Another School Shooting, this time in Florida

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

So then? What solutions do you have to propose? And it doesn't even have to be "ban all guns". There are plenty of nations that still have gun ownership but manged to impliment some common-sense restrictions that made mass shootings a rarity rather than something so numbing that even the political satirists have run out of jokes about it.

[excalibur]

America is unlike any other nation on the planet so how things may work elsewhere in the world might not work out so well in the United States.

A lot of these shooters happen because either no one paid attention to the signs or address their social problems. This one might be one of the worse because he planned to get caught. He killed people, dropped his weapon and blended with the crowd as they ran, then went to Subway and McDonald's like some carefully laid out scheme. This is different from the usual kill everyone until the cops show up and die in a blaze of gun fire. He wanted to get caught. Each of these incidents are very different from one another and needs to be examined from a case by case basis. Put them under an umbrella won't help and from what info has been release, the gun he used belonged to his parents.

The UK heavily restricted guns but it hasn't stopped the rising violent crimes with knives and other weapons and the highest acid attacks in the world. It got so bad that the mayor of London essentially said terrorism is a part of a large city (I'm paraphrasing).


California, New York, and New Jersey has some of the strictest gun control laws in America. The type of rifle used in Florida is near impossible to even construct without breaking several California and New York laws and yet LA and New York City alone account for a massive amount of crimes with guns mixed in with Chicago these are the top cities with high crimes involving firearms yet have some of the strictest laws, so America has already tried and it didn't work. Hell, the Assault Weapons bad of 1994 didn't stop Columbine from happening at all. In fact, you can look up the numbers yourself and can see that mass shootings since the passing of the Gun Free Zone law in the 90s have increased a lot compared to before the 90s where there weren't as many gun laws as there are today.

Here's one solution and I know we have federal money in public schools for them. Metal detectors at primary entrances with armed guards checking. I've seen schools that have this already. I mean, we have this kind of set up at airports, court houses and important government buildings, so why not at school where a country's most important things are, the children? Make it better than the armed guards be veterans that have been struggling to get jobs after retiring or have trouble integrating into civilian life. Give them a purpose to safeguarding the future of our country. How about allowing teachers be armed and get training if they want to. Their jobs are to not only educate our children but to protect them. We leave our kids in their hands when we drop them off and expect them to be looked after. How is the gym teacher going to protect his students if he's unarmed and all he could do is throw his defenseless body in front of bullets?

We shouldn't be sheltering children in school but preparing them for the world once they graduate. Schools are a place of learning. They should have basic courses on things anyone should know what to do when they become an adult like how to change a fucking tire, unclog a toilet, dealing with a stressful work environment instead of pampering children and ignoring the problem child of the class or raising kids to be self entitled little cunts.

Instead of living in a mental utopia where you FEEL safe thinking No Gun signs are force fields and anti-gun laws are magic spells that turns evil people away, there needs to be more practical solutions and not sugar coating that the world is a harsh place and always was. The more comfort we set ourselves in, the more we forget where humanity came from. We haven't changed as a species inherently despite advancing in technology and civilization.

We as a society have become a victim of our own successes and fooling ourselves into thinking that we're so progressive and so civilized that we somehow transcended the reach of evil. Where virtue signaling and pacifism is more important than survival. The problem is this threat isn't coming from the outside. It's here all around us and worse, it can even be within our own houses and having actual protection like armed guards or metal detectors would sudden remind you that evil can happen to anyone and no matter how progressive you get you can't out progress evil. We are vulnerable and there is nothing else you can do about it but prepare and once you are prepared and evil rears its ugly head, you'd be in a better position to fight it head on knowing you did all you could or in the case of school shootings, entrust all the preparations we've done to fight it head on.

And while we're making preparations to turn schools into actual safe places, let's look at why since the 90s there's been so many kids that become stone cold killers because as I said before, pre-90s, school shootings weren't a thing.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Your post gives me at least a better appreciation of how you think and what position you are coming from. I will try to give it the thoughtful reply it deserves when I have the mental stamina and right headspace.

[ORCACommander]

Most eloquent, Excalibur.

[Admiral X]

There are a couple of solutions that come to mind. One would be allowing teachers and staff to apply for CCW permits so they can carry at work. I feel this would be asking too much of teachers and staff members, though, as it would essentially be asking them to do double duty as security guards, and they don't get paid enough as it is. Another solution is very painful in that it will add cost and would therefore be difficult to implement in the, shall we say, less well funded districts. This would be to add a metal-detecting system at a limited access point, with at least two guards, and require everyone who wants to enter the building to go through it. That would be bare minimum, and we would really need to do this to all schools to be truly effective, because to be frank, you can never know where one of these crazies will strike. Aside from cost, a potential problem will be in the vetting of the security guards, because a lot of the problems the police are having in terms of people who really shouldn't have that type of a job are the same and in some cases even worse with non-police security. Or the local law enforcement might have to spare a couple of officers or deputies, though that problem I mentioned is still an issue simply because it's an existing issue with the police.

Undoubtedly, the second solution I proposed would meet with a lot of resistance due to the cost. This could be an opportunity to play hardball, though, if the end goal is to keep children safe. While "reasonable gun control" is a non-starter, it can still be used as something of a bargaining chip, because it can be offered up as an alternative to increasing security - a kind of, "if you care, put your money where your mouth is" tactic. Keep in mind, I'm a moderate libertarian, so suggesting this makes me feel kind of dirty, but since I'm not a "taxation is theft!"/"privatize everything!" Libertarian, I recognize that concessions have to be made someplace, and if it means protecting schools, and raising taxes can accomplish that, then this would probably be a good way to go about accomplishing that.

Of course, keep in mind that this is just an off the top of my head idea. Undoubtedly most conservatives would go for that first solution I mentioned and call it a day (it's the cheapest option and requires no real thought on their part), but this is a complex problem.

Speaking of, something else I'd like to do is send put some professionals on the job and see if they can figure out what the hell is even causing some kids to turn like this. Something aside from "manlet rage" would be useful to know, so hopefully signs can be seen ahead of time. Plus, this is something that was just not a problem until the last 20 years or so. Schools actually used to have shooting teams, if you can believe it. In the more rural areas, it was still fairly common until some time after Columbine for students to drive into school with their guns in the back window of their pick-ups because they planned to go hunting right after school, or because it was just their ranch gun and they just always keep it in their truck. There were still fights at school, but it usually only involved the use of fists. Why have kids started shooting up their schools? If we can figure that out, maybe we can figure out why the grown-ups do it in other places, too.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Alright. Now that I am well-rested, less stressed, and clearer in my head, I'm going to respond to your post, point by point. I'm also drawing on a politifact article about mass shootings, which I hope to refer to for the rest of this post. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter ... shootings/

America is unlike any other nation on the planet so how things may work elsewhere in the world might not work out so well in the United States.

This is a real sticking point for me. I mean, on some level, each nation has different customs, different laws, different demographics, different ecology, etc., but what about the USA do you think is so dramatically unique? What makes it so different that policies which have had success from China to Australia wouldn't be at least partially helpful here? What is such a game changer?

The United States has more mass shootings -- and more people cumulatively killed or injured -- than the other 10 nations combined, according to their research. While part of this is because the United States has a much bigger population than all but China, the difference can’t be explained by skewed population numbers alone.

Where I stand, the only really special thing is the presence of these mass shootings.

A lot of these shooters happen because either no one paid attention to the signs or address their social problems. This one might be one of the worse because he planned to get caught. He killed people, dropped his weapon and blended with the crowd as they ran, then went to Subway and McDonald's like some carefully laid out scheme. This is different from the usual kill everyone until the cops show up and die in a blaze of gun fire. He wanted to get caught. Each of these incidents are very different from one another and needs to be examined from a case by case basis. Put them under an umbrella won't help and from what info has been release, the gun he used belonged to his parents.

Valid point. This school shooting was unusual and a one-size-fits all approach might not be the best one.

The UK heavily restricted guns but it hasn't stopped the rising violent crimes with knives and other weapons and the highest acid attacks in the world. It got so bad that the mayor of London essentially said terrorism is a part of a large city (I'm paraphrasing).

Does the rising crime rate with these other methods, and the damage done by them, outpace the decrease in gun violence?

California, New York, and New Jersey has some of the strictest gun control laws in America. The type of rifle used in Florida is near impossible to even construct without breaking several California and New York laws and yet LA and New York City alone account for a massive amount of crimes with guns mixed in with Chicago these are the top cities with high crimes involving firearms yet have some of the strictest laws, so America has already tried and it didn't work. Hell, the Assault Weapons bad of 1994 didn't stop Columbine from happening at all. In fact, you can look up the numbers yourself and can see that mass shootings since the passing of the Gun Free Zone law in the 90s have increased a lot compared to before the 90s where there weren't as many gun laws as there are today.

Correlation does not equal causation, and given all the things that changed since the 90s I really don't think you have adequate cause to pin that on gun regulation.
Those states having strict gun laws is less helpful if their neighbors have very loose gun laws.

Here's one solution and I know we have federal money in public schools for them. Metal detectors at primary entrances with armed guards checking. I've seen schools that have this already. I mean, we have this kind of set up at airports, court houses and important government buildings, so why not at school where a country's most important things are, the children? Make it better than the armed guards be veterans that have been struggling to get jobs after retiring or have trouble integrating into civilian life. Give them a purpose to safeguarding the future of our country. How about allowing teachers be armed and get training if they want to. Their jobs are to not only educate our children but to protect them. We leave our kids in their hands when we drop them off and expect them to be looked after. How is the gym teacher going to protect his students if he's unarmed and all he could do is throw his defenseless body in front of bullets?

Okay. This is at least a position I understand. I don't agree with it, but I can see the reasoning behind it.
I have concerns that we already do a lot to treat school children like criminals. That said, from a little research it looks like there's some evidence they may help. It's not foolproof, but then no prevention method is, so I'll have to at least consider that the gains here may outweigh the problems.
I will say, however, that this is not a very practical solution in immediate terms because of the abysmal state of school funding. When kids can barely afford writing supplies and teachers are working at walmart to make up for their poor salaries, it's unlikely that any of the schools we worry about will have money for guns, metal detectors, and veteran guards. =/

We shouldn't be sheltering children in school but preparing them for the world once they graduate. Schools are a place of learning. They should have basic courses on things anyone should know what to do when they become an adult like how to change a fucking tire, unclog a toilet, dealing with a stressful work environment instead of pampering children and ignoring the problem child of the class or raising kids to be self entitled little cunts.

This...I really don't see how this is germane to the argument at all. What does this have to do with gun laws and school shootings? Are you implying a connection I'm not seeing?

Instead of living in a mental utopia where you FEEL safe thinking No Gun signs are force fields and anti-gun laws are magic spells that turns evil people away, there needs to be more practical solutions and not sugar coating that the world is a harsh place and always was. The more comfort we set ourselves in, the more we forget where humanity came from. We haven't changed as a species inherently despite advancing in technology and civilization.

We as a society have become a victim of our own successes and fooling ourselves into thinking that we're so progressive and so civilized that we somehow transcended the reach of evil. Where virtue signaling and pacifism is more important than survival. The problem is this threat isn't coming from the outside. It's here all around us and worse, it can even be within our own houses and having actual protection like armed guards or metal detectors would sudden remind you that evil can happen to anyone and no matter how progressive you get you can't out progress evil. We are vulnerable and there is nothing else you can do about it but prepare and once you are prepared and evil rears its ugly head, you'd be in a better position to fight it head on knowing you did all you could or in the case of school shootings, entrust all the preparations we've done to fight it head on.

And while we're making preparations to turn schools into actual safe places, let's look at why since the 90s there's been so many kids that become stone cold killers because as I said before, pre-90s, school shootings weren't a thing.

This section is the most revealing to me, and gives me the most insight. It is also where I have to really spell out my position so you can better understand me.

Me, and the other gun-regulation advocates I know, are not doing this for virtue signaling. We're not even doing it to support pacifism. We're not doing it out of ignorance that there is a lot of evil in the world and a lot of sick people in here and some of those sick people take math class with us or are dating our younger brother or even give us yearly physicals.

The gun regulation advocates, me and others, honestly believe that more regulations and stricter gun laws is the post practical, the most effective, and the most concrete way to reduce senseless gun violence. You can argue the pragmatism of that or its connection to reality, but do not mistake our motives.

Like you, I am afraid, I am painfully aware of evil in our society, and I am struggling to do something about it so that innocent lives may be spared.

[excalibur]

Alright, so giving myself enough time to read, it's my turn.

Where I stand, the only really special thing is the presence of these mass shootings.

That mindset is a bit of a problem because, forgive me for saying this, but that's a very narrow minded world view. Because to me, all acts of violence that can be called senseless like mass shootings are the same regardless of what was used. You just want to focus on guns because they apparently scare you more than other tools used as weapons. If guns didn't exist and we're back in the age of sword, I believe that fear would translate to swords or sticks and stones.

