The Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Shooting

[elone]

I am sure that Retribution has forgotten more about firearms than I ever knew. That being said, I have been around firearms all my life, and that is a long time, and served in the military. I have fired bolt actions rifles, semi automatic rifles and pistols, shotguns, fully automatic "assault rifles", and machine guns, grenade launchers and more. I understand his comments on recoil.

I think people need to understand what they are talking about. There is little difference, in my opinion, between a so called assault rifle, and something more traditional that people think of as hunting rifles.  The main differences are appearance, magazine capacity, weight, and technically their operating actions. This is the main difficulty in trying to ban a certain type weapon and allow others. They are all deadly and all capable of killing many people in a short period of time. So what is to be done?

Personally, I have no problem with stricter sales controls, raising the age limit for buying a gun, background checks and all those things. Here is the problem. There are already thousands and thousand of these "assault rifles" out there. So do we confiscate them?  I don't have an answer, but certainly strict controls is a start for purchases. Raising the age at which a person can buy one is another. We regulate drivers license, we regulate drinking age, voting, and lots of other things. Who decided an 18 year old can buy a gun?

And here is the wording of the second amendment. "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."  Often interpreted as we can all buy all the firearms we want. Of course, others emphasize "A well regulated Militia".  An argument for the ages. Common sense to me says we should be "well regulated" The idea that we need a private militia to protect our freedoms is a little off the wall. I can just see a group of hunters with their assault rifles fighting a tank, Apache helicopters, jet fighters, artillery, and the rest. Good luck.

As for the NRA, they used to be a good organization who emphasized hunting, safety, and gave information on all activities relating to arms. Now they have become some kind of a nut job knee jerk organization who is so afraid that they will lose support of gun manufacturers that they take the most extreme positions on everything related to guns.

A local example, I used to enjoy shooting, targets, as I gave up hunting years ago. The one range around where I live, required one to become a member of the NRA to use their facility. So I guess no more targets or competitions for me.

I have rambled here quite a bit, but my points are: we need controls on who can buy a firearm, we need some common sense regulations on things like magazine size, and we need age limits to purchase. I don't really care if "assault" weapons are banned, but defining them is problematic. I would like the country to not have these things at all, but then again, I would like the world to not have atomic bombs.

And by the way, if anyone thinks arming teachers is a good idea, then they better think hard about why we have police and why everyone is not carrying.

[Retribution]

Cannot say I disagree with any of the above post. What bothers me though is how fast these discussions turn into only guns. This kid set off red flags for a long time. I want to know why that was not acted on.

Not to diminish the tragedy, but this bothers me less than Vegas dis. This young fellow all but screamed that he was a tragedy in the making. Our system really failed that some intervention did not happen. Vegas I have still not seen anything on why that fellow suddenly did it. Admittedly he seemed an odd guy, but that is not a red flag. So Vegas creeps me out more.

I do not say this as a gun nut, but as a human being who cares. Fixing all attention on firearms is crazy. But it seems to always turn into that yet it is doing  victims a disservice. We probably cannot stop things like Vegas, but I certainly feel there is a chance for timely intervention and lives saved in things like Florida.

[gaggedLouise]

Amazingly, an armed trooper arrived at the school about 90 seconds after the killer fired the first shots, but he just...stopped outside the school and took up post there, not entering while seventeen people were killed inside.  >:( The man has now resigned from his job.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/florida-school-shooting-armed-officer-gunman-scot-peterson-nikolas-cruz-sheriff-scott-israel-a8224536.html

If this is what happens with people who are professionally trained to intervene and subdue a violent killer - and to use firearms if needed - how can Trump reasonably think that letting teachers have a gun in a drawer or concealed under their suit would change the game plan??

[Aiden]

Cannot say I disagree with any of the above post. What bothers me though is how fast these discussions turn into only guns. This kid set off red flags for a long time. I want to know why that was not acted on.

Not to diminish the tragedy, but this bothers me less than Vegas dis. This young fellow all but screamed that he was a tragedy in the making. Our system really failed that some intervention did not happen. Vegas I have still not seen anything on why that fellow suddenly did it. Admittedly he seemed an odd guy, but that is not a red flag. So Vegas creeps me out more.

I do not say this as a gun nut, but as a human being who cares. Fixing all attention on firearms is crazy. But it seems to always turn into that yet it is doing  victims a disservice. We probably cannot stop things like Vegas, but I certainly feel there is a chance for timely intervention and lives saved in things like Florida.

Because a mentally diminished person can rack up kills with a gun over anything else.

[Retribution]

I am not all in on armed teachers though I know many who are. It depends on the teacher I suppose at the end of the day. As for the officer definitely dereliction of duty.

Having said that my heart bleeds for the guy. I like to think to steal a phrase that I would be one to run toward the lords of chaos when needed. A person does not know till faced with it. When it came down to it the man was ill suited to his job.

What I would like to see is hired, armed, guards in schools with training. A lot of this training toward spotting and addressing bullying. Bullying starts many of these problems. It has been around forever but addressing it is important. Maybe these people could also be trained in counseling for bad home lives and other factors. I would like to think a shootout would be an exception rather than a rule.

[Aiden]

The last thing we need is people with a hero complex around kids.

Putting more guns in schools is not the answer to less gun shooting.

[Retribution]

Because a mentally diminished person can rack up kills with a gun over anything else.

I happen to not agree with that. I choose not to argue, but there are many examples where sick people have used other devices just as effectively and demonizing a segment of society does not change that nor does it help.

But we are not going to agree on this so we need to smile and agree that is okay also. That helps in its on way as the world has gotten too toxic.

[Aiden]

If you want to cherry pick fine. Most massacres are due to guns, a few are contributed to cars, vans and bombs.

[Retribution]

The last thing we need is people with a hero complex around kids.

Putting more guns in schools is not the answer to less gun shooting.

I am not sure a professional is a person with a hero complex. Using that reasoning law enforcement personnel are villains. If you feel that way fine, but I do not believe that. I am not that anti establishment.

[Retribution]

This is going toxic Aiden and thus the problem we have. If we wish for anything to really happen neither point of view will get all they want and both views will be disappointed.

So here I shall politely bow out before we are at each others throats. You may wish to ban firearms, note I said may. I will fight that with every fiber of my being.

Have a good day.

[Ket]

What I would like to see is hired, armed, guards in schools with training. A lot of this training toward spotting and addressing bullying. Bullying starts many of these problems. It has been around forever but addressing it is important. Maybe these people could also be trained in counseling for bad home lives and other factors. I would like to think a shootout would be an exception rather than a rule.

The vast majority of school these days have what are called resource officers, which are city police officers whose sole job is to work at the schools. Heck, our high school here has four of them. There is not a lack of armed personnel in our schools. I went to high school in the late 90's and we had an armed officer in our school. Armed police officers have had a presence in schools for the past 20+ years. That's not the problem.

The problem has several layers to it, and like you said, bullying is one of them. But bullying is much different today than it was when I was in school. Sure, we had the internet and chat rooms (oh heavens AOL) 20 years ago, but we weren't as connected as children are today. It gives them a place to be somewhat anonymous or disconnected from the person they are bullying, and not see the effects of their actions. So it's going to take much different tactics to combat it then I think a lot of people realise. But, there are many kids who are bullied who never think of shooting their classmates.

Yes, home lives can also be an issue. And there are not enough resources to help children who come from abusive homes, who come from homes with drug or alcohol addicted parents, who come from extreme poverty. Which is horrible, but trying to get money from the government to help these situations is like trying to pull the teeth out of a dragon. Private funding only goes so far. Yet, there are many kids who come from these situations that never think of shooting their classmates.

Mental health, bullying, adverse home environments are simply factors that can lead someone to commit mass murder, however without access to the tools to do such, the mass murders don't occur. Every aspect of the problem - mental health, home life, and access to weapons - needs to be dealt with. But our lawmakers, propped up on their lobbyist money piles, only see people as a means to an end, as a way to make their hoard larger, which prevents any real effective legislation from occurring.

[Mithlomwen]

The last thing we need is people with a hero complex around kids.

Putting more guns in schools is not the answer to less gun shooting.

If they actually make it where professionals, be it teachers or armed guards, are able to carry on school grounds, the people carrying will be trained in how to handle firearms, trained in how to use them, and I would imagine trained in how to handle situations like mass shootings. 

The attitude that it will be people ' with a hero complex' does a disservice to those people. 

I see you offering a lot of opinions on what you think isn't going to work.  I am interested to hear your ideas on what you think will work. 

[AmberStarfire]

Ardent supporter and defender of the second amendment here. Generally I don't comment in threads of a political nature too often, but I feel like I can and should try to make the pro-gun perspective clearer. At the very least, I can speak for my personal side of the table seeing as I can't speak for the various individual perspectives on the 2A-advocate group.

I've always felt that the spirit of the second amendment is meant to serve as a protection from potential tyranny at the hands of the ruling government. A well-armed citizenry is more difficult to control than one that is not. I, for one, would not be comfortable if the military or police were the only ones to have access to guns. And, I still would not be comfortable if the military or police were the only ones to have access to other such weapons like an M-16. My reasoning is simple, this is too much power in the hands of a government. Too much power, to much potential for abuse.

I'm not American so I don't know the amendments, but I think that's the one that gives people a right to bear arms?

The thing is, if you felt (or feel) there was tyranny at the hands of a ruling government, would you use these weapons to deal with it?

I wonder if in some ways this is cyclical in nature. The government and police are more cautious and potentially forceful because so many people have guns/they're putting their lives on the line to a greater extent, and pro-gun people are more defensive of their rights, warier because of what the police can do etc, and it leads to greater tension? That said, I'm sure there are a lot of pro-gun people in both government and the police.

Having been to the US a few times, I can honestly say I felt less safe around the police etc there than I do here or in my home country. I'm not quite sure why it was, but they seem to exert a higher level of control and seem more.. tense. Over here, most police (garda siochana) don't even carry guns. My father and grandfather were both police officers at times in their lives, and as far as I know they did, but it isn't that. Maybe to some extent it's a sense of uncertainty, when you're in a different country, but there seemed to be a difference.

[Aiden]

If they actually make it where professionals, be it teachers or armed guards, are able to carry on school grounds, the people carrying will be trained in how to handle firearms, trained in how to use them, and I would imagine trained in how to handle situations like mass shootings. 

The attitude that it will be people ' with a hero complex' does a disservice to those people. 

I see you offering a lot of opinions on what you think isn't going to work.  I am interested to hear your ideas on what you think will work.

Once you arm teachers or bring in armed guards, your schools become prisons. As for proper training, vetting etc, we barely do that with our armed forces and police. Arming vets or training security to guard schools is scrapping the bottom of the barrel. (The cost aside, lets not forget an ENTIRE state's school teacher's is on strike)

What I think will work.

Imposing stricter laws on gun ownership, increase age you can buy a gun.

I'd even support a gun license similar to one you need to drive and operate in this country.

Banning certain types of guns. (Assault, machine guns, semi auto whatever, the shit they give soldiers)

[AmberStarfire]

Eliminating those with a criminal record or who fail a psychological test might be a good idea too. People wouldn't like it, but something like 1 in 3 people have psychological problems of some kind.

[Ket]

Banning certain types of guns. (Assault, machine guns, semi auto whatever, the shit they give soldiers)

Those are banned, to a very high degree. Yes, you can technically own an automatic rifle, (semi-auto is basically pew and pew only, while auto is pew and pewpewpew options), however it is going to cost you a hell of a lot of money.

The problem with legal semi-auto weapons such as the AR-15 is that they are extremely customisable to the point they become almost automatic. It's not just bump stocks. It's also drop in triggers that allow for a shooting mode that drastically reduces the split times between shots. For less than $1500 you can have a weapon that can fire at near automatic capacity for damn near as much ammo as you can push through it. This drop in trigger has been legal since 2013, and is ATF certified as non-NFA.

We've taken our enthusiasm for guns and the antiquated wording of the second amendment entirely too far, and allowed it to overtake the rights of other people to live their lives without the fear of being shot to death while going about their daily business. Something has to give.

Eliminating those with a criminal record or who fail a psychological test might be a good idea too. People wouldn't like it, but something like 1 in 3 people have psychological problems of some kind.

That's an iffy subject. What is the determining factor? Because I have anxiety and depression, but I have absolutely no desire to shoot people, as I am rather against killing another human. I would argue that most people with psychological disorders feel the same. And what about people with no diagnosis? We have an atrocious health care system here, which leaves many people unable to see a doctor in order to get a diagnosis or help they need after being diagnosed. Mental health is already highly stigmatised in the US, so putting every single person with any sort of psychological diagnosis onto a master list which would prevent them from obtaining a firearm would open up a whole can of worms that would set back and tiny bit of progress that has been made to help remove the stigma of mental illness.

I own guns. I enjoy handguns. I enjoy rifles. But there are some types that people just have absolutely no need to own. And the ability of the average American over the age of 18 to own as many weapons as they can afford - to basically amass an armory - needs to be curtailed.

[Mithlomwen]

Once you arm teachers or bring in armed guards, your schools become prisons. As for proper training, vetting etc, we barely do that with our armed forces and police. Arming vets or training security to guard schools is scrapping the bottom of the barrel. (The cost aside, lets not forget an ENTIRE state's school teacher's is on strike)

What I think will work.

Imposing stricter laws on gun ownership, increase age you can buy a gun.

I'd even support a gun license similar to one you need to drive and operate in this country.

Banning certain types of guns. (Assault, machine guns, semi auto whatever, the shit they give soldiers)

Thank you for that. 

Here's a question I have for you though.  Since you don't think arming people at the school is a good idea. 

In a situation like a mass shooting, when you have someone who is in the building, shooting to kill, what are the people in the schools supposed to do?  Because, no matter what sort of laws are or aren't in place, there is always the possibility of something like this happening again.

Shouldn't the people at the schools be able to defend themselves?  In between the time the police are called, and arrive at the scene, the shooter has however long to kill more people.  What are they supposed to do in the meantime?   As it stands now, they have no way to defend themselves. 

Teachers were shielding kids from being shot with their bodies, because that's all they could do.  (I'm not discussing the armed security guard that was there that did absolutely freaking nothing to help anyone as I have no words).  But if there had been someone there, with the presence of mind (and had been armed) to do something about it, there might have been a lot of lives saved that day.  Shouldn't there be an option to have someone there to protect our children in the event this happens again?

[Aiden]

Hunker down and endure.

This isn't the wild west.

I think we are in a sad state if we are being REACTIVE to this, opposed to active.

Maybe find way to weaponize thoughts and prayers?

The one good thing that came out of this senseless tragedy is the protest led by the survivors.

And I think we SHOULD discuss the armed guard who DID NOTHING.
When push comes to shove, the armed person WHO SHOULD HAVE acted, didn't.

[Mithlomwen]

Hunker down and endure.

This isn't the wild west.

I think we are in a sad state if we are being REACTIVE to this, opposed to active.

Maybe find way to weaponize thoughts and prayers?

The one good thing that came out of this senseless tragedy is the protest led by the survivors.

And I think we SHOULD discuss the armed guard who DID NOTHING.
When push comes to shove, the armed person WHO SHOULD HAVE acted, didn't.

Oh I agree completely.  The fact that the man did nothing has me livid beyond words. 

But, I am sorry.  I cannot agree with the 'hunker down and endure' thing. 

I have two young kids in school.  One is in fourth grade, and one is in sixth.  And if someone came into my child's school, with the intent to kill, I would want to know there was something that could be done other than my kids having to try and hide and pray that the gunman didn't find them. 

I want to know that my child can and will be protected once they enter that building.  To me, this is not an 'option' this should be mandatory. 

[Aiden]

Adding more guns is not the answer.

At that point you now have the risk of a gun falling into a student's hands. A teacher who snaps and abuses their own authority. Guards with that (hero complex), people who can't cut it in the police force, the military, or just aren't stable to be the ones defending children.

But I don't see this discussion going anywhere.

See you next shooting.

#Thoughts and Prayers

[Lustful Bride]

Personally I feel my solution of ex soldiers and police officers near retirement being security for schools would be far better. But that might just be my pride talking.

[Mithlomwen]

See you next shooting.

#Thoughts and Prayers

Aiden, that is completely uncalled for. 

If you want to exit the conversation that is fine, but taking parting shots like the above is not kosher, and you know it. 

Don't do it again.

[Retribution]

Look guys, until there is some give and take it all adds up to more hand wringing. The same applies to most political discussions in the US. A stalemate. There needs to be compromise or nothing will ever change. For me on this topic I will give ground. But I need some assurances it is not simply used as a first step in a steady erosion. That is my fear, same as interchangeable use of the term semi automatic and assault weapon. It can lead to an erosion of what I consider a fundamental freedom and I do not see it lessening the body count. But many of the opposing view see it as simply a first step and that is when I dig in my heels and say alright I will give nothing then. That is why groups like the NRA have been radicalized.

We need to compromise. Now I am really out, as I said I feel this is going toxic thus my feelings in my first post that were badly expressed.

[Ket]

That is my fear, same as interchangeable use of the term semi automatic and assault weapon.

If I have been shot, I have been assaulted with a weapon and that weapon is a gun, regardless of type.

If I have been stabbed, I have been assaulted with a weapon, and that weapon is a knife, regardless of type.

If I have been beaten with a baseball bat, I have been assaulted with a weapon, and that weapon is a baseball bat, regardless of type.

I could continue.

My point is that anything can be considered an assault weapon, including a person's fist.

The difference, when it comes to firearms, is between semi-auto (single pew only) and fully auto (option for pew and pewpewpew).

[Lustful Bride]

If I have been shot, I have been assaulted with a weapon and that weapon is a gun, regardless of type.

If I have been stabbed, I have been assaulted with a weapon, and that weapon is a knife, regardless of type.

If I have been beaten with a baseball bat, I have been assaulted with a weapon, and that weapon is a baseball bat, regardless of type.

I could continue.

My point is that anything can be considered an assault weapon, including a person's fist.

The difference, when it comes to firearms, is between semi-auto (single pew only) and fully auto (option for pew and pewpewpew).

But there need to be a clear understanding of categories and classifications. There are Battle Rifles, Sniper rifles, assault rifles, anti material rifles. When dealing with law and enforcement of that law things need to be very clear cut and understandable.