School shooting Florida

Status
Not open for further replies.
You know, this is such a stupid question that I had to restart my answer several times. Where do you think the discussion is going if you just strawman me after my first reply to you? I think you should ask yourself why you went for misrepresentation and baiting rather than discussion.

Also, I'm having trouble thinking of a culture whose movies contain no violence. Violence, murder, deception, danger - these make for interesting plot devices.

I do think movies reflect a society's values to some degree, but I don't think something as broad as "includes violence" counts. Much more telling is which sorts of characters are constructed as "good guys" and "bad guys" within the stories.
 
I can't tell you that this is a very good critique of Myriad's post. Perhaps pointing out where he goes wrong would help?

1)If the idea expressed in the post were true, then we would expect Israel to be the haven of private gun ownership. It is not.

2)If the USA was heavily influenced by the experience european refugees, we would expect a refugees welcome attitude together with a pro-gun attitude.
The US refused entry to many jews seeking to flee persecution in Germany who were later murdered. See the story of the St.Louis for a stark example.

3)Only a few hundred thousand of the 6 million murdered in the holocaust were german citizens. As such, almost all of the victims were heavily defended by organized resistance armed with proper weapons: Tanks, artillery, planes, bunkers, etc...
Someone who suggests that loose gun laws would have prevented the holocaust either has either a)no idea or b) they believe that private gun ownership is a more effective ways of a fighting wars than actual armies.
 
Is there a problem with men? Yes. Will that offend some men? The truth hurts, I guess.
There is a dirty way to spin it around and blame women.

Men are born to their mothers who are women. These women are responsible for raising their male children to be good and peaceful human beings - not violent criminals and not murderers.

The truth hurts, but women have dropped the ball. Yes, there is a problem with women.

I'm not saying I believe that. I'm just showing something similar to what you show that blames an entire gender for violent crime. And I don't want a thread derail.
 
Also, I'm having trouble thinking of a culture whose movies contain no violence. Violence, murder, deception, danger - these make for interesting plot devices.

I do think movies reflect a society's values to some degree [snip]

Of course. I didn't say they didn't, or imply it, which is why Fudbucker's response is so silly. Instead of responding to what I actually wrote, he extrapolated another opinion from it than the one I hold, and then assumed he interpreted right and answered that. The essence of the strawman.
 
There's a generational shift going on here. That's why the anti-gun backlash "feels different" this time. It may or may not have any different immediate results, but it's the trend for the foreseeable future.

Despite all the talk about the Founding Fathers, there's an aspect of the present gun control issue in the U.S. that's largely rooted in 20th century European and Asian history; specifically, its genocides of relatively unarmed populations. My father's generation was acutely aware of it; many of the immigrants of that generation and the previous one came to the U.S. to flee it. That represented, not necessarily a bloc of gun owners or enthusiasts, but people on the sidelines of that generation and the next, who felt they had, and in some cases still feel they have, an adequate reason to accept the costs and risks of having a well-armed citizenry.

A case in point: the only firearm my own father ever owned was a collector's piece that he inherited late in his life, and he kept it disassembled and never attempted to fire it. Yet I heard him say this, more than once: "If every Jew in Europe had met the Gestapo at the front door with a gun in his hand..."

He didn't finish that sentence. The implication was that the extremes of the Holocaust might have been prevented, although surely such armed resistance would still have been suicidal and there would still have been a bloodbath of some sort. But then, it's plausible that if such a massacre occurred in one neighborhood, the next neighborhood due to be visited might organize a more effective form of armed resistance. As people have pointed out in this thread, such resistance wouldn't be effective in a straight battle against a country's armed forces, but in this case, and as will often be the case in such times of civil upheaval, those forces were busy elsewhere. Ultimately, a genocide (or invasion, occupation, coup, etc.) might be made too costly to sustain, or to contemplate in the first place.

Now we’re seeing a generational shift. To the kids in the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, the menace of NKVD or Gestapo agents with uniforms and pistols pounding on every front door on your block in the middle of the night is nearly as historically remote as the menace of Napoleon’s armies marching in formation across your farms with muskets and cavalry would have been to my parents’ generation. Understandably, they see instead the risks and costs of an armed citizenry, that have played out right before their eyes.

Sooner or later it will be their choice to make. All we can do is help make sure they have the knowledge to make that choice an informed one.

Nommed

This is one of the most sensible posts anywhere that I've seen on this issue. The kids of this generation that have experienced this and recent school spree shootings are the children of the generation that experienced Columbine almost 20 years ago. Its a generation that has grown up with with these incidents being part of their lives

Columbine
Virginia Tech
Thurtsin High
Westside Middle School
Red lake Senior
Sandy Hook
North Illinois U
Oikus U

There is a generational change taking place, and the Millennials are going to have things their way. It make take years, but they aren't going to let this crap continue happen; dinosaurs like Nugent and LePierre will be swept away.
 
