Gun Issues page 3

2293 posts

Flag Post
Meanwhile on the side of common sense we have the fact that elementary schools are already lockdown zones. Nobody gets in or out once school starts, without being known by and trusted by the staff. They have to be a parent, a school official or a law enforcement officer with identification.

I feel like most schools have the policy that visitors must check-in before they can actually enter the school. The problem is that schools have so many interests and the office (at least in my high school) wasn’t exactly near any of the entrances. It’s really good in theory, but logistically really hard in practice.

On a side note, it wouldn’t matter much in this instance as the killer was the son of one of the teachers.

EDIT: Looks like they tried this sorts of measures: http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/12/14/newtown-conn-school-district-had-recently-installed-new-safety-protocols/

 
Flag Post

The guy that did it is 24 years old. He has been identified, but not sure what the policies would be about me putting his name here. Apparently he entered the school and fired shots at the principal’s office then went to the classroom where his mother was the teacher and pretty much killed everyone in the room. It was a kindergarten class.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by issendorf:

EDIT: Looks like they tried this sorts of measures: http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/12/14/newtown-conn-school-district-had-recently-installed-new-safety-protocols/

Yea, but then you run into the same problem: He was the son of one of the teaching staff, so well known (and likely trusted) by the school. There’s very little you can do to prepare yourself for when a trusted person goes off the rails.

There is further security they could have enacted – you know me and my love of tech. But just because they could, doesn’t mean they will.

Sniffers are my favorite. Electronic bloodhounds that pick up the faint traces of gunpowder in the air. Place outside the doors, secure the windows. If there’s the chemical signal of a gun present, automatic locks don’t allow the door to be opened unless done from inside. The peron inside is WARNED by the system that a gun is present.

not perfect, but in cases such as this, would let the staff know that this supposedly trustworthy individual is carrying a deadly weapon into the school, before they actually get the chance to shoot any kids with it.

Placing an office at the main entrance, and regulting all external traffic to go through that office would help as well. We don’t need someone with an assault rifle standing there. I mean an assault rifle, really? But a security officer trained both in school affairs and in dealing with troublesome individuals would be a good idea.

In normal school life you’re going to get deranged parents, and uncontrollable kids, so you need someone to help remove them from the premises. It would solve multiple problems at once.

Originally posted by jim_vierling:

The guy that did it is 24 years old. He has been identified, but not sure what the policies would be about me putting his name here.

Ryan Lanza. Looks like he was out to kill his mother, and anyone who got in the way. The BBC reported a male body was found at a house associated with him, which looks to be his father.

 
Flag Post
Sniffers are my favorite. Electronic bloodhounds that pick up the faint traces of gunpowder in the air. Place outside the doors, secure the windows. If there’s the chemical signal of a gun present, automatic locks don’t allow the door to be opened unless done from inside. The peron inside is WARNED by the system that a gun is present.

not perfect, but in cases such as this, would let the staff know that this supposedly trustworthy individual is carrying a deadly weapon into the school, before they actually get the chance to shoot any kids with it.

This is actually a really good idea, especially because it could be linked into the nearest police authority. As soon as it is triggers, police could be dispatched immediately. I guess the only question I would have is the cost to purchase the unit and maintain the unit. Are these still in the early stages of development or could they begin to be implemented on a large-scale that’s not terribly costly?

Placing an office at the main entrance, and regulting all external traffic to go through that office would help as well. We don’t need someone with an assault rifle standing there. I mean an assault rifle, really? But a security officer trained both in school affairs and in dealing with troublesome individuals would be a good idea.

Absolutely. I have to imagine there are enough retired police officers who would be willing to do something like this as 99.99% of the time nothing will happen and would be a relatively easy job to do. Although I think it’s a better idea to have the guard armed since someone like Lanza isn’t going to be talked down from doing what he did.

 
Flag Post

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/15/nyregion/shooting-reported-at-connecticut-elementary-school.html?_r=0 More info. The Suspect killed his mother and brother, as well as all the students and teachers.

 
Flag Post

I actually think many schools have a security officer of some sort or another. (Some are armed, others are not.)

Overall, this is a terrible tragedy. Unfortunately, if a man is willing to die to kill others, it is very difficult to stop him.

God help us all.

 
Flag Post
Although I think it’s a better idea to have the guard armed since someone like Lanza isn’t going to be talked down from doing what he did.

lol! so what even better armed person is going to keep an eye on your armed guard in case HE goes nuts?

 
Flag Post

Here in Pakistan, we have atleast one guard on each entrance with a shotgun in colleges and universities. With few on standby.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by OmegaDoom:
Although I think it’s a better idea to have the guard armed since someone like Lanza isn’t going to be talked down from doing what he did.

lol! so what even better armed person is going to keep an eye on your armed guard in case HE goes nuts?

So your idea is to have no protection? I’m sure the power of words will work wonders in stopping a shooter from slaughtering large numbers of people.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by OmegaDoom:
Although I think it’s a better idea to have the guard armed since someone like Lanza isn’t going to be talked down from doing what he did.

lol! so what even better armed person is going to keep an eye on your armed guard in case HE goes nuts?

