That's great news. I suppose it's tough coming out and being so far behind in life; it might be too easy to give up hope and lack the incentives to do what it takes. I sure hope he knows now that the alternative to go back is no alternative at all.
Shooting
- Thread starter ProdigalHorn
- Start date
That's great news. I suppose it's tough coming out and being so far behind in life; it might be too easy to give up hope and lack the incentives to do what it takes. I sure hope he knows now that the alternative to go back is no alternative at all.
All gun free zones do is tell crazies where to go when when they want to kill. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...-pushes-to-end-gun-free-zones-in-schools.html
Yeah, but I think there is an emotional bitterness towards the target in many of these cases. In other words, it's not random and maybe unrelated to anything except their internal hatred.
As a twenty-year veteran teaching in rural, Title 1 high schools, it’s a perspective I have.
Arming classroom teachers is a galactically stupid idea. I’ve worked with teachers who I would worry about carrying a deadly weapon. Most people will lose their temper with the right stimuli being applied, and my students were masters at finding buttons.
I worried about personal items (phone, laptop, car) being stolen (don’t laugh about the car reference. It happened three times to other teachers during my time). My stress about a weapon in class would be multiplied times infinity plus three.
We need:
1. Closed campuses that are strictly enforced. Most campuses are in theory but are not staffed to be able to accomplish this. It’s harder to enter and leave my neighborhood Costco than most of the schools I’ve worked at.
2. Uniforms. This aids in identifying people who do not belong there and fosters a sense of inclusion among the students and staff.
3. Seriously go after bullies. How much was the Cruz kid picked on before he snapped? Possibly from some of the same students who are sending foul-mouthed tweets towards the GOP & NRA?
4. Parents have to get behind this. As we get precisely the type of government we deserve, communities get precisely the type of schools they deserve.
All of these represent diminished freedoms, but that historically goes hand-in-hand with times of crises.
How is this paid for? Try cutting the standardized testing budget. Possibly a curriculum advisor or other middle management position. Or God forbid the athletic budget.
I think the security for our schools should be a federal issue because they are federally funded and sure do a great job (sarcasm) of preventing the seeds of religion growing there. So why not layer it in as part of national security?
And I totally agree about policing bullying. I hate bullies.
And I totally agree about policing bullying. I hate bullies.
I say what I mean.
Acknowledged and understood.
Without face-to-face it’s difficult for me to tell sometimes.
My reply was given in the spirit of levity and not meant to give offense.
No problem. We're good. I was distracted anyway so that explains the one-liner. I figured might as well clear the air.
well, my wife's a teacher, too, and thinks it's tragic to have a substantive threat demonstrated and the answer is ... remove the guns. So, she cancels your "laughable."
your salutation is duly noted, boomer.
I can endorse these points, but there's no justification of a responsible adult being restricted from being armed anywhere.
noted is the requirement of firearm retention ... it's why corrections officers aren't armed when directly among the convicts. I get it ... but also we'll never be able to stop/limit casualties unless there is sufficient force to stop the engagement. Pencils and erasers aren't sufficient.
I also think the "anti-bully" campaign has contributed to producing more bullies.
If more 10 year old bullys had their noses punched-in by their "victims," there'd be fewer 18(+) y/o bullies (who can obtain and illegally use firearms). Fighting a student's personal fight FOR THEM doesn't allow them the opportunity to develop, either. So we produce more bullies with the "anti-bully" program ... and produce more snowflakes. Double whammy.
Arming every teacher would be "galactically stupid". I have not heard anyone proposing that. However, putting a firearm in an accessible, secure location for a 20 year veteran to use in case of a school shooting sounds pretty reasonable to me. Anyways, this point has become a distraction because it would be a secondary safeguard. The primary safeguard has to be some of the other measures you list such as securing the school perimeter. That should include armed security. Also, FBI and law enforcement need more leeway to proactively deal with these threats. This kid was flagged by several people as a threat so the system is clearly broken.
Yeah before we start locking down schools and/or arming teachers, let's start with fixing what is wrong with law enforcement when they are told about these people and do nothing.
Yep, you’re right. Mind you when I posted it was way past my bedtime and I am prone to hyperbole when I’m tired.
I just think point security should be left to trained individuals who don’t have to worry about grading & lesson plans also.
I agree but easier said than done. Let's say the FBI did follow-up with the tips it received on the shooter. What could they realistically have done to stop this incident within the bounds of current laws? I am honestly asking the question because I do not know the answer. He bought the AR legally and passed a background check. I suspect that we need to change laws to give FBI and law enforcement more leeway to handle these types of unstable people. At a minimum, the FBI should have the ability to confiscate legally purchased weapons from anyone who makes violent threats in public or social media. Possibly even allow a search of homes to confiscate illegally purchased weapons. Any of these changes are going to be met with severe resistance from the ACLU and other groups.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Here is a dissent by Justice today from the denial of cert in Silvester v. Becerra, which dealt California’s 10-day waiting period for firearms. He accuses the rest of the Court of treating the 2nd A as a "disfavored right."
https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/022018zor_fd9g.pdf#page=34
https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/022018zor_fd9g.pdf#page=34
GreenDragonSix
100+ Posts
I agree but easier said than done. Let's say the FBI did follow-up with the tips it received on the shooter. What could they realistically have done to stop this incident within the bounds of current laws?
Nothing. It's sickening upsetting.
I am honestly asking the question because I do not know the answer. He bought the AR legally and passed a background check.
Nikolaus Cruz did everything legal to purchase a firearm through a FFL dealer. He followed the law until he broke it with premeditated murder.
I suspect that we need to change laws to give FBI and law enforcement more leeway to handle these types of unstable people. At a minimum, the FBI should have the ability to confiscate legally purchased weapons from anyone who makes violent threats in public or social media. Possibly even allow a search of homes to confiscate illegally purchased weapons.
I wholeheartedly agree.
Any of these changes are going to be met with severe resistance from the ACLU and other groups.
I do not think the ACLU will have a problem with restricting firearms to ANYBODY with a mental issue. The HIPPA act is quite restricting in protecting information on health, both body & mind. This is where the ACLU has fought for and won.
Nothing. It's sickening upsetting.
I am honestly asking the question because I do not know the answer. He bought the AR legally and passed a background check.
Nikolaus Cruz did everything legal to purchase a firearm through a FFL dealer. He followed the law until he broke it with premeditated murder.
I suspect that we need to change laws to give FBI and law enforcement more leeway to handle these types of unstable people. At a minimum, the FBI should have the ability to confiscate legally purchased weapons from anyone who makes violent threats in public or social media. Possibly even allow a search of homes to confiscate illegally purchased weapons.
I wholeheartedly agree.
Any of these changes are going to be met with severe resistance from the ACLU and other groups.
I do not think the ACLU will have a problem with restricting firearms to ANYBODY with a mental issue. The HIPPA act is quite restricting in protecting information on health, both body & mind. This is where the ACLU has fought for and won.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
I was having a discussion close to this with a friend over lunch yesterday, but from a parents standpoint. Let's say you have a single parent, in this case a mom. And let's say for this example the child at issue is male. He is bigger and stronger than her. And he is a minor.
What if he just refuses to listen to her on anything? She says clean your room or get up and go to school and he replies by cussing her out. It's that way with everything -- "You cant make me, just leave me alone." Maybe he threatens her physically, or worse. What is she supposed to do with him?
She cant legally kick him out as a minor. As we have just seen, calling the police over and over does not offer a good solution either. And if she did kick him out or he left on his on, then what? I think most of the time they stay with a friend for awhile. But some just hit the streets.
I dont know how common this type of situation is. I would guess much less than 10%. But, by my estimation, this modern society we have created is producing more and more of them all the time. It's a large enough number to be concerned with right now as there can be large real world consequences. But I dont see that we presently have a good solution for these cases. And even if schools were secured (as I say they could be) it would still not provide a remedy for this growing group of misfit kids.
Even if this situation is only 1% it's the percentage of that 1% at true risk of snapping that is probably the stat too focus on. In the cold, calculated way of saying only 3,000 people died during 9/11 and we ended up starting two wars over it, it is obvious that even a very small statistical occurrence is now powerfully (galactically?) impactful because we have now entered the zero-tolerance zone.
A hand-gun, with a few clips that can be slapped in and out very quickly along with a fire alarm being pulled could easily yield the same horrific result and response around the country because of the chaos and the other failures (law enforcement follow-up; mental illness; bullying; hate-filled culture we now endure in our country). I think the focus on AR-15's, while important, is in many ways in the we gotta' do something category. I'm now seeing Trump being mocked for his recent bump stock order when bump stocks were in the public eye after Vegas. I'd never heard of one before. Now we have people on the Left even questioning the legality of the order (see excerpt from LA Times article below) because it's possible they are still smarting from accusations that Obama illegally used executive orders for political purposes. Ok, so Trump is late on the order if it is even his legal right to do so, but it's SOMETHING and it addresses some of the concerns around rapid-fire (as opposed to the other semantically problematic terms such as automatic or semi-automatic) weapons. The political response to this IN MY OPINION is part of the overall problem.
LA TIMES comment about Trump's order:
"President Trump was right Tuesday in insisting that the federal government ban "bump stocks." But there's less than meets the eye to the directive he sent to the Justice Department to rush through a new regulation, already in the works, that would ban the devices, because sure as shooting there will be a legal challenge that probably will succeed. That's why this problem needs to be addressed by Congress in the form of a more expansive law barring devices crafted by creative gun makers to circumvent the intent of federal gun laws."
bystander say's: It's interesting that they think it needs to be addressed by Congress but I wonder if they agreed when Trump said the Dreamer situation must be addressed by Congress. I always look for the consistency from the media. That's how you ferret out the good-faith arguments from the political.
Last edited:
Then you may not like the CNN commentator that just popped off about "how it may be time" that we have live auditors reviewing FB, twitter, etc to make sure these conspirator videos and posts are removed in real time.
I'm not defending the conspiracy posters out there but it is a prime example of how the left is ok with restricting speech when it goes against their values, but only when it goes against THEIR beliefs/values.
At least I'm for **** canning facebook, twitter and the ilk altogether. No one can use it...Left or right...I think the damage it has done, has far outweighed the benefits.
Last edited:
I wonder if they have thought about removing all the "I wish all NRA members/gun owners would die" comments I keep seeing. Probably not.
OUBubba
5,000+ Posts
Ramses was prophetic about certain twitter feeds...
4th_floor
Dude, where's my laptop?
Most of the best have been able to escape in the last 180 years or so.
So let it be written, so let it be done.
4th_floor
Dude, where's my laptop?
How many firearms are in her school now? Would she allow an armed cop in her school?
OUBubba
5,000+ Posts
Of course. Armed police would be great if you could afford it. The place in Florida had two armed security. Didn't help.
OUBubba
5,000+ Posts
Well played.
Weekly Prediction Contest
* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC
Recent Threads
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
-
President Biden Accountability Thread
- Started by 2003TexasGrad
- Replies: 4K
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
