School shooting Florida

Status
Not open for further replies.
BobTheCoward said:
Murder rate has been on a decline since 1990.

It is the murder rate twice as high as Belgium that is super bad.
Click to expand...

It was the second phrase that I took issue with:

It has never been safer to be a high schooler.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schoo...ted_States#Statistics_of_historical_shootings

160 deaths in schools shooting so far this decade, as compared to 11 in the 1940's. Now if you meant their total sum of existence (ie High Schoolers can be murdered outside of school obviously), then maybe High Schools are safer now than in the late 80's or 90's when the murder rate was higher. It could be. But never safer?? Come on.
 
MikeG said:
Oh FFS.......Typical ******** IFS argument for argument's sake over irrelevant trivia.

OK, then, what difference would a semi-automatic have made in the hands of police who weren't on the scene?
Click to expand...

Am i the only one here is is old enough to remember when "automatic" was used to refer to semi-automatic handguns? It was a thing in the old Mike Hammer era, when nior Detective movies and novels were all the rage. Like this one.

"Automatic" meant semiautomatic, a full automatic would have been referred to a "machine gun".

Terms change, language evolves. Semantics is a cop out, especially in gun debates.
 
lobosrul5 said:
It was the second phrase that I took issue with:

It has never been safer to be a high schooler.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schoo...ted_States#Statistics_of_historical_shootings

160 deaths in schools shooting so far this decade, as compared to 11 in the 1940's. Now if you meant their total sum of existence (ie High Schoolers can be murdered outside of school obviously), then maybe High Schools are safer now than in the late 80's or 90's when the murder rate was higher. It could be. But never safer?? Come on.
Click to expand...


Good point. Plus I am considering things such as influenza.
 
MikeG said:
Oh FFS.......Typical ******** IFS argument for argument's sake over irrelevant trivia.

OK, then, what difference would a semi-automatic have made in the hands of police who weren't on the scene?
Click to expand...
Calm down Mike, I thought you might have thought that the Sheriff really was talking about full auto (machine gun).

In this particular incident it seems that it wouldn't have changed anything. But it's easy to imagine a slight variation of this incident where cops see Cruz stalking with his rifle and they need an accurate distance shot to put him down. At that moment they want a good rifle, not a pistol. There are other possible scenario variations where they would want/need a rifle instead of a pistol.
 
MikeG said:
Oi! You've got work to do...... ;)
Click to expand...

Yes, yes. I had that feeling of an unclosed parenthesis. :)

I'm off!

One final thought - thank god those kids were allowed to have their cell phones on them. (Some schools at least ostensibly don't permit it, and some even jam signals inside, apparently, or did in the past.) I'm sure all the people texting both their friends in the school and people outside who could help saved at least a few lives.

Who would have thunk it? Kids and their dreaded ubiquitous phone addictions may have saved the day!
 
MikeG said:
So explain why you said that murder rates have been going down since the NRA went gun-loopy (in terms).
Click to expand...

Not the main fallacy, in that all that Bob's actually doing there is allowing other people to draw the inference that correlation implies causation; one might equally well suggest that global warming has reduced the murder rate. The fact that the overall murder rate is lower does not necessarily imply that the murder rate for children of high school age is lower, so Bob actually needs to produce statistics to back up the latter assertion. My prediction is that he'll evade the question.

Dave
 
BobTheCoward said:
Good point. Plus I am considering things such as influenza.
Click to expand...

No, you're not. You've made a statement that you now realise you can't defend, so you're trying to put up a smokescreen by throwing out a point completely irrelevant to the one you were trying to make, which is that a reduced overall murder rate implies a reduced murder rate of highschool ctudents.

Dave
 
Dave Rogers said:
Not the main fallacy, in that all that Bob's actually doing there is allowing other people to draw the inference that correlation implies causation; one might equally well suggest that global warming has reduced the murder rate. The fact that the overall murder rate is lower does not necessarily imply that the murder rate for children of high school age is lower, so Bob actually needs to produce statistics to back up the latter assertion. My prediction is that he'll evade the question.

Dave
Click to expand...

See post 1161. I have said repeatedly that guns are the primary driver of higher murder rates in the US.
 
So now Wayne LaPierre is blaming Democrats. Obama, Washington DC ,Bernie Sanders, European Socialists and the FBI
 
Dave Rogers said:
Can we therefore assume that your statement that "It has never been safer to be a high schooler" is one you can't be bothered to defend?

Dave
Click to expand...

I can't fill in every year. But here is violent crime data by age from 1973 through 1994 (page 28)

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/apvsvc.pdf

And the rate for 2005, 2013, 2014, and 2015.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/424137/prevalence-rate-of-violent-crime-in-the-us-by-age/

So, you are correct. It hasn't been this safe since likely the 1950s. It is unnecessary hyperbole. (if we restrict safety to violent crime and murder).
 
Last edited:
William Parcher said:
Calm down Mike, I thought you might have thought that the Sheriff really was talking about full auto (machine gun)......
Click to expand...

For the sake of the argument I set out carefully in that post, it wouldn't have mattered if the weapon in question had been a bazooka or a longbow. You could quite clearly see what the argument was, yet chose to divert on to the pointless nit-pick over an irrelevant term rather than answer the question. I'm entitled to not giggle at that tactic.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Probably yes because a shooter could hide among the students being evacuated.
Click to expand...

Can you seriously imagine a cop actually shooting a defiant kid when they were evacuating the classrooms? Maybe whack the kid in the head or back with the rifle butt, even that seems incredibly unnecessary.

I know this kid ran out with other kids and got quite a distance away. But tell me how many of these shooters in schools hid in a classroom with other kids? I'm pretty sure it's zero.
 
Darat said:
Strongly disagree. The fact that such a thing is normalised and formalised is incredibly damaging to your society in of itself.

Kids should not be going to school thinking about what to do if one or more of their classmates start to massacre the other kids. That should be such a remote possibility that the school would be better of running drills of what to do if a meteorite is about to hit the school!
Click to expand...
Did they not have duck and cover drills in the UK when you were a kid? Bomb drills? Fire drills?

Did they make you afraid your school would be bombed? I bet kids in the UK are more afraid now of bombs given current events there.

While you can't really separate the reaction from the action, I think the shooter drills are the least of kids' worries. News of another school shooting, however, probably does make kids very fearful.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Can you seriously imagine a cop actually shooting a defiant kid when they were evacuating the classrooms? Maybe whack the kid in the head or back with the rifle butt, even that seems incredibly unnecessary.

I know this kid ran out with other kids and got quite a distance away. But tell me how many of these shooters in schools hid in a classroom with other kids? I'm pretty sure it's zero.
Click to expand...

I can easily imagine cops doing anything to anyone for any reason that they later justify (I'm quite serious). We had a state trooper fire into a van loaded with kids because their mom was confused and drove away after being stopped, and yes he knew there were kids in the car. He was not even fired.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom