Gun Control Debate #2

[rosemadderlake]

Maybe it is PR. If they took a stand after Sandy Hook they shouldn't need to take a stand now. IMO

And how many massacres since Sandy Hook?

Maybe it was because this boy terrorist purchased a rifle at Dicks.

Maybe it's because the NRAs protocol for tragic events isn't working anymore.

Congress, governors, and the president aren't the only leaders in this country. But they are the ones who are perpetuating the pain by their inaction.

 

[osu]

Dick’s Sporting Goods Media Statement:

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tawny]

Modifying a gun to make it fully automatic is illegal. I know you know that. I'm struggling with your point.

I'm not aware of any crimes committed with modified weapons. Should all guns be banned because they could be modified?

Semi-autos have a place in hunting and self-defense.

I do think magazines should be restricted. Perhaps six rounds. A bit annoying for skeet and shooting clays, but I still think it should be restricted.

Did you know you can reload ammo? It is much more cost effective.

Where do we stop?

We are employing cognitive dissonance to ignore that most of these massacres, most domestic murders, most suicides are crimes of impulse and are made easier by convenience. No, all guns can't be modified. If it can be modified with legal accessories, like bump stocks, it should be banned as well as the bump stock.

Yes, we can reload ammo. We reload our own for hunting. However, it's another thing that slows down a person's efforts to massacre. Some won't bother to learn. Some won't even know that's an option. So, ammunition should be taxed and expensive, IMO. We could also tax the components used to reload ammo (powder etc).

 

[CADwrest]

Maybe start by making semi-auto ammo more expensive.

There's no such thing as "semi-auto ammo." Any round can be used with any kind of action. .223 can be used in bolt-actions, lever actions, pump actions, semi auto, or automatic.

 

[Blef]

There's no such thing as "semi-auto ammo." Any round can be used with any kind of action. .223 can be used in bolt-actions, lever actions, pump actions, semi auto, or automatic.

Cool, I didn't know that.

Then all ammo should be damn expensive. Those using guns for self defense wouldn't need hundreds of rounds for a "just in case" scenario.

 

[bluedivergirl]

Maybe start by making semi-auto ammo more expensive.

There is no difference in the ammo.

The difference is in the gun. When you fire a semi, some of the kick is channeled to eject the spent casing and place a new one.

 

[Blef]

The first thing any first responder is supposed to do is assess the situation. My sources for that are cpr classes for the past three decades, and if you Google "first responder protocols assess" you can find numerous instruction and training documents saying that, too. Nowhere does it instruct anyone to enter a scene without assessing it first--exactly the opposite. It doesn't say anywhere that you're just supposed to enter an unknown scene. To avoid further injuries one must know what they're going into.

So why is this guy not being allowed to do that or bring criticized for doing so?

It reminds me of when I'm driving and have to make a turn against traffic. The guy behind me might think I have plenty of time to make the turn and start honking at me, but he's not seeing it from my angle, nor is he familiar with my car and it's "putt putt" nature. No, it's easier to just honk and try to bully me into making what I consider an unsafe maneuver.

Unless a person was present for this incident I don't understand why anyone thinks they can reasonably criticize this guy. How were the gunshots echoing? How was he to know how many shooters were there? He would assess, that's how. But that takes a moment.

Again, not assessing a scene puts everyone at risk.

RBBM. Exactly. Part of assessing the scene is also assessing the risk to yourself and your colleagues. You don't go rushing into a scene when you don't know what you are facing. If the cop in this situation thought the shooter was outside, which is believable as he saw carnage outside, hear gunshots and couldn't tell where they were coming from etc, why would he go running into the school? He would be trying to assess what was going on. Even military personnel freeze sometimes, and they are trained from day one to go into conflict situations. My dad was a firefighter, and he has told about times when experienced firefighters have been faced with such an awful, traumatising situation that they have literally frozen on the spot, but they had other firefighters around to help them get through. This was one cop, trying to handle what was a massacre, going on in front of him, with limited information about what was happening. I feel for him. He probably is beating himself up constantly. I don't think it's appropriate for Trump, who admits he cannot stand the sight of blood, to publically humiliate and criticise him, and say "well I would go running in", when the likelihood is that he wouldn't.

 

[watergirl62]

Modifying a gun to make it fully automatic is illegal. I know you know that. I'm struggling with your point.

I'm not aware of any crimes committed with modified weapons. Should all guns be banned because they could be modified?

Semi-autos have a place in hunting and self-defense.

I do think magazines should be restricted. Perhaps six rounds. A bit annoying for skeet and shooting clays, but I still think it should be restricted.

Did you know you can reload ammo? It is much more cost effective.

Where do we stop?

DH reloads .300 .50 and .45 cal, but not 22 cal (it's not cost effective). It's much cheaper to reload the large calibers than to buy them. He will purchase a box at the range occasionally if he runs out of his reload supply.

Eta: sorry, interrupted....

Shooting and reloading are not inexpensive hobbies. Raising the price of ammo will help keep it less accesible to people who can't afford it, but I think enthusiasts will still purchase and shoot, just maybe not as frequently. It can also cause a rush on supply and hoarding, but it is a viable option for another approach to gun control.

 

[BayouBelle_LA]

And how many massacres since Sandy Hook?

Maybe it was because this boy terrorist purchased a rifle at Dicks.

Maybe it's because the NRAs protocol for tragic events isn't working anymore.

Congress, governors, and the president aren't the only leaders in this country. But they are the ones who are perpetuating the pain by their inaction.

My point was that Dicks Sporting Goods banned assault weapons after Sandy Hook. Why did they lift the ban?

 

[flourish]

Cool, I didn't know that.

Then all ammo should be damn expensive. Those using guns for self defense wouldn't need hundreds of rounds for a "just in case" scenario.

I like the idea of making ammo and its components very expensive. Tax the carp out of it and get some revenue that way at the same time. The 2nd amendment doesn't say the "well regulated militia" has to have cheap access to firearms and ammo.

 

[flourish]

In this story from 2012, "Separately, Dick’s Sporting Goods, a chain with more than 500 stores, said in a statement on its Web site that it was stopping all sales and displays of guns at its store closest to Newtown and was temporarily ceasing sales of modern rifles nationwide." Note the word, "temporarily." https://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/18/a-rising-chorus-but-not-quite-consensus-on-guns/


Then from today, "This is not the first time Dick’s has made changes in response to a school massacre. In 2012, after the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School that killed 26 people, Dick’s removed assault-style rifles from its main retail stores. But a few months later, the company began carrying the firearms at its outdoor and hunting retail chain, Field & Stream.

This time, Mr. Stack said, the changes will be permanent." https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/28/...r-will-stop-selling-assault-style-rifles.html


Whether or not it's "too little too late" or even just "too late," it's something, which is better than nothing, IMO.


ETA: "modern rifles" is a term from the first article. I wonder if saying that instead of "assault rifle" would allow some of the semantic picking to cease? Doubt it, but found that term notable

 

[rosemadderlake]

My point was that Dicks Sporting Goods banned assault weapons after Sandy Hook. Why did they lift the ban?

They did not lift the ban, they expanded the ban to include their field and stream stores as per their statement posted above. Now it is a total ban.

 

[flourish]

*Waves to guests on this thread*
Come on in, the water's fine! Register and join us!
:welcome:

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

First: Overall, I agree with the intent of OP’s points — some key school personnel could have access to a firearm.

To succeed, however, I strongly believe that law enforcement's key leadership role as first responder — and all the justice-related stuff that goes with that — must remain intact.

But first, I’ll “play out the reel,” so to speak, on OP’s reasoning (quoted below).

1. Correct. Generally. People tend to overestimate skill and underestimate threat during highly emotional/stressful scenarios. For example, during an active shooter event.

2. Protecting a home from an intruder and engaging in one-on-one armed combat to “best protect” 3,000 students from high-octane firepower are completely unrelated scenarios. It’s dangerous to conflate the two. IMO

3. Logically, a teacher volunteer becomes the first responder — trumping law enforcement — just by being there. That puts fantasy land-levels of expectation and accountability onto a teacher, regardless of how confident or competent they are.

4. And probably most important: They aren't law enforcement officers. Period. From a law enforcement perspective, No. 3 (above) creates a cascade of justice-related failures in protocol, leadership, evidence, etc., all the way through the courts. Cases would not be prosecutable. Killers walk. Kiss justice goodbye!​

__________________

Jumping off that, how about:

1. A qualified adult in a school could receive requisite training and ability to aid police and first responders, under law enforcement direction.

2. Create a resource pool — a “contact” list of trained, qualified citizen volunteers within a school from which LE can communicate and/or work with in some capacity under law enforcement’s discretion and direction only.

3. That way, laws, protocols, chains of command, evidence — everything — are preserved. That restricts the volunteer from inadvertently inheriting (or interfering with) law enforcement’s critical "first responder" role.

4. SOLUTION? A quasi "deputy" program in which a qualified civilian volunteer at a school who meets training and experience requirements works with a law enforcement agency — if/when specifically directed to do so by the relative law enforcement agency.

5. School districts and law enforcement agencies, like Broward County and Parkland, work this solution into their emergency response plans. It becomes a template of sorts that other districts can tweak and implement if they so choose.​

This seems like a more realistic — and justice- and safety-oriented — scenario to me.

This is not THE solution, but part of one, imo.

What’cha think, WS peeps?

bbm
That's just not true. In my opinion that's a hysterical projection.

First of all, no one is asking teachers to do anything they aren't comfortable doing. Presumably most teachers are intelligent enough to reason out that choice for themselves.

Secondly, if a teacher is already comfortably carrying at home, I'm sure they're not just hyper-vigilant, walking around waiting to shoot someone 24/7...

They take care of their kids, grade papers make dinner, walk the dog Etc...
Those are the teachers who would likely not have any problem going about there school duties carrying or not.

It seems like some people are acting like teachers are going to be forced to arm themselves, whether they want to or not, when that's just not the case.

There are plenty of teachers that already carry at school and I'm not hearing about any problems with that.

 

[kimlynn]

Dick’s Sporting Goods Media Statement:

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Now this is great. If I were ever in the market for a weapon this would be my store of choice in support of what they are doing.

 

[flourish]

First: Overall, I agree with the intent of OP’s points — some key school personnel could have access to a firearm.

To succeed, however, I strongly believe that law enforcement's key leadership role as first responder — and all the justice-related stuff that goes with that — must remain intact.

But first, I’ll “play out the reel,” so to speak, on OP’s reasoning (quoted below).

1. Correct. Generally. People tend to overestimate skill and underestimate threat during highly emotional/stressful scenarios. For example, during an active shooter event.

2. Protecting a home from an intruder and engaging in one-on-one armed combat to “best protect” 3,000 students from high-octane firepower are two completely unrelated scenarios. It’s dangerous to conflate the two. IMO

3. Logically, a teacher volunteer becomes the first responder — trumping law enforcement — just by being there. That puts fantasy land-levels of expectation and accountability onto a teacher, regardless of how confident or competent they are.

4. And probably most important: They aren't law enforcement officers. Period. From a law enforcement perspective, No. 3 (above) creates a cascade of justice-related failures in protocol, leadership, evidence, etc., all the way through the courts. Cases would not be prosecutable. Kiss justice goodbye!​

________

Jumping off that, how about:

1. A qualified adult in a school could receive requisite training and ability to aid police and first responders, under law enforcement direction.

2. Create a resource pool — a “contact” list of trained, qualified citizen volunteers within a school from which LE can communicate and/or work with in some capacity under law enforcement’s discretion and direction only.

3. That way, laws, protocols, chains of command, evidence — everything — are preserved. That restricts the volunteer from inadvertently inheriting (or interfering with) law enforcement’s critical "first responder" role.

4. SOLUTION? A quasi "deputy" program in which a qualified civilian volunteer at a school who meets training and experience requirements works under the direction of law enforcement agencies — if and when specifically directed to do so by the relative law enforcement agency.

5. School districts and law enforcement agencies, like Broward County and Parkland, work this solution into their emergency response plans. It becomes a template of sorts that other districts can tweak and implement if they so choose.​

This seems like a more realistic — and justice- and safety-oriented — scenario to me.

What’cha think, WS peeps?

I would much rather have dedicated staff who are just there for security. I'm not excited at the prospect of firearms in a workplace which was previously a gun free zone, but if they have to be there I'd much rather it not be the teachers being the carriers. That way if there was a shooting, the teachers could do their job of containing the children, getting the classroom locked and keeping everyone calm and quiet, and the security personnel could go do their thing.

Adding firearms to the mix impacts more than just the ones carrying. I feel it's disingenuous to imply only the teachers who would be armed would be affected, because introducing firearms and armed colleagues changes the protocols, expectations, and safety of all the school personnel.

 

[Blef]

I really think that Dick's have made some very sensible protocol changes, and their suggestions about further control are encouraging too. Their business thrives because people buy firearms from them, and if they can see the current system is broken then everyone should be able to.

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

Please correct me if I'm wrong. Are you suggesting that because a) Dicks sold these guns after Sandy Hook, that b) Dicks is hypocritical/disingenuous to ever stop selling them?

Maybe it is PR. If they took a stand after Sandy Hook they shouldn't need to take a stand now. IMO

 

[Tawny]

Armed teacher arrested after shooting at Georgia high school
POSTED 11:49 AM, FEBRUARY 28, 2018

http://wgno.com/2018/02/28/armed-teacher-arrested-after-shooting-at-georgia-high-school/

 

[Blef]

Just to show how confusing these situations are, here is a story of a man who wrestled a gun from a potential shooter in Texas, and then the responding police officer shot HIM! How confusing would a scenario be if there are up to 3,000 terrified children and staff around.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/worl...the-police-arrived/ar-BBJHf6I?ocid=spartanntp