Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   After careful analysis of mass shootings, police advise that members of the public who find themselves in the midst of one should "run away, hide, or fight back." This report was delivered by police spokesmen Capt. Obvious and Detective N.S. Sherlock   ( nytimes.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, mass shooting, Texas State University, Houston Police Department, Columbine High School, Holocaust survivors, Virginia Tech, Seung-Hui Cho  
•       •       •

2231 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 Apr 2013 at 7:53 PM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



231 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-04-06 09:34:25 PM  

Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: As a professional internet tough guy, I would stare the bastard down, make a smart-ass remark, and put a bullet through his forehead without raising my pulse.


If you were a real internet tough guy, your intelligence and moral superiority by themselves would be enough to overpower the shooter. All you would have to do is point out to him that the second amendment to the Constitution was the illegitimate creation of a bunch of white male slaveowners and that you and he were in a "gun free zone" -- and the gunman would instantly drop his weapon in shame and flee the building.
 
2013-04-06 09:35:26 PM  

Silly Jesus: Let me get this straight.  You're suggesting I get the hell out of Dodge, how, exactly?  I'm in a classroom cowering in the corner with the kids and a guy with a gun is in the doorway and my options are what?  Teleport?


If policy is 'when you hear gunshots and there's an exit away from them, TAKE IT', you live. If not, you die. Maybe you die with a gun in your hand, maybe you die empty-handed, but odds are you die either way. That's why you're called a 'victim'. 

You can NEVER prevent someone from being victimized. It's impossible. You will never be totally safe. Accept it. 

And then look at the odds: if every teacher in this country has a gun in the classroom, more kids will die by accident from those guns than will ever be saved by them, by a factor of ten. It's a statistical inevitability.
 
2013-04-06 09:37:25 PM  

Silly Jesus: Let me get this straight.  You're suggesting I get the hell out of Dodge, how, exactly?  I'm in a classroom cowering in the corner with the kids and a guy with a gun is in the doorway and my options are what?  Teleport?


Reading the article,

Hiding turns out to be the WORST option.  Two classrooms tried that, nearly all died.

A teacher who was also a holocaust survivor advised that the students go out the windows while he held the door shot.  Result:  He died, but "many of the students survived", only 3 hurt by gunfire.

Another classroom they barricaded the door with a heavy desk, ALL survived there.

One thing about carrying - I'm not going to suggest 100% carry rate.  Let's say it's 10% or so - 3 people armed in a 30 person classroom.  While some spree killers have worn armor, none have worn head armor that I know of.  Even with armor, being shot HURTS.

The moment a defender deploys his or her firearm in defense, it has transformed from a shooting gallery - accuracy near 100%, into a firefight - accuracy around 15%, 40% for highly trained individuals.  That ALONE will save lives.  You're also depending on the spree killer being able to accurately spot and engage those 3 people out of 30.

He's still likely to shoot a few people, but it's generally going to cut down on the bodies quite a bit.
 
2013-04-06 09:38:35 PM  

DrExplosion: The most reliable way to stop someone is to make them dead, and guns do a fantastic job of allowing the physically inferior to do so without training obsessively


No.
 
2013-04-06 09:40:26 PM  

Gulper Eel: Libs only go to them fancy independent thee-atres with the subtitles and the French and the lesbians with hairy armpits and Michael Moore.


lel lh3.ggpht.com
 
2013-04-06 09:40:48 PM  

Zeb Hesselgresser: whistleridge:  The whole US was heavily armed once. It became increasingly less so over time, not because we became cowardly or weak, but because it made sense . .

huh?


It's not that hard a concept. Consider:

200 years ago, probably every non-black adult male in the United States owned at least one gun. 100 years ago, it was probably 60 or 70%. Today, it's just over 30%. And those 30% are very disproportionately skewed towards whites and towards certain geographic regions of the country. And if the tendency wasn't towards the few remaining gun owners to have veritable arsenals, the overall number would be way down too. 

