School shooting Florida

[William Parcher]

You can indeed find stores in America that sell food and ammo/guns all over the place.

Those may be known as superstores or supercenters or department stores. But it's misleading (particularly for an international reading audience) to talk about a grocery store selling guns and ammo. That's because a
grocery store is specific for selling food.

 

[jimbob]

Turn schools into fortresses so that whack jobs can roam the streets with modified military weapons? Gonna go with 'no' on that proposal.

Restrict rapid fire high capacity weapons to those who pass additional licensing/background checks? Yeah, still rolling with that.

Indeed.

What happens when the next school shooting occurs when the kids are outside playing? Ban that?

 

[crescent]

Indeed.

What happens when the next school shooting occurs when the kids are outside playing? Ban that?

In addition to "duck and cover", they will also be trained in "dig foxholes".

 

[Dr. Keith]

Turn schools into fortresses so that whack jobs can roam the streets with modified military weapons? Gonna go with 'no' on that proposal.

Restrict rapid fire high capacity weapons to those who pass additional licensing/background checks? Yeah, still rolling with that.

Your priorities match mine. I don't want to live in a walled off society like the rich parts of a Mexican manufacturing town. I want to live in an open society where my front door is welcoming and my front lawn is designed around aesthetic considerations, not defensive. I'd like the same for my public buildings and schools.

 

[William Parcher]

Hard to identify them, and when you do, hard to do much about it. We can restrict their ability to easily acquire mass murdering tools, though.

There is something of a contradiction in your statements. You say they are hard to identify and then that you can still restrict their ability to buy guns.

You can't really restrict those guys until you can identify them. Somehow we need to be able to identify criminally insane people and prevent them from getting access to dangerous things - all sorts of dangerous things that can hurt innocent people and also themselves.

When those people are hospitalized or incarcerated or intensively supervised they are specifically prevented from accessing all forms of dangerous things. Somehow we have to get to identifying these insane people but I don't know how.

 

[jimbob]

Your priorities match mine. I don't want to live in a walled off society like the rich parts of a Mexican manufacturing town. I want to live in an open society where my front door is welcoming and my front lawn is designed around aesthetic considerations, not defensive. I'd like the same for my public buildings and schools.

I'd like to know the health impact of the NRA's proposals. It's quite possible that it would be negative in terms of life expectency

 

[Thermal]

In addition to "duck and cover", they will also be trained in "dig foxholes".

No, no, no! The solution is always more guns! Teach those candy ass young 'uns how to properly pop a cap in a brother. Might as well get 'em used to bullets flying. That way they grow up to concealed carry and sleep in cold fear with a 9 under their pillow.

 

[Thermal]

Your priorities match mine. I don't want to live in a walled off society like the rich parts of a Mexican manufacturing town. I want to live in an open society where my front door is welcoming and my front lawn is designed around aesthetic considerations, not defensive. I'd like the same for my public buildings and schools.

Amen. Preparing for shootouts out of fear of others carrying weapons is too fearful a way to live. Always surprised that that argument is raised.

 

[crescent]

No, no, no! The solution is always more guns! Teach those candy ass young 'uns how to properly pop a cap in a brother. Might as well get 'em used to bullets flying. That way they grow up to concealed carry and sleep in cold fear with a 9 under their pillow.

I was going to suggest training them in light infantry tactics and strategy. In Elementary school they just learn some basics like the use of light automatic weapons, suppressive fire to cover movement, overlapping fields of fire, maybe some of the smaller sizes of mortars. Nothing too complex, just enough to slow down an enemy until the High School Battallion can get there and relieve them.

By the time they get older, each High School should be able to operate as an independent infantry battalion, with some armored vehicles, signals/intelligence, anti-armor guided missiles, and such. The bigger schools may also have anti-aircraft capability and a handful of attack and troop transport helicopters.

It seems the only way to be safe.

 

[Dr. Keith]

Amen. Preparing for shootouts out of fear of others carrying weapons is too fearful a way to live. Always surprised that that argument is raised.

I lived in a neighborhood that had some crime. The lock would get broken off our shed and some tools stolen. I'd calculate whether it was worth making a claim and replace the lock. I think I may have added a motion activated light.

What I didn't do is spend my nights planning an ambush for the stupid SOB who broke into my shed so I could blast his ass the next time he stepped onto my property. Things just aren't that important to me.

And in that neighborhood with fairly high break-in rates the only violence was typically between family members or at the liquor store. I went to a liquor store a bit outside the neighborhood on the recommendation of my neighbor, a local police officer.

 

[phiwum]

Accident or burglary just waiting to happen.

Perhaps, but I grew up in a home where my father stored rifles in my bedroom closet and under my bed. This was the 1970s, and though I knew where the ammunition was stored, I never considered misusing a gun.

Times change and he eventually went to a gun safe. What seemed perfectly reasonable at one time is not so reasonable today.

 

[Thermal]

There is something of a contradiction in your statements. You say they are hard to identify and then that you can still restrict their ability to buy guns.

You can't really restrict those guys until you can identify them. Somehow we need to be able to identify criminally insane people and prevent them from getting access to dangerous things - all sorts of dangerous things that can hurt innocent people and also themselves.

