Gun Control Debate #2

[EuTuCroquet?]

Agreed.

Sadly, though, a guard wouldn't have prevented this massacre, because the shooter was already active.

One of the big issues in the Parkland murders (other than the murderer) is armed personnel who didn't even try to do their job. I understand that an assault rifle is not comparable to a pistol, but there should have been an effort.

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

This is the state of our America.

US Rep. David Scott (D-13th Dist., Georgia) says instead of arming teachers as President Trump suggests, use the National Guard, temporarily, to protect America's schools

http://www.wltx.com/article/news/po...ional-guard-protect-our-schools/101-523190734

 

[kimlynn]

As a retired teacher and the mother and MIL of teachers, I say that dying for someone’s need to have a weapon that shreds organs is ridiculous.

The lives of teachers are not a sacrifice for people to have weapons including semi automatic handguns that serve no purpose. If people want to have fun, they can have them locked up at a gun club. Anyone who resents the inconvenience of having to go to a club makes me furious. To expect teachers to give up their lives for someone’s hobby is repugnant.

If it is such a wonderful idea, let them get their tactical gear on and guard for the $1000 a year that apparently is the bonus for being a target of death.

Great post,human
Next the NRA and Trump will suggest arming other students. It has really gotten crazy. IMO

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Pistol vs. Rifle: It’s Not as Uneven as You Think

There are two advantages the rifle offers over the pistol: It is more powerful and it offers greater accuracy potential over a longer range if it is used correctly. Greater standard ammunition capacity could be considered another advantage, but the vast majority of encounters are going to be decided before the first magazine is expended no matter which weapon you have. So I’m not counting that here. It is also larger and heavier, harder to carry and conceal, and harder to maneuver, especially in close and confined areas. Those are its disadvantages over the pistol.

While a rifle provides some advantages to the shooter over a pistol, it is not and never will be a guarantee. In the end, no weapon ever is. Throughout history, the determining factor has always been the individual behind the gun. Others have beaten rifle-armed attackers with pistols before. If others have done it, you can too. Remember that.

https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/pistol-vs-rifle-not-uneven-think/

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

Great post,human
Next the NRA and Trump will suggest arming other students. It has really gotten crazy. IMO

Nope because the NRA and POTUS aren’t exactly agreeing on things now. Case in point is raising the minimum age of purchasing a weapon; POTUS wants it raised and NRA doesn’t want it raised.

 

[kimlynn]

Nope because the NRA and POTUS aren’t exactly agreeing on things now. Case in point is raising the minimum age of purchasing a weapon; POTUS wants it raised and NRA doesn’t want it raised.

I wasn't really serious with my post. Of course they wouldn't suggest such a thing...at least I would hope they wouldn't.
And Trump is just talking at the moment.Not sure if he has any intention to make changes.
Plus he is easily swayed. IMO

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

Sheriff says only one deputy at fault in Florida school shooting

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ault-in-florida-school-shooting-idUSKCN1G90TL

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

Sheriff says only one deputy at fault in Florida school shooting

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ault-in-florida-school-shooting-idUSKCN1G90TL

Let them release the video & we can all decide. Because if we see 4 deputies huddled behind a police car & then see officers/deputies from another organization rushing into the school.....well, “Lucie, you got some ‘splainin’ to do”!

 

[Tawny]

Pistol vs. Rifle: It’s Not as Uneven as You Think




https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/pistol-vs-rifle-not-uneven-think/

In a situation like a theater or school shooting, there is no comparison. The shooter is not interested in concealing it at that point and by the time someone carrying a pistol is aware a shooter is active, it's too late to be able to accurately aim because it takes upwards of 3 whole seconds to get a target into the sights of a pistol and that's if the target is standing still. Someone using a rifle to rapidly massacre a room full of people has the jump on any would-be hero with a pistol.

That link has no relevance to the massacres we are discussing. It is advocating and attempting to convince hesitant would be concealed carriers to not be so scared of facing down a rifle.

 

[Tawny]

Let them release the video & we can all decide. Because if we see 4 deputies huddled behind a police car & then see officers/deputies from another organization rushing into the school.....well, “Lucie, you got some ‘splainin’ to do”!

This will be the requirement if we arm teachers. Let us see the video so we know whether Mrs Campbell did enough to protect a room full of children. We as a society seem to have zero compassion and no understanding of what it is like to face down rapid fire with a pistol, and we expect every human to be able to do it while simultaneously securing a classroom.

 

[KaaBoom]

Regarding the 2nd Amendment. If it indicates we as Americans have the right to own firearms of any type, why is it illegal to own grenade launchers? Tanks? Anti-tank guns? Sawed off shotguns?

Why are some weapons of war outlawed, but not high capacity rapid fire (HCRF from here on out because ffs it's annoying typing that out every time lol) rifles?

Because it doesn't indicate that Americans have the right to own any weapons. It only indicates that a well regulated militia, is necessary to the security of a free state.

 

[kay74]

All we need are stricter laws for buying guns, hence have the same laws Japan has. They have hardly any gun deaths!!

If Japanese people want to own a gun, they must attend an all-day class, pass a written test, and achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test. Then they have to pass a mental-health evaluation, which takes place at a hospital, and pass a background check, in which the government digs into their criminal record and interviews friends and family. They can only buy shotguns and air rifles — no handguns — and every three years they must retake the class and initial exam. ​

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

Ha! They do have some splainin' to do.

I think the cctv is evidence (for now). I hope it's released eventually, like when the state releases its report. (Though I don't know if I have the stomach to watch it myself.)

Let them release the video & we can all decide. Because if we see 4 deputies huddled behind a police car & then see officers/deputies from another organization rushing into the school.....well, “Lucie, you got some ‘splainin’ to do”!

 

[Tawny]

Ha! They do have some splainin' to do.

I think the cctv is evidence (for now). I hope it's released eventually, like when the state releases its report. (Though I don't know if I have the stomach to watch it myself.)

What fascinates me is that while we are wondering why 4 trained officers didn't rush in to save children, we are also having a conversation where people seriously want to arm teachers and expect more from them! Where is the logic in this???

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

Maybe they've been influenced and desensitized by violent video games, music, mass media and movies to believe it's super easy to just poof an active shooter while securing their kids and facing rapid gunfire.

Yep, I'm turning that argument around onto a lot of the folks who make it while simultaneously suggesting we put more firearms into our schools.

More guns in schools is not the best answer, imo.

/s (kinda)

This will be the requirement if we arm teachers. Let us see the video so we know whether Mrs Campbell did enough to protect a room full of children. We as a society seem to have zero compassion and no understanding of what it is like to face down rapid fire with a pistol, and we expect every human to be able to do it while simultaneously securing a classroom.

 

[BayouBelle_LA]

What fascinates me is that while we are wondering why 4 trained officers didn't rush in to save children, we are also having a conversation where people seriously want to arm teachers and expect more from them! Where is the logic in this???

I'd prefer to be standing behind a 'good guy with a gun' rather than waiting on LE to come and save me.

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

This will be the requirement if we arm teachers. Let us see the video so we know whether Mrs Campbell did enough to protect a room full of children. We as a society seem to have zero compassion and no understanding of what it is like to face down rapid fire with a pistol, and we expect every human to be able to do it while simultaneously securing a classroom.

I for one do not advocate mandating teachers with handguns.

I also feel that a handgun is not enough force against an AR-15.

IMO, it is unlikely that a civilian with a handgun would have the composure, steady-handedness, the proper guarded positioning, and effective reflexes to take out an active shooter with a semi-automatic weapon. But it is hard to predict in its entirety.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

In a situation like a theater or school shooting, there is no comparison. The shooter is not interested in concealing it at that point and by the time someone carrying a pistol is aware a shooter is active, it's too late to be able to accurately aim because it takes upwards of 3 whole seconds to get a target into the sights of a pistol and that's if the target is standing still. Someone using a rifle to rapidly massacre a room full of people has the jump on any would-be hero with a pistol.

That link has no relevance to the massacres we are discussing. It is advocating and attempting to convince hesitant would be concealed carriers to not be so scared of facing down a rifle.

It's completely relevant to school shootings and explains how someone, like a teacher, who is armed with a handgun has some advantages over a shooter using a rifle in the confines of a classroom.

The fact that a shooter is armed with a rifle is not a factor for police to not engage and stop the killing just because they are armed with a handgun. JMO

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I for one do not advocate mandating teachers with handguns.

I also feel that a handgun is not enough force against an AR-15.

IMO, it is unlikely that a civilian with a handgun would have the composure, steady-handedness, the proper guarded positioning, and effective reflexes to take out an active shooter with a semi-automatic weapon. But it is hard to predict in its entirety.

I believe that with proper training anyone, including teachers, can have the skills to stop an active shooter using a handgun. JMO

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

I certainly wouldn't want to be near anyone with a gun if I was trapped inside a school with 3,000 other kids.

I'd rather be as far away as any gunfire as possible, imo. I don't want more ammo thrown out there, don't want more kids lost as casualties. Move them to safety and help keep them calm and wait for LE.

Columbine had multiple shooters. Double the Rambo, double the gun. (Sounds like a gum commercial.)

I'd prefer to be standing behind a 'good guy with a gun' rather than waiting on LE to come and save me.