School shooting Florida

[Andy_Ross]

No, I didn't just pull my opinion out of my arse. I lived in Norfolk Co. for three years, on the outskirts of the village of Watton. I also traversed the Stanford PTA twice daily (that's a heavily wooded military training area). I am highly skeptical of your claims regarding harvested animals.

I had many friends and was active in the community, but I never witnessed nor discussed a firearm in private ownership, so again I'm skeptical of your claims...

I assure you in my part of the country there are plenty of shotguns and rifles used for hunting and pest control.
That doesn't include all the target rifles that are owned. I have owned several myself over the years, a semi auto 22, a Lee Enfield Mk 4 and a 22 Target rifle.
There are several target shooting and clay shooting clubs in the area.

 

[phiwum]

Bald assertion not in evidence.

I'm not firm on gun control or even assault weapons bans, but what about the highlighted assertion is doubtful? The cops were surely outgunned, unless they had similar weapons, weren't they?

They had, one would hope, better training. Is that your point?

 

[surrogate]

As others have already posted, I would like to know how to divine if someone is a "good guy with a gun" without them having been in a mass shooting situation. For those pushing the deadly automobile analogy, would you support gun regulations equivalent to driving & owning a car? I had to take a written exam and road test to get a drivers license, have to register my car every year as well as have it inspected every other year, and carry liability insurance for every vehicle I own.

 

[phiwum]

Just remember there might come a day when you need us heathen Americans again just like you did a couple of times in the last Century. There is a down side to disarming the populace.

I wasn't aware that American militias were a central part of the two world wars. Surely, our abundant natural resources played a more significant role?

 

[Reheat]

I'm not firm on gun control or even assault weapons bans, but what about the highlighted assertion is doubtful? The cops were surely outgunned, unless they had similar weapons, weren't they?

They had, one would hope, better training. Is that your point?

As I've said before in a pistol versus rifle fight the rifle ought to win all other factors being equal. However, in this case it was a teenager with a rifle (he likely hadn't trained with) versus and ex military Sherriff's Deputy who should know more about tactics to better even the odds.

 

[TJM]

Do I know if he specifically somehow managed to weasel out of the training for one of the main facets of his job? No.

But if you’re hanging some larger point on presuming he didn’t have this training, I’d say that’s a bad bet. Especially considering he was basically fired for not doing what he was expected to.

But by all means, roll with that. He had no idea what to do. Right.

Bottom line is you don't know.

Thanks.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Give me a product that isn't a weapon you would accept in analogy.

If you find yourself unwilling it could say something about your willingness to debate in Good faith.

How is using a bad analogy moving the debate forward?

Guns have one function, shoot bullets. Who or what you aim it at is a debatable aspect. How you do or don't regulate guns is a debatable aspect.

You can debate how much focus and resources one should apply to gun deaths when automobiles cause a large number of deaths.

You can discuss the aspects of licensing cars and guns, there are some analogies there.


The analogy I object to is the one I pointed out, the purpose of a gun and the purpose of a vehicle are not analogous. Falsely equating the two is not a legit avenue of debate if you don't acknowledge that.

 

[Pterodactyl]

Bottom line is you don't know.

Thanks.

basic sro training. Googled in 2 seconds.

https://nasro.org/basic-sro-course/

In order to provide a safe learning environment, schools and SROs must be prepared for numerous types of emergency situations on campus from a violent intruder to inclement weather.

Do you have some evidence this particular agency doesn’t conduct basic training and then fires officers for not acting according to training?

Ridiculous series of posts you have going here. You ought to be embarrassed, honestly. Waste of everyone’s time.

 

[Dr.Sid]

Well .. IMHO all was pretty much said. Like 20 times. In this thread alone.

It's really all about what is going to happen. The protest movement seems to be larger than before. NRA is loosing supporters .. but mainly because they feel NRA is actually not enough pro-gun. It seems lot's of people thinks this time it's different. But is it ?

 

[Craig B]

Who's desperate and pushing an agenda? The police were definitely (in part) responsible. From the FBI, to State mental health authorities, to the local Sheriff's Department missed signs that should have alerted then to the danger this jerk posed. I don't see anything desperate about stating facts. But, that doesn't fit with your "be like us" agenda.

I know you're pretty proud of the fact that the UK has essentially disarmed. How could anyone miss that fact with their noses being rubbed in it over and over again in not such a nice way.

Just remember there might come a day when you need us heathen Americans again just like you did a couple of times in the last Century. There is a down side to disarming the populace.

My understanding is that the US forces received the requisite military training when they enlisted, as did the military of other countries. It was not an "armed populace" any more than the British Army was an armed populace. Are you therefore telling us that if gun laws in the US were more like those of other countries, the USA would be useless as an ally? I find such a suggestion insulting to the USA.

 

[Grizzly Adams]

In that scenario there is no function for the police at all, is there? In fact there is no function for any "entity" except the armed individual.

Of course there is a function for the police. But the police are, obviously, not omnipresent and, even when they are there, you can't rely on them to do anything to save you. The responsibility for saving you is, ultimately, your own. Unless the state is willing to take on the responsibility of protecting everyone, the notion that we should disarm ourselves is asinine.