There is a dirty way to spin it around and blame women.

Men are born to their mothers who are women. These women are responsible for raising their male children to be good and peaceful human beings - not violent criminals and not murderers.

The truth hurts, but women have dropped the ball. Yes, there is a problem with women.

I'm not saying I believe that. I'm just showing something similar to what you show that blames an entire gender for violent crime. And I don't want a thread derail.

Pretty weak. You realize men have fathers as well as mothers, right? The blame, if there is any to be shared, would fall on both shoulders.

And if mothers are "dropping the ball so much", why aren't there more violent women? Or are the mothers who "drop the ball" only giving birth to sons?

You really think men have no culpability in this problem? That it's some kind of statistical fluke? Who starts wars, who perpetrates genocide, in what society are men treated as second class citizens by women? You think the rampant misogyny we're seeing on a daily basis is women's fault? You think "toxic masculinity" is something SJW's just came up with in a vacuum?
 
Last edited:
Men are killers. Hunters, warriors. It's in our blood (by which I mean genes). It's not a problem, most of the time. Sometimes it is a problem.
Anyway .. ok, men cause more trouble. How does that relate to anything ?
 
Is it? Seriously, I've never heard of anyone doing this. Not saying you're wrong.

It is indeed. Air rifle is popular because an indoor short range can be used.
22 rifle is also popular as an indoor range is only 25 yards long.
My old Sea Cadet unit had an indoor 25 yard range as did the Army Cadets and the local TA Headquarters in the town.
There are three target shooting clubs in the area that cater for air weapons and firearms.

Surprisingly there are a good number of pubs with shooting ranges as well.
 
Armed sheriff’s deputy stayed outside Florida school while mass killing took place

Washington Post said:
The armed school resource officer assigned to protect students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School took a defensive position outside the school and did not enter the building while the shooter was killing students and teachers inside with an AR-15 assault-style rifle, Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel said Thursday.

Israel suspended School Resource Deputy Scot Peterson on Thursday after seeing a video from the Parkland, Fla. school that showed Peterson outside the school building where the shooter was inside and attacking.

“What I saw was a deputy arrive at the west side of Building 12, take up a position, and never went in,” Israel said.

He said Peterson was armed, and was in uniform, and should have gone into the building during the 6-minute event, which left 17 people, most of them teenagers, dead. When asked what the deputy should have done, Israel said: “Went in and addressed the killer. Kill the killer.”

Peterson, 54, a resource officer at the school since 2009, resigned after Israel suspended him. Israel said two other officers have been placed on a restricted assignment pending an internal investigation relating the school shooting.

“They could have done more, they should have done more,” Israel said. “It’s a fluid investigation. They are on restrictive duty.”....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-florida-school-while-mass-killing-took-place
 
So much for the good guy with a gun and arming teachers. :mad:

B.S. All this shows is that the school resource person was a coward. In the past, everyone waited for SWAT to arrive, however, experience has proven that when the cowardly killers are confronted they generally don't fight an equal (someone with a weapon). They stop and flee.

Had he entered the building and allowed the killer to see him (even without a shot being fired) the death toll could have been less...
 
Last edited:
Depends on the bullet, quite literally.

And the wall material. Standard wallboard walls can be penetrated with a .22. Concrete blocks or brick generally will not be penetrated by a single round of .223, however, NATO 855 (62 grains) in some cases may penetrate after multiple rounds.
 
You know, this is such a stupid question that I had to restart my answer several times. Where do you think the discussion is going if you just strawman me after my first reply to you? I think you should ask yourself why you went for misrepresentation and baiting rather than discussion.

Name me a society in which entertainment with lots of violence has NOT been popular....

Shakespeare, for instance is full of over the top violence....

Anyway, there is a huge difference between saying that movies reflect a culture and saying movies directly cause violence....
 
Last edited:
What a fine example of courage this guy was.......

That's actually common argument against random armed person going around. They won't have the guts. They won't feel the need to get involved. It's also generally discouraged in self-defense classes. You carry the gun to defend yourself and your family. Also most of the defensive gun use do not include firing the gun. You are threatened .. you show you have a gun .. the attacker backs off. Some people even recommend carrying unloaded gun for people, who are afraid of carrying live one.

With teachers in the actual class, that might be different. Some of them will use their own bodies to block the shots. They are motivated enough, that's not the problem. I mean if I were teacher in US school, I would certainly rather had a gun. I mean I would prefer living in save country, but with current state of things ?

This guy failed horribly. But he was alone, probably not well trained, and probably confused about the situation, and probably first time in situation like that. There is reason why cops patrol in pairs.
Certainly single armed guard is not the solution, much less if everybody knows about him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom