An OUTRAGEOUS Solution to School Shootings - Page 4

iknownothing · 18th December 2012, 12:12 PM

Originally Posted by seycyrus

In my what if scenario, the shooter knows that there is at least one armed responder at the school, and chooses an easier target.

Exactly. And how is that better?

Travis · 18th December 2012, 12:17 PM

Originally Posted by johnny karate

Any solution for keeping children safer in schools that puts the preservation of gun ownership rights as its highest priority should be immediately rejected as unserious.

That is exactly what this is. A suggestion who's only purpose is to preserve the right to their precious pop-pop-bang toys that are more important to them than the security of children.

Originally Posted by DGM

I'd like to know who suggesting this. Could this be just your knee-jerk. If there was no guns does this mean they're safe?

That is exactly what it would mean. At least more safe. I would never send my kids to a school where there were armed people on campus. I don't trust guns. I certainly don't trust people who have guns around or on them.

I made it a point to unfriend the only person I ever knew that went out and bought a gun. I just don't want to know such people in real life. They scare me.

Originally Posted by Quad4_72

Please, do tell how that is a "good point". Are teachers unable to access guns now? It seems that you and others like to suggest that when guns are immediately available, people become murderous and go crazy.

I've personally known at least one teacher that had a psychotic break in the classroom. She had to be restrained by the students themselves. Now imagine she could have whipped a gun out from her desk at the spur of the moment.

People are fallible. In fact you cannot trust the average person to do the right thing. Now we want to arm hundreds of thousand more?

My ideal society is one where people have as few weapons at their disposal to harm me as possible.

fuelair · 18th December 2012, 12:24 PM

Originally Posted by Quad4_72

Can I have a Glock .45 in my drawer?

Smith .460 or Ruger .480 ?

ANTPogo · 18th December 2012, 12:26 PM

Originally Posted by DDWW

CNN is covering your funeral. Several neighbors are saying what a nice person you were. Tomorrow they are burying the 4 people killed after he left your office. So sad. Let's have a moment of silence.

Meanwhile, in the real world:

Quote:

Nick Meli is emotionally drained. The 22-year-old was at Clackamas Town Center with a friend and her baby when a masked man opened fire.

"I heard three shots and turned and looked at Casey and said, 'are you serious?,'" he said.

The friend and baby hit the floor. Meli, who has a concealed carry permit, positioned himself behind a pillar.

"He was working on his rifle," said Meli. "He kept pulling the charging handle and hitting the side."

The break in gunfire allowed Meli to pull out his own gun, but he never took his eyes off the shooter.

"As I was going down to pull, I saw someone in the back of the Charlotte move, and I knew if I fired and missed, I could hit them," he said.

Meli took cover inside a nearby store. He never pulled the trigger. He stands by that decision.

"I'm not beating myself up cause I didn't shoot him," said Meli. "I know after he saw me, I think the last shot he fired was the one he used on himself."

The gunman was dead, but not before taking two innocent lives with him and taking the innocence of everyone else.

"I don't ever want to see anyone that way ever," said Meli. "It just bothers me."

In other words, it's not that simple, even if you happen to be the bystander there with a gun ready and able to confront the killer. Meli confidently claims that the gunman committed suicide after he saw Meli had drawn his own weapon, but there is absolutely zero way of knowing if the gunman even saw Meli's weapon at all, much less had that fact influence his decision to shoot himself rather than shoot at Meli or continue his spree, and Meli certainly never opened fire on the gunman to try and stop him. And note that the main reason Meli gave for not firing is the exact same reason usually given by people who think random bystanders opening fire on gunmen in a spree-killing situation is a bad idea: the risk of hitting someone else.

tsig · 18th December 2012, 12:28 PM

Originally Posted by Quad4_72

Please, do tell how that is a "good point". Are teachers unable to access guns now? It seems that you and others like to suggest that when guns are immediately available, people become murderous and go crazy.

Isn't that the exact situation we're discussing.

tsig · 18th December 2012, 12:35 PM

Originally Posted by seycyrus

This thread highlights the the inherent dishonesty that the anti-gun movement resorts to whenever there is an attempt at a serious discussion that does include complete disarmament.

Shooters choose soft targets. This fact has become apparent. If a few well-trained individuals in schools had access to weapons, the impression of schools being soft targets would be reduced or eliminated. These weapons do not need to locked in some sort of fort knox type vault. A locked, reinforced drawer would suffice for daytime storage.

I'm disappointed by the complete lack of candor some individuals on the antigun side of this discussion are showing.

Just listened to NPR and they kept talking about assault weapons. What should have happened is that EVERY single time someone mentioned "assault weapons" they would take 2 minutes to explain that assault weapon is an intentionally ambiguous phrase meant to evoke connections to assault rifles. Assault rifles have not been used in these tragedies and are fully regulated already.

What they are really pushing for is an "Looks like an assault rifle" ban. Which is ridiculous. It is as if we tried to push out an "looks like a pitbull" ban, and anything with a tail qualified.

So in your first sentence you accuse those you disagree with of dishonesty?

tsig · 18th December 2012, 12:37 PM

Originally Posted by Quad4_72

Very well put. The anti gun nutter crowd always likes to spin these types of discussions as if people like myself are advocating a "Wild West" style environment. They also like to propose that there is no possible way that an armed individual in a school could make a bit of difference, and that every bullet they would shoot would hit an innocent bystander. It's just speaking from ignorance, but no solution to the problem is going to be found if individuals on both sides of the argument are not rational and honest.

So you thing the rational and honest solution for gun violence is more guns?

tsig · 18th December 2012, 12:43 PM

Originally Posted by DDWW

Pop quiz.

Bang, bang, you hear shots down the hallway. You run over and lock your office door and go back behind your desk. You look out your fifth floor window and decide jumping is not a good idea.

Bang, Bang, the shots are getting closer. You get on your cell phone and dial 911.

The 911 operator is asking; “what does the gunman look like?”

“I am in my locked office!” you scream.

Someone tries the doorknob on your door. Then several shots go through the door near the lock. Someone is kicking at the door and it is giving way.

