Miami school shooting

[red_slr]

Reports coming through of serious shooting in FL.

Fox news running it live, not on Sky yet.

[red_slr]

Secondary scene about 2 miles away from the school. Suspected to be the shooters home address.

[red_slr]

Male taken into custody at the second scene. Looks about 18 years old.

[red_slr]

FN2TypeR said:

If only the teachers were armed; this wouldn't happen then!

Some schools do now allow teachers to conceal carry.

[red_slr]

Gunman confirmed arrested.

[red_slr]

The school system is very different though in the US. For starters there are a lot more "young adults" and also most of the young drug mules and young gang bangers are all school age.

Miami is pretty bad for gang violence and its not uncommon for kids to start out in a gang at 12 or 13. Being in a gang in the US is totally different to the UK.

So its difficult for us to comprehend how their lives work.

[red_slr]

red_slr said:

The school system is very different though in the US. For starters there are a lot more "young adults" and also most of the young drug mules and young gang bangers are all school age.

Miami is pretty bad for gang violence and its not uncommon for kids to start out in a gang at 12 or 13. Being in a gang in the US is totally different to the UK.

So its difficult for us to comprehend how their lives work.

By the way I am not saying this one was gang related, he was just a mentalist. But a lot of the school shootings are gang and drug related.

[red_slr]

p1stonhead said:

Presumably a shotgun? No one is talking about how dangerous shotguns are. Thats not what is used in these types of shootings.

My sentence should have been - [these types of] guns do not. I assumed people would get that.

You do know you can have an AR15 in the UK right? Ok not semi auto in centre fire (only straight pull or lever release (at the moment)) but you can have an AR15 in .22 Magnum which is a pretty hot round and whilst not on a par range wise with .223 at close range its got serious stopping power.

[red_slr]

Coolbanana said:

I could have purchased an AR-15 for $800 new last year when I was in Houston for my sister. That is entirely wrong.

Its not as easy as it once was. Many states have clamped down or introduced firearms licences.

A lot of the loop holes for buying guns without checks are being closed.

Some states are really going hard on gun laws, New York, California and Connecticut all have laws similar to the UK.

[red_slr]

Matt Harper said:

Gun shows allow pretty much anyone to buy pretty much anything. Pretty ridiculous really.

They closed that loop hole now, you have to do fed check and 3 day wait. Some counties 5 days.

Its only F2F sales that are not regulated.

[red_slr]

TTmonkey said:

The owners no longer have the right to buy ammunition for them, and most have run out of ammo for them. The government recovered over 99% of the ammunition previously issued for these ex service weapons and no longer allows it to be purchased widely and uncontrolled. The government does encourage use of these weapons at ranges and allows purchase of ammunition for this purpose. Were it Is purchased, it must be used at a range and cannot be taken home. In circumstances of national emergency, the ammo will be issued from central controlled resources.

I am not sure I trust their figures on ammo! I have seen people shooting old govt issue ammo.. little brown boxes 50 rounds at a time..

I was under the impression that for normal people (hunters and target shooters) there is no issue with ammo being kept at home, just has to be kept like in the UK.

I thought the restriction on ammo was placed on military guys. So you come out of the army and buy your rifle you then have legal authority to own that rifle however in order to shoot it you have to go to a range and shoot range ammo and then leave without any spare ammo. Where as a licence holder for private purposes has a similar slot on their licence for ammo that we have here and all ammo purchases are recorded, just like here?

Or have I got the wrong end of the stick?

[red_slr]

I think there are 2 classes of firearms owners over there, in broad terms. (they also have CCW, armed guards etc)

Ex military who can own their ex service rifle without a licence. AFAIK they are the ones who can only shoot at a range with ammo purchased there.

The other class is like the UK, normal people who shoot for sports. Hunters and target shooters. I think they apply for their licence and then can buy and store ammo at home.

That's as I understand it. Could be wrong though!

[red_slr]

You can either be military or civilian.

Military require no permit.

Civilian need no permit for hunting rifles or target rifles which are bolt action or straight pull. If you want to buy a semi automatic or pistol then you can but you need a licence. Just like in this country.

[red_slr]

Very bad show that they are blaming this guy IMHO.

[red_slr]

Dr Jekyll said:

La Liga said:

he UK police are exceptionally unlikely to face any serious firearms like an AR-15.

Why?

Because there are very few firearms in the UK and those that do own have been through the process to acquire said firearms so have been checked out. Their doctors are aware they are firearms owners. They are monitored for strange behaviour by other members of their club etc etc. Centre fire semi automatic rifles are banned so rates of fire are (generally) lower. As such the armed police are unlikely to go straight up 1 on 1 with an nutter with an AR15 doing mag dumps.

I would also go as far as to say our armed police are, in some situations, better trained than many US officers. Our armed police have one job to do, and that's to be an armed officer who responds to situations where firearms may be involved. US officers have to do all the other normal stuff police officers do, they just happen to carry a firearm. Also our armed police are often better equipped than US officers. Their vehicles are armoured which is a massive plus, they carry long guns as standard with plenty of ammo, they have ballistic shields, advanced medical equipment and are always in pairs, sometimes 3s or even more. That's the key part.

A cop who has been put on a cushy number to see out his retirement with a pistol and a couple of mags is going to really have his work cut out against someone with a long gun and lots of ammo and a death wish.

[red_slr]

andy_s said:

True, adapting from a standard 'gunman siege' response to an 'immediate ongoing attack' response.

Their real test will come if we do get some proper combat hardened folks who want to do real damage and running AKs etc i.e ISIS etal.
I hope it never comes to that as I expect it will be a much harder fight that most people think as we have seen over the water in France. You could be talking an hour to get some proper back up in some places and most likely coming by air by which time they have moved on.

Luck plays a massive part in these incidents.

[red_slr]

Without googling anyone care to guess how many of the 6,000 deaths, on average, are rifles and how many are pistols?

[red_slr]

What percentage though?

[red_slr]

If memory serves me rightly 95% of deaths were handguns. The other 5% were rifles (think they put shotguns in there too).

"Assault rifles" accounted for 2%.

I just thought this was interesting and gives a slightly different angle on what many Brits would think. IMHO.

[red_slr]

DurianIceCream said:

red_slr said:

Without googling anyone care to guess how many of the 6,000 deaths, on average, are rifles and how many are pistols?

I'd guess over 80% handguns. No Google involved.

It was 95% as per post on previous page.