School shooting Florida

Status
Not open for further replies.
Seems I am not alone in this

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...d4d462a1921_story.html?utm_term=.0c872778b06f





I think you will find large numbers of teachers, perhaps as many as 35% who will see this as a last straw and will leave the profession rather than work in an environment where other teachers are force to carry guns. That is in a profession where there is already a shortage of numbers.

I have carried a firearm into a classroom.
A Muzzle loading 1853 Enfield rifle.
I was asked by a High School Teaacher to do my Civil War Reenactor bit for her class.
Both her and I were very careful to get permission from the school authorities and inform the local police about what was going on.
One of the very few circumstances in which firearms in a class room are permissible.
 
The NRA doesn't know when to quit:

"The National Rifle Association (NRA) today gave its Charlton Heston Courage Under Fire Award to Ajit Pai, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission."

...

"The signature achievement that helped Pai win the NRA courage award came in December when the FCC voted to eliminate net neutrality rules. The rules, ...prohibited Internet service providers from blocking and throttling lawful Internet traffic and from charging online services for prioritization.

"Schneider did not explain how eliminating net neutrality rules preserved anyone's "free speech rights."

:boggled: :eye-poppi :eek: :mad:
 
The presence of law enforcement at a school in noway meets the definition of 'prison.'

Sounds pretty close to a prison to me:

This gives a quick summary of the NRA's proposal to make schools safer through architectural design:

The NRA’s Plan to “Harden” Schools Is Terrifying

Big fence, no trees, no windows, no parking lot, ballistics glass on doors.

I have some nieces who are in elementary school and my bother told me they are not allowed to speak even during lunch. He says they are expected to act "like robots." Add armed teachers and some of the other nonsense suggested and I think that's pretty much a prison.
 
......
One of the very few circumstances in which firearms in a class room are permissible.

Interestingly, the governor of Alaska is saying on MSNBC that when he was a kid, kids would routinely take their shotguns to school and go pheasant hunting during breaks. He was making the point that circumstances vary by state and region, and there is no one size fits all solution.
 
The wall you are quoting wouldn't meet acoustic standards in schools in the UK by many a long mile. If someone farted in the corridor you'd hear it in the classroom. I suspect that fire-rating wouldn't be the critical factor in the design of such a wall, and that at the least it would be filled with insulation. Even that wouldn't bring it into compliance here, or get it anywhere near.


You suspect correctly, and what I described as a 1 hr. rated corridor partition was a simple description of the most basic elements of such a wall.

Generally, in modern schools, the studs themselves will be steel, which adds to the STC (Sound Transmission Class, which places a numerical value on the acoustical transmission properties of a partition system. Higher is better. Your equivalent in the U.K. is probably the SRI or something related to it.) compared to wood studs. These walls will be acoustically sealed (in addition to/as opposed to smoke sealed). They will have acoustical sound batts as "insulation". Sound isolating TypeX drywall can be used and such an assembly will still develop an STC in excess of 50 (54, actually). This level is described as, "Very loud sounds such as musical instruments or a stereo can be faintly heard; 99% of population not annoyed.".

This is a level deemed more than sufficient for classroom walls adjacent to corridors, which are not considered to be likely sources of continual overloud noise during the times the classrooms are in regular use. The ANSI minimum standard for a partition between a core learning space and a corridor is a STC of 45. (The scale, btw, is logarithmic.)

Designers can, of course, seek to build to higher standards, or use other strategies which may vary according to cost and other considerations. As I said, my description was simple and basic. But for the purposes of this discussion, not misleading.
 
There's another negative effect about police officers in schools, kids who would have been suspended for something are instead arrested and charged with crimes. School to prison pipeline

It's a twofur, supports the private prison industry and the gun industry.

Even better, the NRA/Trump plan of making their schools look like prisons (bullet proof glass, no windows, high fences all around, and armed wardens teachers means that these schools will feel like prisons... the kids will be already be prepared for their future surroundings.
 
I have carried a firearm into a classroom.
A Muzzle loading 1853 Enfield rifle.
I was asked by a High School Teaacher to do my Civil War Reenactor bit for her class.
Both her and I were very careful to get permission from the school authorities and inform the local police about what was going on.
One of the very few circumstances in which firearms in a class room are permissible.

When I was at school in the 70s we had a visit from the Royal Marines on a recruiting tour.
They brought A GPMG, Stirling, Browning Hi-Power and an SLR and blasted away with blanks. They even let some of us kids have a go. Great fun.
But, they were professional soldiers and it was controlled.

Our school also had an Army Cadet detachment. They had Lee Enfield Mk IVs and a Bren Gun. They were locked in the Cadet Barrack as the building was called in an armoury. In the 80s they were replaced with SA80s.

I have along with the group I was a member of been into schools in Roman Legionary gear with swords and spears along with a Viking group and Civil War re-enactors with their Matchlocks.
 
Did you miss the part about him being a sheriff's deputy for many years and a military vet? We aren't talking Mallcop here.

No, I'm working on the basis that most military vets wouldn't have used pistols in action. They are a last-ditch weapon for most war situations.

The cop might have practised and trained with pistols, but I doubt that storming a building against superior firepower with lots of innocent people was often included in the scenarios.
 
People are judging the deputy.

training is all very well but until the bullets start fying you don't know how you will react.
You hope you will perform and be as brave as you want to be but until you have been under fire you don't know.
I can understand some judgement. What I find shameful is that he was suspended without pay (prior to his resignation) while officers who go out and shoot innocent people get suspended with pay. He would have been better off going in and shooting any random kid, claiming that he thought they were reaching for a gun.
 

"This time it feels different".

