Culture Ethics Governance & control vs anarchy Society UD Newswatch highlights

News-watch: yet another incident of mass violence in FL, USA — where is this nihilism coming from?

Spread the love

First, condolences and prayers for victims and families.

Daily Mail has a useful header that seems to capture key themes to ponder as we head into the weekend:

These was of course — within minutes — the usual talking point exchange on firearms, gun-free [= target-rich] zones, mental illness and effects of certain antidepressants, affiliations (Antifa and Islamism have also been suggested and there is a picture of him in a MAGA hat) and the like, etc.

U/D: My email inbox has a link to Townhall that points to a claim that “Leon County law enforcement sources told the Tallahassee Democrat that they could not find information linking Cruz, 19, to the Republic of Florida Militia, as first reported by the group’s self-proclaimed leader Jordan Jereb.” So, that one is a bit of a mystery.

My own view is that there need to be mental illness facilities that can effectively detain potentially violent inmates, that we do need to look at effects of drugs and that schools, organisations and public meetings need oversight by an organised, armed civilian marshal corps. Including churches. I have even suggested the Tavor in semi-automatic form and a 6.5 mm Grendel loading, and would add 9 mm pistols where such would be a better fit. That coach should never have been forced to try to use his body as a shield. Obviously, one guard was not enough. Where, too, four or five people (at least two armed), would credibly be able to take down such a would-be shooter in a case where “when seconds count, the police are minutes away.”

While I am at it, if he was repeatedly reported (including to the FBI), was expelled and in a school for the troubled, how was he able to organise and carry out such an attack?

However, we need more.

What is it that is eating out our civilisation and is sending the message to those on the fringes that instead of cherishing one’s neighbour one can view and treat one’s neighbour as little more than a target. Perhaps, all too literally.

Let me add a remark by Pat Buchanan, which points to a further factor:

>>While this massacre may be a product of mental illness, it is surely a product of moral depravity. For this was premeditated and plotted, done in copycat style to the mass killings to which this country has become all too accustomed.

Nikolas Cruz thought this through. He knew it was Valentine’s Day. He brought his fully loaded AR-15 with extra magazines and smoke grenades to the school that had expelled him. He set off a fire alarm, knowing it would bring students rushing into crowded halls where they would be easy to kill. He then escaped by mixing in with fleeing students.

The first ingredient, then, was an icy indifference toward human life and a willingness to slaughter former fellow students to deliver payback for whatever it was Cruz believed had been done to him at Douglas High.

In his case, the conscience was dead, or was buried beneath hatred, rage or resentment at those succeeding where he had failed. He had been rejected, cast aside, expelled. This would be his revenge, and it would be something for Douglas High and the nation to see – and never forget.

Indeed, it seems a common denominator of the atrocities to which we have been witness in recent years is that the perpetrators are nobodies who wish to die as somebodies.

If a sense of grievance against those perceived to have injured them is the goad that drives misfits like Cruz to mass murder, the magnet that draws them to it is infamy. Infamy is their shortcut to immortality.>>

Maybe, we need to ponder a point raised by Bryan, in the 1920’s — though it will doubtless excite ire in some quarters:

>>Darwinism leads to a denial of God. Nietzsche carried Darwinism to its logical conclusion and it made him the most extreme of anti-Christians . . . . As the [First World] war [of 1914 – 1918] progressed I [William Jennings Bryan was from 1913 – 1915 the 41st US Secretary of State, under President Wilson] became more and more impressed with the conviction that the German propa-ganda rested upon a materialistic foundation. I se-cured the writings of Nietzsche and found in them a defense, made in advance, of all the cruelties and atrocities practiced by the militarists of Germany. [It didn’t start with the Nazis!] Nietzsche tried to substitute the worship of the “Su-perman” for the worship of God. He not only re-jected the Creator, but he rejected all moral standards. He praised war and eulogized hatred because it led to war. He denounced sympathy and pity as attributes unworthy of man. He believed that the teachings of Christ made degenerates and, logical to the end, he regarded Democracy as the refuge of weaklings. He saw in man nothing but an animal and in that animal the highest virtue he recognized was “The Will to Power”—a will which should know no let or hin-drance, no restraint or limitation . . . . His philosophy, if it is worthy the name of philos-ophy, is the ripened fruit of Darwinism — and a tree is known by its fruit . . . .

The corroding influence of Darwinism has spread as the doctrine has been increasingly accepted. In the American preface to “The Glass of Fashion” these words are to be found: “Darwinism not only justifies the sensualist at the trough and Fashion at her glass; it justifies Prussianism at the cannon’s mouth and Bol-shevism at the prison-door. If Darwinism be true, if Mind is to be driven out of the universe and accident accepted as a sufficient cause for all the majesty and glory of physical nature, then there is no crime or vio-lence, however abominable in its circumstances and however cruel in its execution, which cannot be justi-fied by success, and no triviality, no absurdity of Fash-ion which deserves a censure: more — there is no act of disinterested love and tenderness, no deed of self- sac-rifice and mercy, no aspiration after beauty and excel-lence, for which a single reason can be adduced in logic.” [The Menace of Darwinism, pp. 52 – 54. Emphases and explanatory parentheses added.]>>

Is this one root of what we are seeing? This is worth pondering, too. For, nihilism, surely, is not distilling itself out of thin air and imposing itself on us. END

PS: As it has come up, some BBC numbers, c 2007 when policy on holding the 50 rounds at home changed:

PPS: Here is an illustration on how Israeli Teachers protect their charges in loco parentis:

Are Israeli Teachers armed? Notice two adults, one on obvious overwatch for an outing carrying an instantly recognisable US WW2 issue/era M1 carbine [not a likely equipment for a security guard or a soldier on active duty], the other interacting more closely with the children. And of course we do not know if the second adult has a concealed weapon. This image is of course scoffed at, but it makes the point — armed overwatch, some open, some not.

216 Replies to “News-watch: yet another incident of mass violence in FL, USA — where is this nihilism coming from?

  1. 1
    kairosfocus says:

    News-watch: yet another incident of mass violence in FL, USA — where is this nihilism coming from?

  2. 2
    kairosfocus says:

    F/N: More from Townhall:

    In 1974, Israel endured the Ma’alot Massacre in which “Palestinian” terrorists took 115 people hostage at Netiv Meir Elementary School. Twenty-two children and three others were killed and 68 injured. Israel now requires schools with 100 or more students to have a guard posted. The civilian police force handles the entire security system of all schools from kindergarten through college. The Ministry of Education funds shelters and fences, reinforces school buses, and hires and trains guards.

    Guards don’t just stand around. They check everyone entering, and engage threats.

    And yeah, they’ve got guns.The lawful purposes for carrying guns are very clear: protect school personnel and students, create a sense of security, deter the ill-intentioned, and provide self-defense.

    Common sense.

    KF

  3. 3
    ET says:

    We are a society that condones the killing of over 1 million unborn a year. And then we turn around and get upset over gun violence that is no where near the level of carnage wrought by abortions.

    Shame on us.

  4. 4
    kairosfocus says:

    ET, Point, the global abortion toll over 40+ years is 800+ millions, that is part of the erosion of civilisation. KF

  5. 5
    ET says:

    Oh my, I think I am going to be sick. What have we become?

  6. 6
    kairosfocus says:

    ET, sorry to say but globally we are the worst mass killers in history. The toll rises at another million per week. KF

  7. 7
    Molson Bleu says:

    I think that your suggestion that the growth of evolutionism and atheism may be a contributing cause (if no a root cause), is simply not supported by reality. Of all of the western countries, the US has one of the largest percentage of people who do not believe in evolution, and one of the higher percentages of practicing Christians, yet none of the more atheist/secular countries have the gun violence that we do. Their increased secularism causes all sorts of other problems, but increased violence simply is not one of them.

    Sadly, we view our constitution as our second Bible. Inerrant and immutable. Does anybody really believe that the founding fathers would have written the second amendment in the way they did if they could foresee the technological advance in armaments? They wrote this when flint-lock was the most advance hand-held weapon.

    Your suggestion of armed marshals in schools, although possibly necessary, is simply a bandaid. It does not get to the root of the problem. We live in a country where we prevent people from flying if they are on the terrorism watch list, but do not prevent them from legally buying guns.

  8. 8
    ET says:

    I think that your suggestion that the growth of evolutionism and atheism may be a contributing cause (if no a root cause), is simply not supported by reality.

    Of course it is. Take away purpose and this is what happens.

  9. 9
    Molson Bleu says:

    “Of course it is. Take away purpose and this is what happens.”

    Then why is this not happening in other countries with less “purpose” than ours?

  10. 10
    ET says:

    Then why is this not happening in other countries with less “purpose” than ours?

    Is that supposed to be an argument? Perhaps their over-the-top liberal policies help soothe the savage beatsies.

  11. 11
    Molson Bleu says:

    I don’t often post things from social media, but I think this one puts things in perspective:

    1967 – Jayne Mansfield is killed when her car runs under the rear end of a tractor trailer. Since then, all trailers have a DOT bar at the rear to keep cars from going under them.

    1982 – Seven people die when Tylenol packaging was tampered with. Since then, it takes a PhD, channel locks, and a sharp object to get into a bottle of pills.

    1995 – A bombing using a certain kind of fertilizer, solution grade ammonium nitrate, killed 168 people, so the government imposed severe restrictions on the purchase of that fertilizer.

    2001 – One person attempts to blow up a plane with a shoe bomb. Since then, all air travellers have to take off their shoes for scanning before being allowed to board.

    Since 1968 – 1,516,863 people have died from guns on American soil. Gun violence kills an average of 168 people every two days! Now, the problem apparently can’t be solved except with thoughts and prayers.

  12. 12
    ET says:

    Molson is clueless. Abortions stops the lives of millions per year. And those are our must vulnerable and who need us the most.

    People who are OK with abortions but rail against guns are the worst type of hypocrite.

    There are plenty of things we can do to make schools safe. Fences, locked doors, cameras and armed security come to mind.

  13. 13
    Molson Bleu says:

    “Molson is clueless. Abortions stops the lives of millions per year. And those are our must vulnerable and who need us the most.

    People who are OK with abortions but rail against guns are the worst type of hypocrite.”

    Where did you get the idea that I was OK with abortions?

    “There are plenty of things we can do to make schools safe. Fences, locked doors, cameras and armed security come to mind.”

    This is true. But nobody seems to want to find out why these types of security measures are not usually needed in other countries.

  14. 14
    ET says:

    Perhaps their over-the-top liberal policies help soothe the savage beatsies.

    And we don’t want that here. Understand?

  15. 15
    Barry Arrington says:

    KF, students learn what they are taught. And many of those students act on the lesson. Eric Harris, for example, was a devotee of Nietzsche. It is not hard to connect the dots from Darwin to Nietzsche. And it is not hard to connect the dots from Nietzsche to at least some mass shooters. See my post on Columbine here.

  16. 16
    asauber says:

    “There are plenty of things we can do to make schools safe. Fences, locked doors, cameras and armed security come to mind.”

    Indeed. But as my wife (former public school teacher) told me last night… schools won’t necessarily buy their kids pencils. Who’s going to be paying for security?

    And who in our beloved government is going to enforce new gun laws (which is a dangerous proposition) when they don’t/can’t enforce laws already on the books?

    Andrew

  17. 17
    News says:

    Canadian commentator Mark Steyn puts the technology in perspective:

    Gun-control advocates often say that, well, the Second Amendment was passed in the age of muskets, before all these big, scary-looking semi-automatics came along. In fact, there’s a mere quarter-century between the death of the last Founding Father (Madison, in 1836) and the invention of the first continuous rapid-fire gun (the Gatling, in 1861). It’s a 19th-century technology, like almost everything else other than the computer. But not until the late 20th and early 21st centuries did schoolboys think to use that 19th-century technology to slaughter their classmates.

    So we – or at any rate some of us – have changed, and for the worse. And the question is why that is: The decline of organized religion, the rise of ersatz substitutes, the collapse of the family, the spread of mass media, the expansion of education, its descent into social engineering, the epidemic of over-medication, the absence of men, the metastasization of narcissism and the worship of the self… Maybe we could have weathered two or three of these, but, as I’ve said before, we changed too much too fast – and somewhere in the void a particular combination of factors incubated the depressingly similar young men who gun down their fellow pupils.

  18. 18
    Molson Bleu says:

    “Perhaps their over-the-top liberal policies help soothe the savage beatsies.”

    “And we don’t want that here. Understand?”

    I wasn’t aware that you spoke for all of us.

  19. 19
    kurx78 says:

    Let’s see if we can put it simple enough:

    Take away purpouse + Lax gun Control = you have a violent, nihilistic individual whot’s going to discharge all his hate on inocent people.

    Culture is also an important variable here obviously

  20. 20
    LocalMinimum says:

    The problem is the optimization of the defensive and righteous persuasive utility of firearms vs. the capacity for killing unrighteously.

    Sadly, it’s an ethereal equation even if you aren’t a politician trying to stay in the lead of a pack of screaming fanatics.

    If we could take limit high capacity magazines, and only high capacity magazines, I think that would make mass shootings a lot less costly without harming the defensive use of firearms much, or at all in nearly every case.

    There will be times and places where a 30 round clip could have saved the right person’s life, but I would think that it’s more likely to help the wrong person take it.

    This won’t stop mass shootings, of course; but it would help restrain the resultant human toll.

  21. 21
    Molson Bleu says:

    News@17, Mark has some very good points, but are all of these things not also happening in other countries? Without the level mass shootings that we see here?

    Given that you are Canadian, I would be very interested in your opinion as to why Canada does not see the proliferation of gun violence (specifically mass shootings) that appears to be epidemic south of the border. It is my understanding that Canada is much further along the evolutionism/atheism spectrum than we are. And Canadian youth are exposed to all of the same TV shows, movies, video games and social media that are often blamed for our problems. Yet mass shootings are almost non-non-existant. Surely we can learn something from the Canadian experience on this. Or the Australian, or the European.

  22. 22
    ET says:

    Then there are statistics. Compare the population of Canada to the USA. Let’s learn from those less populated countries and start kicking people out- say about 250 million. Let’s see how that goes. 🙄

    Clearly we need better gun control. The mere fact this loser was able to legally purchase the weapon is a joke. We need one law to rule them all. One Federal Law that requires a common process and has national database access. Only in the military and under command supervision should a teenager be allowed to have and use a gun. That needs to be part of the law.

  23. 23
    kurx78 says:

    It’s sadly ironic, these kind of situations tend to expose some paradoxes of gun ownership.

    I live in Costa Rica, and right now we have a complex situation with violence because we have one of the highest homicide rates of the region.
    The homicides mostly happen because there are conflicts between druglords and they usually hire hitmen to kill their rivals or enemies.
    Sometimes you are walking to get the bus and someone gets killed on the same street, the police never arrests the hitmen and we go on and on everyday.
    Another serious problem are robbery and assault because guns ownership is quite complicated here for the everyday person, so most of the time if you get assaulted you can’t defend yourself, and you may killed even if you don’t attempt to do it.
    But for some reason, even in one of the most dangerous zones in the world that is Central America… we don’t have school shootings, crime is mostly drug related.
    Nihilism is the key….

  24. 24
    J-Mac says:

    Theism predicts two things about evil: that it exists, and that we are not able to entirely comprehend it. Evil exists because the created universe is not God, but His creation, so it must of necessity fall short of God, who is perfectly Good. After all, if the universe were perfectly good, without evil, it would just be God. If the universe is God’s creation, then it must fall short of perfection, and it must contain evil, understood as the deprivation of good. So Goff is mistaken that theism predicts a perfect cosmos, free from evil. Theism posits a perfect God, and a creation necessarily short of perfection. Theism seems to have gotten this “prediction” quite right, because the cosmos is certainly short of perfection. Theism predicts evil in the world, precisely because God is Good and because the world is not God.

    -Michael Egnor
    https://evolutionnews.org/2018/02/cosmic-fine-tuning-and-the-problem-of-evil/

    In other words, there would no universe, no Earth no human society, unless there was evil, so ultimately God allowed evil in order for material existence to be…

    According to Dr. Egnor’s reasoning, no matter how difficult it could be to understand it, one can’t help but conclude that God must be, at least indirectly, responsible for evil, which would also include the recent shooting in Florida…

    God allowed the existence of the inferior to him universe, but at the price of evil…

    So much for God’s unfathomable love…

  25. 25
    Molson Bleu says:

    I did a little more digging on Canada vs US and mass shootings. There was a recent looking at recent mass shootings and whether the killers could have obtained the guns in Canada. An interesting read.

    http://nationalpost.com/news/c.....s-shooters

  26. 26
    ET says:

    Population of Canada = 36.6 million

    Population of CALIFORNIA = 39.5 million

  27. 27
    Molson Bleu says:

    “Population of Canada = 36.6 million”

    And had zero mass shootings in 2017.

    “Population of CALIFORNIA = 39.5 million”

    And had 32 mass shootings in 2017.

    Suggesting that population size is not the determining factor.

    I don’t know what the solution is but we should look to what other countries have done and see if any of them can work here. Unreservedly protecting everyone’s 2nd amendment rights is obviously not working.

  28. 28
    kairosfocus says:

    MB, You have conveniently left off say Switzerland, where for decades essentially every household had in a cupboard a full auto battle rifle, ammunition and uniform, plus of course training. When particular types of artillery were superseded for the Army, individuals were encouraged to purchase. For many decades, no incidents. IIRC there was one recently. Then over the past few years, we have had France, with extremely strict gun ownership restrictions, only to have Paris turn into a shooting gallery. Further, in the US 100+ millions have 300+ million guns and a serious gun confiscation effort WILL trigger a civil war; so the pols and agit prop operators are playing a dangerous polarisation game, now coming back to haunt them. Plus, with porous borders and a drugs trade, weapons cannot be locked out. There are also signs that terrorists are targetting. In short, a very serious and sober-minded analysis is needed. Part of that will underscore a connection to antidepressants etc, part will show links to nihilism [and UD’s President, who weighed in above, is THE world’s expert on the mindset of the Columbine shooters]. If he points to Nietzsche, believe him, where, so did Bryan 100 years ago. And more. KF

    PS: You have also glided over what the Israelis have done.

  29. 29
    ET says:

    Suggesting that population size is not the determining factor.

    It suggests that population per square mile is a determining factor. Add to that the fact that gun laws appear to be a joke, a society that allows the wholesale slaughter of its most vulnerable, defenseless gatherings of our young and the spread of “the purposeless doctrine”, this is to be expected.

  30. 30
    Molson Bleu says:

    “MB, You have conveniently left off say Switzerland, where for decades essentially every household had in a cupboard a full auto battle rifle, ammunition and uniform, plus of course training.”

    This simply is not true. Gun ownership in Switzerland is about 24/100 people. Canada’s is even higher than that at just over 30/100. US is just over 100/100. Many other countries in Europe have a higher gun ownership than Switzerland.

    What I agree with with respect to Switzerland is the fact that they have mandatory service, as does Israel. If you are going to allow people to own guns, it is in the country’s best interest to make sure that they are properly trained in their use. What training is required before you can purchase a gun in the US?

    I am not against gun ownership. But I do not believe that it should be a right. It should be a privilege, like a driver’s licence. Not frivolously restricted but with background checks, training requirements, storage requirements and the like.

    “It suggests that population per square mile is a determining factor.”

    It may be, but it is my understanding that parts of Canada are very densely packed, mostly along the border with the US. The population of Toronto is the forth largest in north america, only surpassed by New York, Las Angeles and Mexico City.

  31. 31

    MB @ 7: “Sadly, we view our constitution as our second Bible. Inerrant and immutable.”

    The U.S. Consitution has been amended 18 times (the first ten amendments were ratified collectively) for a total of 27 amendments. It obviously isn’t inerrant and immutable, and I have never met a person who thinks it is.

    Also, it is a mistake to think that people who like and support the Second Amendment somehow equate the Constitution with the Bible. Millions of Second Amendment supporters have no religious affiliation at all.

    The real problem for anti-gun people is that they do not have the votes to amend the Second Amendment, nor do they have enough votes on the Supreme Court to neuter it via judicial decree.

    An even bigger problem is the fact that the U.S. now consists of two very large dominant tribes (with smaller tribes nestled within each) that absolutely hate each other. The cultural division in this country is very dangerous… and getting worse.

  32. 32
    kairosfocus says:

    MB, you overlooked that essentially every Swiss male is drafted into the army. The weapons I speak of were there per mobilisation, sitting next to uniforms and kit, ready to go; the inference was, you may have to fight through to your unit. They were not personal weapons. KF

    PS: On second amdt debates and organised compulsory training and service, there is a point for courses in school, registration and training: every child in the cadets so to speak. I have spoken of a civilian marshal corps. That will get increasingly realistic as chaotic disintegration proceeds.

  33. 33
    kairosfocus says:

    Truth, those who have played politics of division will likely eventually get what they have stoked up. It will not be pretty. Already, a major political party and its agit-prop arm are very close to implying that they will not accept elections that do not go their way and will use mind-bending power to smear and discredit whoever they don’t like. Wikipedia is likely a look at a very close-term future, and somebody with nothing to lose is going to resort to rule 303. KF

  34. 34
    kairosfocus says:

    F/N: Read on Switzerland: https://www.scribd.com/doc/24621951/Swiss-Army-in-WWII KF

    PS: The Swiss gun debate c 2007 (the 50 rd immediate reserve largely removed but open to be restored in a crisis): http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/so.....mmo/970614

  35. 35
    Molson Bleu says:

    “MB, you overlooked that essentially every Swiss male is drafted into the army.“

    No I didn’t. I actually commended their idea of mandatory service. The gun numbers I cited include these service weapons.

  36. 36
    kairosfocus says:

    MB, your numbers were simply wrong — for civilian numbers; for military, the implication is essentially every soldier’s home. In a moment, some figs for the OP. KF

  37. 37
    News says:

    Molson Bleu at 35 and above. I read the National Post article you suggested and the comments. It seems well-researched and thoughtful.The implicit assumption seems to be: Why can’t the United States be more like Canada (in which case, there would be fewer of these incidents)?

    First, firearms are a federal responsibility in Canada, which has roughly one-tenth the population of the United States. That makes regulation easier here. Many of the article’s Canada-favorable comparisons reflect that fact: If the Mounties think a guy is a whackjob, New Brunswick can’t vote him guns. Or not easily, anyway.

    By contrast, the 50 states have had separate criminal codes since forever and I don’t see that changing. The US federal government is probably too big for the job. Its police/surveillance bureaus seem so politicized at present that it is hard to see how involving them more would help.

    While the United States and Canada are very similar in many ways, some differences go back centuries and those are the differences that matter in this situation.

    Canada never had either a Revolution or a Civil War. While many injustices were done to the indigenous peoples (native Indians), mass slaughter was rare and not characteristic. So while many Canadians own hunting rifles, etc., or have received military or police training, there is little history of feeling the need to own a gun for personal safety reasons.

    A feedback loop develops: I don’t think I need a gun because I doubt that my neighbours have guns (unless they are hunting rifles). Even people who are acting crazy in the local pub probably do not have guns. If they did, they might be in big trouble, so they’d have to be pretty drunk to let anyone know.

    But here is an opposite feedback loop: Suppose half the people in my neighbourhood have guns? Then I might think I should have one too. If an armed and dangerous person lived in the neighbourhood and nothing could apparently be done about him, I might be right in thinking so.

    There are no simple answers in these situations that simply erase the history of either country.

    One thing that troubles me is that gun control usually comes up when a mass lone shooter appears. But most preventable firearms deaths do not take place during mass shootings. That’s not a promising basis for tackling the questions.

    By the way there was a mass shooting incident at a mosque in Quebec City in 2017, six victims.

  38. 38
    kairosfocus says:

    U/D: Daily Mail adds explosive new details on the FBI’s failure in this case:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....apons.html

    >>The FBI released a statement on Friday revealing that a call came in alerting the agency about Nikolas Cruz being a possible threat in early January
    ‘The caller provided information about Cruz’s gun ownership, desire to kill people, erratic behavior, and disturbing social media posts,’ said Cruz
    That same caller, who contacted the FBI on January 5 via their Public Access Line, also shared their belief that Cruz might conduct a school shooting
    The FBI did not investigate despite the ‘potential threat to life,’ and failed to even alert the Miami field office about the call
    Governor Rick Scott of Florida is now calling on Christopher Wrey to resign as director of the FBI and parents of victims voiced their anger at funerals
    ‘Seventeen innocent people are dead and acknowledging a mistake isn’t going to cut it,’ said Governor Scott >>

    Something has gone very seriously wrong here.

    KF

  39. 39
    tribune7 says:

    Mass school high school/elementary school shootings really didn’t start until after Roe v. Wade. http://billlawrenceonline.com/.....onnection/

    Just a coincidence, I’m sure.

  40. 40
    Molson Bleu says:

    “The implicit assumption seems to be: Why can’t the United States be more like Canada (in which case, there would be fewer of these incidents)?”

    That certainly isn’t my assumption. I just think that the best way to solve this ongoing problem is not to retrench within ourselves and create armed camps. That is a reaction, not a solution. I think that we should get our heads out of the sand and acknowledge that our obsession with the 2nd amendment, and refusal to alter it in any way, is a large part of the problem. Why are we so afraid to look outside our own borders to see how other countries deal with their violence problems? Are we so arrogant that we don’t believe that we can learn from others? A rather sad state of affairs if that is the case.

    Thank you for your well thought out comment.

  41. 41
    john_a_designer says:

    “The oldest and deadliest school massacre in U.S. history” occurred in 1927… “44 people died, 38 of them students.” However, gun control would have done nothing to have prevented the massacre. The weapon that was used was a bomb. But maybe if there had been tougher bomb control laws it could have been prevented. Isn’t that the same logic that gun control advocates are using?

    Read more: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/1927-bombing-remains-americas-deadliest-school-massacre-180963355/#DUx3KzebFPzTKzoi.99

    How does passing a law stop evil people from doing evil things? Are evil people law abiding citizens?

  42. 42
    kairosfocus says:

    Folks,

    A thought.

    Are we seeing something like going amok or a similar culturally conditioned syndrome, a sort of spirit distilled from the times and culturally available messages that leads some to act out in patterns that follow scripts that are implicit but fit the dynamics of a place and time in recognisable ways?

    For example, the “loner” “loser” rising up against the prison of his life in the main custodial institution he experiences, the school, and particularly against other inmates who he perceives [for or without cause] as having tormented him?

    Where, could the capability of prescribed or even non-prescribed drugs to dull his senses actually lead to a sort of pent-up, highly charged emotional state until things explode, all then duly splashed across the world 24/7 live in the media, gaining attention at horrible cost?

    Where, also, the likes of Columbine’s shooters are a sort of social entrepreneur from hell, who show how it can be done, drafting the script for the copy-cats?

    And where we then see a rising frenzy of the copycats doing their own version of me-too?

    Certainly, suicide terrorism went through that sort of cycle; though in many cases it was organised.

    In this context, I think a multiple level response is needed, no one-size-fits-all simple answer will work.