Does the rising crime rate with these other methods, and the damage done by them, outpace the decrease in gun violence?

It does. Recently, the UK is the largest in acid attacks in the world. There had been more terrorist attacks there than in America, a much larger country. But let's focus on crime, knife crime rose dramatic after the ban to carry handguns as personal protection. It's gotten so bad there, they have banned certain knives. You can't even by a butter knife without proper ID and then there's knife boxes to turn in your "assault knives". They've banned metal bats, and other instruments and are even threatening collectors of historic swords. That's the type of escalation of fear I worry about when you let people start banning things yet it has little effect on the criminal mind.

Correlation does not equal causation, and given all the things that changed since the 90s I really don't think you have adequate cause to pin that on gun regulation.
Those states having strict gun laws is less helpful if their neighbors have very loose gun laws.

And pay attention that those neighboring states have so little crime despite their loose gun laws. And you yourself admitted that times have changed but what's changed? Certainly not more guns. You try to correlate the UK's supposed decreased in gun crimes after their bans but I can't tell you there's a correlation with increased gun ownership and decreased in crime?

Okay. This is at least a position I understand. I don't agree with it, but I can see the reasoning behind it.

I have concerns that we already do a lot to treat school children like criminals. That said, from a little research it looks like there's some evidence they may help. It's not foolproof, but then no prevention method is, so I'll have to at least consider that the gains here may outweigh the problems.
I will say, however, that this is not a very practical solution in immediate terms because of the abysmal state of school funding. When kids can barely afford writing supplies and teachers are working at walmart to make up for their poor salaries, it's unlikely that any of the schools we worry about will have money for guns, metal detectors, and veteran guards. =/

We're not treating our kids like criminals by having armed guards and metal detectors. That's the same mindset when you walk through a metal detector at the airport or willing allow your bags to be searched by TSA and even the system at airports isn't fool proof but it helps. 4 former Marines that's been through combat would know how to respond to a situation far better than some rent-a-cop collecting a paycheck.

Also, this is why we need to get better funding locally because the Department of Education hasn't been doing its job since it was created. It tried to standardized public school but in term lowered standards across the board. That's the problem when you rely on the government too much and they give you back nothing and still tax you.

This...I really don't see how this is germane to the argument at all. What does this have to do with gun laws and school shootings? Are you implying a connection I'm not seeing?

It's about looking at the source of some of these shootings. Many of them are caused by students. How they are raised, looked after and how they perform at school. Kids that displayed plenty of signs but no one looked into it. These particular incidents starts with problem children.

This section is the most revealing to me, and gives me the most insight. It is also where I have to really spell out my position so you can better understand me.

Me, and the other gun-regulation advocates I know, are not doing this for virtue signaling. We're not even doing it to support pacifism. We're not doing it out of ignorance that there is a lot of evil in the world and a lot of sick people in here and some of those sick people take math class with us or are dating our younger brother or even give us yearly physicals.

The gun regulation advocates, me and others, honestly believe that more regulations and stricter gun laws is the post practical, the most effective, and the most concrete way to reduce senseless gun violence. You can argue the pragmatism of that or its connection to reality, but do not mistake our motives.

Like you, I am afraid, I am painfully aware of evil in our society, and I am struggling to do something about it so that innocent lives may be spared.

The problem is, from my side, people who do carry guns on a daily basis, live with responsibility and we don't see any gun laws as practical and made by people who have never shot a gun much less carried them for self defense.

It's deflection of personal responsibility and that translate to community responsibility when you think the big government is designed to protect you. It can, but giving up your own personal responsibility to others is irresponsible of you.

I live in a state where no gun signs in private businesses are not the law and I conceal carry my gun where ever I go. If I live in a state where private business's signs are the law, then I don't do business there because I may obey the law but criminals don't and I will not disarm myself so that you "feel" safe in a store. A friend of mine just stopped a robbery at a gas station where the guy was threatening people with a large needle. I saw the camera footage. Everyone was frozen with feel and my friend with a gun, came in to put a stop it. Thankfully he didn't have to use it but it put him in a better position. He would have went in regardless if he was armed, but that's him.

The laws do not work. Making new more restrictive laws as a knee jerk reaction to a tragic incident that happens less than petty crime and gang related crime won't fix anything and will make it worse.

[Admiral X]

I'll just point out that passing legislation based on fear led to the Patriot Act.

[Robovski]

Fear is the enemy of freedom.

[excalibur]

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."