In short: as we have pacified and tamed our land, gun have become less and less necessary, and people no longer have them because they no longer need them - the damn things are expensive, dangerous, a pain in the ass to maintain, and for 95% of the population, utterly unnecessary. In short, it made sense to disarm.
 
2013-04-06 09:40:53 PM  

mr0x: Ennuipoet: I am no gun nut, but I was taught in the cop school that cover and concealment were the first rules of not being killed during a shootout. So, if I were to find myself armed and in a mass shooting, first I would scream, cry, shiat myself, hide under a dead body and then maybe, if I had a clear shot, I would shoot at the rampaging gun nut with the semi-auto chugging rounds into the pre-school class.

I am nothing if not a realist.


THIS!

A mass shooter has a bulletproof vest, semi-automatic weapons etc and all you have is a dinky little concealable weapon. You send one bullet his way and he sends a dozen your way, focusing the fire on you.


I know you're trying to seem smart by throwing around buzzwords like "semi-automatic" and "concealable," but you obviously have no idea what you're talking about. If you did, you'd realize that the majority of modern handguns are also semi-automatic, and that even a century-old double-action revolver has the same effective rate of fire - keep pulling the trigger and exactly one bullet will come out each time until there are no more bullets.

"Bulletproof" vests are also incredibly rare even in mass shootings. I put the word "bulletproof" in quotes because the soft body armor worn by police can only stop (most) pistol rounds. Even the least-powerful of rifle cartridges (such as the 5.56 round fired by the terrifying AR-15) can easily penetrate this armor. Only ballistic plates can reliably stop rifle rounds, and those are both heavy and extremely expensive.

In the event that the shooter does have decent body armor, yes. A concealed handgun is unlikely to kill him by hitting him in the torso. But bullets can still cause blunt trauma, and hoping for a headshot is still better than hoping he runs out of ammo before he gets to you.
 
2013-04-06 09:40:59 PM  

DrExplosion: First, I would like to argue against your "reality" of home defense.Pepper spray is an unreliable method of subduing an attacker


Actually, the junkies are the ones I'd expect it to work best against. Gang bangers planning to do a real home invasion may bull through, but a junkie or high school delinquent would get the fark out of dodge and find a better target.

But my reality was more on the fact that a gun in my house is more likely to be used by one of my kids to commit suicide than to ever scare off an attacker (far more likely in the low-crime neighborhood I live in). And that's ignoring the second-tier statistic that it'd be used to accidentally kill a family member mistaken for a home invader.

I would like to see other non-leathal weapons legalized too. I'm pissed that in NYC I can't carry a taser. I'm baffled as to why they're illegal. Hell, as options go I'd rather be mugged by a guy with a taser than a knife.
 
2013-04-06 09:41:53 PM  

o5iiawah: Princess Ryans Knickers: And in not one of the mass shootings over the past 30 years was it stopped by a bystander with a gun. Tackling after running out of ammo, yes. Police intervention, yes. Shooter kills self. Never by a person carrying.

The Clackamas mall shooter offed himself after a CCW drew on him.  He was in the midst of monkeying around with the charging handle on his AR after one of those evil, scary drum mags failed like they usually do.

So yes, the reason CCW holders dont stop many spree shooters is because the spree shooter is usually stopped after 1 or 2 killed.


Yeah, I remember him.  His name was Nick Meli, and the only person who could verify the story was... Nick Meli.  Confirmation bias really farks with your critical thinking skills, doesn't it?  Retard.
 
2013-04-06 09:43:09 PM  

Lsherm: Fano: I thought hiding then fighting back was murder 1 with malice aforethought.

I don't think it's murder if the attacker is still shooting, regardless of whether or not you hid first.  Maybe he discovered your hiding spot?  Then what?


Well then, you get what you deserve. God hates campers.
 
2013-04-06 09:44:07 PM  

Firethorn: One thing about carrying - I'm not going to suggest 100% carry rate.  Let's say it's 10% or so - 3 people armed in a 30 person classroom.


What do you expect the annual accidental body count to be from that level of carrying? Bearing in mind that wall-to-wall coverage aside, school shooting are vanishingly rare, I really don't see how you could suggest with a straight face that accidental shootings wouldn't be an order of magnitude worse if you're putting a million guns in classrooms.
 