    I also think that we have ever so many who will ride piggyback on a trend of real or perceived “crisis” in order to advance an agenda that would not otherwise gain the sort of mass or institutional support that is desired.

    Where too, we must reckon with the drastic undermining of moral foundations in our culture in our time, and the perception that is promoted that you can make up and impose your own new moral and policy agenda.

    Likewise, the undermining of rationality and responsible freedom, which goes with that undermining of moral foundations.

    I am struck by Keynes on how the mad man distills his notions out of what some long dead professor has said.

    I am pretty sure we do not primarily have a technology problem, we have a socio-cultural one, with the amplifying effect of effective though maybe unintended social permission to the fringe.

    One thing I am sure of, liberty under just law is not anarchy or licence or the nihilistic rule of tooth and claw.

    KF

  43. 43
    Jul3s says:

    @ MB

    “Why are we so afraid to look outside our own borders to see how other countries deal with their violence problems?”

    American exceptionalism.

    “The oldest and deadliest school massacre in U.S. history” occurred in 1927… “44 people died, 38 of them students.” However, gun control would have done nothing to have prevented the massacre. The weapon that was used was a bomb. But maybe if there had been tougher bomb control laws it could have been prevented. Isn’t that the same logic that gun control advocates are using?

    Read more: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/1927-bombing-remains-americas-deadliest-school-massacre-180963355/#DUx3KzebFPzTKzoi.99

    How does passing a law stop evil people from doing evil things? Are evil people law abiding citizens?

    The problem with this argument is that it proves too much. If banning things didn’t work then according to your logic absolutely nothing should be banned since criminals will find a way around any law. That is an impossible standard for any Human law. And yes, sometimes evil people are “law abiding citizens” with no criminal record prior to their killing spree.

    It also ignores the fact that humans have limited resourcefulness, limited willpower and limited ingenuity. It takes more effort to develop the contacts to find a gun on the black market then just going to Walmart. Obviously, laws cannot prevent criminals from doing evil things if said criminals don’t care about the consequences or are extremely determined to commit a crime. But the vast majority of people (criminals included) are not like this.

    Guess what, if something can’t be done easily, then fewer people will succeed in doing it. By making access to a powerful tool like guns more difficult, the lazier, the less intelligent and the less resourceful criminals (which is most of them by far) won’t commit the crimes they otherwise would; at least not on the same scale. That leaves only the much smaller minority of smarter potential criminals committing these major crimes which in turn means that the number of tragedies is lower then it would have been.

  44. 44
    ET says:

    Seeing that gun violence is no where near the carnage of abortions I don’t see any reason to focus on it. Seeing that we allow the abortion carnage to remain unchecked we are very misplaced by going after guns. Given what is legal and what is being taught to our kids I am very surprised there isn’t more violence in our society.

  45. 45
    ET says:

    “Why are we so afraid to look outside our own borders to see how other countries deal with their violence problems?”

    We just have to stop abortions and have better gun laws.

  46. 46
    kairosfocus says:

    Jul3s,

    First, without a critical mass of support, a drafted law is a dead letter. Do I need to say, prohibition? (Or these days, the lost war on drugs?)

    Second, I again draw attention to a wider pattern (which is illustrated in the PS to the OP), from 28 above:

    Switzerland, where for decades essentially every household had in a cupboard a full auto battle rifle, ammunition and uniform, plus of course training. When particular types of artillery were superseded for the Army, individuals were encouraged to purchase. For many decades, no incidents. IIRC there was one recently [u/d, two]. Then over the past few years, we have had France, with extremely strict gun ownership restrictions, only to have Paris turn into a shooting gallery. Further, in the US 100+ millions have 300+ million guns and a serious gun confiscation effort WILL trigger a civil war; so the pols and agit prop operators are playing a dangerous polarisation game, now coming back to haunt them. Plus, with porous borders and a drugs trade, weapons cannot be locked out. There are also signs that terrorists are targetting.

    What I have suggested is that we need to take the saying seriously, that when seconds count, the police are minutes away. Where, I clipped in 2 above:

    In 1974, Israel endured the Ma’alot Massacre in which “Palestinian” terrorists took 115 people hostage at Netiv Meir Elementary School. Twenty-two children and three others were killed and 68 injured. Israel now requires schools with 100 or more students to have a guard posted. The civilian police force handles the entire security system of all schools from kindergarten through college. The Ministry of Education funds shelters and fences, reinforces school buses, and hires and trains guards.

    Guards don’t just stand around. They check everyone entering, and engage threats.

    And yeah, they’ve got guns. The lawful purposes for carrying guns are very clear: protect school personnel and students, create a sense of security, deter the ill-intentioned, and provide self-defense.

    Common sense.

    We have entered a very dangerous age of mass terrorism, with guns, strap-on or planted bombs, cars and trucks, even knives. Riotous assembles haunt campuses and college towns. Media lynchings on pile-on accusations and the like point to even more dangerous possibilities. We already are seeing some implying that they are the only legitimate winners of elections — rolling back the clock to c. 1640 England. I doubt they understand the phrase, Her/His Majesty’s Loyal Opposition and what it took to get there.

    And much more, with a debt mountain, natural disasters, horrible geostrategic trends and the possibility of an EMP attack looming.

    Coming back to the school shooting and the like, I am suggesting we are seeing the rise of a culturally conditioned [I don’t think “bound” is right] syndrome. One similar to demonically running amok. One that draws huge media attention, and therefore attracts piggy-back riders. Not to mention coldly calculating cultural marxist agit-prop operators and the like.

    So, I simply do not trust the climate in which radical policy change is suggested, or the patently scripted manner of talking points that now surface within minutes.

    I have long since argued for a broad-based civilian marshal corps initiative to hold armed overwatch on likely targets for terrorists or those prone to running amok. Gate-guards will need training in detecting and stopping approaching suicide bombers, sooner or later if the trends of settlement jihad are allowed to continue. (And if you don’t know what that term is, that should be a clue on what the dominant media are not telling us. Just as, can you answer as to of what event was Sept 11, 2001 the 318th anniversary, less one day and what message was sent thereby to the Islamic world? If not, that too is a clue.)

    Going beyond, we need a major cultural reformation, from the deleterious influences tracing to the C19 in Germany then accelerated sharply through impacts of Darwinism. As in, evolutionary materialism — never mind the lab coat — is irretrievably self-referentially incoherent and amoral, undermining responsible rational freedom. Thus also, undermining that civil peace of justice which duly balances rights, freedoms and responsibilities.

    I strongly suspect such trends are contributing to the milieu that leads the fringe to distill the social permission to set out on the path of running amok like this.

    Further, in so manipulated and polarised a context, trust has broken down. That is why I note that any serious effort to impose gun confiscation in the USA will lead to civil war, period. But,frankly, if you are looking for an issue to alienate, marginalise and stigmatise certain demographics, and to lock-in an urban-based “progressive” voting bloc, that is it.

    Meanwhile, one of the most corrosive things in the USA and globally energised from it, is the ongoing slaughter of posterity in the womb at a million more victims per week. Over 40+ years, 800+ millions. The resulting distortion of law, professions, media etc that has to be sustained to create a false aura of legitimacy utterly corrupts governance and government with blood-guilt. An influence that must be reckoned with.

    Our civilisation is fundamentally morally bankrupt and utterly corrupted and tainted with blood-guilt.

    Absent serious reformation driven by a spiritual restoration, for cause, I and many others deeply suspect agendas and proposals that affect rights and core institutions. Especially, when lawfare is invited by what is being put up.

    The issues are a lot bigger, much more thorny and far more entangled than we suspect.

    KF

  47. 47
    john_a_designer says:

    “According to data retrieved from the Centers for Disease Control, there were 7 firearm-related homicides for every 100,000 Americans in 1993 (see light blue line in chart). By 2013 (most recent year available), the gun homicide rate had fallen by nearly 50% to only 3.6 homicides per 100,000 population.”

    At the same time, “the number of privately owned firearms in US increased from about 185 million in 1993 to 357 million in 2013. Adjusted for the US population, the number of guns per American increased from 0.93 per person in 1993 to 1.45 in 2013…

    In other words, there was a “56% increase in the number of guns per person that occurred during the same period when gun violence decreased by 49%…”

    http://www.aei.org/publication.....-and-2013/

    Notice the correlation: it’s an inverse one. Of course, correlation is not causation, nevertheless this is raw data from a U.S. government source which does not support the emotion based arguments of the gun control advocates.

  48. 48
    Charles says:

    Jul3s @ 43

    Guess what, if something can’t be done easily, then fewer people will succeed in doing it. By making access to a powerful tool like guns more difficult, the lazier, the less intelligent and the less resourceful criminals (which is most of them by far) won’t commit the crimes they otherwise would; at least not on the same scale. That leaves only the much smaller minority of smarter potential criminals committing these major crimes which in turn means that the number of tragedies is lower then it would have been.

    Chicago has some of the strictest gun control laws in the US and yet the highest gun violence stats, most of it criminal and gang-related. “Less intelligent”, “less resourceful” criminals regardless obtain and discharge firearms at higher rates than elsewhere. The number of “tragedies” (e.g. drive-by shooting deaths of innocent children) is not lower, but higher than elsewhere.

    Gun control doesn’t work.

    Criminal control hasn’t been tried, because that is “racisss”.

  49. 49
    Molson Bleu says:

    KF@42. These are all valid points. But none of this explains why this is only an American problem. Other countries have similar issues. Mental health issues, stresses, and the like. They are bombarded by the same access to media and social media. Yet they don’t experience the same level of this type of evil.

    Yes, other countries experience the occasional ideology or religion based acts of terrorism. But that is not what we are seeing in the US. Other countries have been forced to add serious security around tourist sites. But this is because of a known (although dispersed) enemy with a known ideology, known motives, known strategies and, to a certain extent, known identities of the enemies, and those aiding and abetting these enemies. The difficulty with these enemies is that they know no borders, and obey no rules.

    What we are seeing in the US, however, is a different animal. It is largely the actions of lone individuals, often marginalized in society, often with some mental illness. Many are inspired by other actions or groups, but these inspirations could be anything. ISIS, the IRA, white supremacists, Donald Trump, Skooby-doo. The inspiration is incidental, not causal.

    Stricter gun laws are not going to stop these events. But they certainly will make it more difficult for these sick individuals to obtain weapons, and significantly reduce the numbers.

    Stricter laws could include:
    1) ban on automatic assault rifles.
    2) limit on the magazine size.
    3) background checks that include medical records and social media use.
    4) mandatory training before purchase.
    5) secure storage and transportation requirements.

    This would not prevent the vast majority of Americans from being able to purchase guns. But it might prevent some mass shootings.

  50. 50
    tribune7 says:

    The U.S. does not have that high a murder rate — especially when it is taken into account that most murders occur in relatively limited areas subject to certain social pathologies such as the vast majority of children being raised without a father in the home.

    The big concern about gun bans is that we end up like Mexico or Venezuela rather than Japan or the U.K., which I think is far more likely to occur if we enacted a gun ban.

    But here is a question for our social progressives who think putting ink on paper solves problems: If the U.S. could stop the shootings by rescinding it’s ban on prayer and Bible readings in public schools, would you support it?

    When the U.S. had prayer and Bible readings in public schools, these mass shootings did not occur despite an even easier access to firearms, it should be noted.

  51. 51
    tribune7 says:

    MB, it is not only an American problem.

    School shootings have occurred in:

    France: https://www.cnn.com/2017/03/16/europe/france-high-school-shooting-grasse/

    Finland: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jokela_school_shooting
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kauhajoki_school_shooting

    Brazil: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rio_de_Janeiro_school_shooting

    Japan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osaka_school_massacre (OK that was with a kitchen knife)

    China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_attacks_in_China_%282010%E2%80%9312%29 (oops knives again)

    Oh, and lookee here, Canada: https://www.cnn.com/2016/01/23/americas/canada-saskatchewan-la-loche-school-shooting/index.html

    The reason why America is singled out is because we have a free press that reports this at length and in great detail and globalists (domestic and foreign) hate us.

  52. 52
    Molson Bleu says:

    Tribune, I am not suggesting that school shootings, or mass shootings in general, only occur here. But it is difficult to argue that it is not disproportionately more prevalent here.

    “The reason why America is singled out is because we have a free press that reports this at length and in great detail and globalists (domestic and foreign) hate us.”

    This is rather simplistic. I live in Maine and remember the Canadian media covering the Saskatchewan shooting quite extensively. It is now February 17 and we have already had eight school shootings that have resulted in death or injury. Since 2013 we have averaged one school shooting per week, thankfully, most of them without fatality. Is there any other western country with this frequency, even on a proportional basis?

    Back when I was in high school, I remember several times when one friend of mine or another would show us a handgun in the school yard that he “borrowed” from his father. Just to show off. Does anyone seriously think that this is (or was) a common occurrence in other countries? I would be interested to hear from readers from other countries on this.

  53. 53
    Charles says:

    Molson Bleu @ 49

    Stricter gun laws are not going to stop these events. But they certainly will make it more difficult for these sick individuals to obtain weapons, and significantly reduce the numbers.

    That hasn’t worked in Chicago, which has some of the strictest gun control laws in the coutry, and yet one of the highest rates of gun violence.

    Stricter laws could include:
    1) ban on automatic assault rifles.
    2) limit on the magazine size.

    Automatic assault rifles are already banned, and magazine sizes are already limited.

    3) background checks that include medical records and social media use.

    Meaningful medical records, like a history of clinical sociopathology are already supposed to be reported, including if military service problems like PTSD. Social media is problematic. How do you know whose social media to scan? Under what screen name? This will depend on the applicant being truthful, and those with mental imbalances won’t be truthful.

    4) mandatory training before purchase.
    5) secure storage and transportation requirements.

    Training or proof of proficiency is already a requirement for concealed carry. And criminals will not abide by “storage and transportation requirements”.

    This would not prevent the vast majority of Americans from being able to purchase guns. But it might prevent some mass shootings.

    What has been shown to be most effective in stopping mass shootings is a “good guy” with a gun taking the shooter out early on. Allowing teachers to be armed would go a long way to ending school shootings shortly after they begin.

    When seconds count, the police are minutes away.

  54. 54
    tribune7 says:

    –Tribune, I am not suggesting that school shootings, or mass shootings in general, only occur here.–

    OK, you say “But none of this explains why this is only an American problem.”

    I point out that, well, it isn’t.

    Then you say you didn’t mean it.

    You are very frustrating to have a discussion with.

    You are right that our society has changed. Once upon a time things like what has happened this year (church shootings, concert shootings etc.) were unthinkable.

    What hasn’t changed though is access to guns, which were actually more accessible when mass shootings were almost non-existent.

    Yet banning guns for some strange reason is what certain types insist to be the solution when logic dictates that it obviously not.

    So I pose this question to you: If returning Bible readings and daily prayer to public schools cuts the violence to 1962 levels would you support it?

  55. 55
    Molson Bleu says:

    “You are very frustrating to have a discussion with.”

    My wife tells me the same thing.

    “What hasn’t changed though is access to guns, which were actually more accessible when mass shootings were almost non-existent.”

    More accessible legally. But in practical terms, they were more difficult to obtain. Fewer gun shops. Fewer shows, etc.

    “Yet banning guns for some strange reason is what certain types insist to be the solution when logic dictates that it obviously not.”

    I am not suggesting banning guns. Just some restrictions on types and storage, and more thorough checks on people wanting to purchase them.

    “If returning Bible readings and daily prayer to public schools cuts the violence to 1962 levels would you support it?”

    Sure.

  56. 56
    john_a_designer says:

    Here’s another fact that needs to be kept in mind when weighing whether or not stronger gun control laws would be effective:

    “In [a] study, led by epidemiologist Anthony Fabio of Pittsburgh’s Graduate School of Public Health, researchers partnered with the Pittsburgh Bureau of Police to trace the origins of all 893 firearms that police recovered from crime scenes in the year 2008.

    They found that in approximately 8 out of 10 cases, the perpetrator was not a lawful gun owner but rather in illegal possession of a weapon that belonged to someone else. The researchers were primarily interested in how these guns made their way from a legal purchase — at a firearm dealer or via a private sale — to the scene of the crime.

    The top-line finding of the study — that the overwhelming majority of gun crimes aren’t committed by lawful gun owners — reinforces a common refrain among gun rights advocacy groups. They argue that since criminals don’t follow laws, new regulations on gun ownership would only serve to burden lawful owners while doing little to combat crime.

    https://www.nationalreview.com/blog/corner/study-vast-majority-gun-crime-isnt-committed-lawful-gun-owners/

  57. 57
    kairosfocus says:

    JAD, the inverse correlation invites a dynamical explanation. There are likely many factors but for sure the main point is clear: mere incidence of guns per capita does not drive homicide rates. That is the same message from Switzerland and Finland BTW, with relatively high firearms ownership and relatively low homicides. The pattern of the school etc mass shootings — and note, this is not counting the sort of gangland violence in say Chicago — points to a culturally conditioned syndrome at work. Where, the clear failure of the war on drugs in the same US shows that gun confiscation is unlikely to work, indeed it would predictably trigger civil war as a major section of the population would interpret such along the lines of was it April 19 1775. The cross-factors of a generation of mass killing of posterity in the womb, linked to a willful and often animus-loaded driving out of the Christian heritage from institutional spaces, the public and the mind-space suggest that we have a major cultural challenge and something like simply re-instating prayers, readings and devotionals will not work; too much has changed. A reformation is needed, and such typically only come in response to existential crisis that shatters the hold of a dominant mindset — compare how Mr Putin, a former KGB Light Colonel [and presumably a Communist thus atheist] is evidently serious about the Orthodox faith inherited from his mother. Inference, as a civilisation we have long since crossed several terrible thresholds and we are going to be very lucky indeed if we do not go through collapse of the crumbling cliff-edge underfoot. KF

  58. 58
    john_a_designer says:

    FACT: The Parkland City FL school could have been stopped without any change to current gun laws.

    January 2017 – Administrators at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School recommend a “threat assessment” on Cruz to see if he is a danger to the school and its students, according to a news report by television station WPLG- Ch. 10 filed after the shootings. It is not known if the assessment was conducted, the station reports.

    September 2017 – A blogger in Mississippi warns the FBI that a commenter named ‘nikolas cruz’ wrote on his YouTube page: “I’m going to be a professional school shooter…”

    January 5, 2018 – A person close to Cruz contacts the FBI’s tipline to report concerns about him, including his possession of guns.

    February 16, 2018 – Two days after the killing of 17 people, the FBI acknowledges the January caller provided information about “Cruz’s gun ownership, desire to kill people, erratic behavior, and disturbing social media posts, as well as the potential of him conducting a school shooting,” The agency says proper protocol was not followed, and is launching an investigation into what went wrong.

    http://www.sun-sentinel.com/lo.....story.html

  59. 59
    kairosfocus says:

    JAD, it seems so, cf 38 above. We SHOULD be discussing a serious policing failure and what that points to. Then, what has worked for 40+ years, proved by Israel. Instead, we are seeing media stunts like this. KF

    PS: The linked points to serious questions about media ethics and whether showing up with some media is little more than setting yourself up to be smeared by those who are little more than agit prop operators. Resemblance to the stunts going on at Wiki WRT ID should give us sobering pause.

  60. 60
    Jul3s says:

    Chicago has some of the strictest gun control laws in the US and yet the highest gun violence stats, most of it criminal and gang-related. “Less intelligent”, “less resourceful” criminals regardless obtain and discharge firearms at higher rates than elsewhere..

    Gun control doesn’t work.

    Strict laws won’t work if there are areas with much looser laws nearby. Obviously. This does nothing to refute my point. Countries with stricter gun control (not necessarily banning) don’t have the other problems that Chicago has and they are better off for it.

    The pattern of the school etc mass shootings — and note, this is not counting the sort of gangland violence in say Chicago — points to a culturally conditioned syndrome at work.

    The rest of the developed world isn’t any better culturally, but they don’t have a firearms violence problem that is similar to the US.

    gun confiscation is unlikely to work, indeed it would predictably trigger civil war as a major section of the population would interpret such along the lines of was it April 19 1775.

    I agree but this thinking is incredibly naive. The US government doesn’t need to confiscate people’s guns to take away their freedom or their property. The US government can already do whatever it wants, the CIA has no accountability and has virtually unlimited power.

    Ironically, believing the fantasy of being able to be a hero shooting against a gun-taking tyrant is probably helping to placate the masses.

  61. 61
    tribune7 says:

    MB–

    More accessible legally. But in practical terms, they were more difficult to obtain. Fewer gun shops. Fewer shows, etc.

    Guns were never hard to get in this country. Even very poor people (my grandparents) had guns.

  62. 62
    tribune7 says:

    The US government can already do whatever it wants, the CIA has no accountability and has virtually unlimited power.

    If you believe this, it is true.

    If you don’t believe it, it is not.

  63. 63
    kairosfocus says:

    Jul3s:

    Strict laws won’t work if there are areas with much looser laws nearby.

    Yes, if “nearby” is expanded to include the more lawless areas of say Mexico, Columbia etc. (Kindly note the effect of prohibition and what is now increasingly clearly the losing war on drugs.)

    If what you really imply is global disarmament of civilians (implying global power and massive force) then you are even more looking at April 19 1775 updated.

    Where, too, compare what just happened with the Bundy Ranch case. Including, the interventions by people insistent that another Vicki Weaver case would not happen while they were silent and the whistleblower exposure of snipers etc secretly sent to the ranch.

    I do not think the CIA etc can deal with an April 19 1775 scenario backed by any significant fraction of the relevant gun owners in the US.

    We need to be looking at a more feasible answer, and to ask pointed questions of those playing the polarisation game on this.

    KF

  64. 64
    Jul3s says:

    Yes, if “nearby” is expanded to include the more lawless areas of say Mexico, Columbia etc

    By nearby I meant other parts of the US and central America. Not global disarmament.

    I do not think the CIA etc can deal with an April 19 1775 scenario backed by any significant fraction of the relevant gun owners in the US.

    My argument was not that the CIA can deal with that scenario (I agree that they can’t) but that they don’t need to. People will take up arms if the government tries to confiscate their property. But the government doesn’t need to show up on people’s doorsteps to oppress them directly, instead they can use interest rates, inflation or other financial machinations to do so gradually and with subtlety.

    Guns were never hard to get in this country. Even very poor people (my grandparents) had guns.

    That doesn’t mean that the changes MB mentioned didn’t happen.

    @ Charles

    Automatic assault rifles are already banned, and magazine sizes are already limited.

    Take for example the Los Vegas shooter, Stephen Paddock. He was a millionaire and he did planning and research for months. He was resourceful and determined. He could easily have afforded to get an automatic assault rifle or a machine gun. But he didn’t use either. He instead used more readily available AR-15s with bump-stocks which are legal but very sub-optimal for what he was trying to do. Despite his resources and determination, getting a better, but illegal weapon such as a machine gun was either too difficult or would have drawn too much attention. He knew the shortcomings involved with using bump-stocks because he tried to compensate for their flaws. If he used a machine gun he could have easily killed a hundred more people. So yes, the laws you mentioned and the inconvenience in obtaining firearms it creates are very real and have real effects.

  65. 65
    gooshy says:

    mb @ 55,

    Oswald killed Kennedy with a rifle he bought through the mail.

  66. 66
    gooshy says:

    obtw: machine guns aren’t illegal at the federal level. Just search Youtube for the Bullit County Machine Gun Shoot. Yeehah!

  67. 67
    Charles says:

    Jul3s @ 60

    Strict laws won’t work if there are areas with much looser laws nearby. Obviously. This does nothing to refute my point.

    Your point relies entirely on criminals cooperating with strict laws, obviously, as do the law-abiding citizens. And no matter where you look, criminals don’t cooperate with any laws, do they.

    Countries with stricter gun control (not necessarily banning) don’t have the other problems that Chicago has and they are better off for it.

    Because they aren’t Chicago and don’t have Chicago’s gangbanger criminal element. But Britian and Europe are now overrun with Muslim gangs, complete with no-go zones, and those countries’ citizens are being raped, beaten and robbed daily with no police defense (in fact the police pretend there are no problems and even scrub their reports) and also no means of self-defense.

    Take for example the Los Vegas shooter, Stephen Paddock. He was a millionaire and he did planning and research for months. He was resourceful and determined. He could easily have afforded to get an automatic assault rifle or a machine gun. But he didn’t use either.

    Then banning them would not have stopped Paddock from illegally getting and using them, now would it. You admit banning automatic weapons wouldn’t have stopped Paddock.

    OTOH, a semi AR-15 in the hands of hotel security could have stopped Paddock within 30 seconds. But they were unarmed… they had to call for other people who had guns.

  68. 68
    Jul3s says:

    Just search Youtube for the Bullit County Machine Gun Shoot. Yeehah

    “Knob Creek is a Cold Range. This means NO loaded Firearms of any kind may be carried on Knob Creek property during the Machine Gun Shoot. All Firearms must be declared and zip tied with magazines out at the admission gate”

    Try telling them to abolish this rule since “gun control doesn’t work” and “criminals don’t cooperate with rules”.

    Your point relies entirely on criminals cooperating with strict laws, obviously, as do the law-abiding citizens. And no matter where you look, criminals don’t cooperate with any laws, do they.

    That is a completely ridiculous misrepresentation of what I said. Its not about willing cooperation, but consequences and ease of access. As I pointed out above, mass-shooters have chosen not to break the law in acquiring weapons despite being able to.

    Because they aren’t Chicago and don’t have Chicago’s gangbanger criminal element. But Britian and Europe are now overrun with Muslim gangs, complete with no-go zones, and those countries’ citizens are being raped, beaten and robbed daily with no police defense

    That is an argument against unrestricted immigration, not gun control. The crimes are not primarily firearms related anyway.

    Then banning them would not have stopped Paddock from illegally getting and using them, now would it. You admit banning automatic weapons wouldn’t have stopped Paddock.

    But the laws DID stop Paddock. He didn’t use an optimised but more difficult to access weapon. He used a collection of readily available but very sub-par and unreliable (thanks to their modifications) weapons.

  69. 69
    Charles says:

    Jul3s @ 68

    64: “He could easily have afforded to get an automatic assault rifle or a machine gun. ”
    68: “But the laws DID stop Paddock. ”

    Which is it Jul3s; Paddock could have easily gotten automatic assault rifles and machine guns, or the laws stopped Paddock. You don’t get to argue he ‘could have’ but ‘couldn’t have’.

    That is an argument against unrestricted immigration, not gun control.

    No, it is an argument against not being defenseless in the face of unrestrained criminals, and the UK/EU citizenry are not appreciably safer than Chicagoans. You drew the comparison that countries with strict gun control were better off than Chicago. They’re not. They face an equally hostile criminal element, even though they don’t have guns. They have gun control and they’re defenseless. Not having guns didn’t improve the quality of their lives.

    As I pointed out above, mass-shooters have chosen not to break the law in acquiring weapons despite being able to.

    That’s the problem with all the gun control efforts. They don’t actually keep guns out the hands of criminals. A more pragmatic approach is for teachers, hotel security, citizenry to shoot back. It’s the gun free-zones that leave themselves defenseless.

    When seconds count, the police are minutes away.

  70. 70
    john_a_designer says:

    The Second Amendment says:

    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.

    I live in area that’s quite rural with a lot of small communities– too small for a professionally staffed police dept. or fire dept. For police protection these communities rely on the county sheriff and his deputies. As for protection against fire many of them have volunteer fire depts. I’ve gotten to know a couple volunteer firemen. They go through rigorous training and are on call 24/7. They willingly volunteer to serve and are proud of what they do. I know that because they are not shy about sharing their “war stories.”

    Why not train volunteer security personnel to protect our schools? Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School did have one armed security guard but that was hardly sufficient when you consider the size of the campus. A dozen or so volunteer armed security guards strategically placed around the campus could have mitigated the high injury and death toll.

    Who would volunteer? I think you could find teachers would who be willing to volunteer. They would be strategically placed by just being in their classroom. I am not suggesting that every teacher needs to be trained just enough to meet the schools security needs.

    There already exist organizations that provide this kind of training. The following is one of them:

    http://www.activeresponsetraining.net/

    Greg Ellifritz the President and Primary Instructor of this group had this to say about last Weds. (2/14/18) school shooting.

    The best way to stop a school shooting in progress is through rapid armed intervention. The policy makers can debate as to who is best suited to provide such a response; it doesn’t really matter to me. It can be school staff, armed security guards, a posse of CCW parents, or a uniformed police officer. If someone is killing your kid, I promise that you won’t care who shows up to stop the shooting.

    Notice this is an approach that works with the Second Amendment not against it. We live in a new world. This is something that could prevented a last Weds. tragedy by providing a last line of protection.

  71. 71
    Jul3s says:

    Which is it Jul3s; Paddock could have easily gotten automatic assault rifles and machine guns, or the laws stopped Paddock. You don’t get to argue he ‘could have’ but ‘couldn’t have’.

    I didn’t say that. I said he had enough money to easily afford a few. The law made access to them difficult enough for him that he opted instead for a much worse choice of weapon. The other mass-shooters in recent times have all opted for the more easily accessible weapons.

    it is an argument against not being defenseless in the face of unrestrain criminals.

    The problem and the need for protection was much smaller before unrestrained criminals arrived so no, it is in fact only an argument against uncontrolled immigration.

    That’s the problem with all the gun control efforts. They don’t actually keep guns out the hands of criminals

    No law stops any crime 100% of the time. That is an impossible standard to keep.

  72. 72
    ET says:

    Look, clearly we need better gun laws. This Cruz kid should never have been able to purchase any gun let alone an AR-15. And it is very doubtful that he would have been able to buy a gun on the black market.

  73. 73
    Charles says:

    Jul3s @ 71:

    The problem and the need for protection was much smaller before unrestrained criminals arrived so no, it is in fact only an argument against uncontrolled immigration.

    So you admit their lives aren’t better off than Chicagoans, that not having guns hasn’t made them safer.

    No law stops any crime 100% of the time. That is an impossible standard to keep.

    But the greatest benefit with least burden is an armed citizenry that shoots back. There’s a reason mass-shooters target schools.

    Actually, no law stops any crime, ever. That is the definition of “crime” – a violation of law. The only way for gun control to work is for criminals to cooperate with it. Good luck with that.

    Reducing gun violence thru gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by denying cars to sober people.

  74. 74
    Charles says:

    ET @ 72

    Look, clearly we need better gun laws.

    We clearly need enforcement of the laws we’ve got. We need the FBI and local LEO to do their damn jobs. The FBI was tipped to Cruz twice and they ignored him (just like they ignored the Tsarnov brothers and Hasan and the Pulse shooter, etc.). This isn’t a gun control problem, this is ignore the criminal problem. LEO had been called out to Cruz’s house some 39 times.

    Good greif!!! It wouldn’t matter how strict are gun controls if the police won’t act on the intel they’ve got.

  75. 75
    john_a_designer says:

    Here’s another opinion (see # 70 above) about training a small select number of teachers to serve as armed security guards.

    [There] are two reforms that schools can make at minimal expense. First, if they have unarmed security guards, they can hire armed ones instead. And two, they can pay their teachers a little extra to become trained as armed security guards and carry guns while on the job. Per the Houston Chronicle’s Chron.com,

    The amount of training required [to become an armed guard] in each state varies. In Oklahoma, for instance, applicants must complete two phases of unarmed guard training, for a total of 40 hours, and 32 hours of firearms training; Tennessee requires only four hours of unarmed guard training and eight hours of firearms training.

    That’s something a teacher could easily accomplish during summer vacation, even if schools insisted on rigorous training. If a few teachers in each school did this, schools would gain a line of defense against shooters without hiring more personnel or introducing more police officers into the school environment.

    https://www.nationalreview.com/blog/corner/arm-teachers/

    And it appears it’s already happening is some states:

    Hundreds of school teachers in Ohio, Colorado and elsewhere have been trained by an organization called Faculty/Administrator Safety Training and Emergency Response (FASTER). The group, operated by Ohio-based Buckeye Firearms Association, conducts a program that was created along with concerned parents, law officers and safety experts, according to a description of the group on its website.

    The program provides 26 hours of hands-on training over three days and exceeds the requirements of the Ohio Peace Officer Training Academy, according to FASTER officials. It entails practice scenarios in which the armed protector must find and subdue the threat as students flee a classroom.

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017.....asses.html

    Again, this is an approach that works with the Second Amendment not against it. On the other hand, it’s not an extreme gun rights view where everyone is packing.

  76. 76
    kairosfocus says:

    Folks,

    it is clear that there are layers of problems here, compounded by issues of deep polarisation.

    I find that Charles raises a critical point:

    We need the FBI and local LEO to do their damn jobs. The FBI was tipped to Cruz twice and they ignored him (just like they ignored the Tsarnov brothers and Hasan and the Pulse shooter, etc.). This isn’t a gun control problem, this is ignore the criminal problem. LEO had been called out to Cruz’s house some 39 times.

    Similarly, we can see another:

    the greatest benefit with least burden is an armed citizenry that shoots back. There’s a reason mass-shooters target schools.

    And he makes a third:

    the UK/EU citizenry are not appreciably safer than Chicagoans. You drew the comparison that countries with strict gun control were better off than Chicago. They’re not. They face an equally hostile criminal element, even though they don’t have guns. They have gun control and they’re defenseless. Not having guns didn’t improve the quality of their lives . . . . That’s the problem with all the gun control efforts. They don’t actually keep guns out the hands of criminals. A more pragmatic approach is for teachers, hotel security, citizenry to shoot back. It’s the gun free-zones that leave themselves defenseless.

    When seconds count, the police are minutes away.

    Where, in the case of settlement jihad no-go zones, they may not show up; the local warlord substitutes for law.

    JAD indicates:

    Why not train volunteer security personnel to protect our schools? Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School did have one armed security guard but that was hardly sufficient when you consider the size of the campus. A dozen or so volunteer armed security guards strategically placed around the campus could have mitigated the high injury and death toll.

    He goes on:

    There already exist organizations that provide this kind of training. The following is one of them:

    http://www.activeresponsetraining.net/

    Greg Ellifritz the President and Primary Instructor of this group had this to say about last Weds. (2/14/18) school shooting.

    The best way to stop a school shooting in progress is through rapid armed intervention. The policy makers can debate as to who is best suited to provide such a response; it doesn’t really matter to me. It can be school staff, armed security guards, a posse of CCW parents, or a uniformed police officer. If someone is killing your kid, I promise that you won’t care who shows up to stop the shooting.

    Notice this is an approach that works with the Second Amendment not against it. We live in a new world. This is something that could prevented a last Weds. tragedy by providing a last line of protection.

    This is of course close to what happened a little while ago with the church attack in Texas, where a next door neighbour took up his own AR-15 to engage the gunman, then with help of a passing driver gave pursuit.

    The case of Israel is also quite clear.

    As for the Las Vegas case, I am not at all sure we have the full story. I am concerned that the first long burst is more consistent with a belt-fed weapon than anything else. I do not like the near-far bursts captured by a taxi driver. I also understand that a belt loop or the like can be used to create a “bump stock” type effect, but note that in all of these cases accuracy at any reasonable distance is out of the window. And more.

    A clear pattern that is coming out is that something has gone very wrong with law enforcement.

    But then, that may go back as far as November 1963.

    KF

  77. 77
    tribune7 says:

    –Look, clearly we need better gun laws. This Cruz kid should never have been able to purchase any gun let alone an AR-15.–

    You have sort of a point, but it isn’t the gun laws but their enforcement. The Texas shooter, by law, should not have had a gun. Even Paddock should have raised some red flags.

    With Cruz it seems less about guns and more about mental health policy. I’m real curious to learn if he was on any meds.

  78. 78
    Seversky says:

    It sounds like there is general agreement that this is a multi-factorial problem that requires a strategy comprising several different strands.

    The first and most immediate is improving school security measures. There was the recent case of the girl who brought a pistol into school in her backpack. She dropped the pack, the gun went off and injured two students. Luckily, both survived but that should never have happened. She should not have been able to bring the gun in unchallenged. Cruz got on to school premises with an AR-15 rifle and a number of magazines. That should have not have been possible. Schools need to install better security measures which should be able to delay a shooter getting in long enough for the police to be called even if they can’t stop him entirely. And if Congress can’t pass better gun-control legislation the least they could do is vote the funds for better security.

    The second is better mental health protocols for handling cases where students are clearly troubled and displaying some of the signs that precede violent incidents. This should be more than just expelling troublemakers as expulsion can lead to them being even more isolated and feeling victimized. There needs to be positive interventions that might forestall a crisis.

    Finally, there needs to be better regulation of gun-ownership. Society requires that people who want to drive a car be properly trained in the safe handling of a vehicle, have a working knowledge of the laws and regulations that govern traffic behavior and pass a test of those skills and knowledge before being granted a license to drive. Vehicles are dangerous and society has a right to protect itself as far as possible.

    The same should apply to firearms. Before anyone starts screaming about the Second Amendment, this is in now way a call to have it repealed. As a Millian libertarian I believe that people should be free to shoot guns for sport or recreation. But also as a Millian libertarian I hold that if someone practices a hobby or sport that can harm others if not done in a safe and responsible manner then society has a right and a duty to regulate it so as to minimize the risks.

    As for the connection of these shootings to the works of Nietzsche or Darwin I would point out that millions of people have read their works over the centuries without being driven to go out and shoot people. I would say their works are neither a necessary nor sufficient explanation for these crimes. I also own a few guns myself and have read Darwin – although not Nietzsche – without feeling the slightest compulsion to go out and shoot anything at all.

  79. 79
    kairosfocus says:

    Seversky, several points are in general agreement. I note, this was first yet another policing and/or mental health care failure. That goes to the competence of several bureaucracies including FBI. I forgot, there are signs of a culturally conditioned and scripted syndrome that needs to be dealt with, one similar to going amok. Next, the delay until call the police problem is subject to: “when seconds count, the police are minutes away.” Also, the police have no particular binding obligation to protect those not on a security detail list. The Israeli solution (including armed teachers) is indicated. Firearms and cadets training should be part of the school curriculum, indeed that is part of the classic Swiss system. I have long since highlighted that we are in a different threat age and need to set up a civilian marshal corps with overwatch on essentially every likely target . . . only such would be affordable. I guess it is going to take a few Mumbai and Betaclan attacks to drive that point home. I note, I am not satisfied with official accounts on several incidents, and frankly that goes back to November 1963 for the USA. God only knows how far back elsewhere. KF

    PS: The deleterious influences are notorious, historically. When even a novellist like H G Wells writes a warning into the opening remarks of a popular novel, take him at his word. If de river mullet say Alligator down dere, believe him.

  80. 80
    kairosfocus says:

    U/D: Developing, it seems (operative word) Cruz’s step-aunt reports he was on medication, also his brother seems to have been committed to an institution on Friday. A list from Kupelian:

    Columbine killer Eric Harris, 13 dead, 24 wounded – on Luvox.
    Patrick Purdy, 25, Stockton, California, five dead, 30 wounded – on Amitriptyline and Thorazine.
    Kip Kinkel, 15, Oregon, killed his parents plus two students and wounded 22 others – on Prozac and Ritalin.
    Laurie Dann, 31, Illinois, killed one second grader and injured six – on Anafranil and Lithium.
    Michael Carneal, 14, Kentucky, killed three and paralyzed one – on Ritalin.
    Jeff Weise, 16, Minnesota, nine dead, five wounded – on Prozac.
    Joseph T. Wesbecker, 47, killed nine, wounded 11 – on Prozac for one month.
    Kurt Danysh, 18, Pennsylvania, on Prozac for two weeks. He shot and killed his father and said he had no control.
    John Hinckley, 25, Washington, D.C. Shot and almost killed President Ronald Reagan, wounded three others – took 2 Valium two hours before the shooting.
    Andrea Yates, Houston, Texas, drowned all five of her children in a bathtub – on Effexor.
    Christopher Pittman, 12, Chester, South Carolina, shot and killed his grandparents and burned the house down – on Paxil and Zoloft.

    Something to ponder.

    KF

    PS: There is also a suggestion of an 11 yo girl intimidated into pushing a threatening note under a Principal’s door and being arrested on felony charges. We have to watch that side too — remember Joseph and Potiphar’s wife.

  81. 81
    kairosfocus says:

    U/D: It seems a donation in kind of US$ 10,000 by the NRA to the JROTC programme at the high school is being turned into a guilt by association media talk-point in some quarters. The Blaze:

    What the stories don’t mention is that NRA monies helped fund a program for the JROTC program the shooter was a member of when he attended high school. The NRA gave the school’s JROTC program more than $10,000 in non-cash assistance to help build its air-rifle team.

    A linked story on the effect of the JROTC training speaks volumes:

    Two 17-year-old students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School coupled their quick-thinking skills and Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps training to help save dozens of lives when Nikolas Cruz went on his shooting spree, killing 17 people, Wednesday in Parkland, Florida.

    Company commander Capt. Zackary Walls, 17, and Capt. Colton Haab, 17, told ABC News that they had decided to end their outdoor formations early that fateful day. They had taken their students back inside the school just moments before the fire alarm that sounded just as the massacre began.

    Walls and Haab took charge and herded students and teachers into a classroom after they heard gunshots ringing out nearby. The two JROTC captains used materials inside the room to create a barrier between them and the killer and prepared themselves for a fight.

    Of course, it seems that those who promoted the first talking-point apparently did not provide the balance in the second.

    KF

  82. 82
    Charles says:

    kairosfocus @ 81

    I am often struck by the blatant hypocritical, cynical spin & elision employed against the NRA.

    When a LEO kills with a gun, the antagonists want the officer and his department scrutinized and prosecuted to fix blame & punishment. But when a mass-shooter kills with a gun, the antagonists fix blame on the weapon and want the NRA prosecuted.

    When the police shoot, they blame the police. But when some imbalanced or otherwise malevolent person shoots, they blame guns.

    And, yeah, something rent the fabric of the universe in 1963. An age of innocence ended and an age of sophisticated carnality began. Kennedy’s assasination was one symptom, perhaps even a trigger. The differences between our culture in early to mid 1963 in music, fashion, school, politics, media, even global conflict markedly changed when compared to 1964 and later years.

    I know of only one entity capable of quietly orchestrating a shift across cultures, continents and populations, to sustain it for decades and then compound its effects all to the detriment of the human soul.

  83. 83
    kairosfocus says:

    U/D: It seems the shooter was listening to voices in his head. Fox:

    Nikolas Cruz, who confessed to being the gunman in Wednesday’s deadly Florida school shooting, according to his arrest affidavit, claimed to authorities that voices in his head told him how to carry out the ambush that left at least 17 people dead, ABC News reported.

    Law enforcement sources referred to the alleged voices as “demons,” according to the outlet, and said Cruz, 19, claimed that they told him what he needed to do to launch the deadly assault.

    Definitely demonic voices of evil counsel. Whether actual demons, we can leave for consideration.

    KF

  84. 84
    kairosfocus says:

    Charles, note the latest update. Instructive, evil voices telling HOW to carry out the assault. The thief comes to steal, to kill and to destroy but I am come that they might have life to the full. A sign. KF

    PS: The NY State school prayer for children banned in the watershed US Supreme Court decision of 1962, and obviously the headlined step in a trend of radical secularisation that was gathering momentum:

    Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our country.

    Think about the implications of reversing those sentiments, petitions and affections regarding God and self, family and parents, teachers and nation — sounds chillingly familiar. Note by contrast, the preamble to the Constitution, on the blessings of liberty i/l/o the Congressional calls to prayer, penitence and thanksgiving, esp for May 1776, Dec 1777.

  85. 85
    kairosfocus says:

    PPS: The US Congress, 1776 and 1777 — yes, they called to penitence and revival:

    May 1776 [over the name of John Hancock, first signer of the US Declaration of Independence] : In times of impending calamity and distress; when the liberties of America are imminently endangered by the secret machinations and open assaults of an insidious and vindictive administration, it becomes the indispensable duty of these hitherto free and happy colonies, with true penitence of heart, and the most reverent devotion, publickly to acknowledge the over ruling providence of God; to confess and deplore our offences against him; and to supplicate his interposition for averting the threatened danger, and prospering our strenuous efforts in the cause of freedom, virtue, and posterity.. . . Desirous, at the same time, to have people of all ranks and degrees duly impressed with a solemn sense of God’s superintending providence, and of their duty, devoutly to rely, in all their lawful enterprizes, on his aid and direction, Do earnestly recommend, that Friday, the Seventeenth day of May next, be observed by the said colonies as a day of humiliation, fasting, and prayer; that we may, with united hearts, confess and bewail our manifold sins and transgressions, and, by a sincere repentance and amendment of life, appease his righteous displeasure, and, through the merits and mediation of Jesus Christ, obtain his pardon and forgiveness; humbly imploring his assistance to frustrate the cruel purposes of our unnatural enemies; . . . that it may please the Lord of Hosts, the God of Armies, to animate our officers and soldiers with invincible fortitude, to guard and protect them in the day of battle, and to crown the continental arms, by sea and land, with victory and success: Earnestly beseeching him to bless our civil rulers, and the representatives of the people, in their several assemblies and conventions; to preserve and strengthen their union, to inspire them with an ardent, disinterested love of their country; to give wisdom and stability to their counsels; and direct them to the most efficacious measures for establishing the rights of America on the most honourable and permanent basis—That he would be graciously pleased to bless all his people in these colonies with health and plenty, and grant that a spirit of incorruptible patriotism, and of pure undefiled religion, may universally prevail; and this continent be speedily restored to the blessings of peace and liberty, and enabled to transmit them inviolate to the latest posterity. And it is recommended to Christians of all denominations, to assemble for public worship, and abstain from servile labour on the said day.

    December 1777: FORASMUCH as it is the indispensable Duty of all Men to adore the superintending Providence of Almighty God; to acknowledge with Gratitude their Obligation to him for benefits received, and to implore such farther Blessings as they stand in Need of; And it having pleased him in his abundant Mercy not only to continue to us the innumerable Bounties of his common Providence, but also to smile upon us in the Prosecution of a just and necessary War, for the Defence and Establishment of our unalienable Rights and Liberties; particularly in that he hath been pleased in so great a Measure to prosper the Means used for the Support of our Troops and to crown our Arms with most signal success: It is therefore recommended to the legislative or executive powers of these United States, to set apart THURSDAY, the eighteenth Day of December next, for Solemn Thanksgiving and Praise; That with one Heart and one Voice the good People may express the grateful Feelings of their Hearts, and consecrate themselves to the Service of their Divine Benefactor; and that together with their sincere Acknowledgments and Offerings, they may join the penitent Confession of their manifold Sins, whereby they had forfeited every Favour, and their humble and earnest Supplication that it may please GOD, through the Merits of Jesus Christ, mercifully to forgive and blot them out of Remembrance; That it may please him graciously to afford his Blessing on the Governments of these States respectively, and prosper the public Council of the whole; to inspire our Commanders both by Land and Sea, and all under them, with that Wisdom and Fortitude which may render them fit Instruments, under the Providence of Almighty GOD, to secure for these United States the greatest of all human blessings, INDEPENDENCE and PEACE; That it may please him to prosper the Trade and Manufactures of the People and the Labour of the Husbandman, that our Land may yet yield its Increase; To take Schools and Seminaries of Education, so necessary for cultivating the Principles of true Liberty, Virtue and Piety, under his nurturing Hand, and to prosper the Means of Religion for the promotion and enlargement of that Kingdom which consisteth “in Righteousness, Peace and Joy in the Holy Ghost.”[i.e. Cites Rom 14:9] [Source: Journals of the American Congress From 1774 to 1788 (Washington: Way and Gideon, 1823), Vol. I, pp. 286-287 & II, pp. 309 – 310.]

    Notice, the grand statement structure of the US Articles of Confederation and the Constitution:

    [Art. Confed, 1778:] And Whereas it hath pleased the Great Governor of the World to incline the hearts of the legislatures we respectively represent in Congress, to approve of, and to authorize us to ratify the said Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union. Know Ye that we the undersigned delegates, by virtue of the power and authority to us given for that purpose, do by these presents, in the name and in behalf of our respective constituents, fully and entirely ratify and confirm each and every of the said Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union . . . . In Witness whereof we have hereunto set our hands in Congress. Done at Philadelphia in the State of Pennsylvania the ninth day of July in the Year of our Lord One Thousand Seven Hundred and Seventy-Eight, and in the Third Year of the independence of America.

    [Const 1787:] We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America . . . . [Main Body, Arts I – VII] . . . . Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth. In Witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names. . . . . [AMENDMENTS].

    I’ll bet these are not cited in history texts used in schools. Or, if mentioned they are going to be played down, dismissed or denigrated.

  86. 86
    Charles says:

    Reality Check: More Minnesotans Own Guns, Violent Crime Remains Low
    http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/.....nd-checks/

    By Pat Kessler February 15, 2018 at 5:35 pm
    [snip]
    Minnesota’s violent crime rate hit a 50-year low in 2016, according to the FBI.

    And in 2017, the state set a new record for firearms background checks.
    [snip]

  87. 87
    ET says:

    It’s too cold to go out shooting people in Minnesota.

  88. 88
    kairosfocus says:

    ET, but that means — hunters, those who go swimming in holes cut in the ice and maybe ice fishermen and others like that aside — the people will be cooped up in homes and buildings like fish in a barrel. All nicely bunched up as mass targets. Mix in “gun-free zones,” and you have target rich environments where someone wishing to shoot fish in a barrel can fire away with no fear of having someone to shoot back until the police arrive, when is that on average, five minutes out? Even at two minutes out there is a lot of shooting that could be done. So, as guns can be had or smuggled there, it is not merely having guns or access to guns that drives the phenomenon of mass shootings. And, such access cannot be effectively prevented for one determined to act like this crazed youngster just did. Just ask the ghosts of victims of the Paris attack. KF

  89. 89
    Charles says:

    After Parkland massacre, the left wants to disarm ‘gun-clingers’ yet ignores gun violence in black community

    [snip]From Feb. 1 to Feb. 17, 2018, twenty Chicagoans, mostly black, were killed, and 65 others were shot and wounded. But you won’t see the dead’s faces and names 24-7 on CNN or MSNBC. The same mainstream media that cover school shootings involving mostly white suburban students with pictures and bios for days after the carnage give gunned down black youths, some caught in the crossfire of gang violence, a few seconds or so on a local or national news roundup.

    In the leftist media’s perpetual war on Bible and gun “bitter clingers,” the slaughter of blacks and Hispanics in Democrat-run cities, where guns are easily bought, stolen, traded, and sold neighbor to neighbor, doesn’t serve their interests.

    Nothing illustrates the left’s own agenda-driven, implicit bias more than choosing to ignore minorities killing each other in cities with strict gun control measures, while the mostly white victims at Columbine High, Virginia Tech, Roseburg Community College, Sandy Hook Elementary, and now Marjory Stoneman Douglas High receive daily, exhaustive coverage.

    After each suburban school shooting with a majority-white population, anti-2nd Amendment zealots are out in force within minutes, blaming guns for the murders. When gun violence takes the lives of countless blacks in urban areas, liberals claim “harsh criminal-justice policies in the age of mass incarceration” fuel the chaos. For blacks, guns don’t kill; the system does. For whites, guns kill – not the psychotically disturbed individuals who use them.[snip]

    Why does the government fail so often on existing gun control laws?

    [snip]When Islamic terrorists commit violent acts, we are always lectured not to stereotype Muslims. But when violent mentally ill gun-owners commit atrocious acts, the immediate reaction is to stereotype gun-owners, who are mostly nonviolent, law-abiding citizens. We are always lectured about stereotyping and profiling, but somehow it is OK to blame all gun-owners for the irrational acts of a few.

    When an illegal alien kills someone, we hear very little about the crime from the media or Democrats because that is just so inconvenient to the agenda. When a person kills a person with a gun, we hear that one death is too many – so why don’t we hear that when someone let out by a sanctuary city or state kills someone? Aren’t all deaths and lives important?[snip]

  90. 90
    Charles says:

    And in a disastrous effort to judge criminals by the color of their skin instead of the content of their character…

    Did the Progressive ‘Broward County Solution’ Cost 17 Student Lives?

    [snip]
    Authorities agreed to treat twelve different misdemeanor offenses as school-related issues, not criminal ones. The results impressed the people who initiated the program. Arrests dropped from more than a thousand in 2011-2012 to less than four hundred just four years later.
    [snip]

    According to a source who spoke to the Miami Herald, Cruz had been suspended from Stoneman Douglas High for fighting and also for being caught with bullets in his backpack. This was apparently at least one of the reasons why administrators reportedly emailed a warning to teachers against allowing Cruz on the campus with a backpack. He was later expelled for reasons that have not been disclosed, but he was apparently not arrested.
    [snip]

    School Shooting Was Outcome of Broward County School Board Policy – Now Local and National Politicians Weaponize Kids for Ideological Intents…

    Broward County schools intentionally created polices from 2010 through 2016 that culminated in the 2018 mass school shooting in Parkland. We know this with great specificity because five years ago we warned Broward County Florida school board members this could happen.

  91. 91
    kairosfocus says:

    F/N: Reports indicate the School’s Officer stayed outside the building during the incident, as did three other first-arriving officers. Several further officers arrived a little later and went in. Troubling. KF

  92. 92
    Molson Bleu says:

    I saw a recent comment on FB that is food for thought.

    ‘How would you like to be a black teacher holding a handgun when the police get there?’

    The question has still not been answered. Why does no other western country have the problem with mass shootings that we do. Other countries have far more atheists, have mental health issues, have divorce and family breakups, have access to violent TV, movies and video games, gang problems, and the like. All of the things that are used to explain gun violence.

  93. 93
    kairosfocus says:

    Further developing: The school shooting case is looking more and more like policing failure in the large and in the narrow. By contrast with those who stayed outside [from one police dept] we see the intervention by officers from another:

    https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2018/02/23/stop-what-youre-doing-and-watch-this-coral-springs-pd-officer-talk-about-responding-to-the-stoneman-douglas-hs-attack/

    >>Meet Sgt. Jeff Heinrich of the Coral Springs Police Department.

    Sgt. Heinrich was off duty and unarmed at the time of the attack last week at Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., but he was on campus watering one of the school’s athletic fields in just shorts and a T-shirt. Sgt. Heinrich’s wife is an assistant athletic director at the school, his son is on the football team.

    When he heard the shots — remember now, he’s unarmed — he dropped the hose and ran toward the sound of gunfire where he immediately helped a student who was wounded. Minutes later, he met up with a Coral Springs PD SWAT team member who gave him a vest and a backup weapon and the two of them then entered the school to help clear classrooms. >>

    FOUR “cowardly” officers from the Broward police but the Coral Springs ones are somehow consistently braver?

    I don’t buy it.

    There was, more credibly, some sort of stand down order or order to hold in the perimeter then call in SWAT in force for the Broward police.

    This goes directly to, when seconds count, count on the police to be minutes away . . . in response of not physically. Where, no, flipping out a cell phone and dialling 911 or whatever is not making a difference if this sort of stand-down is likely. (And of course, demonising and scapegoating those who acted is not helping matters. We have to make up our minds about putting police officers in a no-win bind, as that is utterly ruinously counter-productive. Agit prop operatives, media amplifiers and sponsors of media lynch-mob show trials, I am looking straight at you.)

    This further underscores a need for an armed civilian marshals model, where places likely to be targetted by terrorists or those running amok are under armed over-watch by people with sufficient connexion to the community to respond reliably with the rescue reflex or the defense reflex.

    Yes, I include teachers and school administrators in that list.

    No, I don’t buy the talking-point that oh, there is such institutional racism that we cannot trust teachers not to pull a gun and gun down minority students in cumulatively greater or at least significant numbers.

    If teachers are not a suitable population to filter, train and discipline with frankly martial-law accountability for their actions, our civilisation is in deeper peril than even I have been concerned over.

    Nor do I buy the seemingly deep-set emotive over-reaction to the mere word, guns much less the physical object. It is time for reality to hit home.

    The coach who sacrificed his life trying to shield students did not lack character or courage, he lacked equipment.

    The off duty officer lacked equipment, and still ran to help.

    Once spare equipment was given, he joined the intervention-team.

    Where, we are in a post-ban world where criminals, those planning sprees of murder and terrorists clearly have access to full auto weapons if they want them. Why that has not come in is likely, that full auto raises control and ammunition wasting issues.

    For that matter, something like a kukri or a machete or sword would be capable of nearly as much destruction. And such can literally be made from old car springs. Cars and trucks are potentially even more destructive — as we saw on a French waterfront road.

    We are not in an ideal world where there is not a culturally conditioned syndrome of mass violence.

    KF

  94. 94
    kairosfocus says:

    MB, I am a black man and I have been in the classroom or lecture hall. If I am a civilian marshal who can pull out and hold up or pin on a shield — perhaps a hat or the like, that makes all the difference. So, the question can easily become, how would you like to be the black, plainclothes detective who just pulled out his firearm, when the uniformed police arrive. That such has not been an issue shows that the rhetoric in use is appeal to polarisation, not a serious objection. An organised marshal team on overwatch and acting as first responders available in seconds is something police would be notified of or aware of on arrival, I am presuming that communication equipment is there in place and so co-ordination is feasible. The circumstances are also generally going to be clear [teachers tend to be fairly obvious — a good reason for uniforms and/or dress codes], reducing blue on blue casualties. KF

    PS: A shield logo by door-ways and gates notifying that this facility is under armed marshal overwatch would actually enhance security through the deterrence effect.

  95. 95
    kairosfocus says:

    PPS: While CCW is only part way to what I have mentioned, I note that a free CCW course for teachers in Ohio has reportedly been over-subscribed.

  96. 96
  97. 97
    kairosfocus says:

    MB, I suggest to you that you are largely repeating an already answered claim. There are many incidents of mass-murder in various jurisdictions across our civilisation, some with firearms, others with utility knives used to hijack aircraft, others with knives, some with vehicles. Some, with bombs. Next door to the USA there is a major state with much more restrictive firearms laws, which has a huge drugs-linked mass murdering war that has been ongoing for years. Chicago notoriously has restrictive firearms laws, but has a huge murder rate tied to a street gangs culture fuelled by connexions to a drugs-influenced subculture. That gives me pause when I see the sort of strong link to psycho-active drugs use for mental illnesses that is strongly correlated with the current matter. As news pointed out to you, there has been at least one recent incident of mass murder in schools in Canada, and a few years back there was an attempted attack on Parliament. The issue is not firearms as such, but what is motivating people to such attacks. Terrorism, drugs-smuggling gangs, gangs in a drugs-influenced region, a surge of culturally-conditioned running amok, and the like. All are connected to undermining the basic premise of deep respect for life and for the lawful civil peace of justice; where also, due to cultural memory, a society that is undermining the underpinnings for moral self-government and is opening the way for amorality, nihilism and out of control narcissism may spend a long time eating up the cultural capital of a former order of life. But, one funeral at a time, one moral breakdown at a time, something is being eroded. Once it is gone, the culture shifts decisively, and then to get back to something sensible is going to be a desperate and uncertain struggle. Already, we live in a world where the number one evil is that in 40+ years, we have slaughtered 800+ millions of posterity in the womb, utterly corrupting mindsets, medicine, nursing, education, media, and law as well as government. If you sow dragons’ teeth, expect a bitter harvest. The USA is particularly prone as it is a relatively non-traditional society, so the resistance to destructive trend is weaker than in other parts of our civilisation. Ask the Russians about what happened when they put official badges on nihilistic mass-murderers and called them the secret state police. KF

  98. 98
    ET says:

    ‘How would you like to be a black teacher holding a handgun when the police get there?’

    Only whiners and losers think that would be a problem.

    Why does no other western country have the problem with mass shootings that we do.

    There could be many reasons. Why does no other western country have men on the moon, a very successful space program, the best military and everything else that makes us better than them? Why can’t those countries be as successful as us?

    If you asked the people of the USA if they wanted to be more like some other country what do you think the result would be?

  99. 99
    Molson Bleu says:

    “Only whiners and losers think that would be a problem.”

    Only those completely ignorant of racism in America would make such a stupid statement.

    “If you asked the people of the USA if they wanted to be more like some other country what do you think the result would be?”

    Why don’t you ask that of the students and family of the Florida school, or Sandy Hook, or Columbine, or the families of the Vegas shooting victims, or the families of any of the hundreds of mass shootings that occur here every year.

    I am not suggesting that we become Canada, or Australia, or Belgium. But these countries obviously have something that the US doesn’t that makes them less prone to this epidemic of mass shootings. We adopt strategies and laws that work in other countries to resolve other issues. Why wouldn’t we do it in this case?

  100. 100
    ET says:

    Well I know that police officers are also African Americans. I also know that if teachers were allowed to carry firearms the police would know about it. And finally I know that police could distinguish between a student and a teacher.

    Why don’t you ask that of the students and family of the Florida school, or Sandy Hook, or Columbine, or the families of the Vegas shooting victims, or the families of any of the hundreds of mass shootings that occur here every year.

    When they have the majority you will have a point. We have the ways and means to protect schools. That is what we need to focus on.

    And until abortions are eradicated I don’t care about gun violence- seriously. Until we stop the unwarranted killing of the unborn we have no place to talk about guns.

  101. 101
    ET says:

    Molson Bleu needs to read the following:

    Gun Violence: How The U.S. Compares With Other Countries

    31st- we rank 31st in the world when it comes to gun violence deaths.

  102. 102
    Charles says:

    Molson Bleu @ 92

    Why does no other western country have the problem with mass shootings that we do.

    You mean like “December 13, 2011, 6 killed, 125 injured in Liege” or “November 13, 2015 153 Dead In Paris Shootings” or “July 22, 2016 9 killed, 16 injured in Munich shootings”?

    You mean those mass shootings? (and there are many more examples).

    But in America we shoot back when permitted, and that’s what you see as the “problem”, isn’t it.

    Also in America, liberals have staked out our kids like goats on a killing field in gun-free school-zones. But you don’t see that as a problem, do you. You only see defending those kids with guns against gunmen as a “problem”.

    Oddly, Israeli schools don’t have the “problem” of school shootings. Why might that be?

  103. 103
    Molson Bleu says:

    “31st- we rank 31st in the world when it comes to gun violence deaths.”

    Which means that 80% of countries have lower rates of gun deaths than we do. If you want to be counted amongst the worst 20%, that is your choice.

  104. 104
    ET says:

    Which means that 80% of countries have lower rates of gun deaths than we do

    That is OK with me. I don’t want the USA to be like other countries.

    Again, gun violence does not bother me. It can be dealt with without changing gun laws.

  105. 105
    Molson Bleu says:

    “You mean like “December 13, 2011, 6 killed, 125 injured in Liege” or “November 13, 2015 153 Dead In Paris Shootings” or “July 22, 2016 9 killed, 16 injured in Munich shootings”?

    You mean those mass shootings? (and there are many more examples).”

    Although each one is tragic, does any other western country have more mass shootings per year than days in the year? That is what I mean by a problem. It is persistent, with no end in sight.

    As News rightly pointed out, Canada had one mass shooting last year. And as far as I know, Canada has many of the same social and health issues that we do. And is exposed to the same movies, TV and video games as we are. And they have serious gang problems and drug problems. They also have a high per capita gun ownership. Why do they not have a proportionate number of mass shootings? I admit that it is not as simple as more strict gun control, but we would have to be completely blind to the evidence to conclude that gun control does not make a difference.

  106. 106
    ET says:

    Why do they not have a proportionate number of mass shootings?

    one tenth of the people.

  107. 107
    Charles says:

    Molson Bleu @ 92

    The question has still not been answered. Why does no other western country have the problem with mass shootings that we do.

    Molson Bleu @ 105

    does any other western country have more mass shootings per year than days in the year? That is what I mean by a problem. It is persistent, with no end in sight.

    No, that’s you moving the goal posts attempting to win a different argument.

    Regardless, the US doesn’t have more than 365 mass shootings per year, even counting Chicago gang violence. So you still have no point.

    It is persistent, with no end in sight.

    Israel doesn’t have a mass shooting problem in their schools at all, even being the target of several terrorist groups and countries. But you don’t want to have that argument either, do you.

    No, you’d rather wring your hands in anticipation of the next US school shooting, whereas the rest of us prefer instead to fill our hands and end the next shooter on sight.

  108. 108
    Molson Bleu says:

    “one tenth of the people.”

    That’s why I used the word ‘proportionate’. If 1/10 the population was the answer, we would expect 30-40 mass shootings last year. Not one.

    Toronto is a big city. Why don’t they have a similar level of gun violence as Chicago?

  109. 109
    Charles says:

    Molson Bleu @ 108

    Toronto is a big city. Why don’t they have a similar level of gun violence as Chicago?

    Because Chicago has the strictest gun control laws in the country, but no gang control.

  110. 110
    kairosfocus says:

    Charles:

    Israel doesn’t have a mass shooting problem in their schools at all, even being the target of several terrorist groups and countries. But you don’t want to have that argument either, do you

    Of course, Israel HAD such a problem, 40+ years ago.

    They got guards and they armed teachers, who will have gone through military training as the Israeli military is modelled on the Swiss one in key parts.

    The problem went away because the soft targets were hardened.

    There was the shooting on the highways, so fences and walls in main threat areas. Huge media outcry which wasn’t there when people on roads were being shot. But, highway sniping is gone.

    Walk-in suicide bombings, a major campaign. Guards, protective cordons and more. Problem eventually ran out of steam.

    And so forth.

    I noted above:

    There are many incidents of mass-murder in various jurisdictions across our civilisation, some with firearms, others with utility knives used to hijack aircraft, others with knives, some with vehicles. Some, with bombs. Next door to the USA there is a major state with much more restrictive firearms laws, which has a huge drugs-linked mass murdering war that has been ongoing for years. Chicago notoriously has restrictive firearms laws, but has a huge murder rate tied to a street gangs culture fuelled by connexions to a drugs-influenced subculture. That gives me pause when I see the sort of strong link to psycho-active drugs use for mental illnesses that is strongly correlated with the current matter. As news pointed out to you, there has been at least one recent incident of mass murder in schools in Canada, and a few years back there was an attempted attack on Parliament. The issue is not firearms as such, but what is motivating people to such attacks. Terrorism, drugs-smuggling gangs, gangs in a drugs-influenced region, a surge of culturally-conditioned running amok, and the like. All are connected to undermining the basic premise of deep respect for life and for the lawful civil peace of justice; where also, due to cultural memory, a society that is undermining the underpinnings for moral self-government and is opening the way for amorality, nihilism and out of control narcissism may spend a long time eating up the cultural capital of a former order of life. But, one funeral at a time, one moral breakdown at a time, something is being eroded. Once it is gone, the culture shifts decisively, and then to get back to something sensible is going to be a desperate and uncertain struggle. Already, we live in a world where the number one evil is that in 40+ years, we have slaughtered 800+ millions of posterity in the womb, utterly corrupting mindsets, medicine, nursing, education, media, and law as well as government. If you sow dragons’ teeth, expect a bitter harvest. The USA is particularly prone as it is a relatively non-traditional society, so the resistance to destructive trend is weaker than in other parts of our civilisation. Ask the Russians about what happened when they put official badges on nihilistic mass-murderers and called them the secret state police.

    I also note, there is clear documentation of major policing failures sufficient to bring under question the notion that the police will protect. That, all the way up to the FBI.

    Something is very wrong.

    There is a threat and more threats gather on the horizon.

    Who will act promptly and effectively?

    Or, will we face Machiavelli’s point that political disorders are like hectic fever. At first, hard to diagnose but curable. But if at length there is no prompt action, when the problem is obvious to all, it is too late to cure.

    So, the question is our prudence and willingness to act promptly and effectively rather than becoming dupes, face cards and pawns in someone’s agit prop agenda.

    KF

  111. 111
    Charles says:

    kairosfocus @ 110

    Of course, Israel HAD such a problem, 40+ years ago.

    They got guards and they armed teachers, who will have gone through military training as the Israeli military is modelled on the Swiss one in key parts.

    The problem went away because the soft targets were hardened.

    Precisely. Soft targets were hardened.

    there is clear documentation of major policing failures sufficient to bring under question the notion that the police will protect. That, all the way up to the FBI.

    Yes. When seconds count, law enforcement may not even engage, and it all depends on how much ammo the shooter brought.

    Molson Bleu, are you paying attention? School’s in session.

  112. 112
    Molson Bleu says:

    “Because Chicago has the strictest gun control laws in the country, but no gang control.”

    Chicago May have gun control but I don’t recall anyone being searched when they cross into Chicago. Gun control cannot work on a city by city basis, or even on a state specific basis, except maybe Hawaii and Alaska.

  113. 113
    Molson Bleu says:

    Israel’s problems were completely different than ours. They were effectively in a civil war and the acts of violence were largely of a political and organized nature. They are also surrounded by people hostile to them. The US is not surrounded by potential enemies, and most of our mass shootings are not politically motivated. Or, if they are, they are the result of emulation, not of organizational planning.

    Hardening soft targets only has the effect of shifting the shootings to other soft targets, often to areas of congregation outside the secure zone of hardened targets. If we do as KF suggests, to be effective it would turn us into an armed camp, little different than a police state. We would be giving up all sorts of freedom so that Billy-Bob can keep his gun. That’s not the country I want to live in.

  114. 114
    ET says:

    Norway is nice. They ski and shoot.

    New event for the winter Olympics- ski jump skeet shooting.

    (NOTE- a police state can only exist once you disarm the people)

  115. 115
    Molson Bleu says:

    “NOTE- a police state can only exist once you disarm the people.”

    In KF’s solutiion, do you really think that everyone will be allowed to own and carry guns, or only those approved by the state to do so? That sounds like a police state to me.

  116. 116
    kairosfocus says:

    MB, If you want to know, I favour a version on the Swiss model. Yes, not everyone should be armed in the common defence; there are those who are incapacitated and those who show themselves unworthy or incapable. When the state finds it a good thing to be able to sell older artillery pieces to community-level people beyond active enlistment age who intend to man strong-points themselves, that will be a clear sign that the balance is right. Ask yourself why both the Kaiser and Herr Schicklegruber thought twice about invading Switzerland. BTW, this also means essentially everyone is under military discipline and misuse of arms would be essentially an offence against national security. Every organisation and every public space should be under armed overwatch by citizen-marshals; I favour the Tavor in semiauto, 6.5 mm Grendel for general work, and 9 x 19 mm for close range work, any one of the good semiauto pistols, along with the HK MP5 or the like. For longer range, I think the 6.5 mm Creedmoor [the Grendel’s big brother] sounds like a good general-purpose round. For other things, relevant specialist rounds. No, I don’t really like 5.56 x 45 mm. Where, if you imagine our civilisation is not under siege then you have not availed yourself of the opportunity to study say, of what event was 01:09:11 the 318th anniversary less one day or what “Al Andaluz” means, or what civilisation/ settlement jihad means or what is spoken of as The Project i/l/o captured documents. That’s before we get to the significance of widespread gangs, drug funded warlordism, and the rise of the sort of low-grade 4th generation war that is embedded in institutions, is in the media and is increasingly on our streets. KF

  117. 117
    Charles says:

    Molson Bleu:

    Chicago May have gun control but I don’t recall anyone being searched when they cross into Chicago.

    We have a constitutional provision against unreasonable searches, as you seem unaware.

    Besides, Chicago is a sanctuary city. Chicago willfully harbors law breakers. But neither is anyone searched when they cross into Toronto from outlying Canadian locales, and Toronto doesn’t have Chicago’s gangs – a point you willfully, repeatedly ignore.

    Gun control cannot work on a city by city basis, or even on a state specific basis, except maybe Hawaii and Alaska.

    You keep insisting if only gun control were implemented country-wide it would work, and yet, that hasn’t stopped the repeated mass shootings experienced in Europe, such as the Bataclan massacre in France: 153 innocent people died, defenseless, as you would have us all.

    Gun control will never stop gun violence because criminals will always ignore gun control laws, and now even police refuse to engage illegal shooters and the FBI ignores tips of criminal behavior. But you know all that. You just don’t care how many innocents must die at the hands of armed criminals to slake your thirst for even more control of law-abiding defenseless citizens.

    Israel’s problems were completely different than ours.

    But hardening their soft targets, worked regardless, didn’t it. It doesn’t matter what is going thru the mind of the attacker at the moment they get shot, as long as they get shot. Shooting the attacker(s) still eliminates the threat, regardless of their motive. That’s what Israeli methods demonstrate. And their schools aren’t getting shot up anymore like ours.

    Hardening soft targets only has the effect of shifting the shootings to other soft targets, often to areas of congregation outside the secure zone of hardened targets.

    Well Duh!!! That is the whole point. Instead of inviting shooters into gun-free schools, harden the schools. Shift the shooters’ focus to, well, let’s see now, there aren’t any more soft targets after schools, are there. Even church ladies pack heat these days. So the shooters are just going to have to face an armed citizenry, poor things.

    If we do as KF suggests, to be effective it would turn us into an armed camp, little different than a police state.

    I’d rather my kids were schooled in an armed camp, than be returned home in body bags, just so you can virtue-signal.

    I have no problem with an armed camp or bad guys getting shot and their stuff broken. You have no clue just how armed our camp already is, because we’re mostly carrying concealed and defending our homes. You’re ignoring the number of times good guys with guns take out bad guys before they get started. You only become aware when the unarmed camps (like schools) get shot up by bad guys with guns because there weren’t any armed good guys to stop them. But you complain when parents want the bad guys to be shot ASAP, before they do any damage.

    Wouldn’t it be preferable to have a news report that said: “Armed teacher shot Cruz before Cruz could raise his weapon”. That’s what happens in most other venues visited by mass shooters – they get shot by good guys before they make mass headlines. Even the Las Vegas shooter would have been taken out if the hotel security had been armed – but they don’t want to offend their unarmed guests, better the concert-goers next door get shot up instead.

    We would be giving up all sorts of freedom so that Billy-Bob can keep his gun. That’s not the country I want to live in.

    Actually, you’ve already insisted that law-abiding gun owners give up their right to not be searched unreasonably and give up their right to bear arms in self-defense, all so “DeShauntay” can shoot up his neigborhood or school without fear of being shot back.

    That’s the country your virtue-signalling hand-wringing has created. You’d rather US citizens were entirely unarmed and the Bataclan massacre happened in the US instead.

    In KF’s solutiion, do you really think that everyone will be allowed to own and carry guns, or only those approved by the state to do so? That sounds like a police state to me.

    lol! In a police state only the government thugs (formerly criminals now running the “government”) will have guns (see Venezuela, Iran, Sudan, etc.)

    An armed American is a citizen. An unarmed American is a subject, if not a victim.

  118. 118
    Molson Bleu says:

    “We have a constitutional provision against unreasonable searches, as you seem unaware.”

    So does Canada.

    “Besides, Chicago is a sanctuary city.”

    Toronto declared itself a sanctuary city in 2013 (amazing what you can find on Google).

    “and Toronto doesn’t have Chicago’s gangs – a point you willfully, repeatedly ignore.”

    No. Toronto has Toronto’s gangs. And they are active.

    “You keep insisting if only gun control were implemented country-wide it would work, and yet, that hasn’t stopped the repeated mass shootings experienced in Europe, such as the Bataclan massacre in France: 153 innocent people died, defenseless, as you would have us all.”

    So, how many mass shootings did France have that year? I have never said that mass shootings don’t occur elsewhere. Just that they do not occur with the sickening frequency that they do here.

    “Gun control will never stop gun violence because criminals will always ignore gun control laws,…”

    But if guns are more difficult to obtain, the same will be true for criminals.

    “Shift the shooters’ focus to, well, let’s see now, there aren’t any more soft targets after schools, are there.”

    Theatres, summer camps, shopping malls, arcades, amusement parks, train stations, subways, the Washington Mall, festivals, bake sales, Church picnics, and so on.

    “I’d rather my kids were schooled in an armed camp, than be returned home in body bags, just so you can virtue-signal.”

    I would rather my kids not experience either.

    “That’s what happens in most other venues visited by mass shooters – they get shot by good guys before they make mass headlines.”

    How often did that happen last year? I would love to see the reports on this. Or is this just unwarranted extrapolation from a couple incidents?

    “An armed American is a citizen. An unarmed American is a subject, if not a victim.”

    Cruz was an armed citizen.

  119. 119
    Charles says:

    Molson Bleu @ 118:

    No. Toronto has Toronto’s gangs. And they are active.

    Toronto and Chicago are of comparable size and population, but Chicago has over twice as many gangs as does Toronto. Chicago’s gang activity is twice as intense as Toronto’s. That is what is meant by Toronto doesn’t have Chicago’s gangs.

    So, how many mass shootings did France have that year? I have never said that mass shootings don’t occur elsewhere. Just that they do not occur with the sickening frequency that they do here.

    France had 4 mass shootings in 2015, 2 in 2012, total casualties approximtely 540. What you keep wanting to ignore is that France, an entire country has gun control applied country-wide, not just a city, as you advocate, and it didn’t stop 540 casualties in 6 mass shootings in 2 years. You keep pretending if only gun control were imposed broadly enough, it would work. France imposes it on the entire country and it doesn’t work.

    Theatres, summer camps, shopping malls, arcades, amusement parks, train stations, subways, the Washington Mall, festivals, bake sales, Church picnics, and so on.

    Those are mostly public venues where concealed carry is permitted. Owners of theaters and resturants may designate their properties as “gun free”, but patronage is optional, unlike schools where defenseless children are required to be present, staked out like goats on a killing field.

    Yet, increasingly schools are permitting teachers to carry concealed.

    But if guns are more difficult to obtain, the same will be true for criminals.

    No, just making guns more difficult to obtain legally, won’t make them more difficult to obtain illegally. You keep ignoring that criminals don’t abide by the laws you want to impose on everyone else.

    How often did that happen last year? I would love to see the reports on this. Or is this just unwarranted extrapolation from a couple incidents?

    Last year, idunno. But here’s a study from 1995:
    Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun

    “The most technically sound estimates presented in Table 2 are those based on the shorter one-year recall period that rely on Rs’ firsthand accounts of their own experiences (person-based estimates). These estimates appear in the first two columns. They indicate that each year in the U.S. there are about 2.2 to 2.5 million DGUs [Defensive Gun Use] of all types by civilians against humans, with about 1.5 to 1.9 million of the incidents involving use of handguns.”
    Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun,
    86 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 150 (1995) p. 164

    So 2.5 million successful gun defenses per year, in 1995. I’m sure the numbers in 2017 were higher, simply by virtue of increased gun ownership and violent crime.

    But don’t expect to see that reported on CNN, they’d rather you didn’t know. Then again, you didn’t really want to know either, did you.

  120. 120
    Charles says:

    Molson Bleu:

    Here’s another news report of successful defensive gun use:
    Charges brought against home-invasion suspects foiled by armed Hemet homeowners
    PUBLISHED: February 20, 2018

    The couple — Jeff Sagmeister, 71, and his wife of 32 years, Von, 75 — confronted the intruder, who became physically aggressive, striking both of the victims, Hemet police Lt. Eddie Pust alleged. He said the man and his wife both armed themselves with guns and opened fire on Wallace, who was hit at least twice and ran out of the home.

    Good Samaritan helps Swansboro officer during struggle
    Monday Feb 19, 2018

    Newport resident John Babbie was driving through Swansboro on N.C. 24 when he spotted a Swanboro patrol car pulled in behind a U-Haul box truck then noticed two men wrestling in the roadside ditch just west of the Swansboro Belgrade intersection.

    Babbie, who left his eight-year job as a correctional sergeant with the N.C. Department of Public Safety last November for a career in automotive sale, parked behind the patrol car and emerged from his vehicle brandishing his .40-caliber Smith and Wesson towards the man engaged with the officer.

    “I gave the command: Stop resisting, stop resisting” Babbie told The Daily News. “I then told him to roll on your belly. When he saw the barrel of my gun, he complied. I’m glad nothing bad happened,” Babbie said.

    I see several reports like this, pretty much any day.

  121. 121
    ET says:

    In KF’s solutiion, do you really think that everyone will be allowed to own and carry guns, or only those approved by the state to do so?

    OK wait- who do you think should decide who can and who cannot own a gun?

    I definitely don’t want everyone armed. I would love to see written exams and shooting tests to go along with background and mental health checks.

  122. 122
    J-Mac says:

    If only pacifists resided in Florida, would we have to worry about gun control? How about USA? How about beyond USA? Guns don’t kill people… It’s the people who pull the trigger… What is wrong with this world? Who makes the people to hate others to pull the trigger?

  123. 123
    ET says:

    Cruz was an armed citizen.

    Proof that the system needs an overhaul and updating. Two points failed- 1 that he was able to purchase weapons and 2 that he slipped right through even though the authorities were warned.

    Another issue is school security and how Cruz gained access. If he just walked in then that is a big issue. Our schools have all exits and entrances locked to the outside. People have to be buzzed in.

  124. 124
    Molson Bleu says:

    “I see several reports like this, pretty much any day.”

    We were talking about mass shootings. How many mass shootings have been stopped by armed citizens?

  125. 125
    Charles says:

    Molson Bleu @ 124

    We were talking about mass shootings. How many mass shootings have been stopped by armed citizens?

    Well, when they’re stopped they aren’t mass shootings, now are they. The mass shootings occur in gun free zones, where armed citizens are prohibited and police are minutes away, by which time it became a mass shooting.

  126. 126
    kairosfocus says:

    MB, actually, quite a number of mass-shootings [at or trending to 3+ victims] in progress HAVE been stopped by civilians on scene or coming on scene. The shooting up of that church stopped when the shooter was confronted by an NRA instructor who was a neighbour showing up barefoot IIRC, with his own AR-15. After an exchange, the shooter took flight, and the citizen got in a passing car and gave chase. A college shooting was ended by a fellow student who pulled a gun from his vehicle and came back to stop the shooter. And there are many more. Garland TX is a case of off duty police as guards, where the FBI etc seemed to be aware ahead but did not intervene. If the off duty officer from Coral Springs had had a gun on him, he would have been able to do the like. The four deputies from Broward who did not intervene failed, failed badly. But then, they may have been put on explicit or implicit stand-down, we will see. However, we have seen cases where it is a reasonable inference that those who take action as police or as citizens may well be subjected to media lynchings that pay scant regard to facts. KF

    PS: What effect do you think would come from essentially the population coming under military discipline, starting in the school system where they are taught proper firearms use and linked responsibility, similar to the classic Swiss system? Sports are not doing the disciplined fair play training job anymore, it seems. (Where obviously, the sort of problem child as young Cruz manifestly was for years, should have been flagged for far more serious early intervention. I bet the radical lawyers, radicalised educators, radicalised social and psychological services and activist journalists as well as agit prop operators have worked together to undermine such serious intervention before things run totally out of control. I further bet that this aspect will NEVER become part of the 24/7 crisis coverage. And then people dismiss that there is an obvious agenda and trend of corrosion leading to the edge of a cliff at work!)

  127. 127
    jerry says:

    KF,

    Not here much any more but saw this thread today. You may be interested in

    http://slate.me/2CljCKz

    They did everything wrong. This is from 9 years ago and apparently it was all forgotten in Florida.

    In the 10 years since Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold struck, numerous teenagers have plotted to blow up their high schools, and several have proceeded to the action stage. But none has succeeded. Others have sought to kill with automatic weapons, both in and outside of schools. Some succeeded, but most of them, too, have been thwarted.

    Part of the reason why there has not been another Columbine is that the police, school administrators, parents, and children learned the four most important lessons of Columbine (in some cases, a little too well).

    The first lesson is really one that we have unlearned, which is that there actually isn’t a distinct psychological profile of the school killer.

    The second, and perhaps most important, lesson learned from Columbine: what the FBI calls “leakage.” Gunfire in the classroom is the final stage of a long-simmering attack. The Secret Service found that 81 percent of shooters had explicitly revealed their intentions.

    The third key lesson of Columbine: We need to prepare students and teachers better for an emergency. Harris and Klebold caught their high school unprepared. We’re less naive now.

    The final practical lesson of Columbine is a revolution in police response tactics. Cops followed the old book at Columbine: surround the building, set up a perimeter, contain the damage. That approach has been replaced by the “active shooter protocol.”

  128. 128
    jerry says:

    mistake – delete

  129. 129
    Molson Bleu says:

    Given the frequent mention of Israel in this thread, I thought I would post something posted by someone named Nuri McBride on FB. Just for honesty sake, I have to say that I can’t voich for the accuracy. But it does correspond with this other article from 2012.

    https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.timesofisrael.com/israel-dismisses-us-gun-lobbys-inaccurate-claim-about-gun-laws/amp/

    If this is accurate, it casts serious doubt on what is frequently claimed with regard to Israel and gun access.

    I’ve noticed several people in my feed mention Israel concerning armed citizens and guns, quoting [another word for nonsense] put out by the NRA, so let me set a few things straight. If you want to own a gun in Israel you must consider the following:

    1. 40% of applications for firearms permits are rejected. There are only 170,000 active permits currently (population 8.5 million)
    2. Only a small group of people are eligible for firearms licenses. Primarily licenses go to high ranking retired military personnel, police officers, prison guards, security guards, and animal control officers. There are a small number of licences for settlers in the West Bank and hunters.
    3. You must be at least 21 years old for those who completed military service otherwise you have to wait till you are 27 or 45 for non-citizen residents.
    4. Applicants must be a resident of Israel for at least three consecutive years.
    5. You must pass an extensive background check (including criminal check, national security check, health exam, and mental health evaluation)
    6. You must establish a genuine reason for possessing a firearm. I like guns is not an option. If you say you need a gun for self-defence, you can only have one gun, and you are limited to an annual supply of 50 bullets
    7. You have to justify every gun you possess separately. Owning more than two guns is extremely rare.
    8. You must pass a multi-week weapons-training course.
    9. You have to renew your license and pass a shooting course every three years.
    10. You have to undergo a psychological assessment every six years.
    11. You must have a safe at your residence in which to keep the firearm.
    12. There is 100% VAT on firearms, and you will pay thousands of shekels to qualify for your license and hundreds of shekels each year to keep it.
    13. There are enormous legal repercussions should your gun be miss-handled, miss-fire, injure anyone unjustly, or be used in a crime. Even if you are not the one that committed these acts.
    14. You are not allowed to sell your gun to anyone but a registered dealer or the police.

    In Israel, gun ownership is a privilege, not a right. It is illegal to own an assault rifle. The photo below is not an open carry gun enthusiast. It’s an off-duty soldier that has to carry her weapon while in basic training. Know that when you see young Israelis carrying assault rifles, those are soldiers. I have yet to meet a single Israeli that liked doing this. It is basically a punishment. Don’t believe what the NRA says. Gun violence and gun death in Israel is low, not because we all have to carry guns in our youth, but because of gun regulation, enforcement, and not breeding a culture of fear around personal protection.

  130. 130
    Charles says:

    Molson Bleu @ 129

    If this is accurate, it casts serious doubt on what is frequently claimed with regard to Israel and gun access.

    This is you again trying to move the goal posts.

    Copy and paste “what is frequently claimed with regard to Israel and gun access” and compare each against your Facebook paste @ 129.

    How the Israeli’s guard their schools is what has been claimed/discussed on this thread, not Israeli gun owenership.

  131. 131
    Molson Bleu says:

    “How the Israeli’s guard their schools is what has been claimed/discussed on this thread, not Israeli gun owenership.”

    I agree. That is why I provided the link. The first paragraph of which is:

    School shootings were never common here, and Israel should not be invoked as ostensible proof of need for more weapons, experts say.

    The other example often used is the Swiss experience. But even this is questionable at best. Yes, they have a high gun ownership rate. But it is still only 1/4 that of the US. And decreasing. 50% of guns are those of ex servicemen who purchased them after their service finished. At one time a large percentage of service men purchased their weapons. It is now down to 11%.

    And the idea of an armed citizenry being able to respond more quickly that the police is a great concept except that it isn’t reflected in reality. Obtaining a licence to carry a gun in Switzerland is restricted to police and those in the security field. Others are allowed to transport their weapons from home to shooting ranges, or to hunting areas, but they are not allowed to be loaded, and you are not allowed to make side trips. This makes them useless with respect to rapid response.

    And even Switzerland has experienced increased legal restrictions on guns over the last couple of decades. And, surprize, they have seen a reduction in the incidence of gun deaths.

  132. 132
    Charles says:

    Molson Bleu @ 131

    School shootings were never common here, and Israel should not be invoked as ostensible proof of need for more weapons, experts say.

    True, they were never “common” because the Israelis learn a lot faster than US liberals. Israel made changes immediately after the 1st school shooting some 40 years ago. They hardened their schools. There haven’t been any school shootings since because the shooters (or bombers) can’t get close or are killed trying. So the terrorists look for softer targets.

    Israel is proof that arming people in schools works.

  133. 133
    Molson Bleu says:

    Charles, the difference is that the Israelis were dealing with different types of shooters. They were dealing with organized terrorists who oppose the very existence of their country. We are dealing with home-grown crazies, usually loners, who are obtaining their guns legally because of our lax and poorly enforced laws.

    Yes, you can harden soft targets like schools, and I am not saying that we shouldn’t do this, but that is just a bandaid. It does absolutely nothing to solve the root cause. The crazies will no longer shoot up the schools. Instead, they will shoot up the theatres, hospital waiting rooms, subways, theatres, church picnics, church services, New Years celebrations, college graduation ceremonies, pro life rallies, fall fairs, scout jamborees, and the like. Alteratively, we could make it more difficult for the crazies to get their guns in the first place. This won’t eliminate mass shootings, unfortunately the cat is out of the bag on that, but it will reduce them.

  134. 134
    kairosfocus says:

    N/W U/D: I see reports indicating that Fox News’ Laura Ingraham — cf. video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFSHLHyaSR4 — is stating that the Broward Deputies were on a stand down order on account of not having on body cameras:

    “Now, our sources near the Broward County sheriff’s department are telling us that the deputies who arrived at the scene of the shooting were told not to enter the school unless their body cameras were turned on, and then we found out that the deputies did not have body cameras so they did not enter the building or engage the shooter . . . .

    Curiously, police also lost radio communications during the Parkland shooting. And our source claims that radio communication also went dead during the Fort Lauderdale airport shooting in 2017 that he also got a lot of criticism for.”

    Can this be confirmed?

    This would be yet more breakdown of law enforcement — but is obviously driven by responses to anti-police activism.

    Actions and agit prop agendas have consequences.

    KF

  135. 135
    kairosfocus says:

    F/N: I have added an illustration of students in Israel under armed, open carry overwatch. I note that armed, murderous enemies “foreign and domestic” manifesting a clear threat to target “soft” zones such as schools and churches etc must peoperly be answered. Where the Beslan Siege alone should be warning enough that the Islamist terrorist threat extends to schools also. Remember, a fatwa was issued calling out permission for nuclear war scale casualties against the USA. If Office Christmas parties, Night Clubs, Theatres, Cafes, promenades and Marathons have been targetted, the threat is far wider than many are willing to acknowledge. And yes, I recall the shock of bringing my young family to Jamaica and going to the supermarket then as the trolley went around the corner of an aisle there was a police man with an M-16 in his trolley doing some shopping. We got over the shock, recognising the alternative. KF

  136. 136
    Charles says:

    Molson Bleu @ 133:

    Yes, you can harden soft targets like schools, and I am not saying that we shouldn’t do this, but that is just a bandaid.

    Yes you did argue against hardening schools @ 113 and @ 118:

    @113:
    Hardening soft targets only has the effect of shifting the shootings to other soft targets, often to areas of congregation outside the secure zone of hardened targets. If we do as KF suggests, to be effective it would turn us into an armed camp, little different than a police state. We would be giving up all sorts of freedom so that Billy-Bob can keep his gun. That’s not the country I want to live in.

    @118:

    “I’d rather my kids were schooled in an armed camp, than be returned home in body bags, just so you can virtue-signal.”

    I would rather my kids not experience either.

    You continue with:

    Charles, the difference is that the Israelis were dealing with different types of shooters. They were dealing with organized terrorists who oppose the very existence of their country. We are dealing with home-grown crazies, usually loners, who are obtaining their guns legally because of our lax and poorly enforced laws.

    Whether terrorist or home grown crazies, they all bleed red. It doesn’t matter how they got their guns, once they begin attacking a school; shooters of any and all motivations can be stopped by killing them – it works.

    [Hardening schools] does absolutely nothing to solve the root cause. The crazies will no longer shoot up the schools. Instead, they will shoot up the theatres, hospital waiting rooms, subways, theatres, church picnics, church services, New Years celebrations, college graduation ceremonies, pro life rallies, fall fairs, scout jamborees, and the like.

    Hardening schools will stop the mass school shootings, Israeli schools are proof of that.

    But as long as criminals are allowed to have guns, gun violence will continue. Chicago is proof that the strictest gun control in the US regardless has the most gun violence. And before you circle around and argue that gun control needs to be country wide, Bataclan, France is proof that country-wide gun control doesn’t stop mass shootings either.

    Alteratively, we could make it more difficult for the crazies to get their guns in the first place.

    Well duh!!! How about enforcing the laws already on the books? Cruz obtained guns because his “craziness” was deliberately kept out of the system by Broward County School District and Sheriffs office – they literally hid Cruz’s prior offenses that should have gone into his background check. And the FBI ignored credible tips about Cruz including one from a concerned gun dealer. And then the Broward County Sheriffs refused to engage Cruz after he started shooting.

    There’s your trouble.

    This won’t eliminate mass shootings, unfortunately the cat is out of the bag on that, but it will reduce them.

    As long as there are gun free zones, they will remain the target of choice for illegal shooters. That includes Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hasan, Pulse nightclub shooter Omar Mateen, San Bernardino Inland Regional Center shooters Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik – all gun free zones, all soft, inviting targets, all shooters previously flagged for questionable attitudes and actvities – all ignored until after they started shooting.

    The only people that can be relied upon to defend themselves and others are the armed law-abiding citizens who are on-site. The FBI, police, school administation, military police, none can be trusted to come to anyones defense. Reduce the gun free zones and reduce the mass shootings.

    As an example, Jeanne Assam, an armed volunteer security guard for New Life Church, killed Matthew Murray before he could shoot more than four other church attendees.

    President Trump is advocating allowing military personnel to carry while on base and arming school teachers and staff. That’s a good start to eliminate some of the gun free zones.

  137. 137
    kairosfocus says:

    F/N: Glenn Reynolds in USA Today is sobering, by particularly telling contrast to the “the Gov’t will take care of us” mentality that is being promoted through selective emphasis, use of a highly select cross section of survivors as spokesmen and much more:

    The chief problem facing America today is the decline of its institutions, coupled with the denial of that decline by the people in charge of its institutions.

    The latest example of this problem is the Parkland school shooting in Florida. From the FBI, to local law enforcement, to the schools, everyone failed. There was failure early, there was failure in the middle, and there was failure late. And no one has taken responsibility . . . .

    Despite Broward Sheriff Scott Israel’s all-out attack on the NRA the night before Peterson’s inaction became public, this debacle illustrates why so many Americans want to own guns, and aren’t comfortable relying solely on “trained professional law enforcement officers” like Scot Peterson. As Jim Geraghty writes in National Review, “the Parkland shooting is proving to be a colossal cascading failure of both local and federal law enforcement. We know the world has plenty of good cops and good FBI agents. But as American citizens, we never know when we’re going to roll snake-eyes and find that the threat in our midst was missed by cops and that they will not come quickly to our rescue. This is why we need the option to protect ourselves — a right which is in the Constitution. What is the point of changing our laws if the police cannot rise to the challenge of enforcing them?”

    In Sheriff Israel’s case — as with Harvey Weinstein’s promise to “give the NRA my full attention” after he was exposed as a sexual predator — blaming the NRA is an attempt at deflection, and a way of rallying Democrats to his side. It didn’t work for Weinstein and it’s not likely to work for Israel, either.

    But the bigger question is this: We have more government, at all levels, than we’ve ever had before. Yet failures like this keep happening. The FBI, after all, missed the Tsarnaevs (who committed the Boston Marathon bombing) despite being warned by the Russian government. It missed the 9/11 attacks even though it was investigating Zacarias Moussaoui — agents investigating Moussaoui hit so many roadblocks that they joked that Osama bin Laden must have had a mole in the Bureau HQ. And, of course, the San Bernardino shooters and Pulse nightclub shooter Omar Mateen escaped the net as well.

    People are being asked to trust the government to keep them safe, when the government is patently unable to do so. And then, when the government fails, it engages in blame-shifting deflection. Why should people listen?

    KF

  138. 138
    Molson Bleu says:

    Charles@136. In 1994, assault weapons were banned and mass shooting deaths dropped by 43%. In 2004 the ban was lifted and mass shooting deaths increased by 239%.

  139. 139
    Charles says:

    Molson Bleu @ 138

    Cite your sources. I want to see 43% and 239% as compared to what and when. I would also note that “deaths” and “mass shootings” are not the same. A mass shooting is generally defined as 4 or more casualties, but you are counting deaths, which vary greatly from mass shooting to mass shooting. Further, you have not cited what weapons were used to cause those deaths. You imply they were assault weapons but pistols and revolvers are often used in mass shootings as well, and you haven’t actually been specific.

    I’m also aware that in 1999 there were five mass shootings while the “1994 assault weapons ban” was in effect, and that those incidents exceeded the numbers both prior to the ban and then after the ban expired, except for 2012. I.e. when looking at numbers of mass shootings (rather than “deaths” from all types of weapons), the ban was largely ineffective.

    So, cite your sources (publication, issue and page no, ideally post some links) so your claims can be checked.

  140. 140
  141. 141
    gooshy says:

    That supposed ban was nonsense – the differences were strictly cosmetic and the idea it affected anything is preposterous. And the WaPo is a lousy source. Try Bureau of Justice Statistics.

  142. 142
    Charles says:

    Molson Bleu @ 140

    The Washington Post article you linked cites a book
    “Rampage Nation: Securing America from Mass Shootings” by Louis Klarevas.

    But Klarevas doesn’t breakout in his “gun massacre” incidents and deaths due to assault weapons vs other rifles/handguns. So his conclusions that the AWB was effective is unsupported. He’s just arguing a statistical correlation (which isn’t the same as causation), and that correlation is skewed by his choice of massacre definition. His definition of a massacre as 6+ deaths, which tends to sharpen differences from one interval to the next. The other definition of 4+ deaths results in less variation over time.

    A study An Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban conducted by the DoJ in 2004 concluded: [p. 96]

    9.4. Summary
    Although the ban has been successful in reducing crimes with AWs, any benefits from this reduction are likely to have been outweighed by steady or rising use of nonbanned semiautomatics with LCMs, which are used in crime much more frequently than AWs. Therefore, we cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation’s recent drop in gun violence. And, indeed, there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence, based on indicators like the percentage of gun crimes resulting in death or the share of gunfire incidents resulting in injury, as we might have expected had the ban reduced crimes with both AWs and LCMs.

  143. 143
    Quaesitor says:

    “In the case of the USA, there was a moderate association between a decline in mass shootings and the temporary 1994-2004 Federal Assault Weapon Ban. The period following the cessation of the ban saw an increase in incidents and fatalities.”
    — Lemieux F, Bricknell S, Prenzler T, (2015) “Mass shootings in Australia and the United States, 1981-2013”, Journal of Criminological Research, Policy and Practice, Vol. 1 Issue: 3, pp.131-142, https://doi.org/10.1108/JCRPP-05-2015-0013

  144. 144
    kairosfocus says:

    F/N: The definition of “Assault Weapon” is itself a skewing, as it is a politically motivated term with emphasis on cosmetic factors. Between WW1 and WW2, it was recognised that standard 0.30 or so calibre infantry rifles were over-powered for most cases, and attempts to create an effective automatic rifle failed; even the BAR turned into a relatively heavy squad automatic weapon or light machine gun, replacing the Lewis. The US for instance seriously contemplated moving to an intermediate round, for which the Garand semi-auto rifle was actually designed. The top brass rejected and it was reworked around the cartridge used in the Springfield 1903. In Germany, they developed a reduced power round effective at 300 – 400 m, the upper range for almost all infantry engagements and a rifle to fire it, the MP44. This, defined the new category: selective fire, intermediate power weapons. Hitler gave the term: assault rifle. Postwar, the UK developed the EM rifle, a bullpup using an intermediate power round, but with continued US insistence of the US leaders on full power rounds, the FN FAL and an upgraded Garand, the M14 were standardised on the 7.62 NATO round and were deemed battle rifles. They turned out to be hard to manage on full auto. (The UK issue version of the FN FAL was semiauto.) Subsequently the US went to the 5.56/ 0.223 round and the M16 family. In this context, rifles on the whole are not well suited to criminal purposes due to size; in the US they actually account for fewer homicides than knives and IIRC blunt instruments and hands/fists. Most homicides by shooting are with handguns, as are most suicides. However, given a current series of soft target mass shootings, the AR-15 family of semi-auto rifles are a handy target to polarise the public debates — not least by setting up a framework that would implicitly ban semiautomatic (one trigger pull one round) weapons as a category; currently the overwhelming majority of firearms in the US. This family is popular for many reasons, including its low recoil characteristics. Since 1934 most fully automatic weapons were banned from civilian ownership, and this was strengthened in IIRC 1986. Lost somewhere in the noise is the evidence that firearms are used defensively in the face of real or intended crime millions of times per year in the US. A serious gun confiscation initiative would likely trigger civil war as it would be taken by millions to be a step of tyranny. Short of that, political suicide as people will vote on the issue. That cannot be a serious target, so we need to focus on who hopes to benefit from polarised, ill-informed debates over guns rather than the clear government and policing failures several incidents have highlighted. KF

  145. 145
    Charles says:

    Molson Bleu @ 140

    Here’s a bit more on Klarevas’ book (the basis for the WashPo stats you cited) that I’ve excerpted from a review on Amazon Author exaggerates; does not take his opposition seriously.:

    Klarevas states several times in his book:

    “…I examine how and why the United States has evolved into a rampage nation where mass shootings now pose the single greatest threat to American public safety.”

    That is a patently asinine and fraudulent claim. The reviewer goes on to excerpt one of Klarevas’ own stats, that “mass shootings” category results in 438 deaths per year. The reviewer’s own research into other causes of death indicates:

    From what I could gather from Google, drunk driving claims about 10,000 lives per year in the USA. Accidental drowning claims 3000 to 4000 lives per year. Accidental falls, about 30,000 lives. Accidental poisoning (must be children primarily, I should think) claims around 38,000 lives per year. Flu deaths and medical mistakes are hard to pin down exactly, but the most solid number for flu seemed to be 23,000 deaths per year, while estimates for medical mistakes vary from 100,000 to 400,000 deaths per year depending on the sympathies of who is doing the estimate.

    Plainly, 438 mass shooting deaths per year pales in comparison to tens of thousands of deaths from other causes, and “mass shootings” are not the “single greatest threat to American public safety.”

    The reviewer also cites Klarevas’ claim that:

    “it’s even hard to commit mass murder when running people down with vehicles weighing thousands of pounds.”

    Yet on Bastille Day (July 14, 2016) in Nice, France a terrorist killed 84 people with a truck. 84 deaths by truck is second only to the 89-90 shooting deaths at Bataclan, France.

    These are glaring errors that cast doubt on Klarevas’ credibility.

  146. 146
    kairosfocus says:

    F/N: Larry Correia [an expert], 2012:

    So now that there is a new tragedy the president wants to have a “national conversation on guns”. Here’s the thing. Until this national conversation is willing to entertain allowing teachers to carry concealed weapons, then it isn’t a conversation at all, it is a lecture.

    Now when I say teachers carrying concealed weapons on Facebook I immediately get a bunch of emotional freak out responses. You can’t mandate teachers be armed! Guns in every classroom! Emotional response! Blood in the streets!

    No. Hear me out. The single best way to respond to a mass shooter is with an immediate, violent response. The vast majority of the time, as soon as a mass shooter meets serious resistance, it bursts their fantasy world bubble. Then they kill themselves or surrender. This has happened over and over again.

    Police are awesome. I love working with cops. However any honest cop will tell you that when seconds count they are only minutes away. After Colombine law enforcement changed their methods in dealing with active shootersIt used to be that you took up a perimeter and waited for overwhelming force before going in. Now usually as soon as you have two officers on scene you go in to confront the shooter (often one in rural areas or if help is going to take another minute, because there are a lot of very sound tactical reasons for using two, mostly because your success/survival rates jump dramatically when you put two guys through a door at once. The shooter’s brain takes a moment to decide between targets). The reason they go fast is because they know that every second counts. The longer the shooter has to operate, the more innocents die.

    However, cops can’t be everywhere. There are at best only a couple hundred thousand on duty at any given time patrolling the entire country. Excellent response time is in the three-five minute range. We’ve seen what bad guys can do in three minutes, but sometimes it is far worse. They simply can’t teleport. So in some cases that means the bad guys can have ten, fifteen, even twenty minutes to do horrible things with nobody effectively fighting back.

    So if we can’t have cops there, what can we do?

    The average number of people shot in a mass shooting event when the shooter is stopped by law enforcement: 14. The average number of people shot in a mass shooting event when the shooter is stopped by civilians: 2.5. The reason is simple. The armed civilians are there when it started.

    The teachers are there already. The school staff is there already. Their reaction time is measured in seconds, not minutes. They can serve as your immediate violent response. Best case scenario, they engage and stop the attacker, or it bursts his fantasy bubble and he commits suicide. Worst case scenario, the armed staff provides a distraction, and while he’s concentrating on killing them, he’s not killing more children.

    But teachers aren’t as trained as police officers! True, yet totally irrelevant. The teacher doesn’t need to be a SWAT cop or Navy SEAL. They need to be speed bumps.

    But this leads to the inevitable shrieking and straw man arguments about guns in the classroom, and then the pacifistic minded who simply can’t comprehend themselves being mandated to carry a gun, or those that believe teachers are all too incompetent and can’t be trusted. Let me address both at one time.

    Don’t make it mandatory. In my experience, the only people who are worth a darn with a gun are the ones who wish to take responsibility and carry a gun. Make it voluntary. It is rather simple. Just make it so that your state’s concealed weapons laws trump the Federal Gun Free School Zones act. All that means is that teachers who voluntarily decide to get a concealed weapons permit are capable of carrying their guns at work. Easy. Simple. Cheap. Available now.

    Then they’ll say that this is impossible, and give me all sorts of terrible worst case scenarios about all of the horrors that will happen with a gun in the classroom… No problem, because this has happened before. In fact, my state laws allow for somebody with a concealed weapons permit to carry a gun in a school right now. Yes. Utah has armed teachers. We have for several years now.

    Food for thought.

    KF

  147. 147
    kairosfocus says:

    F/N: Cross-complaining tactic by Stacey Patton, an assistant professor of multimedia journalism at Morgan State University, in WaPo:

    President Trump wants to arm teachers to prevent, or reduce the carnage from, future school shootings like the one at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., this month. “A teacher would have shot the hell out of him before he knew what had happened,” Trump said last week about the attacker in Florida. He’s not the only one who thinks this is a good idea: Several states are already considering legislation to allow guns to be carried into schools, ostensibly to protect kids.

    But putting guns into the hands of schoolteachers would be extraordinarily dangerous for black and Latino students, who are already often forced to try to learn in hostile environments where they’re treated as threats.

    How long would it be, if Trump’s plan became reality, before a teacher shoots a black student and then invokes the “I feared for my life” defense we continually hear from police officers who misinterpret young black people’s behavior with deadly consequences?

    It seems evident that there is a spiral of polarisation being pursued. I am fairly sure that were someone to blanket accuse black teachers in a similar manner, there would be a huge outcry. Something is seriously wrong. KF

  148. 148
    Charles says:

    For those concerned about the “single greatest threat to American public safety.”….

    http://www.textinganddrivingsa.....ving-stats

    Texting While Driving Causes:
    1. 1,600,000 accidents per year – National Safety Council
    2. 330,000 injuries per year – Harvard Center for Risk Analysis Study
    3. 11 teen deaths EVERY DAY – Ins. Institute for Hwy Safety Fatality Facts
    4. Nearly 25% of ALL car accidents

    Teens have no consitutional right to cell phones or driving.

    Not one more teen death!!! Banning teens from having cells phones would save 4000+ teen lives every year, plus whatever additional adult accident victims.

  149. 149

    Charles @ 148: Fascinating statistics. I am sure the a/mat leftists (not all a/mats are leftists) will try their best to debunk your analysis. They will fail.

  150. 150
    Molson Bleu says:

    Charles@148. These are certainly chilling numbers. But we are very good at addressing most problems when we first encounter them. When car fatalities were getting out of hand, we mandated car companies to install seat belts and air bags. Made them perform safety tests. Redesigned roads to be safer.

    I can see the cell phone use problem being resolved with technology. I’m sure that car companies can install signal blockers in cars if pressured by government. This would remove the problem by making cell phone access impossible while in a car.

  151. 151
    Molson Bleu says:

    “The definition of “Assault Weapon” is itself a skewing, as it is a politically motivated term with emphasis on cosmetic factors.“

    What term would you prefer? Defensive weapon? Hunting weapon? Target shooting weapon? High speed lead delivery system? It seems to me that automatic and semi-automatic rifles that can fire rapidly are best for two functions. Assaulting or defending against a large group or a small group with similar fire power. You don’t need these to protect yourself in your home. In fact, there is very little need to protect yourself in your home. Someone breaking into your home is not likely doing so to do you harm. He wants your TV. Or your jewelry.

    I have been doing some reading about Canada. Apparently, unlike here, a Canadian is not allowed to use force to protect his property. In fact, people have been charged for using force against someone that has broken into their homes. That may seem strange to us but it seems to work there. Break-ins are no higher than in the US, but we have a much higher rate of violence as the result of break-ins.

  152. 152
    kairosfocus says:

    MB, there are accurate, objective terms that can and should be used; e.g. contrast assault rifle, a selective fire weapon using an intermediate power round which allows for better control on fully automatic fire (and developed i/l/o the 300 – 400 m most firefights evidence). As for relevant scenarios, I suggest you look at the incident at a church in Texas where there was a neighbour who happened to be an NRA instructor and intervened with his own AR-15. I am also going to suggest that one who breaks a home (especially when people are home) cannot be presumed to be “only” interested in violating property. In the relevant context I have raised, organised, armed overwatch is relevant protection. I am not suggesting the AR-15, I think the Tavor bullpup in semi-auto form and using the 6.5 mm Grendel is a better package.For close-range, confined area work and where concealment would be relevant, I suggest 9 mm semiauto. KF

  153. 153
    kairosfocus says:

    U/D: Troubling questions on juvenile delinquency and govt alternatives to arrest programmes in Broward County, here. KF

  154. 154
    Charles says:

    Molson Bleu @ 150

    I can see the cell phone use problem being resolved with technology. I’m sure that car companies can install signal blockers in cars if pressured by government. This would remove the problem by making cell phone access impossible while in a car.

    Yes, you can ask car companies to install signal blockers in new cars, and I am not saying that we shouldn’t do this, but that is just a bandaid. It does absolutely nothing to solve the root cause. The teens will no longer text from new cars, instead they’ll just continue to text from older cars, or trucks, or on bicycles or along roads without paying attention. Alteratively, we could make it more difficult for teens to get their cell phones in the first place. This won’t eliminate texting while driving deaths, unfortunately the cat is out of the bag on that, but it will reduce them.

  155. 155
    Molson Bleu says:

    Charles@154, yup. Twenty years from now teens will save their paper route money to buy antique cars.

    If you know anything about root cause analysis, which you obviously don’t, the corrective action should eliminate the root cause (aka, texting while driving). Banning teens from owning cell phones won’t eliminate texting while driving because this practice isn’t limited to teens. Building cars with signal blockers will do this.

    But you are just trying to demonstrate that banning certain types of guns, or placing more restrictions on gun ownership, will not eliminate mass shootings. But nobody has suggested that it will. However, countries that have invoked stringent and enforced gun access laws do not have more mass shootings than there are days in the year. Trying to divert the subject to texting while driving does not change this fact.

  156. 156
    kairosfocus says:

    MB, There are many issues that are highly relevant and go well beyond what is currently being pushed. Some are discussed above. I am also going to suggest global systems interaction. Because the US is as it is, that shifts dynamics elsewhere. So, if the US were to materially shift, that would greatly empower power elite networks at expense of the ordinary man or woman. I am by no means convinced that the relevant elites have a high value on liberty and the way that huge issues of government and policing failures are seeping out on the surface but are being side-stepped speaks volumes. I have also pointed out that any major confiscation effort would trigger a civil war in the US as millions would take it that this is an index of a new long train of abuses and usurpations. Which, BTW is precisely what the US framers intended — and this is a context where access to weapons sufficient to defeat paramilitary assault is material. Yes, I know this is hard to swallow, but it needs to be reckoned with. Frankly, I think those pushing right now are doing so to hype up polarisation, by playing with fire. KF

  157. 157
    Charles says:

    Molson Bleu @ 155

    But you are just trying to demonstrate that banning certain types of guns, or placing more restrictions on gun ownership, will not eliminate mass shootings. But nobody has suggested that it will.

    No, I was merely using your own words to highlight your two-fold hypocrisy:
    1) that you are not interested in saving teen lives (who die a hundred-fold more annually from texting while driving than from being shot in school), but rather merely driven to deprive law-abiding citizens of their rights.
    2) that hardening schools, as the Israelis did, in fact eliminates the root cause of mass school shootings i.e. “crazies” entering schools with guns.

    @ 133 you argued against hardening schools in favor of making it more difficult for “crazies” to get guns.
    @ 155 you argued in favor of hardening cars and against making it difficult for teens to get cell phones.

    Here were your own exact words @ 133:

    Yes, you can harden soft targets like schools, and I am not saying that we shouldn’t do this, but that is just a bandaid. It does absolutely nothing to solve the root cause. The crazies will no longer shoot up the schools. Instead, they will shoot up the theatres, hospital waiting rooms, subways, theatres, church picnics, church services, New Years celebrations, college graduation ceremonies, pro life rallies, fall fairs, scout jamborees, and the like. Alteratively, we could make it more difficult for the crazies to get their guns in the first place. This won’t eliminate mass shootings, unfortunately the cat is out of the bag on that, but it will reduce them.

    And here @ 155 is your argument to “harden cars” instead of deprive teens of their cell phones:

    If you know anything about root cause analysis, which you obviously don’t, the corrective action should eliminate the root cause (aka, texting while driving). Banning teens from owning cell phones won’t eliminate texting while driving because this practice isn’t limited to teens. Building cars with signal blockers will do this.

    And here is your same argument with its hypocrisy illuminated by substituting “shooting up schools” for “texting while driving”:

    If you know anything about root cause analysis, which you obviously don’t, the corrective action should eliminate the root cause (aka, crazies shooting up schools). Banning crazies from owning assault rifles won’t eliminate shooting up schools because this practice isn’t limited to crazies. Hardening soft targets like schools will do this.

    You continue with:

    However, countries that have invoked stringent and enforced gun access laws do not have more mass shootings than there are days in the year. Trying to divert the subject to texting while driving does not change this fact.

    Firstly, prove that is a fact. Cite your sources that prove the U.S. has more than 365 mass shootings per year.

    Secondly, I didn’t divert the subject, rather you didn’t seem to recognize your own arguments, that you prefer depriving law-abiding citizens of their 2nd amendment rights instead of hardening schools, but prefer to harden cars instead of deprive teen drivers of cell phones. But it does illuminate quite well that you are not about saving teen lives, you’re really just about depriving others of rights you disagree with:

    Molson Bleu @ 27:
    Unreservedly protecting everyone’s 2nd amendment rights is obviously not working.

    Molson Bleu @ 40:
    I think that we should get our heads out of the sand and acknowledge that our obsession with the 2nd amendment, and refusal to alter it in any way, is a large part of the problem.

    When presented with a proven (by Israelis) solution to mass shootings in U.S. schools (less than a couple dozen deaths every few years) by hardening schools, you argue it won’t solve the root cause of “crazies getting guns in the first place”.

    When presented with a solution to prevent teen texting while driving deaths (thousands per year, every year) by preventing teens from owning cell phones in the first place, you argue for the “hardening of cars”.

    You aren’t about “root causes” or “solutions” of teen deaths. You’re just about depriving law-abiding gun owners of their 2nd Amendment constitutional rights, and you’ll use any excuse you think might fly, and you don’t even recognize your own excuses.

  158. 158
    Molson Bleu says:

    “Firstly, prove that is a fact. Cite your sources that prove the U.S. has more than 365 mass shootings per year.”

    OK, I admit that I may have exaggerated. There were 270 in 2014, 333 in 2015, 383 in 2016 and 346 in 2017 and 36 so far in 2018. Hopefully, this lower number for 2018 persists for the entire year.

    http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/past-tolls

    “When presented with a proven (by Israelis) solution to mass shootings in U.S. schools (less than a couple dozen deaths every few years) by hardening schools, you argue it won’t solve the root cause of “crazies getting guns in the first place”.”

    Here is the Israeli example:

    At one high school in Israel, we saw a typical scene — an armed guard outside the main entrance. Since 1974 there have only been half a dozen terror attacks on Israeli schools. Principal Nati Stern says there are about 145 teachers at the school, and none are armed with guns.

    No armed teachers and one armed guard. Just like the Florida school. And the story about high gun ownership in Israel is simply a myth.

    In Israel it can take up to three months to get a gun. For starters, you have to be over 27, unless you’ve served in the military. Then you must prove that your job requires a gun, and get a doctor to sign off. Doctors like Omri Ben Ezra also check for mental illness. The final step is at the gun range.

    But about 40 percent of school security guards fail and need to reapply. That’s fine with principals like Stern.

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-schools-in-israel-keep-students-safe-and-prevent-mass-shootings/

    “You aren’t about “root causes” or “solutions” of teen deaths. You’re just about depriving law-abiding gun owners of their 2nd Amendment constitutional rights, and you’ll use any excuse you think might fly, and you don’t even recognize your own excuses.”

    How is limiting access to the types of weapons that can be purchased a violation of your 2nd amendment rights? You can still buy guns. How is requiring a physical and psychological exam before you can purchase a gun a violation of your 2nd amendment rights? How is a thorough background check and a waiting period a violation of your 2nd amendment rights? How is mandatory training and demonstrated proficiency a violation of your 2nd amendment rights? How are rules about safe storage, transport and use of weapons a violation of your 2nd amendment rights?

    The solution to mass shootings will not be by hardening targets alone, because there are not enough security forces and money to harden all possible targets. I agree that we should provide some hardening for the most vulnerable and valuable groups among us, schools being one of these. But without some movement on sensible and enforceable gun control laws, we will continue to have mass shootings at unprecedented levels.

  159. 159
    Molson Bleu says:

    “I have also pointed out that any major confiscation effort would trigger a civil war in the US as millions would take it that this is an index of a new long train of abuses and usurpations. ”

    I am not talking about the confiscation of any guns, except in cases where they were already obtained illegally. I would rather see an increase in gun restrictions (e.g., assault style weapons) whereby anyone who currently owns one legally would be grandfathered. However, I would not allow the current owner to transfer it to anyone else or bequeath it in an inheritance.

    However, I would like to see an immediate effort placed on more stringent and enforced requirements for the purchase of all guns. Things like meaningful background checks, increased age limit, mandatory training, reference check, and the like. Nothing that any law abiding citizen would have a problem getting through. In addition to this, legally enforcable rules about the proper storage, transport and use of guns. And finally, any transfer of ownership must follow the same restrictions.

  160. 160
    kairosfocus says:

    MB, it seems a confiscation bill was just introduced in the US Congress with looks like 150 co-sponsors. It turns on the implications of the “assault weapons” definition I highlighted. FYI, there are already background checks, just to pick one case; they did not work with NC because there is a push to keep offences and problems of school kids out of law enforcement records. Further, with all due respect 18 year olds are liable for the draft still, are allowed to vote, and are regarded as adults. I also point out the string of policing and government failures in this case which undermines the claim that the government and its agents will provide adequate care, preventative measures and protections. That these issues seem to be significantly drowned out speaks, and not well. KF

  161. 161
    Charles says:

    Molson Bleu @ 158

    OK, I admit that I may have exaggerated. There were 270 in 2014, 333 in 2015, 383 in 2016 and 346 in 2017 and 36 so far in 2018. Hopefully, this lower number for 2018 persists for the entire year.

    Regardless of your exaggeration, Gun Violence Archive has wildly inflated numbers. They did not define “mass shooting”, but looking at some of the incidents, it seems to be a catchall that includes “drive bys” and inter-gang violence. Their numbers wildly surpass Klarevas’ “incidents” per decade of 19 (1984-1994), 12 (1994-2004) and 34 (2004-2014) as quoted by the Wash. Post and cited in your link @ 140.

    Further, here is a Congressional Research Service analysis of FBI data:
    Mass Murder with Firearms Incidents and Victims 1999-2013 – CRS 2015.pdf [p. 2]

    Summary
    With data provided by criminologist Grant Duwe, CRS also compiled a 44-year (1970-2013)
    dataset of firearms-related mass murders that could arguably be characterized as “mass public
    shootings.” These data show that there were on average:
    • one (1.1) incident per year during the 1970s (5.5 victims murdered, 2.0 wounded
    per incident),
    • nearly three (2.7) incidents per year during the 1980s (6.1 victims murdered, 5.3
    wounded per incident),
    • four (4.0) incidents per year during the 1990s (5.6 victims murdered, 5.5
    wounded per incident),
    • four (4.1) incidents per year during the 2000s (6.4 victims murdered, 4.0
    wounded per incident), and
    • four (4.5) incidents per year from 2010 through 2013 (7.4 victims murdered, 6.3
    wounded per incident).

    And for those who question the FBI’s data, here is a dataset compiled by Mother Jones Investigations
    US Mass Shootings, 1982-2018

    You can browse the spreadsheet and you’ll see that for every year, the number of mass shootings is in single digits (i.e. less than 10) for any given year.

    So, CRS/FBI stats and Mother Jones Investigations have “mass shootings” between 4-9 per year, and Klarevas (whom you relied upon earlier) has even less at 2-4 per year. Whereas Gun Violence Archive has 250-350 per year [face-palm].

    Here is the Israeli example: [snip] No armed teachers and one armed guard. Just like the Florida school.

    Yes. Israel does not, as a rule, arm its teachers.

    However, every Israeli school has different threats. Every school undergoes a threat assessment and a security plan is customized for that school’s circumstances. Minimally, every school has at least one armed security guard and more depending on school size, as well as controlled entry and exit points (everyone enters through a manned, secure entrance with metal detectors), and physical security fences including bollards to prevent vehicle attacks. Also, armed guards escort all school trips everywhere in the country. A key aspect of Israeli school security is they profile and question potential threats (unlike our politically correct law enforcement which actually coddles and shields identified threats).

    But unlike the Florida school, the Israeli armed guards don’t cower outside waiting for backup that still doesn’t go in when it arrives.

    And the story about high gun ownership in Israel is simply a myth.

    The issue is how Israeli’s harden their schools, how many armed guards Israeli schools have, not how many of the general population are armed. The rate of armed guards in Israeli schools is approximately 100% versus approximately 24% fulltime for all US public schools (http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2015/2015051.pdf [Table 5, p. 10 ])

    How is limiting access to the types of weapons that can be purchased a violation of your 2nd amendment rights?

    “… the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Which part of “shall not be infringed” do you not understand.

    The solution to mass shootings will not be by hardening targets alone, because there are not enough security forces and money to harden all possible targets.

    We are talking about hardening schools. We harden banks, courthouses, federal office buildings, jewelry stores, customs warehouses, financial couriers, etc., but not schools. Schools put up a sign that says “Gun Free Zone” with a yellow happy face. Universities already have campus police, they just need to be armed. High schools and gradeshools, even nurserys, need to hire at least one additional staff as armed guard, just like banks, etc.

    But without some movement on sensible and enforceable gun control laws, we will continue to have mass shootings at unprecedented levels.

    While your “unprecedented levels” cited by Gun Violence Archive are preposterous, they are still below the number of teens deaths due to texting and driving, which you don’t seem to get too excited about.

    When the sensible laws already on the books are enforced and not circumvented by the government and schools, and when the government actually does something when people say something, and when sensible school hardening steps have been taken, we can reassess what is or isn’t working. Right now, the only thing that is working is an armed citizenry that shoots back. We just don’t let it work everywhere, and the mass shooters know that and exploit it.

    I’ll also note for the record that you totally evaded your argument to “harden” cars to prevent texting and driving deaths but were unwilling to limit teen cell phone ownership. Teens don’t need cell phones for defense nor do they (or anyone) have a right to them. Lawful 2nd amendment gun ownership, OTOH, is vital for self defense and a right.

  162. 162
    kairosfocus says:

    Charles, interesting numbers. I suggest that statistics on Israeli teachers will need to be modified by risk estimation [as in, settler areas] and further modified by the broad-based conscription which implies that essentially every teacher is also a soldier. Further to this, secrecy obtains. KF

    PS: Your cars/phones vs guns argument is also quite illuminating.

  163. 163
    Charles says:

    kairosfocus @ 162

    Further to this, secrecy obtains.

    Indeed. The Israelis don’t publish their security methods, not suprisingly. What is known, is largely known annecdotally from specific instances. Hence a wide range of descriptions of what Israelis do or not to harden their schools.

    Your cars/phones vs guns argument is also quite illuminating

    Yes. Thoughtless, incoherent, hypocrisy that always blames “guns” but never blames behavior, and always demands further rights infringment but never demands law enforcement, always wringing hands over 1 more mass shooting death but never over thousands more texting-while-driving deaths, or thousands more gang-shooting deaths.

    The Leftist hypocrisy is truly stunning.

  164. 164
    kairosfocus says:

    F/N: Just when Gun Control advocates were pushing how reasonable they are, this comes in MN, USA — and recall what is being drowned out in the current media-whipped up agit prop and now lawfare frenzy (as summarised):

    For everyone in MN.

    Here it comes

    HF 3022 is now in the Legislature

    – Permit required to own a gun
    – Permit required to buy a gun
    – Permit required to sell a gun
    – Local law enforcement gets to deny all types of gun permits
    – Local law enforcement gets to deny permits to carry

    [–> arbitrary power in hands of police]

    – Personal medical information must be shared with law enforcement

    [–> opens up info theft, blackmail and more]

    – All firearm transfers must be reported
    – All guns must be registered (fees set by local law enforcement)
    – Registration must be renewed annually
    – Local law enforcement may conduct warrantless “safety inspections” of gun owner’s homes

    [ –> warrantless search and seizure fishing expeditions and politicised police harassment]

    – Local law enforcement sets “safe storage” policies
    – Five day waiting period for all transfers
    – Transfers must be done through an FFL (even between private parties)
    – Fees may be charged for transfers
    – Local law enforcement may conduct background investigation on transfers
    – Total ban on any gun which meets broad “assault weapon” definition – banned guns must be destroyed or surrendered

    [ –> Currently most firearms in the US are semiauto, add one more feature and banned.]

    – Ban thumbhole stocks
    – Ban adjustable stocks
    – Ban pistol grip stocks

    [–> likely implicitly bans handguns, the classic weapon of self defense]

    – Limit fixed magazine capacity to 7 rounds
    – Ban any magazine capable of holding more than 7 rounds

    [ –> Most pistols hold more than this, esp. 9 mm pistols]

    Suspension of gun rights based on complaints from anonymous parties

    [–> This is worse than the Inquisition.]

    – Recriminalization of suppressors
    – Bump stock ban
    – All ammunition sales will be registered
    – Permit required to purchase ammunition

    Almost forgot an important thing —

    HF 3022 would also make gun owner private data public. This would include:

    Number and type of guns you own
    Your address

    [–> this in an era of identity theft, information fraud and targetting by agit prop operators]

    This is similar to the moves made by the British that triggered the American Revolution. What are these legislators thinking?

    Even if one is no gun owner and has doubts about firearms in civilian hands, the implications of such proposals point to ever encroaching state power.

    Don’t ever underestimate power of precedent, and that of a ruthless agenda backed by cultural marxist agit prop and lawfare tactics.

    And, these things cannot be wound up and set running overnight, they have been in the pipeline for years, were probably in prep for the big push that the election of Mr Trump so obviously checked for a moment.

    The same obtains for the surge shown by Antifa and the sort of big media push that we are seeing.

    Some dots need to be connected and the iceberg inferred from the tip showing on the surface.

    And no, this is not conspiracy theorising, it is reading patterns on known dynamics of agit prop and linked ruthless pushes all the way to full bore 4th generation warfare.

    Never forget, with Tet, a sharp and devastating defeat was media amplified into a dominant narrative of hopeless quagmire that culminated in the enslavement and slaughter of millions. Something that has never been properly accounted for or reformed from.

    KF

  165. 165
    Charles says:

    Molson Bleu @ 158

    The solution to mass shootings will not be by hardening targets alone, because there are not enough security forces and money to harden all possible targets.

    Further to this point regarding hardening of schools, it would seem voters and taxpayers are willing to spend the money to harden their schools, but government (i.e. Broward County Superintendent Runcie) has mismanaged the expenditures & deliverables. Golly. Who knew?

    Educational Advisory Board Member: ‘Killings Could, and Should Have Been Prevented’

    February 22, 2018 By Wayne Alder

    [snip]
    Over the past three years I, and the advisory board, continuously sought information from the Broward County School Board on this issue, and pushed for single point of entry implementation in our schools. In 2014 Broward County voters approved an $800 million bond for school improvements. Chief among the promises made by the Broward County School Board in pushing for the bond’s approval were improvements to Broward’s single point of entry protection. However, as of last year, 100 of the 238 schools in Broward County still needed field visits to determine what was needed to accomplish single point of entry, let alone complete the necessary modifications to make it a reality.

    Although some improvements had been made to Marjory Stoneman Douglas High school, large sections of perimeter fencing remained missing, and other necessary improvements remained unfinished for effective single point of entry. Although a final determination remains to be made, it is undeniable that the murderer gained access to the interior buildings of Marjory Stoneman Douglas unimpeded. This is a failure of perimeter control and a failure of the Broward County School Board to implement single point of entry.
    [snip]

    And it seems Runcie has dug himself and Broward County schools into a financial hole….

    Six Clues Prove Broward School’s $800 Million Bond Program Is In Trouble

    Broward School’s $800 million bond program is in trouble with costs skyrocketing by as much as 40 percent.

    Many of the projects promised by School Superintendent Robert Runcie and the School Board cannot be done for the original estimated costs.
    [snip]

  166. 166
    john_a_designer says:

    The following is from a recent NRO article. It’s very worth reading.

    Yesterday Paul Sperry of RealClearInvestigations published a comprehensive report that reached an explosive conclusion:

    “Despite committing a string of arrestable offenses on campus before the Florida school shooting, Nikolas Cruz was able to escape the attention of law enforcement, pass a background check and purchase the weapon he used to slaughter three staff members and 14 fellow students because of Obama administration efforts to make school discipline more lenient.”

    Overstatement? Perhaps, but it contains an important element of truth. In 2013, the Broward County school board entered into an agreement with multiple law-enforcement agencies — including the Broward County sheriff — designed to limit the number of on-campus arrests.

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/03/parkland-shooting-school-discipline-policies-limited-law-enforcement-involvement-with-students/

    So what is the main argument from idiotic gun control nuts advocates? That we should rely completely on the government for our protection and safety? Well, that’s what the Broward County school board decided. However, arresting Nikolas Cruz so he had a criminal record would have prevented him from legally purchasing an AR-15. It also may have gotten him the psychiatric care that he needed.

  167. 167
    Charles says:

    john_a_designer @ 166

    Cruz law enforcement was able to escape focusing attention of law enforcement on Cruz

    There. All fixed up.

  168. 168
    kairosfocus says:

    Charles, I suggest that a volunteer citizen marshal corps comprising people already there and armed with suitable weapons such as Tavor in 6.5 mm Grendel, 9 mm autopistols, MP5’s or the X 95 Tavor etc, would be extremely affordable. A modest stock of 6.5 mm Creedmore guns [1,000+ m] to handle snipers of the ilk that murdered Mrs Weaver is also quite affordable. I am sure IWI and/or licensees would be delighted to give special prices for the million or so weapons in the special calibre. (6.5 mm Grendel is an 800 m round.) Any claims that a proper target-hardening could not be afforded are patently false. Instead they reveal the same hostility and prejudice shown in the unwarranted accusation that teachers of caucasian race would take excuse of holding concealed carry permits to murder significant numbers of black and latino students, as I pointed out above. In fact CCW permit holders have a very good track record to the contrary. KF

  169. 169
    kairosfocus says:

    F/N: I should add, there is an obvious purge of “the right” on major social media outlets, sounding a lot like spiral of silencing backed up by stereotyping, stigmatising and scapegoating. Some folks are pushing hard for big stakes, and things may get really nasty going forward. ID supporters need to monitor carefully as the very same tactics are liable to be used against us by pretty much the same kinds of folks. Remember just over a decade ago the families and children of Kansas USA were held hostage over the accreditation of the education of their children; mostly for the thought crime of teaching a more or less traditional understanding of science. Something nasty this way comes. KF

  170. 170
    john_a_designer says:

    Here are some excerpts from another article which is worth reading:

    Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel backed Runcie’s plan to diminish the authority of police in responding to campus crime. A November 2013 video shows him signing the district’s 16-page “collaborative agreement on school discipline,” which lists more than a dozen misdemeanors that can no longer be reported to police, along with five steps police must “exhaust” before even considering placing a student under arrest.

    In just a few years, ethnically diverse Broward went from leading the state of Florida in student arrests to boasting one of its lowest school-related incarceration rates. Out-of-school suspensions and expulsions also plummeted…

    So Broward County school district went from one of worst to first– well, almost. Never mind if you had been an accountant and had “cooked the books” like this, by just zeroing out a lot of debt, you would have ended up in jail. Nevertheless, this looked good on somebody’s resume.’ And besides their intentions were so good. They really believed they were doing the right thing.

    In January 2014… [the U.S.] department [of education] issued new discipline guidelines strongly recommending that the nation’s schools use law enforcement measures and out-of-school suspensions as a last resort. Announced jointly by Duncan and then-Attorney General Eric Holder, the new procedures came as more than friendly guidance from Uncle Sam – they also came with threats of federal investigations and defunding for districts that refused to fully comply…

    [The Broward County school] district’s legally written discipline policy also lists “assault without the use of a weapon” and “battery without serious bodily injury,” as well as “disorderly conduct,” as misdemeanors that “should not be reported to Law Enforcement Agencies or Broward District Schools Police.” This document also recommends “counseling” and “restorative justice.”

    https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2018/02/28/obama_administration_school_discipline_policy_and_the_parkland_shooting.html

    This is how government from the federal level right down to the state and local government planned to keep our children safe. How has that plan been working out? (Did they even think about school safety here?)

    So what has the response been from control advocates? Vilify and demonize the NRA, “they’re ultimately responsible.” Ban guns with the wrong cosmetics like the AR-15. Heck nobody needs a gun, the police are there to protect us… Yeah, right.

  171. 171
    kairosfocus says:

    F/N: Corsi’s opposition view at USA Today is worth reading: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/02/27/arm-qualified-willing-teachers-and-staff-editorials-and-debates/378812002/ I find it significant that a search came up with denunciations and dismissals highlighted, targetting him as a conspiracy theorist. This is a PhD in American studies who, like it or not has published several best selling books of significant impact, who has had something to say. For sure, on fair comment, a lot more than High School students who seem ignorant on several major issues and implications of what they have advocated but wear the near-martyr halo. I suggest we would be better advised to address the issues. KF

    PS: I should note that corporate strategies, ideological agendas, agit prop operations, secret subversion, hidden agendas, secret groups and societies, media manipulation and much more have always existed. There is a saying: if it succeed none dare call it treason, and that saying exists for a reason. The issue is not if such are possible or even fairly common but whether there is good warrant regarding particular cases. Where, we must ever remember Machiavelli’s hard-bitten counsel that political disorders are like hectic fever, at first easy to cure but hard to diagnose, but if at length the course of the disease is obvious to all it is then too late to cure. The point here is that we need credible experts who can read patterns early and can provide good warrant for prudent action in good time. Are we reading the signs of our times?

  172. 172
    kairosfocus says:

    JAD, sobering issues. Is there corroboration or confirmation? KF

  173. 173
    Charles says:

    kairosfocus @ 171

    I should note that corporate strategies, ideological agendas, agit prop operations, secret subversion, hidden agendas, secret groups and societies, media manipulation and much more have always existed.

    And media coverup of professional astro-turfing….

    Why Did It Take Two Weeks To Discover Parkland Students’ Astroturfing?

    [snip]
    On February 28, BuzzFeed came out with the actual story: Rep. Debbie Wassermann Schultz aiding in the lobbying in Tallahassee, a teacher’s union organizing the buses that got the kids there, Michael Bloomberg’s groups and the Women’s March working on the upcoming March For Our Lives, MoveOn.org doing social media promotion and (potentially) march logistics, and training for student activists provided by federally funded Planned Parenthood.

    The president of the American Federation of Teachers told BuzzFeed they’re also behind the national school walkout, which journalists had previously assured the public was the sole work of a teenager. (I’d thought teachers were supposed to get kids into school, but maybe that’s just me.)

    In other words, the response was professionalized. That’s not surprising, because this is what organization that gets results actually looks like. It’s not a bunch of magical kids in somebody’s living room. Nor is it surprising that the professionalization happened right off the bat. Broward County’s teacher’s union is militant, and Rep. Ted Lieu stated on Twitter that his family knows Parkland student activist David Hogg’s family, so there were plenty of opportunities for grown-ups with resources and skills to connect the kids.
    [snip]

  174. 174
    john_a_designer says:

    KF @ 172,

    You need to do some of your own homework here. Sperry, in the article I cited @ 170, gives us the link to the BROWARD COUNTY COLLABORATIVE AGREEMENT ON SCHOOL DISCIPLINE. That is the official legal document which modifies the policy that opened up the cracks in the system.

    Here is the link:

    https://www.browardprevention.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Fully-Executed-Collaborative-Agreement.pdf

    Let me quote the documents two opening paragraphs:

    WHEREAS, the parties acknowledge that law enforcement plays an essential role in maintaining safety in the community. However, the use of arrests and referrals to the criminal justice system may decrease a student’s chance of graduation, entering higher education, joining the military, and getting a job. [emphasis added]

    But what about the 14 students who were killed because this new policy allowed Nikolas Cruz to slip through the cracks– those are cracks the policy itself created.

    WHEREAS, in the 2011-2012 school year, the Department of Juvenile Justice reported 1,062 school-related arrests in Broward County, the highest number in the state. 71% of these arrests were for misdemeanor offenses. Over half of those students had never been referred to the Juvenile Justice System before.

    So if you can “magically” just zero out 60-70% of the arrests by not having them “reported” (even by police themselves!) you can then boast you have dramatically improved your school districts embarrassing discipline problems even though nothing has really changed. Again, how did Nikolas Cruz slip through the cracks? There is no doubt that this policy is a major reason.

    Notice the signatures, especially on pages, 16 (school superintendent), 17 (circuit court judge), 18 (state attorney) and 20 (county sheriff).

  175. 175
    kairosfocus says:

    JAD, thanks, significant and telling about the agit-prop job that is now in progress. looks like, meant to feed lawfare and censorship to shut down viral expose. It SHOULD be utterly implausible that school kids in shock and in effect meeting over a cafeteria table could be pushing a major policy agenda; for sure they simply do not really know what they seem so confident over; strongly suggesting something I know all too well from 40 years ago. For, now, it is increasingly clear they are being USED as near-martyr status face cards who are likely swept up way over their heads and are used to push a long simmering agenda; in a context where there is a clear pattern of government and policing failure not to mention outright manipulation by major media.Right now, I think I have good enough reason to believe that young man complaining of scripting and to take CNN’s harsh denunciations as proof they wish to crush and brush aside those who will not toe the agit prop partyline and are so foolish as to blurt out inconvenient truth. Spiral of silencing tactics. We should take this as the exposed tip of an iceberg glimpsed through the fog that tells us the utterly cynical and even outright will-to-power is all, nihilistic nature of media, educational, policing and government establishments. But, who is listening, and increasingly, who is left to sound a clear, credible alarm? Something is deeply wrong. KF

  176. 176
    kairosfocus says:

    U/D: Yahoo News-Reuters:

    FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. (Reuters) – The Florida Senate rejected a proposal to ban assault weapons, and voted for a measure to arm some teachers, weeks after 17 people were killed in the deadliest high school shooting in U.S. history.

    An amendment that would have banned assault weapons attached to a wider bill failed on Saturday in a largely party-line vote, in response to the Feb. 14 killing of 14 students and three faculty at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in the Fort Lauderdale suburb of Parkland.

    The vote was 20-17 against the assault weapon ban, with two Republicans joining all of the senate’s 15 Democrats in support of the proposal, the Miami Herald reported.

    The full bill, the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Act, is expected to pass the state Senate on Monday, then go to the Florida House.

    After the Senate rejected the ban, Stoneman Douglas student Jaclyn Corin tweeted, “This breaks my heart, but we will NOT let this ruin our movement. This is for the kids.”

    Fellow classmate David Hogg, who has become one of the school’s leading activists on gun safety, tweeted, “Elections are going to be fun!”

    Notice, who are the cited spokespeople chosen to counter the vote, and their talking points. Then compare what has come out above, including the development as to why a background check on NC would very likely fail to detect dangers.

    KF

  177. 177
    kairosfocus says:

    F/N: Former US Secretary of State and US National Security advisor Rice on The View:

    Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice offered an amazing story from her childhood to explain to the more liberal hosts of “The View” why she supports Second Amendment rights.

    Here’s what she said

    “Let me tell you why I’m a defender of the Second Amendment,” she began.

    “I was a little girl growing up in Birmingham, Alabama, in the late fifties, early sixties,” she explained. “There was no way that Bull Connor and the Birmingham Police were going to protect you.”

    “And so when White Knight Riders would come through our neighborhood,” she said, “my father and his friends would take their guns and they’d go to the head of the neighborhood, it’s a little cul-de-sac and they would fire in the air, if anybody came through.”

    “I don’t think they actually ever hit anybody,” she continued. “But they protected the neighborhood. And I’m sure if Bull Connor had known where those guns were he would have rounded them up.”

    “And so, I don’t favor some things like gun registration,” she said to a suddenly silent crowd.

    “That said, it’s time to have a national conversation about how we can deal with the problems we have. It’s not going to be any single fix to the terrible events at Parkland,” she concluded.

    KF

  178. 178
    Charles says:

    The chilling school shooting threats made across the country since the Parkland massacre: Dozens of kids have been arrested – including a 10-year-old – all vowing to kill teachers and classmates
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....kland.html

    Since February 14, there have been at least 38 different threats across the US
    Most were made by students posting on social media who were underage
    In one case, a student took a gun to school but killed himself instead of others
    He had planned to commit mass murder but changed his mind last minute
    Not all are serious – some kids said they were trying to be funny or stall classes
    The frightening trend is being met with harsh, swift action from police
    Now, dozens of teens across the country are facing felony charges and jail time

    [snip]

    The large number of threats is worrying but not necessarily an increase on years gone by.

    Experts say it is purely that they are now being made public because police are not taking any chances and are arresting children who would ordinarily be disciplined more privately by their teachers and parents.

    ‘Kids make bad decisions and I think that in decades past those decisions would have been addressed behind closed doors with the principal and parents.

    ‘Now they’re being addressed behind closed doors in the police station and the courtroom,’ said Ken Trump, president of National School Safety and Security Services, a Cleveland-based consulting company.

    Mostly handguns shown or mentioned. 1 kid pictured with semi-auto carbine.

    One kid said he was going to use a nerf gun. Not one more brused eye!!! Time to ban nerf guns, for the kids!

  179. 179
    Charles says:

    Dodge County, Wisconsin, Sheriff Dale Schmidt pens an open letter about root causes of school shootings:

    https://www.theblaze.com/news/2018/03/04/wisconsin-sheriff-pens-viral-letter-addressing-the-root-cause-behind-parkland-shooting

    [snip]
    Read the full letter below:

    Following every mass killing, I ask myself, what has happened to our society? I also wonder what the solution is to ensure our families do not become future victims.

    Many have pointed out that years ago, people would go to school and have hunting rifles in their vehicles. Yet, mass violence in schools and other locations did not happen as in society today. It makes me think that there must be a root cause that we are not addressing that has led to this change.

    So what has changed and more importantly how do we fix it? Media reports of school walk-outs and gun control discussions are becoming more prevalent than ever, all in an effort to find a quick and easy solution. I think it is safe to say that there is no quick and easy solution.

    I think perhaps we are not evaluating the true root cause which is obviously very complex. We must make efforts to change our society as a whole. It’s my belief that the root cause starts with our youth lacking basic skills including respect for authority figures like parents and teachers, the ability to cope with conflict and the ability to handle rejection. Further issues like mental health and alcohol/drug use also play a role, but column length restrictions limit my ability to cover all aspects of the root cause today.

    I believe it is imperative that we raise our children in a manner that instills respect for authority. While we all love our children, we need to get back to a society of parents who expect a level of respect toward both them and others in authority, including teachers. Discipline needs to be reintegrated into our society. Parents, don’t ever let anyone tell you that you can’t or shouldn’t reasonably discipline your child in a non-abusive manner. Teachers need to have the support of parents when they make disciplinary decisions and parents need to resist the urge of running to the defense of their children when a teacher feels the need to discipline. It undermines their authority and will likely be treated as an example for actions toward others in authority in the future.

    What about inability to cope or handle rejection? For years we have watched as competition has been replaced by participation awards that are given to make children feel good. While no one wants their child to ever be disappointed or upset, when they are young, they need to face conflict and disappointment and learn to resolve it appropriately under the guidance of adults. It is part of developing their personality and dealing with conflict in the future. When youth are not taught how to handle difficult situations, they must find their own way to cope, which without guidance may be result in unhealthy or even dangerous future behavior. I am no expert and am merely giving an opinion of what I have seen in my own experience, but I feel that my opinions have merit as I have witnessed people dealing with difficult situations at the worst times of their lives.

    My point in writing this is not to place blame but rather to start conversations on what truly is the root cause of violence in society. Many have strong opinions about gun control but realistically gun control will do nothing more than place a very small band aid on a much bigger problem. It is imperative that we have serious discussions on what we can do to change the norms of our society and positively impact the decisions our youth make. It’s time to refocus our energy to affect long lasting change so that we can keep Dodge County a safe and enjoyable place to live, work and visit.

    Sheriff Dale J. Schmidt

    I would only quibble with:

    Parents, don’t ever let anyone tell you that you can’t or shouldn’t reasonably discipline your child in a non-abusive manner. Teachers need to have the support of parents when they make disciplinary decisions and parents need to resist the urge of running to the defense of their children when a teacher feels the need to discipline.

    So is spanking ok again?

    Teachers won’t get any support as long as they attempt to indoctrinate kids in alternate lifestyles and promote Islam over Christianity.

    Otherwise, the sheriff is exactly right.

    I guess I’ll add that teachers need some help to get the school administration off their backs and free them up to teach more and test less, and get rid of common core and its look-alikes.

  180. 180
    Charles says:

    Molson Bleu @ 155

    If you know anything about root cause analysis, which you obviously don’t…

    Here are a group of psychologists and the Secret Service who analyzed the actual root causes of school shootings.

    A group of psychologists studied prevention of school shootings:

    A Qualitative Investigation of Averted School Shooting Rampages

    The most salient prevention effort mentioned by multiple participants was that of establishing and implementing what they believe to be successful antibullying programs. Such programs appear to have instilled a climate within these schools that bullying is not acceptable and not tolerated. Consistent with best practices on prevention (Hage et al., 2007), participants mentioned antibullying programs that the literature has supported, such as the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program (e.g., Olweus, Limber, & Mihalic, 1999). It is important to note this explicit effort to minimize bullying when considering that some studies have shown that retaliation for being bullied is one of the most common reported motives for planning and executing a school rampage (e.g., Daniels, Buck, et al., 2007; O’Toole, 2000; Vossekuil et al., 2002). As Molina, Dulmus, and Sowers (2005) emphasize, the sooner such prevention/intervention programs are implemented, the greater the likelihood that future school violence can be prevented.
    [p. 88]

    And the Secret Service earlier had studied how to “profile” school shooters:
    The Final Report and Findings of the Safe School Initiative:
    Implications for the Prevention of School Attacks in the United States

    Overview of Safe School Initiative Findings
    The findings of the Safe School Initiative suggest that there are productive actions that educators, law enforcement officials and others can pursue in response to the problem of targeted school violence. Specifically, Initiative findings suggest that these officials may wish to consider focusing their efforts to formulate strategies for preventing these attacks in two principal areas:
    • developing the capacity to pick up on and evaluate available or knowable information that might indicate that there is a risk of a targeted school attack; and,
    • employing the results of these risk evaluations or “threat assessments” in developing strategies to prevent potential school attacks from occurring.

    Support for these suggestions is found in 10 key findings of the Safe School Initiative study. These findings are as follows:
    • Incidents of targeted violence at school rarely were sudden, impulsive acts.
    • Prior to most incidents, other people knew about the attacker’s idea and/or plan to attack.
    • Most attackers did not threaten their targets directly prior to advancing the attack.
    • There is no accurate or useful “profile” of students who engaged in targeted school violence.
    • Most attackers engaged in some behavior prior to the incident that caused others concern or indicated a need for help.
    • Most attackers had difficulty coping with significant losses or personal failures. Moreover, many had considered or attempted suicide.
    • Many attackers felt bullied, persecuted or injured by others prior to the attack.
    • Most attackers had access to and had used weapons prior to the attack.
    • In many cases, other students were involved in some capacity.
    • Despite prompt law enforcement responses, most shooting incidents were stopped by means other than law enforcement intervention.
    [pp. 11-12]

    Most attackers used some type of gun as their primary weapon, with over half of the attackers using handguns (61 percent, n=25), and nearly half of them using rifles or shotguns (49 percent, n=20). Three-quarters of the attackers used only one weapon (76 percent, n=31) to harm their victims, although almost half of the attackers had more than one weapon with them at time of the attack (46 percent, n=19).
    [p. 16]

    The large proportion of attackers who acquired their guns from home points to the need for schools and law enforcement officials to collaborate on policies and procedures for responding when a student is thought to have a firearm in school. In particular, schools should be aware of the provisions of the Federal Gun-Free Schools Act, which requires that all schools expel students who bring a gun to school and should report all violations to local law enforcement officials. [p. 36]

    The key takeaways above are: school shootings are often the result of bullying, they are often signalled well in advance, they seldom involve “assault rifles”, and failure of school administration and police to treat students bringing firearms to school as a crime only enables some future attack.

    If and when the above untried preventative methods fail, then a hardened school (only partially implemented at Parkland) would stop a school shooter. No gun bans as proposed would have changed what Cruz was enabled to do, but preventing Cruz from being bullied, and failing that, processing his numerous incidents of violent behavior as crimes (as Broward county school administration and law enforcement deliberately avoided) would have shown up in background checks and prevented his firearm purchases.

    A safe school is a school in which students are not bullied, students who are violent are expelled and put “in the system”, and teachers are allowed to teach instead of be disciplinarians.

  181. 181
    Molson Bleu says:

    Charles@179&180, I don’t think that anyone thinks that the root cause is as simple as gun control. But the attitude that any type of gun control can’t even be on the table with respect to remedial correction and ultimate corrective action is just narrow minded and selfish.

    Any effective solution will require a multi-prong approach. Limited but enforced gun control, hardening of schools, increased resources in schools for guidance and social support, and the like.

    Would you not be willing to have some rules placed on your ownership of an AR15 (eg, storage, transport and transfer requirements similar to Israel and Switzerland) in order to make mass shootings more difficult to do?

  182. 182
    Charles says:

    Molson Bleu @ 181

    I don’t think that anyone thinks that the root cause is as simple as gun control.

    You do:

    Molson Bleu @ 133:
    Yes, you can harden soft targets like schools, and I am not saying that we shouldn’t do this, but that is just a bandaid. It does absolutely nothing to solve the root cause. The crazies will no longer shoot up the schools. Instead, they will shoot up the theatres, hospital waiting rooms, subways, theatres, church picnics, church services, New Years celebrations, college graduation ceremonies, pro life rallies, fall fairs, scout jamborees, and the like. Alteratively, we could make it more difficult for the crazies to get their guns in the first place. This won’t eliminate mass shootings, unfortunately the cat is out of the bag on that, but it will reduce them

    You ask:

    Would you not be willing to have some rules placed on your ownership of an AR15 (eg, storage, transport and transfer requirements similar to Israel and Switzerland) in order to make mass shootings more difficult to do?

    Well, Would you not be willing to have some rules placed on your speech about an AR15 (eg, false statistics, mischaracterizing firearm features, mischaracterizing root-causes of school shootings, ignoring risks to law-abiding gun owners, ignoring criminal behavior, ignoring policy that thwarts criminalizing violent students, similar to yelling “fire” to stampede a crowd) in order to make anti 2nd amendment propaganda more difficult to do?

    Since you’re so eager to impose “sensible limits” on my 2nd amendment rights, the time has come to impose sensible speech control limits on your 1st amendment rights. Just as you are, sensibly, not permitted to stampede people by yelling “fire”, no longer shall you be permitted to stampede policy makers by yelling “blame guns”.

    Your speech is hereby prohibited from using the words “rifle”, “pistol”, “firearm”, “magazine”, “ammunition”, and “shooting”

    Your speech that mentions gun control shall be limited to a capacity of 10 words.

    You must acquire a permit to discuss, post, tweet or retweet, or otherwise mention gun control.

    Your speech which does mention gun control must first be approved by an authorized agency such as the NRA.

    Violation of any of these sensible speech control laws will result in 6 months imprisonment for the 1st and 2nd offense, and 10 years imprisonment thereafter.

    Anyone prepared to restrict my 2nd amendment rights should be equally prepared to have their 1st amendment rights restricted.

  183. 183
    Molson Bleu says:

    “Well, Would you not be willing to have some rules placed on your speech about an AR15…”

    So, your right to have no rules placed on your ownership of an AR15 is more important than a school kid’s chance of attaining an age where he can buy an AR15.

    I think that you have made your position very clear.

  184. 184
    Charles says:

    Molson Bleu @ 183

    So, your right to have no rules placed on your ownership of an AR15….

    I’m already restricted from purchasing fully automatic firearms, or magazine capacities greater than 30 rounds, or supressors, or carry concealed or open in every state. My right to use my otherwise lawful firearms to defend myself is further restricted by “gun free zones”. And I’m already subject to background checks, waiting periods, and permits in some cases.

    … is more important than a school kid’s chance of attaining an age where he can buy an AR15.

    You argue from a false premise. There is no cause and effect that school kids won’t live to buy AR15s if AR15s aren’t further restricted. They live and buy them today, under existing restrictions. And they are a thousand fold more likely to die from texting and driving than from a mass shooting, but you don’t really care about saving those lives, do you.

    That’s just more of your “snake oil” speech that needs to be limited.

    The problem you refuse to acknowledge is that a rare few use AR15s unlawfully because the government doesn’t enforce laws already on the books, doesn’t act on tips, doesn’t enter past violent behavior into background databases, doesn’t harden the schools taxpayers have already paid for, doesn’t engage an active shooter even after backup arrives, and doesn’t put an end to the bullying that triggers these kids in the first place.

    Further infringing on my AR15 rights won’t change any of that. But your “snake oil” would get more people killed. School kids who think they’re protected by your “sensible limits” will die because the root causes continued to be ignored instead of corrected. Your “sensible limits” are actually depraved indifference on your part to the deaths you’ll cause.

    You don’t get to falsely yell “fire” to stampede people and you don’t get to falsely accuse lawful gun owners of being responsible for the governments’ failings and unlawful kids.

    If your “sensible limits” on gun ownership to prevent school shootings were offered as a prospectus seeking investors, the SEC would bring you up on fraud charges, which is why your speech needs to be limited.

    I think that you have made your position very clear.

    My position has been clear, very clear.

    It is your position that has been hypocritical, self-contradictory, unsubstantiated, incoherent, and now is little more than shrill hyperbole.

  185. 185
    Charles says:

    What You Need To Know About The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban To PREVENT Another One

    [snip]
    For the six years from 1999 to 2004 when the ban was lifted, 52,214,932 background checks were conducted. For the first six years after the ban was lifted (2005 to 2010), 71,319,676 background checks were conducted. If each background check represents one gun, 19 million more guns were purchased in the six years after the ban than during the last six years of the ban. This makes intuitive sense: when guns are banned, fewer guns are sold; when the ban is lifted more guns are sold. But is it the number of guns we care about or what people are doing with those guns?

    You compare the data on background checks — your reference point for gun sales — to the FBI’s data on what people were doing with those guns for 1997 to 2001, 2002 to 2006, and 2007 to 2011. While you’re at it, you look at what the FBI says people were doing with rifles specifically since there were a principal target of the ban.

    The FBI says that during the last six years of the ban, firearms were used to kill 54,468 people, 2,483 of whom were killed with a rifle. During the first six years after the ban — with 19 million more guns on the street — the FBI says firearms were used to kill 58,065 people, 2,432 of whom were killed with a rifle.

    What? More people were killed with a rifle during the ban than after the ban? Could it be the assault [rifle] ban made no difference to homicide by rifle? Why, yes, yes it could. And with 19 million more guns on the street after the ban, there were only 3,597 additional firearms homicides? Could it be that limiting guns had very little impact on limiting total firearms homicides? Why, yes, yes it could.

    You realize that during the last six years of the ban, there was one gun murder for every 959 guns whereas during the first six years after the ban, there was one gun murder for every 1,228 guns. Well, you’re right to wonder, if there were more guns but fewer firearms homicides per gun, what was everybody doing with all those extra guns? They certainly weren’t using them to murder more people. Could this help to explain the steady drop in violent crime rates that has continued since 2004? Could it be that people are using those extra guns to defend themselves and to deter and prevent all kinds of violent crime? Why, yes, yes it could.

    You need to tell your mother.

    Especially if she looks like Dianne Feinstein.

    After the assault rifle ban ended, 19,104,744 more firearms were purchased than during the ban, but the murder rate went down from 1 murder per 959 guns during the ban to 1 murder per 1,228 guns after the ban.

    Increased gun ownership did not correlate to an increase in murders by gun.

    During the assault rifle ban 2,483 people were killed with a rifle.
    After the assualt rifle ban ended, 2,432 people were killed with a rifle.

    Banning assault rifles did not correlate to a reduction in murder by rifle.

  186. 186
    Charles says:

    How Many Lives Are Saved by Guns – and Why Don’t Gun Controllers Care?

    [snip]
    As to defensives uses of guns, the CDC report said, “Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was ‘used’ by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies. … Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008.”

    Criminologist and researcher Gary Kleck, using his own commissioned phone surveys and number extrapolation, estimates that Americans use guns for defensive purposes 1.2 million times each year — and that 1 in 6 Americans who have used guns defensively believe someone would have died but for their ability to resort to their defensive use of firearms. Twenty years ago economist John Lott, author of “More Guns, Less Crime,” and his research partner wrote: “We find that allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons deters violent crimes and it appears to produce no increase in accidental deaths. If those states which did not have right-to-carry concealed gun provisions had adopted them in 1992, approximately 1,570 murders; 4,177 rapes; and over 60,000 aggravated assaults would have been avoided yearly.

    [snip]
    Third, many on the left want to ban the “mentally ill” from obtaining firearms. Currently firearms cannot be legally possessed by someone determined by a judge to be of danger to himself or to others. What about people who do not meet that standard? It was the left, most prominently the American Civil Liberties Union, that in the 1970s successfully pushed to end “involuntary commitment” for those who do not meet that standard. Bruce Ennis became legal director of the ACLU in 1977 and was known as the father of the “mental health bar.” In 1974 he said, “My personal goal is either to abolish involuntary commitment or to set up so many procedural roadblocks and hurdles that it will be difficult, if not impossible, for the state to commit people against their will.”

    Key takeaways:
    Defensive use of guns reduces victim injury, and reduces murders, rapes, and aggravated assaults by thousands per year.

    It is the liberal left, the ACLU, that has made it near impossible to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill.

    Further 2nd amendment infringements won’t change the ACLU’s enabling of the mentally ill to get guns and would increase rapes, murders and aggravated assault.

  187. 187
    Allan Keith says:

    Charles, interesting discussion between yourself and Molson Bleu. However, your last couple posts are so decisive that all I expect to hear from Molson in response is the chirping of crickets.

  188. 188
    Charles says:

    Allan Keith @ 187

    However, your last couple posts are so decisive that all I expect to hear from Molson in response is the chirping of crickets.

    Yes. It takes a rare individual to climb out of a hole as deep as he dug himself into.

    What is sad (pathetic?) is he’ll keep running his same schtick on someone else on some other forum, or even this forum on some other thread. It’s not that he doesn’t learn, it’s that his political agenda is unaltered and indifferent to truth.

    FWIW, I don’t argue with people like Molson Bleu because I expect to persuade them, no. I argue with Molson to demonstrate to lurkers how vacuous are his arguments, how false are his statistics, and how cynical he is for using deaths as props.

  189. 189
    Charles says:

    Truth Will Set You Free @ 149

    Fascinating statistics. I am sure the a/mat leftists (not all a/mats are leftists) will try their best to debunk your analysis. They will fail.

    It would appear they have given up. But then again their failure was baked into the cake. Their position was unsupportable to begin with, and their method was mostly virtue signalling and hand wringing. Very little hard evidence, and what there was, was poorly thought through.

    I would have replied sooner, but I didn’t want to “telegraph” anything to Molson Bleu.

  190. 190
    john_a_designer says:

    Here you go: the sound of crickets.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKmRkS1os7k

    It goes on and on and on… this way for ten hours. No, I haven’t listened to the whole thing.

  191. 191
    Charles says:

    Here again is the hypocrisy of the Left. They demand gun safety until they find out that gun safety is possible without banning guns:

    Facebook, Twitter, Etc, are Prohibiting Ads for a New Form of Gun Safety that Could Benefit Parents and Teachers

    [snip]
    The company is called Zore, and the gun safety product they have created is pretty ingenious. Instead of putting your gun in a safe or lock box, their product “Zore-X” allows you to attach a locking mechanism to the firearm via the chamber. In order to load a bullet, all you need to do is turn the dial on the mechanism left and right to the specific amount of clicks it take to unlock it. There are no numbers, just the clicks. This allows you to open your gun in the dark, or out of site. Once the mechanism is unlocked, chamber a round like you would normally, and the mechanism will fall away without fuss.
    [snip]
    According to Zore, Facebook, YouTube, and Outbrain all returned written statements that said the video violated its policies, with only Outbrain noting that it’s a “complicated field, even though it’s a safety device.”

    Twitter, however, verbally told Zore flat out that they wouldn’t even open an ad account for the company to start with.

    This unwillingness to help promote a form of gun safety is very telling. While Zore has created a device that allows for safety, it also allows for the gun to be easily accessible and ready to use a moment’s notice. For many who support the restriction and suppression of firearms, as many leftist organizations do, Zore makes things more complicated for them despite the fact that it makes guns safer. The idea of “gun safety” for them is to have it out of site, out of mind, and behind thick metal doors.
    [snip]
    We’ve received many inquiries over the last few weeks from teachers and school staff who are interested in ZORE as a solution to keep their firearms secure but accessible on campus,” Escojido told RedState.
    [snip]

  192. 192
    kairosfocus says:

    U/D: Fox news:

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018.....um=twitter

    The Broward County Sheriff’s Office has identified to Fox News the captain who, according to sources, directed responding deputies and units to “stage” or form a “perimeter” outside Stoneman Douglas High School, instead of rushing immediately into the building, as the mass shooting unfolded there.

    Multiple law enforcement and official sources said the commands in the initial moments after Nikolas Cruz allegedly opened fire would go against all training which instructs first responders to “go, go, go” until the shooter is neutralized. As law enforcement arrived, the shooter’s identity and exact location were still unknown.

    Multiple sources told Fox News that Captain Jan Jordan was the commanding officer on scene. In an email responding to Fox News’ request for information, a BSO spokesperson wrote, “Capt. Jordan’s radio call sign is 17S1.”

    The massacre on February 14 killed 17 people and wounded 16 others.

    Sources told Fox News it was Jordan giving the commands because they were recorded on the dispatch logs coming from Jordan’s radio insignia 17S1, or “Seventeen Sierra One.”

    This speaks saddening volumes.

    KF

  193. 193
    Allan Keith says:

    Kairosfocus@192, and this from someone who has, supposedly, received extensive training on how to respond to crisis situations.

    I hate to judge the actions of others in this type of situation because nobody knows how they would respond until they find themselves in that situation. Except, of course, for Trump, who would have run in unarmed to confront the shooter. :).

    But if someone trained in handling this, someone who deals with law enforcement every day, fails to react appropriately, how is a teacher, who has obtained a fraction of the training, going to respond. I am not opposed to armed security in schools, but the idea of arming teachers scares me. However, I can see an exception to this for teachers who were in the armed forces and received extensive training.

  194. 194
    Charles says:

    Allan Keith @ 193

    I thought I would make an attempt to offer an answer to the question you posed to kairosfocus. Obviously he will provide his own answer as he sees fit.

    But if someone trained in handling this, someone who deals with law enforcement every day, fails to react appropriately, how is a teacher, who has obtained a fraction of the training, going to respond.

    Firstly, the hypothetical circumstances are significantly different. The law enforcement person has considerable choice about when to enter, where to enter, what cover to choose, possibly even the element of surprise. The teacher, OTOH is under attack, possibly pinned down, focus scattered on protecting students as well as themselves.

    Now you might say the teacher has no advantages and thus ought not to be armed. But that is precisely why they should be armed, if they are willing to be armed. The teacher (and their students) is under attack with no means of defense for at least the first few minutes. It is precisely that defenselessness at a moment of no alternatives, no choice, when it is kill or be killed, they should be allowed to be armed if they wish.

    Secondly, in the specific case of Parkland, the law enforcement did not come to the defense of the teachers or students for several minutes. It wasn’t “failing to react appropriately”, it was failing to do the job for which they were hired and charged. Not only by the “on site” school resource officer, but by his backup when they arrived. What use is an on-site resource officer who doesn’t go in. Why bother having them on-site if all they’re going to do is phone the office. People in the school were already phoning in the attack.

    Thirdly, considering that whether by negligence, error, or travel delays, law enforcement permitted Cruz several minutes in which he killed 17 people. How could a willingly armed teacher do worse?

    Lastly, I would point you to a post by kairosfocus @ 146 which you ought to read in its entirety (as well as the source link which has much more). But I would highlight:

    No. Hear me out. The single best way to respond to a mass shooter is with an immediate, violent response. The vast majority of the time, as soon as a mass shooter meets serious resistance, it bursts their fantasy world bubble. Then they kill themselves or surrender. This has happened over and over again.
    [snip]
    The average number of people shot in a mass shooting event when the shooter is stopped by law enforcement: 14. The average number of people shot in a mass shooting event when the shooter is stopped by civilians: 2.5. The reason is simple. The armed civilians are there when it started.

    The teachers are there already. The school staff is there already. Their reaction time is measured in seconds, not minutes. They can serve as your immediate violent response. Best case scenario, they engage and stop the attacker, or it bursts his fantasy bubble and he commits suicide. Worst case scenario, the armed staff provides a distraction, and while he’s concentrating on killing them, he’s not killing more children.
    [snip]

    In that post and at the source link, Correia goes into more detail about training teachers who want to be armed.

  195. 195
    Allan Keith says:

    Charles@193, I’m not arguing with the stats. But we are dealing with a situation that we have never dealt with. Armed teachers in a crowded school. Even Israel only does that in extremely rare circumstances. But, as I mentioned, I would make an exception for teachers who were previously in the armed forces, with extensive training, and a favourable reference from the army. In general, if we are going to have armed people in the school, make sure that they are there for that reason and heavily trained. And be prepared to pay more taxes to do it.

  196. 196
    Charles says:

    Allan Keith @ 195

    But we are dealing with a situation that we have never dealt with. Armed teachers in a crowded school.

    No, it has been dealt with before. Correia cites as an example that Utah has had armed teachers in its schools for several years (as of 2012). Other states have armed teachers in their schools. There is history & experience to draw upon.

  197. 197
    Charles says:

    http://blogs.findlaw.com/blott.....hools.html

    The full list of the 18 states that allow guns in schools with certain restrictions, according to NBC News [in 2013], are:

    Alabama
    California
    Connecticut
    Hawaii
    Idaho
    Iowa
    Kentucky
    Massachusetts
    Mississippi
    Montana
    New Hampshire
    New Jersey
    New York
    Oregon
    Rhode Island
    Texas
    Utah
    Wyoming

    States that are considering whether to allow guns in schools include Alaska, Florida, Indiana, Maine, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Tennessee. To learn more about gun laws in your state, check out FindLaw’s page on State Gun Control Laws.

    https://www.campussafetymagazine.com/university/list-of-states-that-allow-concealed-carry-guns-on-campus/

    First, here’s the list of the states that allow the permitted concealed carry of guns on public college and university campuses [in 2017]:

    Arkansas
    Colorado
    Georgia
    Idaho
    Kansas
    Mississippi
    Oregon
    Texas
    Tennessee
    Utah
    Wisconsin

    https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/NCSL-Arming-Staff-Brief.pdf

    One policy that states have considered to prevent school violence and improve school safety is
    arming teachers and other school staff. Prior to 2013 state legislative sessions, the National
    Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) was not aware of any state laws that specifically
    authorized teachers or other school staff to carry firearms on K–12 school campuses. In 2013,
    however, at least 33 states introduced more than 80 bills related to arming teachers and school
    staff. These bills varied widely from state to state and include the following measures:
    • Authorizing school districts and schools to create and implement policies to allow arming of teacher and staff at their discretion;
    • Allowing districts to designate a certain number of teachers and staff to carry concealed firearms in K-12 schools, such as the principal in each school or one teacher per school;
    • Allowing teachers who already have concealed carry permits or endorsements to carry weapons on private or public school grounds; and
    • Creating programs and special endorsements that allow teachers and staff to provide school security and carry firearms in K-12 schools.
    States that introduced legislation in 2013 related to arming teachers or school staff include AK, AL, AR, AZ, CA, CO, CT, FL, GA, IA, IL, KS, MD, ME, MI, MO, MS, NC, ND, NH, NM, OK, OR,
    PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, VA, WA, WI, WV, and WY.

  198. 198
    Charles says:

    ‘She was scared of him and I think that killed her’: Parkland school shooter’s late mother contemplated giving up her parental rights after years of enduring his violent behavior

    [snip]
    The mother once told the family source that Nikolas, dressed in a military uniform and holding an air gun, approached her and said: ‘Drop to your knees b—-, I’m going to blow your f—ing brains out.’

    He later laughed it off and said ‘I’m sorry, Mom.’

    She once told the source on the phone, ‘He thinks he’s f—ing ISIS.’

    Despite the outbursts, Lynda still loved her son.

    ‘She wrote things off that should have been addressed sooner,’ the source said.

    Officials said the teen had received treatment at a mental health clinic for a while, but stopped getting help more than a year ago.

    He was also found to be autistic at age 10, and suffered from attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHA) and depression in his preteen years.

    Cruz’s frequent outbusts included punching holes in walls and throwing things at their upper middle class home in Parkland.

    He was also seen on Snapchat cutting himself after a breakup.

    According to police incident reports Cruz in one instance threw chairs, a dog bowl and a drinking glass around the home, and in another he hit his adoptive mother with the plastic hose of a vacuum cleaner.

    Police would often respond, along with mental health professionals that were aware of Cruz’s case history.

    However, none of the calls ever ended with a conviction on felony charges, and he was never involuntarily held due to mental illness, two points that are flagged in the national gun background checks.

    During one of dozens of times police responded to the Cruz family home for threats violent outbursts and self destructive behavior was in September of 2016.

    In that incident report he is described as suffering from mental illness and being ’emotionally handicapped,’ and being on behavioral medication.

    Another report notes, ‘He has mentioned in the past that he would like to purchase a firearm.’

    The emergency calls that the police received from the home included incidents categorized as ‘mentally ill person,’ ‘child/elderly abuse,’ ‘domestic disturbance’ and ‘missing person.’
    [snip]

    Let’s summarize: threatens to blow his mother’s brains out, cuts himself, physically abuses his mother, autistic, ADHA and depression, thinks he’s ISIS, quits a mental health clinic, categorized as a “mentally ill person” but never involuntarily held due to mental illness and consequently no flag in his national gun background check, and consequently no block on his purchase of firearms.

    Nikolas Cruz, poster child for the ACLU’s refusal to allow “involuntary commitment” of future mass shooters.

    [face palm]

    Why won’t the ACLU do more to outlaw the ‘mentally ill’ purchase of firearms? How many more whackjobs has the ACLU allowed to pass a firearms backgroud check?

  199. 199
    kairosfocus says:

    AK, for several days, I had a struggle with web access; in any case, other things have to hold priority. I suggest to you that Charles’ clip is right in essential focus [it comes from an expert who has actually taught teachers volunteering to be armed civilian marshals at school, Larry Correia]. Beyond, I note the urgency that seconds count and the real choice is to force brave teachers to offer up their bodies as living shields in a needlessly disarmed target-rich environment. When in fact the bare fact that there will likely be several armed people seconds away will be an effective deterrent. I should note with Correia that many of these people will be veterans or former law enforcement officers. If you go above in thread, you will see what I have drawn out from the Swiss example and what I have suggested for general target hardening. KF

    PS: Post Columbine, the training has been, once two officers are there, go in. Just as, post 9-11, the principle is to have armed marshals on flights, and to hold the cockpit.

  200. 200
    kairosfocus says:

    F/N: I find it significant that there seems to be a co-ordinated talk-point pushback much along the lines of oh, facing an armed attacker — if police failed to act, how much more a teacher with less training would. This fails on several grounds, first it selects part of the chain of failure, leaving off for example that the Broward officers were ORDERED to stand down (a familiar pattern). We now see where SWAT officers from another jurisdiction training nearby rushed to scene and did intervene . . . only to now face disciplinary charges. (BTW, that suggests they knew something was seriously wrong with protocols and intervened on natural duty.) Teachers or administrators in the scene would face a different situation; being in the scene when an incident begins and being equipped and trained to do something about it. (Cf. Correia — and I suspect they may get even more or at least comparable training on this focal matter, they face one thing, police officers have to be far more broadly trained.) The observation that instant response makes a big difference to casualties and that bursting the shooting fish trapped in a barrel fantasy tends to precipitate surrender or suicide is also relevant. Going beyond, what is driving this pattern of going amok as a culturally conditioned syndrome that is clearly building up as a media-fed wave . . . the fad from Hell itself. KF

    PS: We must recall the post Columbine shift to, once there are two, go in with what you got, now. Cf Correia on the explanation.

  201. 201
    kairosfocus says:

    F/N: Miami Herald on missed red flags:

    http://www.miamiherald.com/new.....50699.html

    The rage and obsession with violence documented by Cruz’s therapists during nearly two years of interactions when he was 15 to 17 years old continued through his school career: Again and again, authorities were warned about the teen’s explosive tendencies and lack of impulse control. Again and again, authorities ignored the warnings.

    In addition to the troubling behavior Cruz exhibited at the schools he attended — including an incident in which the teen reportedly brought a backpack with bullets to class — law enforcement officers were also alerted that Cruz might be dangerous.

    The FBI failed to act on two tips about Cruz, one of which involved Cruz posting online that he planned to become a “professional school shooter.” The Broward Sheriff’s Office was also warned about the teen, and had received a report that he “planned to shoot up the school.”

    Cruz alternated between periods of good behavior and periods of paranoia during which he acted out at school and at home, making fun of his peers, cursing at school staff and making threats, according to notes from his time at Cross Creek. The records obtained by the Herald documented weekly therapy sessions between February 2014 and December of 2015.

    There was plenty of opportunity to act in good time that was missed, consistently missed at local and central levels. Why, and how can that be dealt with? KF

    PS: Going forward, how many other similar cases are out there, where systems and schemes are blocking sound action in good time? Maybe, there is need to draw out the truth and address the patterns that are coming out.

  202. 202
    Charles says:

    OK, open question:

    Nikolas Cruz is reported to have had his 19th birthday in September of 2017.

    Assume, hypothetically, that the age to buy any firearm was raised to 21 years, as of say 2014. Assume further that it is now 2019, and Nikolas Cruz is 21 years of age.

    What has changed that prevents Nikolas Cruz, now aged 21, from purchasing the same firearms and shooting up his old alma mater?

  203. 203
    Allan Keith says:

    Charles,

    What has changed that prevents Nikolas Cruz, now aged 21, from purchasing the same firearms and shooting up his old alma mater?

    Two years to possibly obtain help with his mental issues (or get worse). Two years to let his hatred of the school and the people in it to fade (or become worse). Personally, I don’t have a problem with the 21 year restriction. As long as this does not prevent those younger to hunt and shoot under supervision.

  204. 204
    Charles says:

    Allan Keith @ 203:

    Two years to possibly obtain help with his mental issues (or get worse). Two years to let his hatred of the school and the people in it to fade (or become worse).

    So, no change in preventing Cruz from buying firearms and shooting up a school. A non-solution.

    Moreover, as Cruz’s history shows, he rejected help and was getting worse: two additional years to become an even more psychotic, embittered, and vengeful shooter.

  205. 205
    Allan Keith says:

    Charles,

    Moreover, as Cruz’s history shows, he rejected help and was getting worse: two additional years to become an even more psychotic, embittered, and vengeful shooter.

    Or not. People can’t drink until they are 21. What is the danger of not being able to buy a gun until you are 21? It definitely isn’t the entire solution. But it can certainly be part of it. After 21, the only restrictions, other than specified gun types, should be criminal record checks and other contraindicated factors (eg, serious mental health problems, drug addiction, Celine Dionne fans).

  206. 206
    kairosfocus says:

    AK, the inconsistencies pile up. A generation ago, there was a push to move adulthood and voting age to 18, the drafting age. Now we have old enough to vote and to face the draft (also, the noose) at 18, but not to buy a drink or a firearm. If the Gov’mint issues you a full auto arm that’s okay but if you go buy yourself a semi auto it’s not. It seems to me that this is a situation where the obvious and utterly clear have been set aside to push agendas that taken far enough would trigger civil war; likely as in key part as distractors. This is the emblematic, poster-child case for the failings of the policing, social welfare and educational authorities sustained across years. It even implicates those who struck deals to artificially suppress interventions on juvenile crime. Had even a few of the systems worked as advertised, nothing would have happened. Had deputies acted i/l/o their “bounden duties” early intervention would have saved lives. The patent insincerity and cover up of failure by policing, government and education authorities are the strongest proofs that we could have that it is foolish to try more of the same as solution. Especially, when an obvious solution is known to work: harden the targets. KF

  207. 207
    Charles says:

    Allan Keith @ 205

    What is the danger of not being able to buy a gun until you are 21?

    That at age 21 he will still shoot up a school. You obviously didn’t see that as a danger. Waiting until he’s 21 hasn’t changed a single thing, other than he’ll shoot up the class of 2020 instead of 2018. It will still be 17 dead undefended kids at the hands of a guy who should have restrictions placed on him personally, directly. The problem is his mental state, not his age. Making everyone wait until they’re 21 won’t change Cruz’s mental state, or stop him from getting guns at age 21, and won’t harden schools, or stop Cruz from shooting them up.

    But it can certainly be part of it [a solution to preventing people like Cruz from shooting up schools].

    But if it doesn’t actually change anything to prevent mentally ill people like Cruz from getting guns and shooting up undefended schools, then nothing is “solved” and it isn’t part of a solution.

    It is only part of a misguided, ineffective, politically-correct gun-control agenda. Cruz buying guns at age 21 instead of age 16-19, as you admit, isn’t preventing Cruz from taking lives.

  208. 208
    Charles says:

    kairosfocus @ 206

    The patent insincerity and cover up of failure by policing, government and education authorities are the strongest proofs that we could have that it is foolish to try more of the same as solution.

    As well as the Soros-funded crisis-actors, Hollywood hypocrits (who glamorize gun-violence and surround themselves with armed body guards) and bused-in truant-marchers, all trying guilt-trip us into reliquishing more rights to those failed authorities.

  209. 209
    kairosfocus says:

    Charles, I am not sure the term “crisis actors” is particularly clear in meaning. But it is appropriate to note that in agit prop operations, it is common to find people who can put an attractive or compelling face on a fundamentally corrupt policy. In my native land, such are termed “face cards,” and they often are used in false, apparently “grass-roots” movements, astroturfing in the phrase that came up some years ago. Young David Hogg and others simply lack the background to understand subtle policy issues and implications, and do not begin to imagine how they are being used by the utterly cynical and frankly deceitful — there is a particular responsibility of the media towards truth and fairness. It is significant that other voices from the same school’s 3,000 member student body are clearly marginalised by the media. The recent media show trial set up by CNN was ugly, and language slandering US Const. 2nd Amdt advocates and movements as murderers is utterly beyond the pale; especially as there is clear evidence that such weapons save lives and defend property hundreds of thousands of times every year, also serving as a clear red warning line that checks the advance of creeping totalitarian, politically messianistic government pretending to be saviour from all ills. That language of blame projection then becomes utterly revealing as displacement of guilt to scapegoats i/l/o the emerging pattern of failures by relevant authorities, and takes on an even more sinister light when we consider that the single greatest evil of our day is the ongoing holocaust of living posterity in the womb, amounting to in excess of 800 millions in 40+ years, mounting up at another million every week. The blatant inconsistency speaks for itself. It is also a wake-up call to other groups, such as Bible-believing Christians, on the sort of scapegoating we may well face. Indeed, the recent pretence at Calais that imaginary Right wing Christian terrorists contemplate mowing down crowds of Muslims with vehicles itself speaks volumes, as does the abuse of holding and questioning a 22 year old girl under a terrorism statute, trumpeting that tainting incident to the world. (Her crime, it seems, was to respond to blasphemous characterisations of Jesus as a sexual pervert, by performing a social experiment with Allah along similar lines . . . not well advised but patently not terrorism.) KF

    PS: It seems Ms Southern was literally pushed out the door in the wee hours of the morning, in effect shoved out into the streets. That, too, is a red flag warning on the underlying attitude and mentality of the state agents. What would they have said or done if something untoward happened to her? and indeed, simply by the tainting slander of questioning under a terrorism act and publicising the fact, they have done much the same in a more subtle fashion. Something is deeply, deeply wrong.

  210. 210
  211. 211
    Allan Keith says:

    It’s not as if a teacher with gun training could ever accidentally injure students.

    https://www.google.ca/amp/amp.timeinc.net/time/5199328/seaside-high-school-gun

  212. 212
    kairosfocus says:

    U/D: If you needed proof that we are looking at an agit prop, astroturf operation using students as face cards:

    https://ijr.com/2018/03/1076385-ohio-student-suspended-refusing-to-leave-classroom/

    A high school student in Hilliard, Ohio, didn’t want to pick sides in the contentious gun debate surrounding Wednesday’s “National Walkout,” so he stayed in class instead of joining the largely anti-gun protest or an alternative “study hall.”

    Hilliard Davidson High School senior Jacob Shoemaker was then reportedly slapped with a suspension.

    The student argued that divisive politics have no place in America’s schools and he refused to take sides in the debate . . . .

    Shoemaker’s suspension citation was posted online, possibly by a friend, and the story quickly went viral.

    “Student refused to follow instructions after being warned repeatedly by several administrators,” the letter said. “Student not permitted on school property.”

    School district spokesperson Stacie Raterman said official policy prohibited school officials from leaving Shoemaker unattended in the building for “security reasons,” 10TV reported.

    KF

  213. 213
    kairosfocus says:

    AK, leaving targets soft and trusting the state’s policing agencies have SYSTEMATICALLY failed — if you think Cruz is the only case out there that is gross error (and the failure to prioritise correcting the failures is criminal negligence) — so, it is time to realise the real choices. One, keep on with propaganda indoctrination centres that turn students into sitting ducks while playing scapegoating agit prop games (the attitude to the abortion holocaust of 800+ millions in 40+ years and mounting at a million more per week being a very good index of what is really going on). Two, withdraw students to home and private schools that will be target hardened. Three, harden the schools and other soft targets through a civilian marshals programme . . . and fix the agit prop games that have been so clearly exposed. Right now, given the obvious indoctrination, I would immediately rule out no. 1. No 3 is dubious, given the evident balance of power — unless a lot more people get a lot more awake than we are seeing. A sign of that would be plummeting viewership of the agit prop networks calling themselves news networks, especially the one that tried a show trial stunt. KF

  214. 214
    Charles says:

    Allan Keith @ 211

    It’s not as if a teacher with gun training could ever accidentally injure students.

    It’s not as if a pyschotic who was recommended for committment would ever deliberately kill students.

    Some wanted Florida suspect, Nikolas Cruz committed in 2016
    http://www.firstcoastnews.com/.....-529628694

    [snip]
    The documents were provided by a psychological assessment service initiated by Cruz’s mother called Henderson Behavioral Health. The documents show a high school resource officer who was also a sheriff’s deputy and two school counselors recommended in September 2016 that Cruz be committed for mental evaluation under Florida’s Baker Act. That law allows for involuntary commitment for mental health examination for at least three days.

    Such an involuntary commitment would also have been a high obstacle if not a complete barrier to legally obtaining a firearm, such as the AR-15 rifle used in the Stoneman Douglas massacre on Feb. 14, authorities say.

    There is no evidence Cruz was ever committed. Coincidentally, the school resource officer who recommended that Cruz be “Baker Acted” was Scot Peterson — the same Broward Sheriff’s Office deputy who resigned amid accusations he failed to respond to the shooting by staying outside the building where the killings occurred.
    [snip]

    Let me see… hmmmm…. Teacher accidental discharge versus system accidentally enabling 17 to be killed….

    I’m gonna go with teacher accidental discharges as the better outcome.

  215. 215
    kairosfocus says:

    Charles, we have a clear pattern of across-the-board failure of government, law enforcement, education and social welfare agencies. Where, if you imagine NC was/is the only one in that situation, there is fine Caribbean beach-front property for sale in Siberia for you. That unresponsiveness and the failure to focus on the governance failure issues that have surfaced are telling us something. Something, we need to heed. KF

    PS: I see where a teacher in CA has been suspended for asking a class discussion: ” if schools … are going to allow one group of students to get up during class and walk out to protest on one issue, would they still give the same courtesy to another group of students who wanted to get up and walk out in protest. And I used the example of abortion” https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/california-high-school-teacher-put-on-leave-after-asking-whether-schools-would-allow-students-to-walk-out-to-protest-abortion

    Abortion is of course highly relevant as all students currently in primary or secondary schools in the US are survivors of a global holocaust that is ongoing at the rate of a million more victims per week. The US daily toll likely exceeds a thousand. There are no grand media 24/7 wall to wall news focus presentations on the annual march for life. The media by and large are complicit in that holocaust, at least as enablers, and so are the education power brokers.

    It is high time for reformation.

  216. 216
    Charles says:

    Stoneman Douglas students arrested for knives, deputy suspended for sleeping on job

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018.....n-job.html

    [snip]
    Two students, identified as Jordan Salter, 18, and Gavin Stricker, 17, were arrested on weapons charges, the Sun Sentinel reported, citing the sheriff’s office.
    [snip]
    A third Stoneman Douglas student, identified only as a sophomore, allegedly posted photos of himself with a gun in his pants waistband on Snapchat, along with pictures of bullets, the sheriff’s office said in a news release. Both photos included threatening messages and called out someone named “Josh,” according to officials.
    Authorities also released the first responders’ radio transmissions. Phil Keating reports from Florida. Video
    Parkland school shooting 911 calls released

    The student, who faces a misdemeanor charge for the threats, was hospitalized for a mental health evaluation under Florida’s Baker Act.

    Following the arrests, Florida Gov. Rick Scott requested in a letter to Sheriff Scott Israel and Superintendent Robert Runcie that “immediate action be taken to require an armed law enforcement officer to secure every point of entry” of the high school “while students are on campus.”
    [snip]

    Secure every entry point, actually arrest students who carry weapons and make threats, and even officially evaluate their mental health (which can be a future barrier to purchasing firearms).

    Golly. What a novel approach. Who knew???

Leave a Reply