Hey, theres a whole country of people and theres a better chance one of them is going to go nuts and kill people than the few gaurds that you hired

 
Flag Post

Good work, America. You’ve done it again. Regulate your guns or keep getting people dead; it’s your choice. To all western world countries except you it is an obvious one.

Now people might be pissed at this post. What I’m pissed off about is 27 people dying in yet another shooting. The likelihood of their dying in a gun-regulated society is much, much smaller. And even in societies with guns such as Russia, even they don’t get near half as many shootings. It’s time to actually act upon this whole thing, America.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

Here in Pakistan, we have atleast one guard on each entrance with a shotgun in colleges and universities. With few on standby.

No offense, but those regions in the Middle East don’t seem to have the most level headed people. Even the U.S. shootings don’t hold a candle to their bombings and seemingly regular violence; perhaps armed guards at those insitutions are needed. It’s not like it could get much worse.

 
Flag Post

Hmm, why do they need armed guards? Oh, I don’t know, maybe because of the drones the United States has regularly in Pakistan, and consequentially the constant civil unrest? The U.S. fucked up Pakistan, as per usual with America. Previously seen in: Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Kuwait, Palestine, Chile, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, etc. The United States implants their wanted regimes in lesser countries and does what they want with those countries. I wish they taught that in “U.S. History”, but that would not fit in with the patriotic agenda.

 
Flag Post

Nothing will happen. A memorial may be held, and we’ll mourn as a nation, but nothing will change. We lead the world in school massacres, and have for a while. We all will say something needs to change, but none of us will make any efforts other than saying change needs to happen, because we’re hypocritical pieces of shit. We don’t know what to do, so we discuss it while it’s socially relevant, pretending that what we do will effect change. It won’t. We won’t effect new laws or strive to better our community for any time longer than a week.

That’s the American way, and it’s pathetic. Our lives in the future will remain unaltered. Chalk another tragedy up for our death statistics! Maybe some day, in the distant future, our nation will learn that action is required for change, rather than incessantly bickering about irrelevant topics. We’re America. We’re special.

Every single person able to vote, including each and every one of you shares the blame for events like this. We find ourselves in complacence, not giving a shit about the affairs of America until socially relevant tragedies strike, and then drifting back to complacency when the social relevance dissipates, waiting for the next thing to harp on. You guys don’t give a true shit, and neither do I. What’s that? I’m wrong? You do give a shit? Okay, begin volunteering in your community to effect change, progressive change.

Here’s to waiting for the next tragic event with you social scavengers! Scavengers is a fantastic noun to use, because you harp all over this social stuff whenever someone dies.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by issendorf:
Originally posted by OmegaDoom:
Although I think it’s a better idea to have the guard armed since someone like Lanza isn’t going to be talked down from doing what he did.

lol! so what even better armed person is going to keep an eye on your armed guard in case HE goes nuts?

So your idea is to have no protection? I’m sure the power of words will work wonders in stopping a shooter from slaughtering large numbers of people.

Originally posted by stormtrooper261:
Originally posted by OmegaDoom:
Although I think it’s a better idea to have the guard armed since someone like Lanza isn’t going to be talked down from doing what he did.

lol! so what even better armed person is going to keep an eye on your armed guard in case HE goes nuts?

Hey, theres a whole country of people and theres a better chance one of them is going to go nuts and kill people than the few gaurds that you hired

OMG HIDE!!!!!!1

dudes, seriously. what you’re saying is that you can’t have safe situations, but you can, i know you can. my entire country was shocked when we did have a spree shooter a few years ago in Alphen aan den Rijn, he killed seven people, but really it just never happens. i would dare to walk any street, any night, any time, by myself, unarmed, even naked, and pretty much have no fear at all.

your paranoia is amuzing. i feel so privilaged.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by DarkBaron:


Here’s to waiting for the next tragic event with you social scavengers! Scavengers is a fantastic noun to use, because you harp all over this social stuff whenever someone dies.

Calm down, Maddox. Save your exasperated outrage for just one or two worthies.

OMG HIDE!!!!!!1

dudes, seriously. what you’re saying is that you can’t have safe situations, but you can, i know you can. my entire country [that is, the netherlands] was shocked when we did have a spree shooter a few years ago in Alphen aan den Rijn, he killed seven people, but really it just never happens. i would dare to walk any street, any night, any time, by myself, unarmed, even naked, and pretty much have no fear at all.

your paranoia is amuzing. i feel so privilaged.

Case in point. Note that he is seriously comparing America’s gun problems with his own country, which has one of the lowest incidences of crime in Europe. Indeed, he should feel so privileged.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by JaumeBG:

Good work, America. You’ve done it again. Regulate your guns or keep getting people dead; it’s your choice. To all western world countries except you it is an obvious one.

