School shooting, bombing etc thread
Posted: Sun May 29, 2022 3:38 pm
Provide your solutions.
You can tell I'm angry; what gave it away? I hate the POS too, just less so in this case because he's dead as he deserves.
To which my ever loyal stalker replied:You (WEYOUN) have already shown conclusively that you are an 'in the tank' leftist, doc.
The Good Doctor himself (or herself, I really don't know, and I would hate to use the wrong pronoun) replied:If you knew Weyoun's history on this Bored, you'd know how ridiculous this statement is.
I don't know or remember jerrell or anything specific about the doc aside from what I've seen recently. But his or her latest insightful post, inside a thread that most of us left as a respectful memorial to those who were murdered by an evil ^#^&$67, pretty much confirms my hypothesis:I enjoy these comments suggesting I’m some sort of communist. I am guessing a certain poster was not around back in the day when I butted heads with jerrell(?).
Yes, as far as I am concerned, the good doctor is a confirmed, self-righteous sanctimonious leftist whose religion is politics.Gun nuts are awfully quiet.
A lot of their beliefs took a hit.
With all those kids being murdered, you would’ve thought a good man with a gun would’ve stopped at all.
It is Texas after all and everyone is packing!
Welp!
Just a shame. I wonder how many more children will have to die because of the insecurity of these people.
Here, BJ, is something that will undoubtedly prevent more school shootings than any background checks.
https://youtu.be/j-Kb4XuHoKw
It is my understanding that every school in the state of Florida is in the Guardian program. Trained, armed protectors on the school campus that will prevent any armed active shooter from shooting any children in that school.
Amazingly, they say that the Broward County School district where the Marjory Stoneman Douglas shooting occurred, to which this program was the response, was the last one to adopt it, and they had to be forced to.
If this program prevents one child from being killed in an active shooter situation, won't this be worth it?
Watch starting at 26:58 if you want an answer to the question of 'more common-sense gun laws'.
How many accidental shootings, or shootings arising from a fit of rage, will be too high a price for increasing the prevalence of guns on campus? --Bobflockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑Sun May 29, 2022 6:15 pmAnother confirmed self-righteous, sanctimonious ultra-leftist whose religion is politics, our own bob (I have confirmed their pronoun as biologically male unless they wish to correct me), decided to try and trip me up by bringing the Uvalde shooting up in the 1984 thread.
Here is what they are implementing in Florida to prevent school shootings before they happen. As they state, it is to stop it from happening once there is an active shooter. The hard part is to determine what causes a person to become an active shooter and how to prevent that without making everyone else in the country into a suspect.Here, BJ, is something that will undoubtedly prevent more school shootings than any background checks.
https://youtu.be/j-Kb4XuHoKw
It is my understanding that every school in the state of Florida is in the Guardian program. Trained, armed protectors on the school campus that will prevent any armed active shooter from shooting any children in that school.
Amazingly, they say that the Broward County School district where the Marjory Stoneman Douglas shooting occurred, to which this program was the response, was the last one to adopt it, and they had to be forced to.
If this program prevents one child from being killed in an active shooter situation, won't this be worth it?
Watch starting at 26:58 if you want an answer to the question of 'more common-sense gun laws'.
That being said, which is an argument that has been going on for a long time, what are your objections to the Guardian program implemented by Florida?a1mamacat wrote: ↑Sun May 29, 2022 6:32 pmImmediately retire any “assault” style gun, outside of military use.
Require a license to purchase any gun.
Require a course to acquire said license.
Require at least a one week cooling off period after request to purchase said gun.
You need a license to fish, you need a license to drive, but no license to buy a mass destruction weapon?
This won’t stop the criminal element, but the spur of the moment mental health situations could be lowered.
Not perfect, but IMHO, responsible gun enthusiasts are not having any rights impinged upon. They can still buy their guns and ammo.
Do you have armed, trained people protecting you when you go into your local courthouse, bob? What do you do when they go on their frequent fits of rage?Bob78164 wrote: ↑Sun May 29, 2022 6:29 pmHow many accidental shootings, or shootings arising from a fit of rage, will be too high a price for increasing the prevalence of guns on campus? --Bobflockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑Sun May 29, 2022 6:15 pmAnother confirmed self-righteous, sanctimonious ultra-leftist whose religion is politics, our own bob (I have confirmed their pronoun as biologically male unless they wish to correct me), decided to try and trip me up by bringing the Uvalde shooting up in the 1984 thread.
Here is what they are implementing in Florida to prevent school shootings before they happen. As they state, it is to stop it from happening once there is an active shooter. The hard part is to determine what causes a person to become an active shooter and how to prevent that without making everyone else in the country into a suspect.Here, BJ, is something that will undoubtedly prevent more school shootings than any background checks.
https://youtu.be/j-Kb4XuHoKw
It is my understanding that every school in the state of Florida is in the Guardian program. Trained, armed protectors on the school campus that will prevent any armed active shooter from shooting any children in that school.
Amazingly, they say that the Broward County School district where the Marjory Stoneman Douglas shooting occurred, to which this program was the response, was the last one to adopt it, and they had to be forced to.
If this program prevents one child from being killed in an active shooter situation, won't this be worth it?
Watch starting at 26:58 if you want an answer to the question of 'more common-sense gun laws'.
Other than the facts that these programs are ineffective and actually increase the death rate at school shootings with armed guards, nothing.flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑Sun May 29, 2022 7:04 pmThat being said, which is an argument that has been going on for a long time, what are your objections to the Guardian program implemented by Florida?
There are a number of other studies to that effect. They had over a dozen police on the site in Uvalde. They had an armed security guard in Buffalo. The only groups promoting armed guards in schools are the NRA and the security companies themselves who love the extra work they get.Armed guards are now stationed at schools across the country. But do they actually protect students in active shooter incidents? A surprising new study in JAMA Network Open finds them to be ineffective. Researchers examined all U.S. shootings at K-12 schools from 1980-2019. They found that of 133 incidents, 1 in 4 had an armed guard on the scene. Not only did the presence of the armed guards not correlate with fewer injuries, but the death rate was 2.83 times greater in school shootings with armed guards.
The effect was catastrophic with assault weapons. “An armed officer on the scene was the number one factor associated with increased casualties after the perpetrators’ use of assault rifles or submachine guns,” write the authors. They suggest that officers’ weapons may increase aggression, a phenomenon called “weapons effect,” which may be further exacerbated by the fact that many school shooters are suicidal.
On this last point, the researchers insightfully “question the effectiveness” of active shooter drills, given that most would-be shooters participate in the active shooter drills, and therefore know precisely where students are hiding. The authors suggest that rather than drills and armed guards, schools need to invest resources toward preventing shootings long before the incident.
Trained armed protectors waited around in Uvalde,flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑Sun May 29, 2022 7:04 pmThat being said, which is an argument that has been going on for a long time, what are your objections to the Guardian program implemented by Florida?a1mamacat wrote: ↑Sun May 29, 2022 6:32 pmImmediately retire any “assault” style gun, outside of military use.
Require a license to purchase any gun.
Require a course to acquire said license.
Require at least a one week cooling off period after request to purchase said gun.
You need a license to fish, you need a license to drive, but no license to buy a mass destruction weapon?
This won’t stop the criminal element, but the spur of the moment mental health situations could be lowered.
Not perfect, but IMHO, responsible gun enthusiasts are not having any rights impinged upon. They can still buy their guns and ammo.
That I can agree with. But the news media pretty much has one master: the democrat party. They would have to get on that bandwagon, and I doubt they will.jaybee wrote: ↑Sun May 29, 2022 8:42 pmHow about having 100% of news media adopt a policy to release absolutely NO information about the shooter? Other than the very basic - ie: 18 year old male. Or, if they want to they can refer to the shooter as "pathetic loser". I'm pretty sure that 100% of these types of shooters are either captured quickly or killed on site. If they know going in that they are also going to die then at least some of them are doing it for their only chance of 15 minutes of nationalized fame.
So the answer to Flock's question, "If this program prevents one child from being killed in an active shooter situation, won't this be worth it?" is not if it winds up getting many more children killed in other active shooter situations as statistics show occurs.Last year, a group of public health scholars published a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association examining 133 school shootings from 1980 to 2019. An armed guard was present in about a quarter of the incidents in the study. Those schools actually suffered death rates nearly three times higher than schools without armed guards. Similarly, a 2020 review of gun policy research by the RAND Corporation think tank found no evidence that the presence of more guns had any effect on gun violence. Criminologists at Texas State University found that unarmed staff or the shooters themselves are far more likely to bring a school shooting to an end than someone with a gun returning fire.
So-called good guys with guns fail to effectively deter or end mass shootings for a variety of tactical and psychological reasons.
For one thing, it’s actually very hard to shoot straight in a situation like a mass shooting. RAND analysts have found that even highly trained NYPD officers only hit their intended target in 19 percent of gunfire exchanges. Winning a gunfight with a shooter only becomes more difficult when the perpetrator carries a semi-automatic rifle like an AR-15, as the Uvalde suspect and many others have done. These weapons have a much longer range and are far more accurate than the kinds of pistols typically used by police and civilian concealed carriers, allowing shooters to keep responders far enough away that their own weapons will be of little use. The Uvalde gunman, for instance, managed to overpower two officers whom he encountered on his way to the elementary school. In the most extreme cases, a single gunman with a semi-automatic rifle can stymie an entire SWAT team for hours: Back in 2015, a single gunman assaulting a Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood with an AK-style rifle held off police for the better part of a day before surrendering.
The idea that armed guards and teachers could deter shootings in the first place presumes mass shooters behave rationally, weighing risks, when in fact the opposite is true. As the JAMA authors noted, “many school shooters are actively suicidal, intending to die in the act, so an armed officer may be an incentive rather than a deterrent.” Considering the long odds of taking down a determined shooter equipped with an assault rifle, armed police and bystanders sometimes have difficulty motivating themselves to actually engage at all, as happened so infamously in the Parkland shooting when two sheriff’s deputies apparently hid from the gunman.
Good guys with guns fail to stop bad guys with guns in the moment because mass shootings are rare, surprising, and unpredictable events. Red flag laws are effective because mass shooters are, by contrast, pretty predictable: They almost always display clear warning signs that they are a danger to society and themselves. The Uvalde shooter was no exception: According to friends, he engaged in self-harm, shot a BB gun at strangers, and expressed a desire to kill. He also posted frequently on social media about his desire for guns. If Texas had the appropriate legal machinery in place, the people in the shooter’s life who had been so alarmed by his behavior might have had an opportunity to act before it was too late. A 2019 case study of California’s law, passed in the wake of the 2014 Isla Vista shooting, found the orders were used in 21 cases where gun owners had made credible threats of mass shootings. It’s at least conceivable that this law prevented other possible atrocities.
I'd go along with all of these as well as buy-back program. Australia implemented one and saw their gun violence rate go down by more than 50% over ten years.a1mamacat wrote: ↑Sun May 29, 2022 6:32 pmImmediately retire any “assault” style gun, outside of military use.
Require a license to purchase any gun.
Require a course to acquire said license.
Require at least a one week cooling off period after request to purchase said gun.
You need a license to fish, you need a license to drive, but no license to buy a mass destruction weapon?
This won’t stop the criminal element, but the spur of the moment mental health situations could be lowered.
Not perfect, but IMHO, responsible gun enthusiasts are not having any rights impinged upon. They can still buy their guns and ammo.