When those people are hospitalized or incarcerated or intensively supervised they are specifically prevented from accessing all forms of dangerous things. Somehow we have to get to identifying these insane people but I don't know how.

Its not really a contradiction; they are tough to identify, and when you can, its tough to do much. So make all owners jump through the hoops, essentially proving their competence up front. This of course is where the NRA gets up in arms about infringement. I would argue that it would not be infringing on able owners, while reducing threat via regulation as acknowledged in DC v Heller. The NRA worries about how to vett objectively, and that is a valid concern. Dead schoolchildren should be a great incentive to come to an agreement on the 'how' problem.

 

[Thermal]

Perhaps, but I grew up in a home where my father stored rifles in my bedroom closet and under my bed. This was the 1970s, and though I knew where the ammunition was stored, I never considered misusing a gun.

Times change and he eventually went to a gun safe. What seemed perfectly reasonable at one time is not so reasonable today.

Yes, but on top if the fridge? I would assume that meant a handgun, and further assume loaded (or why have it there?). Little too cavalier with safety for my tastes

 

[jimbob]

Perhaps, but I grew up in a home where my father stored rifles in my bedroom closet and under my bed. This was the 1970s, and though I knew where the ammunition was stored, I never considered misusing a gun.

Times change and he eventually went to a gun safe. What seemed perfectly reasonable at one time is not so reasonable today.

Well it's a percentage game. It's just that if even 0.1% of the people who store guns like that have one occasion a year where their gun gets picked up by the wrong person and accidentally fired by a kid, it's a potential tragedy waiting to happen.

The thing is that most of the time - lots of accidents often have many near-misses beforehand, where not everything went wrong so the worst consequences were avoided. Every so often, the dice all roll the wrong way, though

Its not really a contradiction; they are tough to identify, and when you can, its tough to do much. So make all owners jump through the hoops, essentially proving their competence up front. This of course is where the NRA gets up in arms about infringement. I would argue that it would not be infringing on able owners, while reducing threat via regulation as acknowledged in DC v Heller. The NRA worries about how to vett objectively, and that is a valid concern. Dead schoolchildren should be a great incentive to come to an agreement on the 'how' problem.

Indeed. And just because you can't spot all dangerous people, it doesn't mean that you shouldn't try to prevent the most obviously-dangerous people from getting hold of firearms.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Indeed.

What happens when the next school shooting occurs when the kids are outside playing? Ban that?

Or shooting up the parking lot or the kids coming and going.

 

[Dr. Keith]

Its not really a contradiction; they are tough to identify, and when you can, its tough to do much. So make all owners jump through the hoops, essentially proving their competence up front. This of course is where the NRA gets up in arms about infringement. I would argue that it would not be infringing on able owners, while reducing threat via regulation as acknowledged in DC v Heller. The NRA worries about how to vett objectively, and that is a valid concern. Dead schoolchildren should be a great incentive to come to an agreement on the 'how' problem.

Agree generally, but really like the highlighted. Even if it is a bit "think of the children".

 

[jimbob]

Or shooting up the parking lot or the kids coming and going.

It's OK, the C130s can land inside the perimeter disgorging kids straight to their bunkers with only a short time when they are exposed to NVA artillery.

 

[Thermal]

Agree generally, but really like the highlighted. Even if it is a bit "think of the children".

Yes, it is fairly a bit of an appeal to emotion. Up thread, it was cited that 150,000 schoolchildren have been exposed to school shootings. For me, that raises the argument into shocking the conscience territory

 

[mgidm86]

I was going to suggest training them in light infantry tactics and strategy. In Elementary school they just learn some basics like the use of light automatic weapons, suppressive fire to cover movement, overlapping fields of fire, maybe some of the smaller sizes of mortars. Nothing too complex, just enough to slow down an enemy until the High School Battallion can get there and relieve them.

By the time they get older, each High School should be able to operate as an independent infantry battalion, with some armored vehicles, signals/intelligence, anti-armor guided missiles, and such. The bigger schools may also have anti-aircraft capability and a handful of attack and troop transport helicopters.

It seems the only way to be safe.

Call Of Duty games in every classroom.

 

[Thermal]

Well it's a percentage game. It's just that if even 0.1% of the people who store guns like that have one occasion a year where their gun gets picked up by the wrong person and accidentally fired by a kid, it's a potential tragedy waiting to happen.

The thing is that most of the time - lots of accidents often have many near-misses beforehand, where not everything went wrong so the worst consequences were avoided. Every so often, the dice all roll the wrong way, though



Indeed. And just because you can't spot all dangerous people, it doesn't mean that you shouldn't try to prevent the most obviously-dangerous people from getting hold of firearms.

The argument about who would be deemed not fit is a tough one. Based on convictions, or are repeated police reports enough? The Pulse nightclub shooter, IIRC, had a clean background, but was seen to become unhinged. Could people reporting odd behavior warrant suspension of gun use? The objectivity problem kicks in again. But you are right, some people are already over the line, as Cruz was, and it should not be so Herculean a task to nip guys like that in the bud