Now people might be pissed at this post. What I’m pissed off about is 27 people dying in yet another shooting. The likelihood of their dying in a gun-regulated society is much, much smaller. And even in societies with guns such as Russia, even they don’t get near half as many shootings. It’s time to actually act upon this whole thing, America.

Guns are regulated somewhat. However, I’ll hear you out – what are the specifics on how you’d handle guns?

Also, your facts seem somewhat off. For example, Russians don’t really own that many guns. Also, the Swiss own tons of guns but have little gun crime. Perhaps you mean something mroe specific with the term “regulate” though.

Finally, it’s fine that incidents like these spur discussions on gun laws. However, we need to be careful to not overreact in the heat of the moment and instead we need to take a level-headed look at what would and would not reduce violence.

The event horrified me. It’s an awful thing that should never happen. Still, when people use something like this to push political points it disgusts me a little.

 
Flag Post

Let me give you a couple of points to consider. First, schools are gun free zones in the states. Effectively, this gives someone wanting to kill large masses of people a place where they don’t have to worry about someone shooting back. The theater shooting also had a ban of firearms carriers in the theater. Every place these shootings happen, it is some type of gun free zone. Is it any wonder that these nut-jobs gravitate toward gun free zones?

Have any of you noticed that these shooters are all either in their late teens or early twenties? This makes me wonder if this has a meaning we should be searching for.

 
Flag Post
The event horrified me. It’s an awful thing that should never happen. Still, when people use something like this to push political points it disgusts me a little.

The only reason I’m saying that guns should be regulated somewhat is because I want less people to die in America because of all these shootings you guys have. This is not about politics; this is about human lives. I don’t want any more teachers to die, I don’t want any more children to die, I don’t want any more human beings to die in events like these which are regular in America.

I’m sick and tired of seeing at least 3 news reports per month about another American shooting. It’s frustrating, and with all this gun regulation dated seemingly from 1776… well no, you will not have a safe society. Bob, this is not about politics, and don’t accuse me of making this political; I merely want less people to die. And less people will die if less people have access to being able to commit shootings like these.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:

Let me give you a couple of points to consider. First, schools are gun free zones in the states. Effectively, this gives someone wanting to kill large masses of people a place where they don’t have to worry about someone shooting back. The theater shooting also had a ban of firearms carriers in the theater. Every place these shootings happen, it is some type of gun free zone. Is it any wonder that these nut-jobs gravitate toward gun free zones?

Have any of you noticed that these shooters are all either in their late teens or early twenties? This makes me wonder if this has a meaning we should be searching for.

1. What? why would you even want the school to not be a gun-free zone?
2. same thing, why would you want the theatre to not be a gun-free zone?
YOU DONT NEED GUNS FOR THOSE AREAS!

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:

Let me give you a couple of points to consider. First, schools are gun free zones in the states. Effectively, this gives someone wanting to kill large masses of people a place where they don’t have to worry about someone shooting back. The theater shooting also had a ban of firearms carriers in the theater. Every place these shootings happen, it is some type of gun free zone. Is it any wonder that these nut-jobs gravitate toward gun free zones?

Have any of you noticed that these shooters are all either in their late teens or early twenties? This makes me wonder if this has a meaning we should be searching for.

Yeah, how about not letting people who are ‘nut jobs’ or in their late teens/early twenties have access to firearms!

That could be one point to construe from your argument.

 
Flag Post
1. What? why would you even want the school to not be a gun-free zone?
2. same thing, why would you want the theatre to not be a gun-free zone?
YOU DONT NEED GUNS FOR THOSE AREAS!

Because sane people aren’t going to open up fire on others there. Insane people who want to shoot up the theater will, regardless if its a gun-free zone or not. At least permitting guns allows the rest of the theater to protect themselves.

 
Flag Post
The only reason I’m saying that guns should be regulated somewhat is because I want less people to die in America because of all these shootings you guys have. This is not about politics; this is about human lives.

Gun control has become inherently political in this country. The Democrats and the Republicans both have it as part of their party platforms. It’s a bit unfortunate, but there’s no way to talk about guns in this country that isn’t political.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by issendorf:
1. What? why would you even want the school to not be a gun-free zone?
2. same thing, why would you want the theatre to not be a gun-free zone?
YOU DONT NEED GUNS FOR THOSE AREAS!

Because sane people aren’t going to open up fire on others there. Insane people who want to shoot up the theater will, regardless if its a gun-free zone or not. At least permitting guns allows the rest of the theater to protect themselves.

Or cause a massive chaos with bullets flying everywhere.
You can’t expect everyone to be highly competent with guns, especially kids in schools.



Originally posted by jhco50:

Have any of you noticed that these shooters are all either in their late teens or early twenties? This makes me wonder if this has a meaning we should be searching for.

Maybe you could think about that for a second and get the answer for that yourself.
Here a few pointers:
Puberty, a deciding timespan in people’s lives with rapidly changing environments (jobs, studying, moving around), experiences and emotions, stress, a feeling of loneliness and not finding an opportunity to take your time and just relax…

Honestly, I’d be surprised if it was not this age that was prone to such outbursts.

 
This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator