Miami school shooting

[Halmyre]

frankenstein12 said:

Byker28i said:

frankenstein12 said:

Not perfect but a decent compromise to the idea of having either none or all which seems to be about the present mindset.

Quoted as seriously I cannot believe you wrote that.

Go read this article
https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...land-should-...

Link does not work.

You can disbelieve all you want. The reality FACT of the matter is you will not stop nutters gaining access to these types of weapons whether you restrict access or ban them. There are just too many of them in the US. There are something like 2 guns for every person in the US.

As such as much as it sucks the only realistic to try reduce death tolls in school shootings barring turning schools into fortressess/virtual prisons for students is to arm teachers.

Edited by frankenstein12 on Friday 23 February 17:17

Sit down and have a think about how long it would take for the teachers to make their way to the gun cabinet, unlock it (who sets off the gun alert?) and tool up. In the meanwhile the assailant is running around shooting up the place. Oh, and he set the fire alarm off so presumably everyone was outside or on their way outside.

[DurianIceCream]

Halmyre said:

Sit down and have a think about how long it would take for the teachers to make their way to the gun cabinet, unlock it (who sets off the gun alert?) and tool up. In the meanwhile the assailant is running around shooting up the place. Oh, and he set the fire alarm off so presumably everyone was outside or on their way outside.

You can get a gun cabinet you can open in seconds. That's a side topic: arming teachers is really admitting abject failure. There must be better solutions.

[frankenstein12]

zippy3x said:

frankenstein12 said:

Yes I am "The Idiot" for suggesting a "safe" practical midway solution to the issue as part of the solution.

Your response is the EXACT reason these sorts of massacres will continue because rather than looking for compromise solutions you simply take a standard line of guns are bad anyone who suggests anything else is an idiot to be disregarded.

Well Done.

Maybe your ideas would have been better received had you not started with the "handguns are as lethal as assault rifles" bks

Question : having read the article linked, and taking two minutes to ask why every combat soldier in the world is given an assault rifle instead of a couple of pistols, do you still think that they are equally lethal?

That article is froma nurse/doctor. Yes Rifle bullets are substantiallly faster normally than pistol rounds. That factors into the nature of the injury HOWEVER pistols can have extremely damaging rounds loaded into them as well and depending on the gun can have very high velocity fire as well.

The point is all guns are dangerous and capable of killing people and singling out machine guns as the problem and banning them or simply bringing in tighter rules is not and will not solve the problem of school shootings.

Unfortunately I have realised after my last post that I cannot research into the finer details on this issue due to my work. It may not be an issue but I dont want to take that risk.

Edited by frankenstein12 on Friday 23 February 18:36

[frankenstein12]

Halmyre said:

frankenstein12 said:

Byker28i said:

frankenstein12 said:

Not perfect but a decent compromise to the idea of having either none or all which seems to be about the present mindset.

Quoted as seriously I cannot believe you wrote that.

Go read this article
https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...land-should-...

Link does not work.

You can disbelieve all you want. The reality FACT of the matter is you will not stop nutters gaining access to these types of weapons whether you restrict access or ban them. There are just too many of them in the US. There are something like 2 guns for every person in the US.

As such as much as it sucks the only realistic to try reduce death tolls in school shootings barring turning schools into fortressess/virtual prisons for students is to arm teachers.

Edited by frankenstein12 on Friday 23 February 17:17

Sit down and have a think about how long it would take for the teachers to make their way to the gun cabinet, unlock it (who sets off the gun alert?) and tool up. In the meanwhile the assailant is running around shooting up the place. Oh, and he set the fire alarm off so presumably everyone was outside or on their way outside.

Ok so your response to reduce the threat to schools/soft targets is? And lets be realistic here since there is no way at all they can ban guns in the US due to the second amendment.

[frankenstein12]

DurianIceCream said:

Halmyre said:

Sit down and have a think about how long it would take for the teachers to make their way to the gun cabinet, unlock it (who sets off the gun alert?) and tool up. In the meanwhile the assailant is running around shooting up the place. Oh, and he set the fire alarm off so presumably everyone was outside or on their way outside.

You can get a gun cabinet you can open in seconds. That's a side topic: arming teachers is really admitting abject failure. There must be better solutions.

Such as?

[simo1863]

DurianIceCream said:

22 rimfires are still deadly, they just aren't drop dead instantly deadly. You might expire a half hour later. I think if you Google up Hoddle Street Massacre, that was done with a 22 rimfire.

Going off topic here as it was originally about if someone could get their hands on something as deadly as an AR15 in the UK (which they can't) but..... if the Florida or Vegas shooters had a 22 instead of their AR15s (as is the direct comparison being made, as in legal semi automatics in the UK vs US) then the casualties would have been much much lower.

Whilst a 22 is lethal, a single bullet isn't going to tumble through multiple bodied and cause much of a bullet cavity like a 556 will..... and certainly won't kill past about 100-120 yards.... certainly that's about my limit with rabbits but I've not tried much further.

[TTmonkey]

Them school kids was well protected in the 60's.....

[andy_s]

DurianIceCream said:

22 rimfires are still deadly, they just aren't drop dead instantly deadly. You might expire a half hour later. I think if you Google up Hoddle Street Massacre, that was done with a 22 rimfire.

[icekiller] Subsonic .22 is good to the head with a suppressor as it rattles around the brain cavity [/icekiller]

You're much more likely to survive a .22 than a 5.56 round though - the 5.56 was developed to replace the 7.62 NATO so it had to be effective in combat. Cavitation and tumbling etc.

[StephenGalley]

frankenstein12 said:

DurianIceCream said:

Halmyre said:

Sit down and have a think about how long it would take for the teachers to make their way to the gun cabinet, unlock it (who sets off the gun alert?) and tool up. In the meanwhile the assailant is running around shooting up the place. Oh, and he set the fire alarm off so presumably everyone was outside or on their way outside.

You can get a gun cabinet you can open in seconds. That's a side topic: arming teachers is really admitting abject failure. There must be better solutions.

Such as?

Arming and training teachers and/or security guards is being considered and it is a good idea, at least there will be people who can shoot back so the shooter can't do whatever they want. They have armed guards at banks etc., how much more important are our children?

There are hundreds of millions of guns in the U.S.A., the bad guys will always have them, that is why the good people have to have them also so they can protect themselves and their family against any bad guys on equal terms.

Edited by StephenGalley on Friday 23 February 18:59

[Halmyre]

frankenstein12 said:

Halmyre said:

frankenstein12 said:

Byker28i said:

frankenstein12 said:

Not perfect but a decent compromise to the idea of having either none or all which seems to be about the present mindset.

Quoted as seriously I cannot believe you wrote that.

Go read this article
https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...land-should-...

Link does not work.

You can disbelieve all you want. The reality FACT of the matter is you will not stop nutters gaining access to these types of weapons whether you restrict access or ban them. There are just too many of them in the US. There are something like 2 guns for every person in the US.

As such as much as it sucks the only realistic to try reduce death tolls in school shootings barring turning schools into fortressess/virtual prisons for students is to arm teachers.

Edited by frankenstein12 on Friday 23 February 17:17

Sit down and have a think about how long it would take for the teachers to make their way to the gun cabinet, unlock it (who sets off the gun alert?) and tool up. In the meanwhile the assailant is running around shooting up the place. Oh, and he set the fire alarm off so presumably everyone was outside or on their way outside.

Ok so your response to reduce the threat to schools/soft targets is? And lets be realistic here since there is no way at all they can ban guns in the US due to the second amendment.

Your 'solution' panders to the standard wk-fantasy of steely-eyed sharpshooters taking down the bad guy with precise and accurate shooting. Won't happen.

[StephenGalley]

Halmyre said:

frankenstein12 said:

Halmyre said:

frankenstein12 said:

Byker28i said:

frankenstein12 said:

Not perfect but a decent compromise to the idea of having either none or all which seems to be about the present mindset.

Quoted as seriously I cannot believe you wrote that.

Go read this article
https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...land-should-...

Link does not work.

You can disbelieve all you want. The reality FACT of the matter is you will not stop nutters gaining access to these types of weapons whether you restrict access or ban them. There are just too many of them in the US. There are something like 2 guns for every person in the US.

As such as much as it sucks the only realistic to try reduce death tolls in school shootings barring turning schools into fortressess/virtual prisons for students is to arm teachers.

Edited by frankenstein12 on Friday 23 February 17:17

Sit down and have a think about how long it would take for the teachers to make their way to the gun cabinet, unlock it (who sets off the gun alert?) and tool up. In the meanwhile the assailant is running around shooting up the place. Oh, and he set the fire alarm off so presumably everyone was outside or on their way outside.

Ok so your response to reduce the threat to schools/soft targets is? And lets be realistic here since there is no way at all they can ban guns in the US due to the second amendment.

Your 'solution' panders to the standard wk-fantasy of steely-eyed sharpshooters taking down the bad guy with precise and accurate shooting. Won't happen.

Can happen and does happen, a member of the public shot that shooter not long ago. There are countless cases of this happening in the U.S.A.

Your "solution" is to to let the bad guy run wild without being shot back at. Which makes more sense?

[Ructions]

frankenstein12 said:

There are something like 2 guns for every person in the US.

I've been reading elsewhere that 3% of Americans own half the gun stock in the US.

[mike9009]

frankenstein12 said:

Ok so your response to reduce the threat to schools/soft targets is? And lets be realistic here since there is no way at all they can ban guns in the US due to the second amendment.

Have you checked the 13th and 21st Amendments?

[DurianIceCream]

Ructions said:

I've been reading elsewhere that 3% of Americans own half the gun stock in the US.

About 1.5% of Brits own 100% of the UK guns.

[frankenstein12]

Halmyre said:

frankenstein12 said:

Halmyre said:

frankenstein12 said:

Byker28i said:

frankenstein12 said:

Not perfect but a decent compromise to the idea of having either none or all which seems to be about the present mindset.

Quoted as seriously I cannot believe you wrote that.

Go read this article
https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...land-should-...

Link does not work.

You can disbelieve all you want. The reality FACT of the matter is you will not stop nutters gaining access to these types of weapons whether you restrict access or ban them. There are just too many of them in the US. There are something like 2 guns for every person in the US.

As such as much as it sucks the only realistic to try reduce death tolls in school shootings barring turning schools into fortressess/virtual prisons for students is to arm teachers.

Edited by frankenstein12 on Friday 23 February 17:17

Sit down and have a think about how long it would take for the teachers to make their way to the gun cabinet, unlock it (who sets off the gun alert?) and tool up. In the meanwhile the assailant is running around shooting up the place. Oh, and he set the fire alarm off so presumably everyone was outside or on their way outside.

Ok so your response to reduce the threat to schools/soft targets is? And lets be realistic here since there is no way at all they can ban guns in the US due to the second amendment.

Your 'solution' panders to the standard wk-fantasy of steely-eyed sharpshooters taking down the bad guy with precise and accurate shooting. Won't happen.

So you dont have any solutions? Ok then why are you criticising my suggestion which is a damn sight better than most that have been made by Trump etc which involve allowing teachers to wander around schools armed with guns?

[frankenstein12]

Ructions said:

frankenstein12 said:

There are something like 2 guns for every person in the US.

I've been reading elsewhere that 3% of Americans own half the gun stock in the US.

Possibly. There are some serious gun lovers in the US. I suspect in many parts of the US people can and probably do legally marry their guns rather than actual humans.

[frankenstein12]

mike9009 said:

frankenstein12 said:

Ok so your response to reduce the threat to schools/soft targets is? And lets be realistic here since there is no way at all they can ban guns in the US due to the second amendment.

Have you checked the 13th and 21st Amendments?

I dont see the relevence?

One is about slavery and the other is about repealing the prohibition on alcohol. Neither is relevant.

You still fail to understand the very basics of this.

The Second Amendment was based partially on the right to keep and bear arms in English common law and was influenced by the English Bill of Rights of 1689. Sir William Blackstone described this right as an auxiliary right, supporting the natural rights of self-defense and resistance to oppression, and the civic duty to act in concert in defense of the state.[8]

In United States v. Cruikshank (1876), the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that, "The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence" and limited the scope of the Second Amendment's protections to the federal government.[9] In United States v. Miller (1939), the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment did not protect weapon types not having a "reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia".[10][11]

NO politician in their right mind in the USA would even consider banning or trying to ban guns as it strikes to the heart of the American idea of defending ones self from the state.

In a country which brought us the phrase "I know my rights" where people regularly get shot and killed by police because they believe their "rights" will make them invincible against bullets and so they fail to comply or they try fight or run from police you REALLY think the people will accept the government trying to take away their guns?

REALLY?

I am not saying I agree or disagree with the sale of or ownership of guns of any type to anyone. I am simply talking the real world realities of the situation and the possible compromise solutions.

It seems everyone else on here and elsewhere seems to be of the mindset it HAS to be either banning/restricting guns or allowing all teachers to carry guns in school.

NEITHER is the solution to this problem. As such a middle ground needs to be found.

[Ructions]

DurianIceCream said:

Ructions said:

I've been reading elsewhere that 3% of Americans own half the gun stock in the US.

About 1.5% of Brits own 100% of the UK guns.

True, but those 1.5% don't make a habit of shooting up the local school.

[frankenstein12]

Ructions said:

DurianIceCream said:

Ructions said:

I've been reading elsewhere that 3% of Americans own half the gun stock in the US.

About 1.5% of Brits own 100% of the UK guns.

True, but those 1.5% don't make a habit of shooting up the local school.

No but then they are all legal and sane gun owners. How many guns in the UK are owned illegally?

Gun crime is on the increase in the UK. In fact crimes using most weapons are on the increase in the Uk and most of them are with illegal weaponry such as guns, Knives and acids.

[mike9009]

frankenstein12 said:

mike9009 said:

frankenstein12 said:

Ok so your response to reduce the threat to schools/soft targets is? And lets be realistic here since there is no way at all they can ban guns in the US due to the second amendment.

Have you checked the 13th and 21st Amendments?

I dont see the relevence?

Lots of other interesting stuff.

The relevance is that Amendments can be changed/ repealed. You suggested that there was no way the US can ban guns due to the second amendment? Not correct.