 

[Grizzly Adams]

Yes, stop people having guns.

A: Where did you get your magic wand?

B: When people have no guns, how does a person defend herself from a knife-wielding rapist?

 

[Grizzly Adams]

Taking your approach to its illogical conclusion, it would be worse than the dark ages, when warriors had to take elaborate precautions to ensure they weren't jumped if they came across someone new. At least in those times, one only had to worry about someone within a few feet not line of sight.

Except it wouldn't be worse than the dark ages because it isn't now.

 

[TJM]

basic sro training. Googled in 2 seconds.

https://nasro.org/basic-sro-course/

And?

Do you have some evidence this particular agency doesn’t conduct basic training and then fires officers for not acting according to training?

Do you have some evidence I'm claiming this?

Ridiculous series of posts you have going here. You ought to be embarrassed, honestly. Waste of everyone’s time.

And yet, here you are.

 

[Giz]

I wasn't aware that American militias were a central part of the two world wars. Surely, our abundant natural resources played a more significant role?

Well, there was:

———
After the fall of France and the Dunkirk evacuation in 1940, Britain found itself short of arms for island defense. The Home Guard was forced to drill with canes, umbrellas, spears, pikes, and clubs. When citizens could find a gun, it was generally a sporting shotgun, which was ill-suited for most types of military use because of its short range and bulky ammunition. British government advertisements in United States newspapers and in magazines such as American Rifleman begged readers to "Send A Gun to Defend a British Home--British civilians, faced with threat of invasion, desperately need arms for the defense of their homes." The ads pleaded for "Pistols, Rifles, Revolvers, Shotguns and Binoculars from American civilians who wish to answer the call and aid in defense of British homes."[77] As

Prime Minister Winston Churchill's book Their Finest Hour details the arrival of the shipments. Churchill personally supervised the deliveries to ensure that they were sent on fast ships, and distributed first to Home Guard members in coastal zones. Churchill thought that the American donations (p.418)were "entirely on a different level from anything we have transported across the Atlantic except for the Canadian division itself." Churchill warned an advisor that "the loss of these rifles and field-guns [if the transport ships were sunk by Nazi submarines] would be a disaster of the first order." He later recalled that "[w]hen the ships from America approached our shores with their priceless arms, special trains were waiting in all the ports to receive their cargoes." "The Home Guard in every county, in every town, in every village, sat up all through the night to receive them .... By the end of July we were an armed nation ... a lot of our men and some women had weapons in their hands."

———

 

[Grizzly Adams]

If having a gun in the house is an effective means of self defence why do insurance rates go up and not down when you have on? Is it because actuaries have proven that you’re far, far more likely to shoot yourself or a family member than someone attacking you?

I don't know what insurance company you have, but the only thing my guns have to do with my insurance rates is the fact that I have them covered in addition to whatever other amount of coverage I have. In other words, I pay $X per month for $Y of coverage, but pay $A extra because I also have an additional $B of coverage for firearms.

 

[bruto]

What was he trained or expected to do in this kind of situation? Unless he was trained to counter a school shooter, then I would not expect him to live up to anyone's expectations if they assumed he would enter the school and subdue the shooter.

Excuse me if this quick thread has outpaced my answer, but while I do not dispute the basic idea that the guard could not be expected to do this, I wonder then what is the point of having a guard? If it's just for the deterrent effect of having a guard visible, then perhaps they should hire a couple more, and save money by not giving them real guns.

 

[Grizzly Adams]

I think one should add that the 'good guy with a gun' hero is a fantasy and needs to be stated as such.

You seem to be under the faulty impression that the fact that this shooter wasn't stopped by a "good guy with a gun" then that means no shooter will be stopped by a "good guy with a gun." Which is demonstrably false.

As for the government, lets call that for what it is as well, it's the voters.

Fine. The voters didn't rush in and save anyone, either. You shouldn't rely on the voters to protect you.

Better?

 

[lobosrul5]

Excuse me if this quick thread has outpaced my answer, but while I do not dispute the basic idea that the guard could not be expected to do this, I wonder then what is the point of having a guard? If it's just for the deterrent effect of having a guard visible, then perhaps they should hire a couple more, and save money by not giving them real guns.

They could've saved a lot of money by paying for a $12/hour guard. Rather than an actual police offer (which he was) about 3 or 4 times that when you factor in his pension and benefits.

 

[Lurch]

Who's desperate and pushing an agenda? The police were definitely (in part) responsible. From the FBI, to State mental health authorities, to the local Sheriff's Department missed signs that should have alerted then to the danger this jerk posed. I don't see anything desperate about stating facts. But, that doesn't fit with your "be like us" agenda.

I know you're pretty proud of the fact that the UK has essentially disarmed. How could anyone miss that fact with their noses being rubbed in it over and over again in not such a nice way.

Just remember there might come a day when you need us heathen Americans again just like you did a couple of times in the last Century. There is a down side to disarming the populace.

That last paragraph; what a doozie! I'm speechless against what shall remain unsaid...