2013-04-06 09:44:57 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Lsherm: Fano: I thought hiding then fighting back was murder 1 with malice aforethought.

I don't think it's murder if the attacker is still shooting, regardless of whether or not you hid first.  Maybe he discovered your hiding spot?  Then what?

Then "he takes the gun from your hand and shoots you with it".


That's why I don't fark with the jesus
 
2013-04-06 09:45:22 PM  

Surpheon: DrExplosion: First, I would like to argue against your "reality" of home defense.Pepper spray is an unreliable method of subduing an attacker

Actually, the junkies are the ones I'd expect it to work best against. Gang bangers planning to do a real home invasion may bull through, but a junkie or high school delinquent would get the fark out of dodge and find a better target.

But my reality was more on the fact that a gun in my house is more likely to be used by one of my kids to commit suicide than to ever scare off an attacker (far more likely in the low-crime neighborhood I live in). And that's ignoring the second-tier statistic that it'd be used to accidentally kill a family member mistaken for a home invader.

I would like to see other non-leathal weapons legalized too. I'm pissed that in NYC I can't carry a taser. I'm baffled as to why they're illegal. Hell, as options go I'd rather be mugged by a guy with a taser than a knife.


Hell, if you just give up your valuables to the first person who demands them, it wouldn't matter if they had a knife, taser or a flame thrower.
 
2013-04-06 09:46:33 PM  
Is it just me or does Silly Jesus basically just run around shiatting in every thread just to be a total dickhole?
 
2013-04-06 09:46:37 PM  

whistleridge: And then look at the odds: if every teacher in this country has a gun in the classroom, more kids will die by accident from those guns than will ever be saved by them, by a factor of ten. It's a statistical inevitability.


I certainly wouldn't arm every teacher.  I'd make it a bit like armed airline pilots.  Even a 1% carry rate will affect the decisions of a mass shooter.  I'd certainly encourage them to be trained.
 
2013-04-06 09:48:10 PM  
mr0x:A mass shooter has a bulletproof vest, semi-automatic weapons etc and all you have is a dinky little concealable weapon. You send one bullet his way and he sends a dozen your way,

I don't think you are talking out of your ass, but it sure sounds that way.  There are some serious CCWs around.
 
2013-04-06 09:48:30 PM  
Spirit Hammer:
Hell, if you just give up your valuables to the first person who demands them, it wouldn't matter if they had a knife, taser or a flame thrower.

Valuables? Of course I'd give up my valuable if I was mugged by someone making a credible threat of severe bodily injury. By credible, I mean more than some tough guy in a relatively busy parking lot threatening to fark me up if I don't give him $20. But if a knife is pulled or something, I never carry any mere valuable worth the time off work even a minor stab wound would require.
 
2013-04-06 09:49:11 PM  
if you have legs and can run then you are never blocking an emergency exit
 
2013-04-06 09:53:55 PM  

whistleridge: In short: as we have pacified and tamed our land, gun have become less and less necessary, and people no longer have them because they no longer need them - the damn things are expensive, dangerous, a pain in the ass to maintain, and for 95% of the population, utterly unnecessary. In short, it made sense to disarm.


You're forgetting that there are at least three legitimate functions of firearms: target shooting, hunting, and self- defence. At long as any of these functions are an ongoing consideration, it makes sense to own a firearm (and no, they aren't particularly difficult to maintain).
 
2013-04-06 09:56:11 PM  

Firethorn: whistleridge: And then look at the odds: if every teacher in this country has a gun in the classroom, more kids will die by accident from those guns than will ever be saved by them, by a factor of ten. It's a statistical inevitability.

I certainly wouldn't arm every teacher.  I'd make it a bit like armed airline pilots.  Even a 1% carry rate will affect the decisions of a mass shooter.  I'd certainly encourage them to be trained.


If there were a practical means, I would encourage it. But there isn't. 

Think about it: kids are curious above all other things, and the ONE THING they would be most curious about in a classroom would be the teacher's gun. It doesn't matter how many lessons and safety talks you give on it, some kid is ALWAYS going to try and get to it. It's human nature. 

So instead of just freely diving into the classroom and trying to focus on things like teaching verbs and keeping Jenny Closton from eating paste again, that teacher has to do one of two things: always pack, and always keep an eye on the gun, or lock it up and never ever ever take it out. 

If she's always packing, it's heavy, it can get oil on clothes, it's annoying, and it's generally not worth it. If there are about 5 million teachers in the US, in the past 10 years maybe 10 of them have had any demonstrable need for a gun. In that same time frame, how many accidents and problems do you think would arise from having call it 100,000 extra guns in our classrooms? Also: who would pay for these guns? The ammo? The training? Schools can barely afford photocopier paper, and teachers already use a huge chunk of their too-meager salaries to buy supplies. That's a BIG expense that neither can really afford.

And let's be honest: teachers tend to be sweet kid-loving types, not hard-nosed gun toting types. That gun would get locked up, never tended to, and eventually taken home and left there because they needed that storage space for extra textbooks or something. 

At the end of the day, the safest thing is to do what is already being done: have specially trained security guards, and let the teachers teach.
 
2013-04-06 09:59:19 PM  

skozlaw: Is it just me or does Silly Jesus basically just run around shiatting in every thread just to be a total dickhole?


This. I found myself agreeing with him in one thread and suddenly he was just screaming abuse and worshipping his own cleverness. I was glad I didn't get myself into that mess.
 
2013-04-06 10:01:00 PM  

I_Am_Weasel: I don't like any of those options.  I need more.


Well, there is also "DIE".
 
2013-04-06 10:01:09 PM  

Ennuipoet: Fano: I thought hiding then fighting back was murder 1 with malice aforethought.

I am no gun nut, but I was taught in the cop school that cover and concealment were the first rules of not being killed during a shootout.  So, if I were to find myself armed and in a mass shooting, first I would scream, cry, shiat myself, hide under a dead body and then maybe, if I had a clear shot, I would shoot at the rampaging gun nut with the semi-auto chugging rounds into the pre-school class.

I am nothing if not a realist.


You should ditch the gun, because the unarmed are unstoppable nerves-of-steel mag-swap interruption machines.
 
2013-04-06 10:01:13 PM  

Surpheon: DrExplosion: First, I would like to argue against your "reality" of home defense.Pepper spray is an unreliable method of subduing an attacker

Actually, the junkies are the ones I'd expect it to work best against. Gang bangers planning to do a real home invasion may bull through, but a junkie or high school delinquent would get the fark out of dodge and find a better target.


Eh, I've heard too many horror stories from my cop friends and family members about drunks and junkies shrugging off pepper spray or joint locks to trust my life to the stuff, especially when I've personally had a 100% success rate with firearms. Most criminals are going to wait until the house is empty before they break in, but junkies are less likely to think that rationally and more likely to be under the influence of something allowing them to ignore pain.

But my reality was more on the fact that a gun in my house is more likely to be used by one of my kids to commit suicide than to ever scare off an attacker (far more likely in the low-crime neighborhood I live in). And that's ignoring the second-tier statistic that it'd be used to accidentally kill a family member mistaken for a home invader.

Fair enough. I may disagree with the conclusion you've reached with those statistics, but I'm certainly not going to try to force you to get a gun.

I would like to see other non-leathal weapons legalized too. I'm pissed that in NYC I can't carry a taser. I'm baffled as to why they're illegal. Hell, as options go I'd rather be mugged by a guy with a taser than a knife.

I agree completely. NYC is a farking police state. I wouldn't be able to tolerate living in an area where the cops mentioned upthread were trusted with my protection but I was not.
 
2013-04-06 10:01:43 PM  

EvilRacistNaziFascist: You're forgetting that there are at least three legitimate functions of firearms: target shooting, hunting, and self- defence. At long as any of these functions are an ongoing consideration, it makes sense to own a firearm (and no, they aren't particularly difficult to maintain).


Horseshiat. There is only one valid reason to own a gun: you enjoy shooting, and it is your Constitutionally-protected right to do so. What you listed are three  rationalizations

And sorry, but you're not being very realistic: guns require some degree of maintenance, therefore, by modern standards, they are difficult to maintain. It's easy for you, but you should not assume that means it will be easy for others. At least not in my experience.

How many people do you know who can't be bothered to get their oil changed, or take their computer to Best Buy for the Geek Squad because upgrading their OS is just too much work? Do you  reallywant that person firing something that, if not properly maintained, could take off a hand? Do you  reallywant them doing that around your kid?
 
2013-04-06 10:02:43 PM  

prollynot: if you have legs and can run then you are never blocking an emergency exit


Hi Mitch!
 
2013-04-06 10:05:30 PM  

whistleridge: So instead of just freely diving into the classroom and trying to focus on things like teaching verbs and keeping Jenny Closton from eating paste again, that teacher has to do one of two things: always pack, and always keep an eye on the gun, or lock it up and never ever ever take it out.


Good point, students would shoot themselves left and right.

And let's be honest: teachers tend to be sweet kid-loving types, not hard-nosed gun toting types.

Uh, not always...
 
2013-04-06 10:06:34 PM  

FARK rebel soldier: skozlaw: Is it just me or does Silly Jesus basically just run around shiatting in every thread just to be a total dickhole?

This. I found myself agreeing with him in one thread and suddenly he was just screaming abuse and worshipping his own cleverness. I was glad I didn't get myself into that mess.


The ignore function exists for a reason. And it's him.
 
2013-04-06 10:07:31 PM  

dfenstrate: BigLuca: serial_crusher: What happens if the dude tries to shoot up a swimming pool inside of a gun free zone?  Can't fight back without your gun, running is strictly not allowed around the pool, and there's not really anywhere to hide at a pool

That's why I only swim with fat kids.

Mythbusters tested this. Just go underwater a few feet and hope the shooter wastes his ammo before you come up. Bullets lose all their energy very rapidly in water. Any bullet, rifle or handgun.


Rifle bullets disintegrate almost immediately, iirc.
 
2013-04-06 10:08:46 PM  

FARK rebel soldier: DrExplosion: The most reliable way to stop someone is to make them dead, and guns do a fantastic job of allowing the physically inferior to do so without training obsessively

No.


I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you don't think there are better ways for someone to kill a physically superior attacker. I will also assume that your issue is with me saying that firearms don't require obsessive training to use effectively in self-defense. If this is the case, I will go on to assume that we simply have different definitions of "obsessive" or that you are a lousy shot.
 
2013-04-06 10:10:41 PM  

FARK rebel soldier: whistleridge: So instead of just freely diving into the classroom and trying to focus on things like teaching verbs and keeping Jenny Closton from eating paste again, that teacher has to do one of two things: always pack, and always keep an eye on the gun, or lock it up and never ever ever take it out.

Good point, students would shoot themselves left and right.


Not left and right, but statistically, probably at least 1 or 2 accidents per year would be inevitable. And you just know the first time there was a fatal accident, the administrators in that district would come under huge and immediate pressure to reform/do away with the program, and it would be locked down to the point of being useless AND it would cost more money. 

And let's be honest: teachers tend to be sweet kid-loving types, not hard-nosed gun toting types.

Uh, not always...


Hence 'tend'. I was a teacher for a few years, and I have a number of friends who still are. No, anecdote isn't evidence, but I did notice a generally tendency between nicer/sweeter people and younger grades. The hardasses tended to teach high school. :p
 
2013-04-06 10:19:13 PM  

RedPhoenix122: Krymson Tyde: RedPhoenix122: Krymson Tyde: No praying? According to Facebook this shiat wouldn't happen if we prayed more.

Also armed everyone.

Yeah, that too. Then we'd be living in a good, honest God-fearing utopia.

Add in racism and you have the South.


Hmm.

All K-12 shootings in the US this millennium with two or more dead victims (that is, not counting shooter suicide):
Connecticut (26 dead), Minnesota (8 dead), Pennsylvania (5 dead), Ohio (3 dead), California (2 dead), and Minnesota (2 dead).

Not a single southern state in the bunch.  Maybe you should try more prayer, more guns, and more racism?
 
2013-04-06 10:19:28 PM  

fusillade762: FARK rebel soldier: skozlaw: Is it just me or does Silly Jesus basically just run around shiatting in every thread just to be a total dickhole?

This. I found myself agreeing with him in one thread and suddenly he was just screaming abuse and worshipping his own cleverness. I was glad I didn't get myself into that mess.

The ignore function exists for a reason. And it's him.


I prefer to favorite in many different colors. It makes the threads much more interesting looking. Sorry colorblind people.
 
2013-04-06 10:20:57 PM  

stealthd: Nice to have some national media coverage on this. For far too long, what was missing was the emphasis on 'run the fark away'. It was hard to work against the 'lock-downs are the only legit technique we teach' to something more reasonable.

So you can have: Run Hide Fight
Or
Get Out, Hide Out, Take Out (my favourite)
Or
Some other variant.

/getting a kick, etc...


"Lock Downs", Zero Tolerance" and "All Violence Is Bad (unless it is the government doing it to you)" are the transnational progressive version of "Abstinence Only" sex education. They know it is bullshiat and doesn't work but it is the "approved" position so they will preach it religiously and pretend to believe it.
 
2013-04-06 10:22:13 PM  

whistleridge: Horseshiat. There is only one valid reason to own a gun: you enjoy shooting, and it is your Constitutionally-protected right to do so. What you listed are three  rationalizations.


What you're saying would be totally accurate if applied to another American, but I don't live in the US. My country doesn't have an equivalent to the Second Amendment, so our right to gun ownership rests on a more philosophical basis, which is that rights are not granted by governments to the people but vice- versa; free people delegate to their rulers certain powers in order that the latter may act on their behalf, and one of those powers is the right to use violent means in order to protect the citizenry. Now in the event that the State cannot or will not protect the citizenry with its force of arms (which unfortunately for logistical reasons is most of the time), it is clearly the right of the citizenry to use those same means to defend itself.

And sorry, but you're not being very realistic: guns require some degree of maintenance, therefore, by modern standards, they are difficult to maintain. It's easy for you, but you should not assume that means it will be easy for others. At least not in my experience.

I'm a relative newbie to firearms, but I haven't found their upkeep to be exceptionally challenging. It's much easier to clean a gun than to fix a computer or perform maintenance on your car (to use the examples you provided).

Do you  reallywant that person firing something that, if not properly maintained, could take off a hand? Do you  reallywant them doing that around your kid?

Guns can't fire anything unless a round is in the chamber -- which to any gun owner should be pretty goddamn obvious -- so if the most basic precautions are observed, cleaning a gun won't pose the slightest danger to anyone, at least not anymore than changing your car's windshield washer fluid will pose the threat of having your kids run over in the driveway.
 
2013-04-06 10:22:51 PM  
I intend to finish the game.
 
2013-04-06 10:22:56 PM  
We need laws... laws... laws. Laws are the only way to stop a crook.
 
2013-04-06 10:23:52 PM  

Deep Contact: Fight back with what? Harsh language?


Well, it sure would be nice if we had some GRENADES.
 
2013-04-06 10:24:40 PM  
Alien:Resurrection had the same cast as Firefly; discuss.
 
2013-04-06 10:26:45 PM  

Schroedinger's Glory Hole: o5iiawah: Princess Ryans Knickers: And in not one of the mass shootings over the past 30 years was it stopped by a bystander with a gun. Tackling after running out of ammo, yes. Police intervention, yes. Shooter kills self. Never by a person carrying.

The Clackamas mall shooter offed himself after a CCW drew on him.  He was in the midst of monkeying around with the charging handle on his AR after one of those evil, scary drum mags failed like they usually do.

So yes, the reason CCW holders dont stop many spree shooters is because the spree shooter is usually stopped after 1 or 2 killed.

Yeah, I remember him.  His name was Nick Meli, and the only person who could verify the story was... Nick Meli.  Confirmation bias really farks with your critical thinking skills, doesn't it?  Retard.


http://www.oregonlive.com/clackamascounty/index.ssf/2012/12/security _g uard_said_he_had_rob.html

Authorities confirmed Monday that Meli was seen during the incident, gun drawn, near the entrance to Macy's inside the mall.

Seems the people who say he was there with his gun drawn was him, and bystanders, who corroberated his story to the police, who were satisfied with the testimony and included it in their report.

Like a cat chasing a laser pen...you think you're the smartest person in the room.
 
2013-04-06 10:38:14 PM  
CSB:
My dad served two years in the army during Vietnam, and later during the early 70's he worked for USPS.  One day he was in a Saginaw HS dropping off some mail when a suspended kid showed up outside and started shooting into the office.  My dad dropped down behind a perfectly good metal desk while the staff poured into the hall.  One of them yelled for him to follow, and he replied "No thanks, I am just fine right here."

No one was hit, but if the gunman came around inside my dad would still have a route out.  Maybe having real training would make more sense than just general statements.
 
2013-04-06 10:42:12 PM  

Surpheon: Firethorn: One thing about carrying - I'm not going to suggest 100% carry rate.  Let's say it's 10% or so - 3 people armed in a 30 person classroom.

What do you expect the annual accidental body count to be from that level of carrying? Bearing in mind that wall-to-wall coverage aside, school shooting are vanishingly rare, I really don't see how you could suggest with a straight face that accidental shootings wouldn't be an order of magnitude worse if you're putting a million guns in classrooms.


Gah, statistics are hard to come by.  I was trying to find how many accidental shootings police officers have each year; just to give us a ballpark estimate.  I can't find it.  I did find that the rate right now was 10 deaths per 100k in 2004 using a CDC source, but that's from everything.  That's roughly 30k/year, and about 50% lower than vehicle deaths.
 Meanwhile there's about a million police officers and they kill ~600 people a year, not all of them with firearms, and about 400 of them justified(even if I don't justify as many as they do).


So you're looking at ~200 people dead from negligent shootings by about a million guns, whereas spree killings seem to be about 30 a year.

In order to determine that you'd get fewer deaths, more deaths, an OOM more deaths, etc...  Would depend on the training.  While police would presumably be better trained than our non-professional CCW people, said CCW people are also not pulling SWAT style raids where people tend to get shot by police the most.

I think we're going to have to wait until some more studies have happened.  I only found 3 stories of negligent injuries on the part of CCW holders, for example.
 
2013-04-06 10:42:39 PM  

whistleridge: guns require some degree of maintenance, therefore, by modern standards, they are difficult to maintain.


a gun that sits in a safe, so long as it was put away cleaned and oiled, should be oiled once or twice a year.  The gun I shoot the most, my Mosin-Nagant takes about 15 mins to clean.  There's youtube videos of guys burying glocks in mud, digging them up a year later, hosing them off with a garden hose and emptying 2x 20-rd mags with no failures.  I think you're humping something that isn't really a problem.
 
2013-04-06 10:48:16 PM  

zvoidx: I wonder if everyone carried a (legal) air horn and, upon seeing a shooter with a gun, everyone directed them all at the shooter at the same time. It may be unbearable to the point of having to drop the gun football.


Try an NFL game in the "special fans" section.  I believe they think they are going to cause a fumble if they unite their trumpets of His holy will.

/maybe vuvululuzases or what the fluck ever hosepipe + funnel
 
2013-04-06 10:52:03 PM  
Mass shootings are so common these days, I tell ya.

I have personally lived through seven mass shootings in the past year alone, and they're scary.

Worse than driving in snow.
 