911: “Are you sure its gunshots?”

You: “#@*&!”

You open your desk drawer and find: (pick one)

1. An olive branch.
2. A ceramic unicorn incense burner where the scented smoke comes out it’s a$$.
3. An autograph photo of Nancy Pelosi.
4. A white flag (made in France).
5. A loaded Colt 1911 .45 acp with two spare loaded magazines. (Prefer a Kimber myself)

BTW: You have ten seconds.

You whip out your Colt 1911 .45 and blow away a police officer who thought the shooter was in that office.

BTW: you get ten years.

ANTPogo · 18th December 2012, 12:44 PM

Originally Posted by tsig

So you thing the rational and honest solution for gun violence is more guns?

It's homeopathic thinking, almost. Like cures like.

Travis · 18th December 2012, 12:45 PM

Imagine if we handled all problems this way.

A man is beating his wife? Well the solution is to beat him not get him to stop hitting his wife!

A company is poisoning the water? Well the solution is to give everyone poison that they might use on the company employees!

There is a forest fire threatening a house? Burn the house down now so the forest fire doesn't get the chance!

tsig · 18th December 2012, 12:49 PM

Originally Posted by DDWW

Yes, Not a Glock fan myself but would use it if needed with confidence.

BTW: Everyone esle; The door was just kicked in. You now have 5 seconds.

The second officer drills you right between the eyes.

BTW: you now have 0 seconds.

Skeptic Ginger · 18th December 2012, 12:56 PM

It's TV movie mentality where the hero always shoots the bad guy(s). Reality isn't like that.

I'm curious how long the shooting actually went on here but between just before the first call to 911 and the arrival of the police, the whole thing was over. The cops said, (I believe knowing how wrong the media got the details), that the shooting stopped when they arrived. I doubt the movie version of the hero saving all the kid's by taking out the shooter is a realistic version. It would have had to have been Bruce Willis or Sly Stallone and school/mall cops are more likely to be young kids with high school educations getting minimum wages.

johnny karate · 18th December 2012, 12:56 PM

Originally Posted by DGM

I'd like to know who suggesting this. Could this be just your knee-jerk.

It's inherent in the OP. It's quite clear that the starting place for a "solution" to gun violence that calls for more guns violence isn't the safety of innocents.

Quote:

If there was no guns does this mean they're safe?

I don't recall suggesing there should be no guns.

Originally Posted by DGM

Call me when you start making sense. K?

Let me know what words I'm using that you don't understand and I'll attempt to rephrase in more simplistic terms.

ben m · 18th December 2012, 12:58 PM

Let's suppose, for the sake of argument, that the OP's premises are correct. "If you arm people, they can defend themselves, and this prevents a lot of mass shootings". So we can imagine a world where the mentally ill, the criminals, etc., all have guns, and whenever they try to use them there's a little gun battle, which the good guys often win in the end.

You know what? I don't care. I don't want to live in that world. Jesus! If you dropped me and my family into Baghdad, or the favelas, or Mogadishu, or Juarez, or Compton circa 1975, I sure would NOT say "This is fine, me and my neighbors will obtain tactical training and live here with the security of self-defense." I would get the holy hell out as fast as possible. Good lord.

Because I don't have the mental capacity to protect myself from everything. I don't walk around the world braced for action in case my building is about to fall down (codes!), if my doctor is an untrained impostor (licensing!), if the car in front of me has no brake lights (mandatory inspections!), or if my tap water is drinkable (environment!). Neither do you. Neither does anyone---or, at least, not anyone with spare brain cells and sanity to devote to art, science, hobbies, family, etc..

I choose to live in a world with public safety doing 99% of the work of protecting me from terrorism, lead, mercury, deathtrap cars, potholes, cholera, smallpox, building collapses, gas main leaks, switchblades, mislabeled alcohol, electrical shorts, gas-station fires, and so on. Why in the name of God should the nation's public safety apparatus sit down and ignore an omnipresent hazard due to highly-engineered high speed murder weapons floating around everywhere? Why should this specific public safety problem suggest the non-solution of "you're on your own, shoot back and you'll be fine"? Jesus. The obvious solution, and the one that's working well in every other developed country, is get rid of the omnipresent weapons.

NoahFence · 18th December 2012, 12:59 PM

Quote:

What if, and this is a very big hypothetical, in the elementary school in Connecticut there were about 5 or so teachers/faculty members who had been trained in the use of firearms and also trained in reacting to an active shooter scenario? And also, what if each of these teachers/faculty members had a vault in their classroom with either a shotgun or a handgun inside?

Because no teacher will ever fly off the handle....

tsig · 18th December 2012, 01:00 PM

Originally Posted by Quad4_72

I know we are going to disagree, but how do you propose it is an escalation? There are two courses of action there. 1, the gunmen can roam about the school at free will mowing down any and everyone he sees without a single bit of resistance, knowing that everyone is helpless. 2, there is actually someone there to offer resistance and the ability to defend others, slowing or if all goes as planned, completely stopping the attacker.

Even if he decides to up his weaponry in response to anticipated security, whether is be a pistol or semi automatic rifle, the mass killing will happen regardless if there was no one there to defend others. If there was in fact someone there to offer a defense, at least it is a fighting chance to avoid a complete massacre.

How about roboguns that automatically pinpoint a gunshot and return fire?

iknownothing · 18th December 2012, 01:10 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

I'm curious how long the shooting actually went on here but between just before the first call to 911 and the arrival of the police, the whole thing was over.

That's another thing I was thinking about. Armed guards are less of a deterrent for someone bent on a murder/suicide. This guy went into the school expecting to die; the only question is how many he kills before he kills himself. Best case scenario with people shooting back is that he kills slightly fewer kids before it's over. Because by the time they hear shots, grasp the situation, retrieve their guns, and make it to where he is, he's already done most of the damage he did anyway.

Worst case scenario, is in the confusion and adrenaline, more people adding more shooting into the mix might have accidentally killed a few more kids.

