o.canada.com/2012/12/14/interactive-mass-shootings-around-the-world-since-1996/)
The amazing thing is that there are about 300 million guns in the US, and most of the other countries do not allow their citizens to own or possess guns of any kind, which is leading to homicides by bats, tire irons, golf clubs and knives, except that Britain is talking about outlawing carving knives 9" or longer.
However, here is another interesting statistic:
http://www.cchrint.org/school-shooters/
which states that at least fourteen recent school shootings were committed by those taking or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs.
Zoloft
SSRI
benzodiazapine
Prozac
Xanax
Ambien
Trazodone
Effexor
Ritalin
Luvox
All of them product hallucinations, delusions, altered mental patterns, and even death, as indicated in this report on one of them, prozac: http://www.drugwatch.com/prozac/ (http://www.drugwatch.com/prozac/)
Even something that appears to be as harmless as a sleeping aid can be dangerous:
Some people using this medicine have engaged in activity such as driving, eating, or making phone calls and later having no memory of the activity. If this happens to you, stop taking Ambien and talk with your doctor about another treatment for your sleep disorder.
Ambien may impair your thinking or reactions.
...
-
Thereis an web based interactive map showing the locations of school shootings around the world since 1999. There have been 31 in the USA and 14 in the rest of the world. Anti-gun proponents are making hay with that graphic.
http://o.canada.com/2012/12/14/interactive-mass-shootings-around-the-world-since-1996/ (http://o.canada.com/2012/12/14/interactive-mass-shootings-around-the-world-since-1996/)
The amazing thing is that there are about 300 million guns in the US, and most of the other countries do not allow their citizens to own or possess guns of any kind, which is leading to homicides by bats, tire irons, golf clubs and knives, except that Britain is talking about outlawing carving knives 9" or longer.
However, here is another interesting statistic:
http://www.cchrint.org/school-shooters/
which states that at least fourteen recent school shootings were committed by those taking or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs.
Zoloft
SSRI
benzodiazapine
Prozac
Xanax
Ambien
Trazodone
Effexor
Ritalin
Luvox
All of them product hallucinations, delusions, altered mental patterns, and even death, as indicated in this report on one of them, prozac: http://www.drugwatch.com/prozac/ (http://www.drugwatch.com/prozac/)
Even something that appears to be as harmless as a sleeping aid can be dangerous:
Some people using this medicine have engaged in activity such as driving, eating, or making phone calls and later having no memory of the activity. If this happens to you, stop taking Ambien and talk with your doctor about another treatment for your sleep disorder.
Ambien may impair your thinking or reactions.
...
-
This is clearly a horrible year for shootings. It's horrifically saddening.
Now to go off on an overly emotional and tangential rant that I probably shouldn't...
However, here is another interesting statistic:
http://www.cchrint.org/school-shooters/
which states that at least fourteen recent school shootings were committed by those taking or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs.
Zoloft
SSRI
benzodiazapine
Prozac
Xanax
Ambien
Trazodone
Effexor
Ritalin
Luvox
All of them product hallucinations, delusions, altered mental patterns, and even death, as indicated in this report on one of them, prozac: http://www.drugwatch.com/prozac/ (http://www.drugwatch.com/prozac/)
Even something that appears to be as harmless as a sleeping aid can be dangerous:
As a mental health paraprofessional, bringing up statistics like this usually make me tense. Largely because you're going to give them to people who have absolutely no understanding of psychiatric drugs or firearms. After evaluation by psychologists/psychiatrists/clinical social workers in conjunction with general medical doctors, the military regularly sends people armed with squad automatic weapons and high explosives into hostile fire zones on 90% of the drugs you've mentioned and run into very minimal problems.
Of course when we do run into problems, they make international news. Yes, there are times when we reccomend people are not armed while becoming stable on medication or even the duration of the medication's use. I'd like to see statistics on how treatment compliant these folks actually were. If people get treated by a mental health professional, are compliant with their treatment, and generally responsible, they're not any more dangerous than the average generally responsible person. There's a possibility they might even be safer. However, with liability insurance to worry about I really doubt any civilian doctor would *ever* call someone in their care "safe to own a firearm."
I also have a very personal and real fear of making my job harder by making veterans even MORE hesitant to seek mental health care they need because of laws banning someone who's ever taken any sort of SSRI or something from owning a firearm. The last thing I want to do is take away a veterans self defense devices, hunting abilities, etc after he or she has some post traumatic stress reactions after putting his or her life on the line for our country.
I'm scared of lawyers making psychiatrist decisions in general. If you can't legally prescribe drugs, you probably shouldn't be in the position to make legal decisions about them. I think it'd discourage general population from getting care not just veterans and overall just making the world a more dangerous and unfun place to live.
-
Also worth noting... I don't know how legitimate this news source really.
http://www.chinanews.net/index.php/sid/211386916/scat/9366300fc9319e9b/ht/22-students-stabbed-in-China (http://www.chinanews.net/index.php/sid/211386916/scat/9366300fc9319e9b/ht/22-students-stabbed-in-China)
China News.Net Friday 14th December, 2012
A mentally ill villager armed with a knife Friday stabbed an 85-year-old woman and 22 school children at the gate of a primary school in China, officials said.
A madman with a blade is also pretty scary...
Give people treatment not restrictions please.
-
Was waiting for someone to eventually post the China story.
-
Reactionary stuff to what's happened is natural.
The problem is, people will attempt to push an agenda using the tragedy.
It's a tragedy, the fault lies at the feet of the person who committed it, and no amount of legislation will fix it.
And you can't go about pointing at things and saying 'eeeeevil'.
IE:
* it was a gun! restrict all guns!
* it was the meds! restrict all meds!
* it was a veteran! restrict all veterans! (see current provisions in this year's ndaa)
* it was a train! restrict all trains! (see school rules near train tracks)
* it was the bat! restrict all bats! (see bat company sued cause a kid got hit by a base/soft ball during a normal base/etc hit at a game)
* it was the video game doom! restrict the games!
It was a tragedy. Doesn't mean you can "fix it". And you can't point at something arbitrary and claim it was responsible.
As far as legislation... he was already in one of the strictest gun control states. He had the weapon illegally (under 21). He entered school grounds (illegal). He committed homicide (illegal). Somehow I don't think words scribbled on paper helped nor would more words he would have ignored.
As far as the frequency of which these things seem to be happening over the last few years... well... its hard times for everyone, things are going to be getting ugly.
-
As far as the frequency of which these things seem to be happening over the last few years... well... its hard times for everyone, things are going to be getting ugly.
We had hard times in the Depression too. I don't recall stories of mass murder in our schools though. We're reaping the harvest of those who think we can lead a pain free/consequence free life.
-
Another horrible incident in a gun free zone. As a parent my heart sank on hearing this story.
Armed security teams in schools won't happen for monetary reasons as stated above.
The 'gun control' types usually tend to be big government types. Their pitch is the messianic state will provide everything from cradle to grave and protect us. So folks like us that believe we can provide some of our own security do not jibe with their worldview.
Teachers who willing to carry concealed would be a viable but unlikely option.
I don't know all the answers. I'm not sure I even know the questions sometimes
-
Interesting side note - the shooting a few days ago in Oregon was quite possibly stopped by a CCW holder:
http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html (http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html)
Of course, this will be ignored by the national media.
-
So much information out there and who knows what is accurate, knowing I can't trust the media to verify much if anything. But I saw on ABC last night something that sounded conflicted and I don't know how many viewers would have caught this. They kept saying these guns were legally purchased. I also head that he "borrowed" a family members purchase card to buy the guns. How is that legal? We all know the answer. I don't know if what was stated by ABC was accurate. God knows I despise ABC news and don't trust them, but that seemed like an odd little tidbit of information.
I believe the reason the mall shooting in Oregon didn't get used more by the anti's is because the gun was stolen.
-
I believe the guns were owned and registered to his mother. Technically, they were legal, just not for him.
-
Just thought I'd point out---that the number of mass shootings actually hasn't changed over time----merely the amount of coverage of such things.
http://boston.com/community/blogs/crime_punishment/2012/08/no_increase_in_mass_shootings.html (http://boston.com/community/blogs/crime_punishment/2012/08/no_increase_in_mass_shootings.html)
I don't necessarily agree with the author's conclusions regarding what needs to be "fixed" --- but his statistics regarding mass shootings over time is interesting.
This isn't in any attempt to say that "this was just another one of those things"----but it is to note that yes, kids play lots of video games, watch violent movies, and are indeed obviously reared in a "self-esteem" mode versus a "self-respect" mode AND YET those really don't seem to be causing much in the way of changes.
Matter of fact, if you think about it, given those statistics, the RATE at which mass shootings are occurring is actually getting lower each year, due to how the population is growing.
We just hear about it much, much more.
That should tell people something. (It won't, of course---as has been pointed out, we want a "fix" for everything horrible that happens, even if there cannot be a "fix" for it.)
Guns aren't the problem. If they were, the massive increase in the number of guns in the US would have driven a corresponding increase in mass shootings (and deaths).
Mental health issues and meds aren't the problem. If they were, the massive increase in population plus the massive increase in the amount of meds that are given each year to people would have driven a corresponding increase in mass shooting (and deaths).
Violence on TV, in movies, and in video games isn't the problem. If any of those (or combinations of those) were, we'd see a HUGE increase in mass shootings because the number of video games with direct, shoot-em-up violence, the number of movies directly about violence, and the amount and types of violence now allowed on TV has gone up in amounts that would be unbelievable to someone living in 1980.
People are the problem. And you can't fix people BEFORE they do something. You can deal with them during, and you can deal with them after. But you can't actually "fix" people when they haven't done anything yet.
"If they don't have weapons, they can't shoot people." "If we decide they are a danger, we can force them to be on meds." "If we make laws to restrict everyone from anything, the world will be all fine."
Every parent eventually figures out that they can't coat the world in cotton batting to protect their children. (Well, I suppose some don't.) When something horrible like this happens, people revert back, and many reactions are all emotional. (Unsurprisingly.)
-
http://boingboing.net/2012/12/15/roger-ebert-on-how-the-press-r.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter (http://boingboing.net/2012/12/15/roger-ebert-on-how-the-press-r.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter)
-
Does Michigan get it?
The deadly school shooting in Connecticut came less than 24 hours after Michigan lawmakers passed legislation that allows those with concealed pistol licenses to carry guns into schools and other once forbidden places.
Proponents of the legislation said if the bill is signed into law, it will give people the opportunity to respond to crimes and possibly stop a similar situation.
“This kind of tragedy is hard to process, but if one person – a faculty member or a parent – could legally carry, at least it could have limited some of the mayhem,” said Rob Harris, media director for Michigan Open Carry Inc., on Friday. “This legislation has to be passed to at least have a fighting chance against the evil in this world.”
http://www.freep.com/article/20121214/NEWS06/121214074/In-Michigan-supporters-say-new-gun-law-could-help-stop-tragedies-like-Conn-massacre (http://www.freep.com/article/20121214/NEWS06/121214074/In-Michigan-supporters-say-new-gun-law-could-help-stop-tragedies-like-Conn-massacre)
-
Interesting link jth. I always appreciate stats. I like things I can measure.
Mental health issues and meds aren't the problem. If they were, the massive increase in population plus the massive increase in the amount of meds that are given each year to people would have driven a corresponding increase in mass shooting (and deaths).
There's also been huge advances in mental health treatment and availability of care. Without any actual formal science or number crunching to back it up this looks like it might be *gasp* actually working. However, since I work in the field I know I am trying to justify my own existence on some level.
People are the problem. And you can't fix people BEFORE they do something. You can deal with them during, and you can deal with them after. But you can't actually "fix" people when they haven't done anything yet.
It's really hard to measure prevention unfortunately. Education on mental health issues and how to get help seems to be like a better solution than most, I spend most of my time doing this so again I am biased as all hell. I don't know for sure that people I've helped would have gotten to the point where they'd be so broken that they'd take others or their own life but I know I've helped people. I don't want to force anyone to get care. I don't want to mandate mental evals for anyone. I just want people to know that it's there and there's choices.
