How about adding to that making it a criminal offense to allow your weapon to fall into the hands of children, including your own? You could wrap that up in all sorts of caveats (making an exception for kids at licensed shooting ranges, for instance). The designed effect would be to encourage people to store their guns safely at home, in a place where children couldn't get to them. This as an alternative to a registration scheme with safe storage requirements and police checks, which some people would resist.
School shooting Florida
- Thread starter Darat
- Start date
- Status
How about adding to that making it a criminal offense to allow your weapon to fall into the hands of children, including your own? You could wrap that up in all sorts of caveats (making an exception for kids at licensed shooting ranges, for instance). The designed effect would be to encourage people to store their guns safely at home, in a place where children couldn't get to them. This as an alternative to a registration scheme with safe storage requirements and police checks, which some people would resist.
Here's your raw data. How about you draw the graph, then come back to us?
Thing is, that site you linked to thinks it worth omitting a killing spree if only 3 people died. I mean, what's 3 schoolkids in the scheme of things, hey?
Last edited:
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
No, there isn't, or at least none that anyone other than complete idiots take seriously.
"The Left wants to take away everyone's guns" is the Big Lie that the NRA, ultra rightists and other paranoid delusional morons keep repeating over an over in a Goebbels-esque attempt to have people believe it.
Thermal
August Member
That's a good idea. Its funny, I don't often think about requiring safe storage at home because it was so automatic for me, I take it as a given that an owner would never leave a firearm laying around easily accessible. Some others, not so much I suppose.
Actually I think that is what I said in the first place. Maybe I was not clear enough when I first replied re. comparisons with target shooting?
But I suspect some here have got far too "hung up" on what I had to say about the original or essential/basic underlying reason for why people shoot at targets.
What I said about that, or what I meant about that (to spell it out) is - we are talking about gun owners in the US who use their guns to shoot targets. And everyone is agreeing that is an entirely harmless pursuit as far as it goes, i.e. as long as it is only ever targets that will be shot at ... but that is of course precisely the problem! ... because for a small but very deadly proportion of those target-shooters, it does not turn out to be just targets that they end up shooting!
Afaik virtually none of those people who are shooting at targets are using relatively harmless weapons that are made just to shoot at paper targets. They are not using paint-ball guns for example. Afaik, almost all of them (maybe literally all of them?) are using guns that are specifically designed to be lethal weapons made for the specific purpose of killing people! The fact those same guns can be used to shoot paper targets is completely irrelevant … they are still designed as deadly weapons.
For that small proportion of US gun owners who do become killers, when they also shoot at targets, what they are doing is deliberately practicing to become more accurate with a deadly weapon. And for that small proportion, their target shooting practice does then become their preparation for what ends up with them using the self-same guns and putting their shooting practice/skills/prepartion to use in killing people.
Steve
Penultimate Amazing
Arm the teachers!!! Suuure.
The Florida school had an armed police officer who was presumably there for the purpose of protecting the kids. When the kids needed that protection he stayed out of harms way and listened to them being shot. There are some here who argue that was the correct thing to do because of protocols and training. Also, he was worried that he might be "out-gunned".
So what will be the training and protocols for armed teachers? Will they be expected to stay and return fire, where the professional would not? Or will they similarly be told to stay out of harms way, especially if they think that might be out-gunned?
There is something seriously ********** up about an argument that can support armed teachers and simultaneously think that the guard did the right thing. If you cannot expect an armed professional to do the job he is there for there can be no expectations for teachers to put them selves in harms way.
That is one seriously screwed up country!
The Florida school had an armed police officer who was presumably there for the purpose of protecting the kids. When the kids needed that protection he stayed out of harms way and listened to them being shot. There are some here who argue that was the correct thing to do because of protocols and training. Also, he was worried that he might be "out-gunned".
So what will be the training and protocols for armed teachers? Will they be expected to stay and return fire, where the professional would not? Or will they similarly be told to stay out of harms way, especially if they think that might be out-gunned?
There is something seriously ********** up about an argument that can support armed teachers and simultaneously think that the guard did the right thing. If you cannot expect an armed professional to do the job he is there for there can be no expectations for teachers to put them selves in harms way.
That is one seriously screwed up country!
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
Great way to cherry pick the statistics to fit their theory; only count those school shootings where more than some arbitrary number have to die, so as to remove all those inconvenient data points that don't fit the narrative.
Unfortunately for Allie & Lia, when you include ALL of the school shootings, a very different picture emerges...
More than half school shootings in the last 23 years happened in the last five years
More than half the school kids killed in school shootings in the last 23 years were killed in the last eight years
You don't have to be a maths whiz to see that this is anything but a downward trend.
Last edited:
That's not the way it works around here. Anyone who comes up with an opinion or an idea gets torn to shreds, or nit-picked into oblivion. Are you sure you're on the right forum?
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2005
- Messages
- 27,487
Did Peterson say that? I didn't see that quote from him.
Steve
Penultimate Amazing
No. Allow me to clarify:
"There are some here who argue that was the correct thing to do because of protocols and training. Also, they argue that he was worried that he might be "out-gunned".
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2006
- Messages
- 54,545
How else are you supposed to defend against home invaders? If it is not out it might as well be elsewhere. Guns strewn around the home is fairly normal.
Thermal
August Member
'Normal'.
I really can't picture firing agun in my home. The odds of shooting something or someone unintended are so high that I would never fire inside. Hell, a bullet could travel easily through walls and over to my neighbor's place. I really don't get what scenarios the home defense crew are envisioning.
Typically it does fall under child endangerment statutes. In practice it is rarely enforced because the only time it becomes apparent to the police is when someone has died or been seriously injured. At that point we get the "haven't they suffered enough" logic that prevents the responsible adult from being punished under the law.
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2012
- Messages
- 16,222
According to this study
http://news.northeastern.edu/2018/0...e-safest-places-for-children-researcher-says/
"Since 1996, there have been ... 8 are mass shootings, or incidents involving 4 or more deaths, excluding the assailant."
But, according to this list, mass shootings (4 or more dead) in schools (including colleges and universities and some which included others being shot, such as family members as well as going to the school) since 1990;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_the_United_States#1990s
March 24, 1998 Craighead County, Arkansas
May 21, 1998 Springfield, Oregon
April 20, 1999 Littleton, Colorado
October 28, 2002 Tucson, Arizona
March 21, 2005 Red Lake, Minnesota
October 2, 2006 Nickel Mines, Pennsylvania
April 16, 2007 Blacksburg, Virginia
February 14, 2008 DeKalb, Illinois
April 2, 2012 Oakland, California
December 14, 2012 Newtown, Connecticut
June 7, 2013 Santa Monica, California
October 24, 2014 Marysville, Washington
October 1, 2015 Roseburg, Oregon
November 14, 2017 Rancho Tehama Reserve, California
February 14, 2018 Parkland, Florida
That is 15, or near double the original claim.
http://news.northeastern.edu/2018/0...e-safest-places-for-children-researcher-says/
"Since 1996, there have been ... 8 are mass shootings, or incidents involving 4 or more deaths, excluding the assailant."
But, according to this list, mass shootings (4 or more dead) in schools (including colleges and universities and some which included others being shot, such as family members as well as going to the school) since 1990;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_the_United_States#1990s
March 24, 1998 Craighead County, Arkansas
May 21, 1998 Springfield, Oregon
April 20, 1999 Littleton, Colorado
October 28, 2002 Tucson, Arizona
March 21, 2005 Red Lake, Minnesota
October 2, 2006 Nickel Mines, Pennsylvania
April 16, 2007 Blacksburg, Virginia
February 14, 2008 DeKalb, Illinois
April 2, 2012 Oakland, California
December 14, 2012 Newtown, Connecticut
June 7, 2013 Santa Monica, California
October 24, 2014 Marysville, Washington
October 1, 2015 Roseburg, Oregon
November 14, 2017 Rancho Tehama Reserve, California
February 14, 2018 Parkland, Florida
That is 15, or near double the original claim.
alfaniner
Penultimate Amazing
Watching The PDJT and the senators trying to hash out a bill. I'm slightly amused because it appears that the senators appear very aware that the only way to get The PDJT's attention and approval is to suck up to him.
"It's going to be all up to you, sir!"
And he sits back and beams smugly.
"It's going to be all up to you, sir!"
And he sits back and beams smugly.
His words would magically mean something other than the thing he actually said. And many, many Republicans would accept that and give him a pass on it.
Steve
Penultimate Amazing
Sarah Huckabee Sanders: "You heard incorrectly. He actually said that he has no desire to take anyone's guns"
Trump supporters: " Damned liberal media fake news, distorting his words like that!"
- Status