2013-04-06 10:52:22 PM  
August, 1999. I was not even 21 yet, and had only one rifle to my name, a Bushmaster AR15 clone (XM15). About 8pm, heard lots of yelling downstairs (I was in my upstairs studio). Then, shots. I loaded and turned off the tv. Went outside to the top of the stairs leading to my apt and its two adjacent ones. Wanted to make sure I could control who was coming up. Mostly hid at the top, behind the railing alongside the stairs. I heard about another 2 shots, and then nothing more. Police sirens about 2-3 minutes later.  Found out much later that someone had fired shots at a nearby apartment building. Nobody was hit (I think).

Did I stop the shooter? No.
Did I save anyone's life? No.
Did I even use my rifle to defend myself? No.

But I'll tell you one thing. I sure as hell felt a lot safer. So did my neighbor, who saw me sitting there. He got his baseball bat and hung out with me there until cops had the whole 4x4 blocks locked down with chopper overhead and all.

I'd like to think that I have what it takes to stop a murderer if it comes to it. But if nothing else, I am responsible for my own safety - and I did so without depending on the vagaries of others.
 
2013-04-06 10:52:44 PM  

o5iiawah: whistleridge: guns require some degree of maintenance, therefore, by modern standards, they are difficult to maintain.

a gun that sits in a safe, so long as it was put away cleaned and oiled, should be oiled once or twice a year.  The gun I shoot the most, my Mosin-Nagant takes about 15 mins to clean.  There's youtube videos of guys burying glocks in mud, digging them up a year later, hosing them off with a garden hose and emptying 2x 20-rd mags with no failures.  I think you're humping something that isn't really a problem.


Yeah, but Glocks don't rust because they are made of plastic and cost more than you make in a month.

/don't worry, this is snark.
 
2013-04-06 10:52:48 PM  
There's a recognition in these 'active shooter' situations that there may be a need for citizens to act in a way that perhaps they haven't been trained for or equipped to deal with."

That's the "no shiat" part.  If the "obvious" tag was meant to imply that everyone already has a strategically ordered, multi-step plan in place for this type of events then I'd have to invite you to come to planet Earth from where ever you are and experience a day of reality with our fellow species.  Because your ivory tower has achieved orbit and beyond.
 
2013-04-06 10:57:18 PM  
I'll have to update my list.

1. Run away
2. Hide
3. Make a cake
4. Fight back
 
2013-04-06 10:57:42 PM  

whistleridge: Think about it: kids are curious above all other things, and the ONE THING they would be most curious about in a classroom would be the teacher's gun. It doesn't matter how many lessons and safety talks you give on it, some kid is ALWAYS going to try and get to it. It's human nature.


This depends on the level of school, elementary through college.  In my 3 person example, I should probably make clear that I was considering a COLLEGE classroom at that time, though 1% teacher carry rate could carry down.  It shouldn't be an issue middle school and on.

For elementary school, even above it, it's called a 'retention holster'.  A kid should not be able to draw the weapon before the teacher can stop the attempt.

how many accidents and problems do you think would arise from having call it 100,000 extra guns in our classrooms? Also: who would pay for these guns? The ammo? The training? Schools can barely afford photocopier paper, and teachers already use a huge chunk of their too-meager salaries to buy supplies. That's a BIG expense that neither can really afford.


About 1 accident going by CCW stats.
Payment - I'd have the teacher obtain the gun.  Part of only having the 'most interested' 1% carry is that they probably already own a suitable firearm.  Ammo - ditto.  Training - I'm picturing a 50/50 split.  At 1% arm rate you could almost confine it only to former military members, though I wouldn't do that.  Make the program only open to those that have or obtain CCW permits on their own; follow up with a school specific training that shouldn't be too expensive.  One expense you didn't mention was safe storage - if a teacher needs to disarm, I'd have a discrete gun safe installed at school expense in a area not normally accessed by students.  Call that about $10k for professional installation.  You can also use it to store confiscated weapons and such until the police arrive.

It's not as expensive as you might think given that many schools are already hiring armed 'security officers' who would need the above(and more) anyways, we're just including the interested teachers as well.  Some schools are even hiring actual police.  IE they pay the officer's salary to have him or her permanently assigned to the school system, but the police department still provides the authority, training, equipment, etc...
 
Displayed 50 of 231 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report