So I've been listening and reading about "what went wrong" for 24 hours now. Yet few people are talking about a solution to the problem.
To me, it's simple:
Allow those who are licensed to carry handguns on school campuses.
In Viriginia it's illegal to carry a firearm (under any circumstance) on an educational institution; this is the case in almost every state. Why do you think these nut jobs go to schools to unleash their mayhem? No one (except for the lone Police Officer) is allowed to carry guns. Thus, there's a small chance of being killed by your victims. So you can basically kill, kill, and kill until the police show up or until you run out of bullets.
I guarantee if every state passed a law allowing LICENSED owners to carry guns on school campuses the dealth toll and incident frequency would DECREASE.
I'm with ya.. We have the concealed law here but everywhere you go signs are posted you can't bring it in.
Florida passed that law about allowing yourself to defend yourself if getting attacked based on believing it would lower crime if people could protect themselves physically.
That woman a few years ago.. she carried her gun everywhere but Texas passed a law saying you couldn't carry it to certain places. The first day she left it at home, she went into a restaurant with her parents. A gunman entered, started killing people. Both her parents were killed execution style while she sat there watching.. because that law went into effect a day before, the guy didn't have the fear.
You should be able to carry a gun to almost any location.
That woman a few years ago.. she carried her gun everywhere but Texas passed a law saying you couldn't carry it to certain places. The first day she left it at home, she went into a restaurant with her parents. A gunman entered, started killing people. Both her parents were killed execution style while she sat there watching.. because that law went into effect a day before, the guy didn't have the fear.
Penn & Teller did a Bullshi*t episode on gun control and featured her on the episode. Sad and very true story.
Yeah, that's where I saw it and that's what I was referencing.. couldn't provide a link.
But still, they got the point across that people should be allowed to carry guns. I know I'd be shooting back instead of running away.
Though I wonder why people didn't just rush him when they knew he was coming into a classroom.. fear.. a strange thing. Yeah, possibly a 30 bullet clip, but entering a room is the choke point.
Though I wonder why people didn't just rush him when they knew he was coming into a classroom..
Maybe because if you rush him the first 5-10 die. If there's only you rushing him... If I could be sure of support backing me up (i.e. 10 others), I'd rush him. Otherwise I'd wait until his back was turned.
They were talking about him shooting through doors and coming in, randomly shooting, then walking out.
You know he's coming, go to the door so when he comes in you can jump on him. He might get 2-3 shots off, most likely not lethal unless you stand right in front of him.
Second.. when someone has you line up against the wall, execution style, and the first person is shot in the head, YOU FOCKING RUSH THE GUY BECAUSE YOU'RE DEAD REGARDLESS.
Just my two cents. But that is fear playing its role. One must not ignore fear, but realize and overcome it. Fear is designed to keep you alive, not to kill you. We've lost touch with the relation of our instincts and fear. We let ourselves get killed because we're afraid to die, whereas it should be fear causes us to fight so we're not killed.
I wasn't in the situation so I can't really say, only wonder why different actions weren't taken.
After Columbine, a few weeks later some kid tried to do a shooting in his school but a bunch of wrestlers bum rushed him and tackled him. He mildly wounded one person. It really didn't make the news all that much because no one was killed and people took action.
Take no action, it'll be sure to be on the news. Take action, no one cares.
We're saying almost the same thing. You're going into much more detail. I was going on the brief news reports. Why? I have other things to take up my time, and reading details about another idiot who killed people indiscriminately isn't one of them.
But posting here on voting is. Which is more worthwhile?
I didn't go into work yesterday so I sat around watching the news on and off.
I think ever student CNN and Fox had on the phone used the word "Actually" at least twice per interview. I was getting annoyed listening to the people speak so I'd stop watching on and off.
in truth that wouldn't be so good. you forget that humans are involved. riser got it right(for once) with fear. if you arm alot of people a can assure you the amount killed and wounded would be far higher as these kids are not going to be marksman, they are going to shoot an dmiss or hit by-standers depending on the situation.
if that were me in an ideal situation i know what i would do, use what ever weapon i had, i would move fast as i have a feeling your average school gunmen ain't going to eb able to hit fast moving targets. since this is a school my prefered weapon would be textbooks(yes, they can hurt like hell) and of course the chairs and desks. i see no point in rushing the guy first.
wait until he approaches then throw a chair at him, then when he stumbles charge him. this may sound silly but in games, you throw a grenade first or a flashbang when you hear someone coming then ambush them. the same rules apply.
by allowing guns onto the school grounds all you do is increase the chance of some hot head blasting people away. instaed of premeditated murder you get random by chance ones.
Small locking folders are legal under certain situations. Switchblades are classed as an offensive weapon. There's not much in the speed difference and given that your assailant is most likely on a bad comedown this would most likely be offset in real world usage. Or so I'm told... I don't personally own any weapons of any kind although my brother does collect knives.
I used to work in a college. I still travel on buses with the little bastoids in a morning. Given the way its going one of these is starting to appeal.
A bunch of nervous college kids don't make the best shooters, in my experience. Just think about how difficult it is to beat close order drills into soldiers.
One person opens up, so two other people who are the quickest whip out their guns. Then the next couple of people overcome their disorientation and see three people shooting at one another. Who started it? Who is trying to kill them? F**k it, shoot them all. Everyone rushes to the scene, you have a shootout of Doom proportions.
Or, two of them open up and just friendly f**k a half a dozen others whilst taking down the one shooter.
hmm, i just noticed that post reply button at the bottom. how long has that been there. can't be to long as i have only recently noticed the no name in the reply.
what happened to just replying to the OP if it was in general?
A bunch of nervous college kids don't make the best shooters, in my experience. Just think about how difficult it is to beat close order drills into soldiers.
One person opens up, so two other people who are the quickest whip out their guns. Then the next couple of people overcome their disorientation and see three people shooting at one another. Who started it? Who is trying to kill them? F**k it, shoot them all. Everyone rushes to the scene, you have a shootout of Doom proportions.
Or, two of them open up and just friendly f**k a half a dozen others whilst taking down the one shooter.
I see your logic. However, most states require that you qualify to carry a concealed weapon. Regardless, I was shooting expert in the Army at the age of 18. The army likes to brag about marksmanship, but to be honest it isn't the end all be all training they'd like to think it is. In fact, army qualification is rather easy with any weapon. That said, it certainly better than what Al Qaida has going on. (Spray and pray!)
On the last point, there'd definitely be some chaos, I don't deny that. But the scope of these mass shootings would certainly decrease if gun restrictions were less restrictive.
In addition to that, I would actually punish criminals instead of sending them to travel restricted resorts.
Take all the money spent on TVs, weights, books, magazines etc in prison, an redirect it to gaurds wages. Give them all raises. Lock the prisoners in their cells and dont let them out. No exercise, no movie nights, not even work detail. Cut out lunch, give em a slice of wonderbread at noon. Make them adhere to a dress code. No cutting off the arms, all buttons buttoned etc. Give the gaurds the leagal riht to punish unacceptable behavior without having to undergo a congressional investigation. You know, make prison for retribution rather than rehabilitation I know, shocking concept, but if criminals get the idea that prison really sucks, maybe they wont want to go. Of course, not applicable in this case since the kid offed himself.
Oh, one other thing. Offer incentive programs/signing bonuses specifically to lure former Marine DIs as gaurds.
I see your logic. However, most states require that you qualify to carry a concealed weapon. Regardless, I was shooting expert in the Army at the age of 18. The army likes to brag about marksmanship, but to be honest it isn't the end all be all training they'd like to think it is. In fact, army qualification is rather easy with any weapon. That said, it certainly better than what Al Qaida has going on. (Spray and pray!)
On the last point, there'd definitely be some chaos, I don't deny that. But the scope of these mass shootings would certainly decrease if gun restrictions were less restrictive.
Anyone can shoot straight, particularly on a range. I doubt states are going to have potential gun owners run through an eight week program which culminates in a live fire exercise.
In South Africa gun ownership is particularly high among both criminals and the civil population - as criminals got more guns, civilians got more guns so that they could protect themselves. So, what happens in SA today when somebody wants to rob your wallet, or your phone, or your watch? They just sneak up behind you and shoot you in the back of the head, rather than risk a firefight.
The problem with the principal of Mutually Assured Destruction with firearms is that people actually use it.
As I've said a million times, gun ownership isn't the problem, it's the mindset people have about it. The area where I grew up and now live again has the highest and fastest growing gun crime rate in Ireland (remember, we've a lot of paramilitaries out of their former business, so we're not talking about some boys from da hood doing the shooting here either); when something happens nearby my first instinct isn't to reach for the gun. That, I think, is the difference. If you bring a gun to a situation and start waving it around, you'll end up having to use it at some point. Or, somebody else will use theirs on you.
Your reference to South Africa... you are referring to illegal firearms on both the criminal and civilian sides, yes? Because a legal firearm here is either an heirloom, a hunting rifle, a shotgun, a pistol, or (most frequently) wishful thinking.
Civilians can't get licensed for firearms very easily, and it's almost impossible to get licensed to carry one - ownership license notwithstanding - unless you're a cop. And if you're a cop, well, even more criminal-friendly laws apply there about actually using the thing.
Illegally, though... I'm guessing about 75% of civilian firearms (criminal and non-criminal owners) are unlicensed.
You still have the culture issue to deal with. Even in countries where criminals can easily get their hands on weapons (in Ireland we've got criminals trained to make effective indirect fire weapons in their garage, ffs) why isn't there more gun crime?
Socially compared to the US in terms of what people earn, and how they earn it, Canada, Europe and Australia are the next places to look. Why don't they have the same gun crime as the US? That, to me, is the fundamental question.
As soon as you figure out how, let me know please.
@riser
Not only the US society, but your point remains valid. Especially considering that a large amount of the rest of the world looks to the US as a role model.
Aye. I live in the US and can't say other countries are the same, though I know many have the same problems. But I can only speak on which I know, your holiness.
If it's not the problems that we're used to (i.e. all of the well-catalogued problems of living in a democratic/Western society) then it's problems arising from a different social model (i.e. communism, feudalism, etc).
Unfortunately I can't think of an acceptable answer beyond 'exterminate the lot and start again at the amoeba level', my child.
We protect the unintelligent and the unwilling. What we are seeing today is the effects of years past.. we have been breeding this.
How easy is it for someone to not work and still get paid, have a place to live, etc? Why work?
There once was a short lived religion that when you were born, you were already destined to heaven or hell. It was great, unless someone thought you were going to Hell.. Everyone quit working, doing anything.. why bother? They're already going to heaven or hell. Needless to say, it didn't last very long.
You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months. If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.