Skeptic Ginger · 18th December 2012, 01:15 PM

Originally Posted by NoahFence

Because no teacher will ever fly off the handle....

And no angry out of control kid will ever get the gun from the teacher.....

Hercules Rockefeller · 18th December 2012, 01:16 PM

My suggestions are:

-Practice evacuation drills regularly.

-Have law enforcement as close to the schools as possible.

-Change the way media reports these incidents ( I don't know how).

-Pray to FSM that some crazy bastard doesn't decide to shoot up a place near you.

NoahFence · 18th December 2012, 01:23 PM

Originally Posted by DDWW

Answer; Too late; you just died. Sorry.

You know, the chances of that person being the teacher from down the hall are exactly the same as it being some nobody from the street.

quadraginta · 18th December 2012, 01:28 PM

Originally Posted by DGM

Most yes (this is not code but is usually the case). For parents that go to "meet the teacher" days, notice the metal door frames on classroom doors, this is for fire but, makes them almost impossible to kick in.

It isn't quite that simple.

Metal door frames (AKA hollow metal frames or HM frames) are standard for nearly all commercial or institutional construction. One reason is that overall they can be less expensive.

Whether they are fire rated or not is a different story, but they only need to have a rating equal to the rating of the partition (wall) they are installed in. The corridor wall in a school is probably going to have a 2hr. rating, if it's rated at all.

The funny thing is that generally all HM frames can pass muster for a two hour rating, since it costs less to make them all out of a heavy enough gauge to pass than to have different production runs. Normally the only difference is that someone with a UL certification pop-rivets a tag to the ones which are sold as rated.

As far as security is concerned, it is the door itself which is usually the weak point. HM doors are not commonly used in most interior applications. A wood veneer door can easily carry a two hour rating (even 4hr., with a gypsum core). When the door is kicked in it is the door which fails, not the frame.

Direction of swing will make a bigger difference, because of the stop built into the frame. If a door is 'reverse swing' (swings into the corridor instead of into the room) it will be much harder to break down if you're trying to get into the room, but it will still probably be the door that fails, not the frame.

Most room doors are regular swing. All that has to fail is the material around the lock assembly.

NoahFence · 18th December 2012, 01:33 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

It's TV movie mentality where the hero always shoots the bad guy(s). Reality isn't like that.

I'm curious how long the shooting actually went on here but between just before the first call to 911 and the arrival of the police, the whole thing was over. The cops said, (I believe knowing how wrong the media got the details), that the shooting stopped when they arrived. I doubt the movie version of the hero saving all the kid's by taking out the shooter is a realistic version. It would have had to have been Bruce Willis or Sly Stallone and school/mall cops are more likely to be young kids with high school educations getting minimum wages.

Exactly. Even after Aurora, there were folks clamoring "If everybody was armed this wouldn't have been this bad"

In that specific case, it would have bee 100x worse.

John Mekki · 18th December 2012, 01:42 PM

Originally Posted by NoahFence

Exactly. Even after Aurora, there were folks clamoring "If everybody was armed this wouldn't have been this bad"

In that specific case, it would have bee 100x worse.

From the victims and their families point of view, maybe 100x worse.

From everyone else in the planet, less people to compete with and more room for everyone else

More land, more air available for everyone

NoahFence · 18th December 2012, 01:45 PM

Yay Fear!!
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/20...tCO/story.html

NoahFence · 18th December 2012, 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by John Mekki

From the victims and their families point of view, maybe 100x worse.

From everyone else in the planet, less people to compete with and more room for everyone else

More land, more air available for everyone

Feel free to respond, never.

:

triforcharity · 18th December 2012, 01:55 PM

Originally Posted by Dcdrac

Increase the Sales?puchase tax on guns according to how powerful they and also increase the cost the of permits and licences for them according to their power.

The less powerful the weapon you buy is the less you pay.

So, what does that do? Do you honestly think that the majority of criminals purchased their guns legally?

Horse ****. All this does is unfairly tax people who use high powered rifles for hunting.

Plus, this type of system is already in place. It's called sales tax. Because a more powerful weapon is naturally going to cost more, as are the bullets, we already pay more in tax.

The price for my .50 cal ammo is already about 3.70 a round. Yes, you read that right, per round.

Wrong idea, and it won't prevent another CT. Remember, he stole the weapons.

Quad4_72 · 18th December 2012, 01:55 PM

Well it seems the usual characters have showed up to present nothing but irrationality to the thread. I predicted as much. But luckily there have been some pretty intelligent posts with some ideas that are actually pretty feasible. Much appreciated to those that intelligently presented flaws in my idea and presented some reasonable alternatives. To those that added ideas such as:

"I made it a point to unfriend the only person I ever knew that went out and bought a gun. I just don't want to know such people in real life. They scare me."

"A company is poisoning the water? Well the solution is to give everyone poison that they might use on the company employees!"

"How about roboguns that automatically pinpoint a gunshot and return fire? "

"Yeah that's the solution. Add more guns!"

Thanks for nothing.

triforcharity · 18th December 2012, 01:59 PM

Originally Posted by BStrong

It won't fly.

School Administrators in California don't want armed uniformed LEO's in school unless the local government forces them to - there have been cases where calls for service have been made from a school, the officer comes out and is ordered off school property by the school administration - no ****.

The single best defense to an active shooter situation would be armed professionals on site beforehand, but it's such a charged political issue that the administrators and the squeaky wheel (generally liberal) school board types would never allow it - even in the face of Newtown.

That breaks my heart too - I could give back to my community in the only way I am really qualified to do so, but in the eyes of some I'd be a dirty bastard for even suggesting it.

Are you ******* kidding me???? Do you have a link to a story about that???

Secondly, kudos to you for being willing to donate your time. It's admirable.

I heard a suggestion of a way to put veterans back to work. Hire 1 or 2 for each and every school, and let them be their security. They've already got the training and know how, and as long as their properly vetted, I don't see an issue.

ANTPogo · 18th December 2012, 02:01 PM

Originally Posted by triforcharity

Remember, he stole the weapons.

That's a really misleading way of saying "he used the guns that were owned by his mother and kept in the house he lived in with her and which she used to take him shooting with".

Monketey Ghost · 18th December 2012, 02:03 PM

It is, and I've heard it from the first, "stolen guns". There's a huge piece missing here and it's too bad the kid wrecked his hard drive.

triforcharity · 18th December 2012, 02:08 PM

Originally Posted by Dcdrac

Another suggestion all would be gun owning families have to take a psychriatric and medical test before being allowed a licence at their own cost.

How idiotic. You do realize this will not do a damn bit of good, right?

Do you have anything constructive to add?

triforcharity · 18th December 2012, 02:11 PM

Originally Posted by Abooga

Take a look at Europe.

We have plenty of crazies here but being much harder to find guns when they have a fit they have to resort to katanas, axes, knives... so the death toll is much much lower. (see the wikipedia list of school shootings in the US and other countryes... says all)

So perhaps the solution is to begin to undestand that as society becomes more civilised, guns are going to become obsolete, little by little, so it wouldn´t be such a bad idea to start limiting their availability, more control etc.

Seriously, your idea of getting more guns in the classroom sounds quite crazy from my (gun free) perspective.

Nope, not gonna happen, and isn't a solution at all.

Look at Chicago. The last time I checked, they had something like 290+ GUN homicides this YEAR. And they do not allowed a citizen the right to carry openly, concealed, in their car, etc.

Banning guns only ensures that criminals will have guns.

BTW, the 2nd Amendment prevents an outright ban, or even a wind down in availability.

ANTPogo · 18th December 2012, 02:12 PM

Originally Posted by Monketey Ghost

It is, and I've heard it from the first, "stolen guns". There's a huge piece missing here and it's too bad the kid wrecked his hard drive.

The guns were all registered to his mother, a gun and shooting enthusiast who was also apparently something of a "doomsday prepper" type, and were kept in the home where the both of them lived.

triforcharity · 18th December 2012, 02:15 PM

Originally Posted by lionking

And yet this is what's being proposed not just by Quad, but by politicians. There is a correlation in the US between higher gun ownership and a higher gun death rate. Adding guns worsens the problem.

Um, explain Chicago....K thx...

Monketey Ghost · 18th December 2012, 02:16 PM

Originally Posted by ANTPogo

The guns were all registered to his mother, a gun and shooting enthusiast who was also apparently something of a "doomsday prepper" type, and were kept in the home where the both of them lived.

yep. The reason was on the hard drive.

To stay on-topic then, is this just individual people losing their minds, or is it a societal issue? We'd do well to find out! And it'd be one of the best ways to honor those poor kids and adults.

Bob001 · 18th December 2012, 02:18 PM

The governor of Virginia, among others, has asked a similar question.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...939_story.html

I don't think too many people would want to see teachers packing heat in their classrooms. But if senior administrators had access to securely stored firearms, after proper training and licensing, they would be equipped to resist a lunatic gunman. In Connecticut, three administrators were shot -- and two killed -- trying to tackle the shooter. If one of them had been armed, maybe 20 kids would be alive.

And at Virginia Tech, quite a number of teachers and older students were Army veterans. Trusting them to carry weapons on campus might have saved some lives.

Guns are tools. They have good uses and bad. Protecting children is a good use.

BenBurch · 18th December 2012, 02:54 PM

Originally Posted by Bob001

...

Guns are tools. They have good uses and bad. Protecting children is a good use.

Atom bombs are tools. They have good uses and bad. Blowing up incoming asteroids is a good use...

...but this doesn't mean I want the general public having access to them.

Quad4_72 · 18th December 2012, 03:04 PM

Originally Posted by BenBurch

Atom bombs are tools. They have good uses and bad. Blowing up incoming asteroids is a good use...

...but this doesn't mean I want the general public having access to them.

This is the kind of ridiculousness that is counter productive to any discussion regarding firearms. There are absolutely STUPID comparisons on both sides of the argument. This is probably one of the dumbest ones posted yet. Congrats if that's what you were going for. If you were serious, may FSM help you.

geni · 18th December 2012, 03:15 PM

Originally Posted by Bob001

Guns are tools. They have good uses and bad. Protecting children is a good use.

Problem is that is what they are for they are remarkebly bad at it going by the number of child abuse cases last year.

triforcharity · 18th December 2012, 03:25 PM

Originally Posted by ANTPogo

That's a really misleading way of saying "he used the guns that were owned by his mother and kept in the house he lived in with her and which she used to take him shooting with".

Did he have permission to take those guns? Doubtful.

If not, they're stolen. Even if he lived there.

18th December 2012, 12:17 PM	#122
Travis Misanthrope of the Mountains Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Tuolumne City, CA Posts: 17,937	Originally Posted by johnny karate Any solution for keeping children safer in schools that puts the preservation of gun ownership rights as its highest priority should be immediately rejected as unserious. That is exactly what this is. A suggestion who's only purpose is to preserve the right to their precious pop-pop-bang toys that are more important to them than the security of children. Originally Posted by DGM I'd like to know who suggesting this. Could this be just your knee-jerk. If there was no guns does this mean they're safe? That is exactly what it would mean. At least more safe. I would never send my kids to a school where there were armed people on campus. I don't trust guns. I certainly don't trust people who have guns around or on them. I made it a point to unfriend the only person I ever knew that went out and bought a gun. I just don't want to know such people in real life. They scare me. Originally Posted by Quad4_72 Please, do tell how that is a "good point". Are teachers unable to access guns now? It seems that you and others like to suggest that when guns are immediately available, people become murderous and go crazy. I've personally known at least one teacher that had a psychotic break in the classroom. She had to be restrained by the students themselves. Now imagine she could have whipped a gun out from her desk at the spur of the moment. People are fallible. In fact you cannot trust the average person to do the right thing. Now we want to arm hundreds of thousand more? My ideal society is one where people have as few weapons at their disposal to harm me as possible.
	__________________ "Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com Zingiber Officinale The Humor blog of some not crazy guy

18th December 2012, 12:24 PM	#123
fuelair Cythraul Enfys Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 28,881	Originally Posted by Quad4_72 Can I have a Glock .45 in my drawer? Smith .460 or Ruger .480 ?
fuelair Cythraul Enfys Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 28,881	__________________ There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed. Wash this space! We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!

18th December 2012, 12:26 PM	#124
ANTPogo Unique Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Birmingham, AL Posts: 9,286	Originally Posted by DDWW CNN is covering your funeral. Several neighbors are saying what a nice person you were. Tomorrow they are burying the 4 people killed after he left your office. So sad. Let's have a moment of silence. Meanwhile, in the real world: Quote: Nick Meli is emotionally drained. The 22-year-old was at Clackamas Town Center with a friend and her baby when a masked man opened fire. "I heard three shots and turned and looked at Casey and said, 'are you serious?,'" he said. The friend and baby hit the floor. Meli, who has a concealed carry permit, positioned himself behind a pillar. "He was working on his rifle," said Meli. "He kept pulling the charging handle and hitting the side." The break in gunfire allowed Meli to pull out his own gun, but he never took his eyes off the shooter. "As I was going down to pull, I saw someone in the back of the Charlotte move, and I knew if I fired and missed, I could hit them," he said. Meli took cover inside a nearby store. He never pulled the trigger. He stands by that decision. "I'm not beating myself up cause I didn't shoot him," said Meli. "I know after he saw me, I think the last shot he fired was the one he used on himself." The gunman was dead, but not before taking two innocent lives with him and taking the innocence of everyone else. "I don't ever want to see anyone that way ever," said Meli. "It just bothers me." In other words, it's not that simple, even if you happen to be the bystander there with a gun ready and able to confront the killer. Meli confidently claims that the gunman committed suicide after he saw Meli had drawn his own weapon, but there is absolutely zero way of knowing if the gunman even saw Meli's weapon at all, much less had that fact influence his decision to shoot himself rather than shoot at Meli or continue his spree, and Meli certainly never opened fire on the gunman to try and stop him. And note that the main reason Meli gave for not firing is the exact same reason usually given by people who think random bystanders opening fire on gunmen in a spree-killing situation is a bad idea: the risk of hitting someone else.
	__________________ "A nation can survive with kufr, but not with zulm." - ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib "No more hurting people" - Martin William Richard Currently Reading: Righteous Victims, by Benny Morris

18th December 2012, 12:43 PM	#128
tsig a carbon based life-form Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 26,632	Originally Posted by DDWW Pop quiz. Bang, bang, you hear shots down the hallway. You run over and lock your office door and go back behind your desk. You look out your fifth floor window and decide jumping is not a good idea. Bang, Bang, the shots are getting closer. You get on your cell phone and dial 911. The 911 operator is asking; “what does the gunman look like?” “I am in my locked office!” you scream. Someone tries the doorknob on your door. Then several shots go through the door near the lock. Someone is kicking at the door and it is giving way. 911: “Are you sure its gunshots?” You: “#@*&!” You open your desk drawer and find: (pick one) 1. An olive branch. 2. A ceramic unicorn incense burner where the scented smoke comes out it’s a$$. 3. An autograph photo of Nancy Pelosi. 4. A white flag (made in France). 5. A loaded Colt 1911 .45 acp with two spare loaded magazines. (Prefer a Kimber myself) BTW: You have ten seconds. You whip out your Colt 1911 .45 and blow away a police officer who thought the shooter was in that office. BTW: you get ten years.
	Last edited by tsig; 18th December 2012 at 12:44 PM.

18th December 2012, 12:44 PM	#129
ANTPogo Unique Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Birmingham, AL Posts: 9,286	Originally Posted by tsig So you thing the rational and honest solution for gun violence is more guns? It's homeopathic thinking, almost. Like cures like.
	__________________ "A nation can survive with kufr, but not with zulm." - ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib "No more hurting people" - Martin William Richard Currently Reading: Righteous Victims, by Benny Morris

18th December 2012, 12:12 PM	#121
iknownothing Graduate Poster Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 1,148	Originally Posted by seycyrus In my what if scenario, the shooter knows that there is at least one armed responder at the school, and chooses an easier target. Exactly. And how is that better?

18th December 2012, 12:28 PM	#125
tsig a carbon based life-form Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 26,632	Originally Posted by Quad4_72 Please, do tell how that is a "good point". Are teachers unable to access guns now? It seems that you and others like to suggest that when guns are immediately available, people become murderous and go crazy. Isn't that the exact situation we're discussing.

18th December 2012, 12:35 PM	#126
tsig a carbon based life-form Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 26,632	Originally Posted by seycyrus This thread highlights the the inherent dishonesty that the anti-gun movement resorts to whenever there is an attempt at a serious discussion that does include complete disarmament. Shooters choose soft targets. This fact has become apparent. If a few well-trained individuals in schools had access to weapons, the impression of schools being soft targets would be reduced or eliminated. These weapons do not need to locked in some sort of fort knox type vault. A locked, reinforced drawer would suffice for daytime storage. I'm disappointed by the complete lack of candor some individuals on the antigun side of this discussion are showing. Just listened to NPR and they kept talking about assault weapons. What should have happened is that EVERY single time someone mentioned "assault weapons" they would take 2 minutes to explain that assault weapon is an intentionally ambiguous phrase meant to evoke connections to assault rifles. Assault rifles have not been used in these tragedies and are fully regulated already. What they are really pushing for is an "Looks like an assault rifle" ban. Which is ridiculous. It is as if we tried to push out an "looks like a pitbull" ban, and anything with a tail qualified. So in your first sentence you accuse those you disagree with of dishonesty?

18th December 2012, 12:37 PM	#127
tsig a carbon based life-form Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 26,632	Originally Posted by Quad4_72 Very well put. The anti gun nutter crowd always likes to spin these types of discussions as if people like myself are advocating a "Wild West" style environment. They also like to propose that there is no possible way that an armed individual in a school could make a bit of difference, and that every bullet they would shoot would hit an innocent bystander. It's just speaking from ignorance, but no solution to the problem is going to be found if individuals on both sides of the argument are not rational and honest. So you thing the rational and honest solution for gun violence is more guns?

18th December 2012, 12:45 PM	#130
Travis Misanthrope of the Mountains Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Tuolumne City, CA Posts: 17,937	Imagine if we handled all problems this way. A man is beating his wife? Well the solution is to beat him not get him to stop hitting his wife! A company is poisoning the water? Well the solution is to give everyone poison that they might use on the company employees! There is a forest fire threatening a house? Burn the house down now so the forest fire doesn't get the chance!
	__________________ "Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com Zingiber Officinale The Humor blog of some not crazy guy

18th December 2012, 12:49 PM	#131
tsig a carbon based life-form Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 26,632	Originally Posted by DDWW Yes, Not a Glock fan myself but would use it if needed with confidence. BTW: Everyone esle; The door was just kicked in. You now have 5 seconds. The second officer drills you right between the eyes. BTW: you now have 0 seconds.

18th December 2012, 12:56 PM	#132
Skeptic Ginger formerly skeptigirl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shifting through paradigms Posts: 40,489	It's TV movie mentality where the hero always shoots the bad guy(s). Reality isn't like that. I'm curious how long the shooting actually went on here but between just before the first call to 911 and the arrival of the police, the whole thing was over. The cops said, (I believe knowing how wrong the media got the details), that the shooting stopped when they arrived. I doubt the movie version of the hero saving all the kid's by taking out the shooter is a realistic version. It would have had to have been Bruce Willis or Sly Stallone and school/mall cops are more likely to be young kids with high school educations getting minimum wages.
	__________________ (Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, ~~Pubbie Party, Repubs~~ "Republics" and Republic Party in response.) Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 18th December 2012 at 12:58 PM.*

18th December 2012, 12:56 PM	#133
johnny karate ... and your little dog too. Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 7,814	Originally Posted by DGM I'd like to know who suggesting this. Could this be just your knee-jerk. It's inherent in the OP. It's quite clear that the starting place for a "solution" to gun violence that calls for more guns violence isn't the safety of innocents. Quote: If there was no guns does this mean they're safe? I don't recall suggesing there should be no guns. Originally Posted by DGM Call me when you start making sense. K? Let me know what words I'm using that you don't understand and I'll attempt to rephrase in more simplistic terms.
	__________________ Lost your faith in humanity? Click here to have it restored. Or here.

18th December 2012, 12:58 PM	#134
ben m Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 4,637	Let's suppose, for the sake of argument, that the OP's premises are correct. "If you arm people, they can defend themselves, and this prevents a lot of mass shootings". So we can imagine a world where the mentally ill, the criminals, etc., all have guns, and whenever they try to use them there's a little gun battle, which the good guys often win in the end. You know what? I don't care. I don't want to live in that world. Jesus! If you dropped me and my family into Baghdad, or the favelas, or Mogadishu, or Juarez, or Compton circa 1975, I sure would NOT say "This is fine, me and my neighbors will obtain tactical training and live here with the security of self-defense." I would get the holy hell out as fast as possible. Good lord. Because I don't have the mental capacity to protect myself from everything. I don't walk around the world braced for action in case my building is about to fall down (codes!), if my doctor is an untrained impostor (licensing!), if the car in front of me has no brake lights (mandatory inspections!), or if my tap water is drinkable (environment!). Neither do you. Neither does anyone---or, at least, not anyone with spare brain cells and sanity to devote to art, science, hobbies, family, etc.. I choose to live in a world with public safety doing 99% of the work of protecting me from terrorism, lead, mercury, deathtrap cars, potholes, cholera, smallpox, building collapses, gas main leaks, switchblades, mislabeled alcohol, electrical shorts, gas-station fires, and so on. Why in the name of God should the nation's public safety apparatus sit down and ignore an omnipresent hazard due to highly-engineered high speed murder weapons floating around everywhere? Why should this specific public safety problem suggest the non-solution of "you're on your own, shoot back and you'll be fine"? Jesus. The obvious solution, and the one that's working well in every other developed country, is get rid of the omnipresent weapons.
ben m Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 4,637

18th December 2012, 12:59 PM	#135
NoahFence Psycho Kitty Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Patriot Nation Posts: 9,288	Quote: What if, and this is a very big hypothetical, in the elementary school in Connecticut there were about 5 or so teachers/faculty members who had been trained in the use of firearms and also trained in reacting to an active shooter scenario? And also, what if each of these teachers/faculty members had a vault in their classroom with either a shotgun or a handgun inside? Because no teacher will ever fly off the handle....
	__________________ Our truest life is when we are in our dreams awake. -Henry David Thoreau

18th December 2012, 01:00 PM	#136
tsig a carbon based life-form Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 26,632	Originally Posted by Quad4_72 I know we are going to disagree, but how do you propose it is an escalation? There are two courses of action there. 1, the gunmen can roam about the school at free will mowing down any and everyone he sees without a single bit of resistance, knowing that everyone is helpless. 2, there is actually someone there to offer resistance and the ability to defend others, slowing or if all goes as planned, completely stopping the attacker. Even if he decides to up his weaponry in response to anticipated security, whether is be a pistol or semi automatic rifle, the mass killing will happen regardless if there was no one there to defend others. If there was in fact someone there to offer a defense, at least it is a fighting chance to avoid a complete massacre. How about roboguns that automatically pinpoint a gunshot and return fire?

18th December 2012, 01:10 PM	#137
iknownothing Graduate Poster Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 1,148	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger I'm curious how long the shooting actually went on here but between just before the first call to 911 and the arrival of the police, the whole thing was over. That's another thing I was thinking about. Armed guards are less of a deterrent for someone bent on a murder/suicide. This guy went into the school expecting to die; the only question is how many he kills before he kills himself. Best case scenario with people shooting back is that he kills slightly fewer kids before it's over. Because by the time they hear shots, grasp the situation, retrieve their guns, and make it to where he is, he's already done most of the damage he did anyway. Worst case scenario, is in the confusion and adrenaline, more people adding more shooting into the mix might have accidentally killed a few more kids.
	Last edited by iknownothing; 18th December 2012 at 01:12 PM.

18th December 2012, 01:15 PM	#138
Skeptic Ginger formerly skeptigirl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shifting through paradigms Posts: 40,489	Originally Posted by NoahFence Because no teacher will ever fly off the handle.... And no angry out of control kid will ever get the gun from the teacher.....
	__________________ (*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, ~~Pubbie Party, Repubs~~ "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)

18th December 2012, 01:16 PM	#139
Hercules Rockefeller Graduate Poster Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Ponylandistan Posts: 1,377	My suggestions are: -Practice evacuation drills regularly. -Have law enforcement as close to the schools as possible. -Change the way media reports these incidents ( I don't know how). -Pray to FSM that some crazy bastard doesn't decide to shoot up a place near you.
	__________________ Quantum physics means that anything can happen at anytime and for no reason. Also, eat plenty of oatmeal, and animals never had a war! - Deepak Chopra

18th December 2012, 01:23 PM	#140
NoahFence Psycho Kitty Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Patriot Nation Posts: 9,288	Originally Posted by DDWW Answer; Too late; you just died. Sorry. You know, the chances of that person being the teacher from down the hall are exactly the same as it being some nobody from the street.
	__________________ Our truest life is when we are in our dreams awake. -Henry David Thoreau

18th December 2012, 01:28 PM	#141
quadraginta What was the question? Join Date: May 2009 Location: Central Vale of Humility Posts: 7,906	Originally Posted by DGM Most yes (this is not code but is usually the case). For parents that go to "meet the teacher" days, notice the metal door frames on classroom doors, this is for fire but, makes them almost impossible to kick in. It isn't quite that simple. Metal door frames (AKA hollow metal frames or HM frames) are standard for nearly all commercial or institutional construction. One reason is that overall they can be less expensive. Whether they are fire rated or not is a different story, but they only need to have a rating equal to the rating of the partition (wall) they are installed in. The corridor wall in a school is probably going to have a 2hr. rating, if it's rated at all. The funny thing is that generally all HM frames can pass muster for a two hour rating, since it costs less to make them all out of a heavy enough gauge to pass than to have different production runs. Normally the only difference is that someone with a UL certification pop-rivets a tag to the ones which are sold as rated. As far as security is concerned, it is the door itself which is usually the weak point. HM doors are not commonly used in most interior applications. A wood veneer door can easily carry a two hour rating (even 4hr., with a gypsum core). When the door is kicked in it is the door which fails, not the frame. Direction of swing will make a bigger difference, because of the stop built into the frame. If a door is 'reverse swing' (swings into the corridor instead of into the room) it will be much harder to break down if you're trying to get into the room, but it will still probably be the door that fails, not the frame. Most room doors are regular swing. All that has to fail is the material around the lock assembly.

18th December 2012, 01:33 PM	#142
NoahFence Psycho Kitty Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Patriot Nation Posts: 9,288	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger It's TV movie mentality where the hero always shoots the bad guy(s). Reality isn't like that. I'm curious how long the shooting actually went on here but between just before the first call to 911 and the arrival of the police, the whole thing was over. The cops said, (I believe knowing how wrong the media got the details), that the shooting stopped when they arrived. I doubt the movie version of the hero saving all the kid's by taking out the shooter is a realistic version. It would have had to have been Bruce Willis or Sly Stallone and school/mall cops are more likely to be young kids with high school educations getting minimum wages. Exactly. Even after Aurora, there were folks clamoring "If everybody was armed this wouldn't have been this bad" In that specific case, it would have bee 100x worse.
	__________________ Our truest life is when we are in our dreams awake. -Henry David Thoreau

18th December 2012, 01:42 PM	#143
John Mekki Banned Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 537	Originally Posted by NoahFence Exactly. Even after Aurora, there were folks clamoring "If everybody was armed this wouldn't have been this bad" In that specific case, it would have bee 100x worse. From the victims and their families point of view, maybe 100x worse. From everyone else in the planet, less people to compete with and more room for everyone else More land, more air available for everyone
John Mekki Banned Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 537	Last edited by John Mekki; 18th December 2012 at 01:43 PM.

18th December 2012, 01:45 PM	#144
NoahFence Psycho Kitty Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Patriot Nation Posts: 9,288	Yay Fear!! http://www.boston.com/news/nation/20...tCO/story.html
	__________________ Our truest life is when we are in our dreams awake. -Henry David Thoreau

18th December 2012, 01:46 PM	#145
NoahFence Psycho Kitty Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Patriot Nation Posts: 9,288	Originally Posted by John Mekki From the victims and their families point of view, maybe 100x worse. From everyone else in the planet, less people to compete with and more room for everyone else More land, more air available for everyone Feel free to respond, never. :
	__________________ Our truest life is when we are in our dreams awake. -Henry David Thoreau

18th December 2012, 01:55 PM	#146
triforcharity Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: The South! Posts: 12,061	Originally Posted by Dcdrac Increase the Sales?puchase tax on guns according to how powerful they and also increase the cost the of permits and licences for them according to their power. The less powerful the weapon you buy is the less you pay. So, what does that do? Do you honestly think that the majority of criminals purchased their guns legally? Horse ****. All this does is unfairly tax people who use high powered rifles for hunting. Plus, this type of system is already in place. It's called sales tax. Because a more powerful weapon is naturally going to cost more, as are the bullets, we already pay more in tax. The price for my .50 cal ammo is already about 3.70 a round. Yes, you read that right, per round. Wrong idea, and it won't prevent another CT. Remember, he stole the weapons.
	__________________ "The horse has been led to the water, the horse is in fact standing up to its knees in the water, but the horse is telling you in a loud voice that there's no water to be had....he's still so very thirsty!" ~alienentity

18th December 2012, 01:55 PM	#147
Quad4_72 AI-EE-YAH! Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: USA Posts: 5,830	Well it seems the usual characters have showed up to present nothing but irrationality to the thread. I predicted as much. But luckily there have been some pretty intelligent posts with some ideas that are actually pretty feasible. Much appreciated to those that intelligently presented flaws in my idea and presented some reasonable alternatives. To those that added ideas such as: "I made it a point to unfriend the only person I ever knew that went out and bought a gun. I just don't want to know such people in real life. They scare me." "A company is poisoning the water? Well the solution is to give everyone poison that they might use on the company employees!" "How about roboguns that automatically pinpoint a gunshot and return fire? " "Yeah that's the solution. Add more guns!" Thanks for nothing.
	__________________ Looks like the one on top has a magazine, thus needs less reloading. Also, the muzzle shroud makes it less likely for a spree killer to burn his hands. The pistol grip makes it more comfortable for the spree killer to shoot. thaiboxerken

18th December 2012, 01:59 PM	#148
triforcharity Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: The South! Posts: 12,061	Originally Posted by BStrong It won't fly. School Administrators in California don't want armed uniformed LEO's in school unless the local government forces them to - there have been cases where calls for service have been made from a school, the officer comes out and is ordered off school property by the school administration - no **. The single best defense to an active shooter situation would be armed professionals on site beforehand, but it's such a charged political issue that the administrators and the squeaky wheel (generally liberal) school board types would never allow it - even in the face of Newtown. That breaks my heart too - I could give back to my community in the only way I am really qualified to do so, but in the eyes of some I'd be a dirty bastard for even suggesting it. Are you ***** kidding me???? Do you have a link to a story about that??? Secondly, kudos to you for being willing to donate your time. It's admirable. I heard a suggestion of a way to put veterans back to work. Hire 1 or 2 for each and every school, and let them be their security. They've already got the training and know how, and as long as their properly vetted, I don't see an issue.
	__________________ "The horse has been led to the water, the horse is in fact standing up to its knees in the water, but the horse is telling you in a loud voice that there's no water to be had....he's still so very thirsty!" ~alienentity

18th December 2012, 02:01 PM	#149
ANTPogo Unique Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Birmingham, AL Posts: 9,286	Originally Posted by triforcharity Remember, he stole the weapons. That's a really misleading way of saying "he used the guns that were owned by his mother and kept in the house he lived in with her and which she used to take him shooting with".
	__________________ "A nation can survive with kufr, but not with zulm." - ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib "No more hurting people" - Martin William Richard Currently Reading: Righteous Victims, by Benny Morris

18th December 2012, 02:03 PM	#150
Monketey Ghost Body of Work Join Date: May 2003 Location: I'm on your screen! Posts: 14,806	It is, and I've heard it from the first, "stolen guns". There's a huge piece missing here and it's too bad the kid wrecked his hard drive.
	__________________ _{The membership of this forum is henceforth to refer to me as potato-headed Bobby} _{SSKCAS, member in long standing}

18th December 2012, 02:08 PM	#151
triforcharity Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: The South! Posts: 12,061	Originally Posted by Dcdrac Another suggestion all would be gun owning families have to take a psychriatric and medical test before being allowed a licence at their own cost. How idiotic. You do realize this will not do a damn bit of good, right? Do you have anything constructive to add?
	__________________ "The horse has been led to the water, the horse is in fact standing up to its knees in the water, but the horse is telling you in a loud voice that there's no water to be had....he's still so very thirsty!" ~alienentity

18th December 2012, 02:11 PM	#152
triforcharity Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: The South! Posts: 12,061	Originally Posted by Abooga Take a look at Europe. We have plenty of crazies here but being much harder to find guns when they have a fit they have to resort to katanas, axes, knives... so the death toll is much much lower. (see the wikipedia list of school shootings in the US and other countryes... says all) So perhaps the solution is to begin to undestand that as society becomes more civilised, guns are going to become obsolete, little by little, so it wouldn´t be such a bad idea to start limiting their availability, more control etc. Seriously, your idea of getting more guns in the classroom sounds quite crazy from my (gun free) perspective. Nope, not gonna happen, and isn't a solution at all. Look at Chicago. The last time I checked, they had something like 290+ GUN homicides this YEAR. And they do not allowed a citizen the right to carry openly, concealed, in their car, etc. Banning guns only ensures that criminals will have guns. BTW, the 2nd Amendment prevents an outright ban, or even a wind down in availability.
	__________________ "The horse has been led to the water, the horse is in fact standing up to its knees in the water, but the horse is telling you in a loud voice that there's no water to be had....he's still so very thirsty!" ~alienentity

18th December 2012, 02:12 PM	#153
ANTPogo Unique Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Birmingham, AL Posts: 9,286	Originally Posted by Monketey Ghost It is, and I've heard it from the first, "stolen guns". There's a huge piece missing here and it's too bad the kid wrecked his hard drive. The guns were all registered to his mother, a gun and shooting enthusiast who was also apparently something of a "doomsday prepper" type, and were kept in the home where the both of them lived.
	__________________ "A nation can survive with kufr, but not with zulm." - ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib "No more hurting people" - Martin William Richard Currently Reading: Righteous Victims, by Benny Morris

18th December 2012, 02:15 PM	#154
triforcharity Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: The South! Posts: 12,061	Originally Posted by lionking And yet this is what's being proposed not just by Quad, but by politicians. There is a correlation in the US between higher gun ownership and a higher gun death rate. Adding guns worsens the problem. Um, explain Chicago....K thx...
	__________________ "The horse has been led to the water, the horse is in fact standing up to its knees in the water, but the horse is telling you in a loud voice that there's no water to be had....he's still so very thirsty!" ~alienentity

18th December 2012, 02:16 PM	#155
Monketey Ghost Body of Work Join Date: May 2003 Location: I'm on your screen! Posts: 14,806	Originally Posted by ANTPogo The guns were all registered to his mother, a gun and shooting enthusiast who was also apparently something of a "doomsday prepper" type, and were kept in the home where the both of them lived. yep. The reason was on the hard drive. To stay on-topic then, is this just individual people losing their minds, or is it a societal issue? We'd do well to find out! And it'd be one of the best ways to honor those poor kids and adults.
	__________________ _{The membership of this forum is henceforth to refer to me as potato-headed Bobby} _{SSKCAS, member in long standing}