Of course making schools and gun free zones harder targets is also a form of prevention, which is again really hard to measure.
Interesting side note - the shooting a few days ago in Oregon was quite possibly stopped by a CCW holder:
http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html (http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html)
Of course, this will be ignored by the national media.
Additionally, thanks for pointing that out bkoeing.
-
This tragedy could be a tipping point for additional gun control. The loss of children like this is so difficult and emotional for everyone. God bless the families.
-
A very interesting article from the Canada Free Press…
“Gun control isn’t about putting an end to horrors, it’s about controlling people. And people who are used to being controlled have even less ability to cope with the uncontrolled and the uncontrollable.”
More at the link…http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/51786
-
“Gun control isn’t about putting an end to horrors, it’s about controlling people. And people who are used to being controlled have even less ability to cope with the uncontrolled and the uncontrollable.”
Excellent quote.
-
We had hard times in the Depression too. I don't recall stories of mass murder in our schools though. We're reaping the harvest of those who think we can lead a pain free/consequence free life.
Mass Murder has been around along time. Durring the Depression.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster)
-
I wonder if people realize that Connecticut has an "Assault Weapons Ban?" If it didn't work there to prevent the shooting, how would it work nationwide?
http://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/Chap943.htm#Sec53-202c.htm (http://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/Chap943.htm#Sec53-202c.htm)
-
I thought this is was a good read.
http://westernrifleshooters.wordpress.com/category/uncategorized/ (http://westernrifleshooters.wordpress.com/category/uncategorized/)
-
At its press conference today the NRA calls for a nationwide effort to put professional armed security in every school......thats just crazy ::)
- Shawn
-
Here is the transcript of the press confrence: http://home.nra.org/pdf/Transcript_PDF.pdf (http://home.nra.org/pdf/Transcript_PDF.pdf)
-
At its press conference today the NRA calls for a nationwide effort to put professional armed security in every school......thats just crazy
- Shawn
+++++1 ...bad idea......better solution, if a teacher has a CHP let'em legally carry and go about their vigilance as if out and about anywhere else.....
-
At its press conference today the NRA calls for a nationwide effort to put professional armed security in every school......thats just crazy ::)
- Shawn
Yep, that's so much like having a full-time security team in each building, which you called for.
-
I have an issue with one item that Wayne said; making a database of everyone with any mental issues is a bad idea. I don't believe in putting people on lists, just to be rounded up the next time something goes haywire (see gun registration). We do need to improve our mental health system but making it less likely that someone would seek help does nothing to fix the bigger problem.
-
I have an issue with one item that Wayne said; making a database of everyone with any mental issues is a bad idea. I don't believe in putting people on lists, just to be rounded up the next time something goes haywire (see gun registration). We do need to improve our mental health system but making it less likely that someone would seek help does nothing to fix the bigger problem.
It's my opinion that there'd be a whole lot of politicians on that list...
-
Gun registration = mental illness database
Bans (limiting 2A) = censoring (limiting 1A)
Its satire, though it could have been delivered better.
-
Ya know, every story that I read keeps concentrating on the senseless murder of the children.
That is very sad to say the least, but there were also 6 adult teachers / administrators that were murdered also. I wonder if they had a chance to conceal carry how this would of turned out.
People talk of armed guards or police, but in uniform, they would be easily identified and possibly targeted. But if the staff was allowed conceal carry, there may some, there may be none, but the possibility of multiple defenders could just be enough to keep the cowards away.
Get the Feds out and let the States and Local School Districts decide. I bet there would plenty of volunteers.
-
Yep, that's so much like having a full-time security team in each building, which you called for.
Its difficult to express sarcasm properly online. I`ll try to do better next time.
I did call for armed security in evey school and I stand by it. And apparently Im not the only one who thinks that armed security in every school is the right first step. That is the only way to guarantee that there will be at least one armed and trained professional present, all the time, everyday. The NRA stated that they will outline a comprehensive plan that addresses the financial aspect, so before I decide this is unaffordable, I will wait and see what they propose.
- Shawn