I think we can safely say this has never happened before. What we need now is for a major firearms manufacturer to distance themselves from the NRA... I reckon that would be the watershed which would start a stampede


I have carried a firearm into a classroom.
A Muzzle loading 1853 Enfield rifle.
I was asked by a High School Teaacher to do my Civil War Reenactor bit for her class.
Both her and I were very careful to get permission from the school authorities and inform the local police about what was going on.
One of the very few circumstances in which firearms in a class room are permissible.

A Pattern .577 calibre? If so, I'll bet that's worth a pretty penny, maybe $1100 or more. Have you had that valued?
 
We don't know if Officer Peterson had a semi-automatic pistol or a revolver pistol. A firefight could have been semi-automatic rifle versus semi-automatic pistol. Lots of folks in this thread seem to be assuming he had a revolver but we don't really know. It seems unlikely that he would have had as much ammo as Cruz had in his backpack. For what it's worth.

The number of police forces in the US that still issue revolvers for duty cary is exceedingly low.
 
Donald Trump stokes a totally false idea on the 2nd Amendment in CPAC speech

President Donald Trump spent the last two days insisting that he was ready to find compromise on gun control measures....

...That all changed during Trump's speech Friday morning at the Conservative Political Action Conference just outside Washington. Talking about the stakes of the 2018 election, Trump said that if Democrats win back control of Congress "they'll take away your 2nd Amendment."

As he closed his speech, Trump again said Democrats want to repeal the 2nd Amendment: "They will do that, they will do that," he said.

In doing so, Trump is aping a longtime tactic of the NRA -- casting the entire gun debate as a slippery slope. Give an inch on gun control -- universal background checks, for example -- and open Pandora's box to the true motive of gun control fanatics: National gun collection.

"You should be anxious and you should be frightened," NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre told the CPAC crowd 24 hours before Trump spoke. "What they want is more restrictions on the law-abiding. They want to sweep right under the carpet the failure of school security."

This sort of all-or-nothing thinking is a massive impediment to any change -- even on something like universal background checks, which has near-unanimous support -- on gun laws.

I've been hearing this crap for 30 years, it never changes. We don't want your guns. We don't want to take them away. We never did. NOBODY IS COMING FOR YOUR DAMN GUNS! If you think that we want to, you've believed decades of lies.
 
The number of police forces in the US that still issue revolvers for duty cary is exceedingly low.
Right, but if you go back and look at the posts most people here are assuming it would be a semi-automatic against a non semi-automatic.
 
We don't know if Officer Peterson had a semi-automatic pistol or a revolver pistol. A firefight could have been semi-automatic rifle versus semi-automatic pistol. Lots of folks in this thread seem to be assuming he had a revolver but we don't really know. It seems unlikely that he would have had as much ammo as Cruz had in his backpack. For what it's worth.

I am assuming he had a pistol.

I am assuming that in a confused situation and a shooter with a "tactical vest" whether bulletproof or not, the guy with the pistol would think it was a bulletproof vest, meaning that they have a relatively inaccurate weapon that is unlikely to have the power to hit the torso so they'd have to aim for only small targets.

Meanwhile the shooter will have something that does have the accuracy and power to hit the officer. Maybe even through a bulletproof vest.
 
She has a website for her real job. One look at it would make me run directly toward voting for whatever happened to be running against her:
https://kimberlydaniels.net/


Welcome to the home of Kimberly Daniels Ministries International! By entering this site you have embarked upon an opportunity to enter into a new realm of the Spirit that will take you another level in God.

Does this mean she's running some sort of holy elevator concierge service?
 
I am assuming he had a pistol.

I am assuming that in a confused situation and a shooter with a "tactical vest" whether bulletproof or not, the guy with the pistol would think it was a bulletproof vest, meaning that they have a relatively inaccurate weapon that is unlikely to have the power to hit the torso so they'd have to aim for only small targets.

Meanwhile the shooter will have something that does have the accuracy and power to hit the officer. Maybe even through a bulletproof vest.

It really depends on the type of vest. Here is what 9x19mm does to someone wearing soft Kevlar armour, which is more common, in civilian use, than hard plate armor.



Not likely to be fatal, but very likely to get him to stop what he's doing on account of the extreme pain.
 
State legislators in Florida advance Bill HB 839 which would require every public school in Florida to display "in a conspicuous place" the state motto, "In God We Trust."

The bill's sponsor in the House, Rep. Kimberly Daniels, a Democrat from Jacksonville said "It is not a secret that we have some gun issues that need to be addressed, but the real thing that needs to be addressed are issues of the heart,"

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...hare&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social


So that's all right then.

Yeah because shootings never happen at a place where God is allowed. Like a church. :rolleyes:

Surely this violates separation of church and state.
 
I am assuming he had a pistol.

I am assuming that in a confused situation and a shooter with a "tactical vest" whether bulletproof or not, the guy with the pistol would think it was a bulletproof vest, meaning that they have a relatively inaccurate weapon that is unlikely to have the power to hit the torso so they'd have to aim for only small targets.
.....

If the vest was in fact "bulletproof" to pistol rounds, getting shot wearing one is still pretty much like getting whacked with a baseball bat. Not lethal, but temporarily disabling, especially if you're hit more than once. More important, the cop hiding outside had no way to know who the shooter was, let alone that he might be wearing a "bulletproof" vest.
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2013/10/21/painful-shot-wearing-ballistic-vest/
 
Yes he did. He wore it during the shooting and then ditched it when he walked out with the students. He ditched his rifle, his body armor and a backpack full of ammo (loaded magazines ready to go).

I cannot find any report corroborating your claim that Cruz was wearing body armor. There are several reports stating that he wore a vest, perhaps to hold magazines, that he left with his rifle in the school; but there is no indication of any kind of body armor.

The Sandy Hook shooter also wore a cloth vest with extra ammunition in it that is often misrepresented as body armor.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom