" a gun obsessive living in fear of society's collapse "

[/dev/null]

We already have that, they are called police officers. Schools in the 'hood already have a cop on duty. It's time to make that the policy at every school.

 

Yes I know. They had them at my high school and Erie, PA back in the 90s wasn't exactly a hotbed of gangland activity

 

Armed police sound like a good idea at first. But somebody who does this would factor the police officers into their plan and eliminate them first

[3rdnlng]

Yes I know. They had them at my high school and Erie, PA back in the 90s wasn't exactly a hotbed of gangland activity

 

Armed police sound like a good idea at first. But somebody who does this would factor the police officers into their plan and eliminate them first

 

Which High School? My daughter went to McDowell.

[/dev/null]

Which High School? My daughter went to McDowell.

Central

 

I don't recall any of the suburban districts with officers when I was in school. Just the city schools.

Of course Erie's school shooting episode occured far outside the city in Edinboro where nobody thought such a thing could ever happen

[Nanker]

Harry Reid on Gun Control: "I carried a gun with me wherever I went."

[3rdnlng]

Central

 

I don't recall any of the suburban districts with officers when I was in school. Just the city schools.

Of course Erie's school shooting episode occured far outside the city in Edinboro where nobody thought such a thing could ever happen

 

There was one at East 3-4 years ago. Student on student, in the gym at I believe a basketball game.

[KD in CA]

Yes I know. They had them at my high school and Erie, PA back in the 90s wasn't exactly a hotbed of gangland activity

 

Armed police sound like a good idea at first. But somebody who does this would factor the police officers into their plan and eliminate them first

 

In how many of these school shootings has a cop beeing killed?

 

It's a little harder to factor it into your plans when trying to take out a trained cop vs a 6 year old. Especially if your own shooting experience is limited to the range and video games, as is generally the case with these nuts. Had there been a cop inside SHES, he would have heard the shots breaking the glass and been able to respond accordingly.

 

Compare having a cop on the grounds vs. some of the ludicrous suggestions like arming teachers.

[/dev/null]

In how many of these school shootings has a cop beeing killed?

 

It's a little harder to factor it into your plans when trying to take out a trained cop vs a 6 year old. Especially if your own shooting experience is limited to the range and video games, as is generally the case with these nuts. Had there been a cop inside SHES, he would have heard the shots breaking the glass and been able to respond accordingly.

 

Compare having a cop on the grounds vs. some of the ludicrous suggestions like arming teachers.

 

A cop on school ground is a symbolic gesture, a show of force, at best and a single point of failure at worst if taken out.

 

Had there been a cop inside SHES, yes they would have heard the shots and been able to respond. The loss of life would have been lessened but not averted

Edited December 19, 2012 by /dev/null

[KD in CA]

A cop on school ground is a symbolic gesture, a show of force, at best and a single point of failure at worst if taken out

No, at worst a show of force, which may be enough in many circumstances.

 

And at best the single point of success that no one else in the building can be reasonably expected to attain.

 

 

 

p.s. waiting for your answer on how many cops have been killed in prior school shootings since you obviously dismiss their existance as nothing more than another dead body.

[/dev/null]

No, at worst a show of force, which may be enough in many circumstances.

 

And at best the single point of success that no one else in the building can be reasonably expected to attain.

 

 

 

p.s. waiting for your answer on how many cops have been killed in prior school shootings since you obviously dismiss their existance as nothing more than another dead body.

 

absence of evidence vs evidence of absence

 

how many school shootings have been prevented by school police

[Joe Miner]

A cop on school ground is a symbolic gesture, a show of force, at best and a single point of failure at worst if taken out.

 

Had there been a cop inside SHES, yes they would have heard the shots and been able to respond. The loss of life would have been lessened but not averted

 

Most schools are too large for 1 solo cop/security personnel. I would argue that 1 cop would be largely symbolic, possibly still effective to a degree, but still largely symbolic. If he happened to be taking a **** while the gunman entered the school, he's not gonna be able to provide much security. Schools are gonna have to staff multiple security professionals to be prepared to deal with something like this.

[KD in CA]

absence of evidence vs evidence of absence

 

how many school shootings have been prevented by school police

None, because the vast majority of schools don't have police on site. That's the point. Had a cop been on site, the shooter wouldn't have had time to go to multiple classrooms. Cops also have radios that instantly connect to the other cops, rather than waiting for someone to call 911 which reduces backup response time. So even if he's taking a dump, he has the ability to respond as soon as shots are fired.

 

Conversely, with no one there to stop him, a shooter can just keep going. Had the police station been another few miles further away, we'd probably be talking about 40 dead people instead of 26.

 

 

Had there been a cop inside SHES, yes they would have heard the shots and been able to respond. The loss of life would have been lessened but not averted

If the loss of life had been lessened by definition it would have been averted. It would have been averted for those who didn't die. 10 dead isn't the same as 26 dead.

[/dev/null]

If the loss of life had been lessened by definition it would have been averted. It would have been averted for those who didn't die. 10 dead isn't the same as 26 dead.

 

This I think is where you and really differ. You see events like this as something that is going to happen and needs to be dealt with when it happens. I see the problem as why does it occur in the first place

 

Accepting school shootings as part of the new normal, to me is like accepting that pissed off Muslims will continuously fly airplanes into skyscrapers. It's treating the symptoms not the cause

[meazza]

This I think is where you and really differ. You see events like this as something that is going to happen and needs to be dealt with when it happens. I see the problem as why does it occur in the first place

 

Accepting school shootings as part of the new normal, to me is like accepting that pissed off Muslims will continuously fly airplanes into skyscrapers. It's treating the symptoms not the cause

 

Well what are the symptoms?

 

Seriously they better not come and take my video games

[truth on hold]

 

 

This I think is where you and really differ. You see events like this as something that is going to happen and needs to be dealt with when it happens. I see the problem as why does it occur in the first place

 

Accepting school shootings as part of the new normal, to me is like accepting that pissed off Muslims will continuously fly airplanes into skyscrapers. It's treating the symptoms not the cause

So then you don't want airport security either. Just give it up

[3rdnlng]

So then you don't want airport security either. Just give it up

 

And airports and schools are similiar, how?

[TakeYouToTasker]

So then you don't want airport security either. Just give it up

I would prefer that the individual airlines administered security policy, allowing me to select from amongst the many competing airlines depending on their offerings.

[Gary M]

Ha - "survivalist." So they've come up with a name to legitimize the paranoid, anti-government freaks who stockpile food and weapons.

 

Like these guys?

 

http://www.ready.gov/

[Chef Jim]

I'm sorry, but who is it that is trying to attack your family? This is another ridiculous pro-gun romanticism that gets tossed about by loons like yourself. Are you living on the frontier in 1817? Are you Mad Max in a post-nuclear free-for-all? In the minuscule chance that someone really does "attack" your family, you are just as likely to shoot one of your own family members as you are to take out the "attacker." And why would you need multiple weapons to defend yourself? Wouldn't one be enough? Or is the concern an entire fleet of stormtroopers?

 

Let's put this ridiculous justification for a heavily-armed populace to bed. It's absurd.

 

The previous owners of our house were broken in to, robbed, tied up and beaten for 6 hours. If they had a gun I assume none of that would have happened. I live in a nice neighborhood but crazy people tend to like to rob people that have nice things.

[VABills]

Most schools are too large for 1 solo cop/security personnel. I would argue that 1 cop would be largely symbolic, possibly still effective to a degree, but still largely symbolic. If he happened to be taking a **** while the gunman entered the school, he's not gonna be able to provide much security. Schools are gonna have to staff multiple security professionals to be prepared to deal with something like this.

 

Just like our military forces in Korea. They are a trip wire and there just to slow down North Korea/China if they decide to come across. The job is to slow them down/act as a deterant. If they come slow it down enough until you can activate a division of Marines from Okinawa, and other forces in theatre. Which again will not stop 500,000 screaming Chinamen, but will again slow it down further.

 

Same in a school. If an on staff resource officer acts as a deterant, great. If something happens, then some folks will probably die, but if he can slow it down by a few minutes it gives time for calvary to respond.

 

I would prefer that the individual airlines administered security policy, allowing me to select from amongst the many competing airlines depending on their offerings.

 

And the terrorists with that knowledge will target the ones with minimal security. Thus making the skies and skyscrapers even more dangerous.

 

Are people really that short sighted?

[KD in CA]

This I think is where you and really differ. You see events like this as something that is going to happen and needs to be dealt with when it happens. I see the problem as why does it occur in the first place

 

Accepting school shootings as part of the new normal, to me is like accepting that pissed off Muslims will continuously fly airplanes into skyscrapers. It's treating the symptoms not the cause

Why does it have to be one or the other? Why refuse to take simple steps to address the obvious ongoing risks just because you feel we need to address some of the root causes? It's not possilbe to do both? Treating the symptoms is fine, but that isn't going to change the current risk quotiant for years to come.

 

Of course I see it as something that is going to be attempted again. It's inevitable. Not accepting reality will only result in more deaths when that day comes.

 

I find your analogy is odd considering the US made significant changes to prevent Muslims from flying more planes into buildings and so far have been successful.