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:
News-watch: yet another incident of mass violence in FL, USA — where is this nihilism coming from?
F/N: More from Townhall:
KF
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.
ET, Point, the global abortion toll over 40+ years is 800+ millions, that is part of the erosion of civilisation. KF
Oh my, I think I am going to be sick. What have we become?
ET, sorry to say but globally we are the worst mass killers in history. The toll rises at another million per week. KF
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.
Of course it is. Take away purpose and this is what happens.
“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?
Is that supposed to be an argument? Perhaps their over-the-top liberal policies help soothe the savage beatsies.
I don’t often post things from social media, but I think this one puts things in perspective:
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.
“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.
Perhaps their over-the-top liberal policies help soothe the savage beatsies.
And we don’t want that here. Understand?
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.
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
Canadian commentator Mark Steyn puts the technology in perspective:
“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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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….
“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…
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
Population of Canada = 36.6 million
Population of CALIFORNIA = 39.5 million
“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.
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.
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.
“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.
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.
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.
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
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
“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.
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
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.
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
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.
“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.
“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?
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
@ MB
American exceptionalism.
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.
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.
We just have to stop abortions and have better gun laws.
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:
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:
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
“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.
Jul3s @ 43
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”.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Molson Bleu @ 49
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.
Automatic assault rifles are already banned, and magazine sizes are already limited.
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.
Training or proof of proficiency is already a requirement for concealed carry. And criminals will not abide by “storage and transportation requirements”.
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.
–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?
“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.
Here’s another fact that needs to be kept in mind when weighing whether or not stronger gun control laws would be effective:
https://www.nationalreview.com/blog/corner/study-vast-majority-gun-crime-isnt-committed-lawful-gun-owners/
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
FACT: The Parkland City FL school could have been stopped without any change to current gun laws.
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/lo.....story.html
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
Jul3s:
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
By nearby I meant other parts of the US and central America. Not global disarmament.
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.
That doesn’t mean that the changes MB mentioned didn’t happen.
@ Charles
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.
mb @ 55,
Oswald killed Kennedy with a rifle he bought through the mail.
obtw: machine guns aren’t illegal at the federal level. Just search Youtube for the Bullit County Machine Gun Shoot. Yeehah!
Jul3s @ 60
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.
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.
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.
“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”.
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.
That is an argument against unrestricted immigration, not gun control. The crimes are not primarily firearms related anyway.
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.
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’.
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.
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.
The Second Amendment says:
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.
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.
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.
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.
No law stops any crime 100% of the time. That is an impossible standard to keep.
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.
Jul3s @ 71:
So you admit their lives aren’t better off than Chicagoans, that not having guns hasn’t made them safer.
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.
ET @ 72
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.
Here’s another opinion (see # 70 above) about training a small select number of teachers to serve as armed security guards.
https://www.nationalreview.com/blog/corner/arm-teachers/
And it appears it’s already happening is some states:
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.
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:
Similarly, we can see another:
And he makes a third:
Where, in the case of settlement jihad no-go zones, they may not show up; the local warlord substitutes for law.
JAD indicates:
He goes on:
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
–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.
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.
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.
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:
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.
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:
A linked story on the effect of the JROTC training speaks volumes:
Of course, it seems that those who promoted the first talking-point apparently did not provide the balance in the second.
KF
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.
U/D: It seems the shooter was listening to voices in his head. Fox:
Definitely demonic voices of evil counsel. Whether actual demons, we can leave for consideration.
KF
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:
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.
PPS: The US Congress, 1776 and 1777 — yes, they called to penitence and revival:
Notice, the grand statement structure of the US Articles of Confederation and the Constitution:
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.
Reality Check: More Minnesotans Own Guns, Violent Crime Remains Low
http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/.....nd-checks/
It’s too cold to go out shooting people in Minnesota.
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
After Parkland massacre, the left wants to disarm ‘gun-clingers’ yet ignores gun violence in black community
Why does the government fail so often on existing gun control laws?
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?
School Shooting Was Outcome of Broward County School Board Policy – Now Local and National Politicians Weaponize Kids for Ideological Intents…
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
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.
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:
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
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.
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.
F/N: Firearms facts for news reporters: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1F8h2-3JR-J8Rg7dVHMhEm5kZ7pBhK98NlES_sFH7S_U/edit#slide=id.p KF
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
Only whiners and losers think that would be a problem.
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?
“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?
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.
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.
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.
Molson Bleu @ 92
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?
“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.
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.
“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.
one tenth of the people.
Molson Bleu @ 92
Molson Bleu @ 105
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.
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.
“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?
Molson Bleu @ 108
Because Chicago has the strictest gun control laws in the country, but no gang control.
Charles:
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:
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
kairosfocus @ 110
Precisely. Soft targets were hardened.
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.
“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.
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.
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)
“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.
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
Molson Bleu:
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
“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.
Molson Bleu @ 118:
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.
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.
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.
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.
Last year, idunno. But here’s a study from 1995:
Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun
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.
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
Good Samaritan helps Swansboro officer during struggle
Monday Feb 19, 2018
I see several reports like this, pretty much any day.
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.
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?
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.
“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?
Molson Bleu @ 124
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.
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!)
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.
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.”
mistake – delete
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.
Molson Bleu @ 129
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.
“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:
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.
Molson Bleu @ 131
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.
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.
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:
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
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
Molson Bleu @ 133:
Yes you did argue against hardening schools @ 113 and @ 118:
You continue with:
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 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.
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.
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.
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:
KF
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%.
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.
“Cite your sources.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/02/15/its-time-to-bring-back-the-assault-weapons-ban-gun-violence-experts-say/?utm_term=.fb0f2a7b2a37
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.
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]
“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
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
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:
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:
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:
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.
F/N: Larry Correia [an expert], 2012:
Food for thought.
KF
F/N: Cross-complaining tactic by Stacey Patton, an assistant professor of multimedia journalism at Morgan State University, in WaPo:
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
For those concerned about the “single greatest threat to American public safety.”….
http://www.textinganddrivingsa.....ving-stats
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.
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.
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.
“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.
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
U/D: Troubling questions on juvenile delinquency and govt alternatives to arrest programmes in Broward County, here. KF
Molson Bleu @ 150
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.
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.
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
Molson Bleu @ 155
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:
And here @ 155 is your argument to “harden cars” instead of deprive teens of their cell phones:
And here is your same argument with its hypocrisy illuminated by substituting “shooting up schools” for “texting while driving”:
You continue with:
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:
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.
“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:
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.
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.
“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.
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
Molson Bleu @ 158
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]
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].
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.
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 ])
“… 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.
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.
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.
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.
kairosfocus @ 162
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.
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.
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):
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
Molson Bleu @ 158
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
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
The following is from a recent NRO article. It’s very worth reading.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/03/parkland-shooting-school-discipline-policies-limited-law-enforcement-involvement-with-students/
So what is the main argument from
idioticgun controlnutsadvocates? 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.john_a_designer @ 166
There. All fixed up.
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
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
Here are some excerpts from another article which is worth reading:
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.
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.
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?
JAD, sobering issues. Is there corroboration or confirmation? KF
kairosfocus @ 171
And media coverup of professional astro-turfing….
Why Did It Take Two Weeks To Discover Parkland Students’ Astroturfing?
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:
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.
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).
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
U/D: Yahoo News-Reuters:
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
F/N: Former US Secretary of State and US National Security advisor Rice on The View:
KF
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
[snip]
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!
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
I would only quibble with:
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.
Molson Bleu @ 155
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
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
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.
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?
Molson Bleu @ 181
You do:
You ask:
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.
“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.
Molson Bleu @ 183
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.
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.
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.
What You Need To Know About The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban To PREVENT Another One
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.
How Many Lives Are Saved by Guns – and Why Don’t Gun Controllers Care?
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.
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.
Allan Keith @ 187
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.
Truth Will Set You Free @ 149
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.
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.
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
U/D: Fox news:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018.....um=twitter
This speaks saddening volumes.
KF
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.
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.
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:
In that post and at the source link, Correia goes into more detail about training teachers who want to be armed.
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.
Allan Keith @ 195
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.
http://blogs.findlaw.com/blott.....hools.html
https://www.campussafetymagazine.com/university/list-of-states-that-allow-concealed-carry-guns-on-campus/
https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/NCSL-Arming-Staff-Brief.pdf
‘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
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?
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.
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.
F/N: Miami Herald on missed red flags:
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.
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?
Charles,
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.
Allan Keith @ 203:
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.
Charles,
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).
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
Allan Keith @ 205
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 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.
kairosfocus @ 206
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.
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.
Video — 27 minutes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNSDSbNwi3U
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
U/D: If you needed proof that we are looking at an agit prop, astroturf operation using students as face cards:
KF
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
Allan Keith @ 211
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
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.
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.
Stoneman Douglas students arrested for knives, deputy suspended for sleeping on job
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018.....n-job.html
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???