Posted on 02/21/2018 6:25:59 AM PST by Kaslin
Our schools need armed security and hardened entry and exit points. These people must be highly trained and able to shoot under pressure. No laws will keep this from happening. The only way to stop a school shooter is by killing him before he starts his killing spree.
Two pronged problem. A) Mental health in High Schools to pick out and get help for problems-—Rebuild Mental Hospitals. Don’t let these kids fall though the cracks. They are being tossed away. B) a national data base for troubled people. All groups, schools, local police, public, FBI etc... to list and investigate people with problems so they can’t get a legal gun.
My suggestions are, (1) make it a go-to-prison offense to threaten mass-killing on a website or in any other way, (2) all law enforcement agencies must communicate, but local authorities have the primary responsibility for translating evidence into apprehensions, (3) be aware that a group of people gathered together is always a potential mass-killing target.
Oprah and George Clooney.
Wonder how many of those people in the initial photo were paid to be there.
No we don’t.
It would be fun to be on the team tasked with removing the guns from those that family members deem “dangerous”.
Well, Ben, I'm not sure you've looked into the full consequences of such a facially prudent idea. One has only to look at Domestic Violence restraining orders to see that this process can be egregiously abused, e.g. the bitter and vengeful spouse who obtains such an order and places the partner under a restrictive cloud for months before seeing a court that is sympathetic to the aggrieved petitioner.
Under such license to accuse:
- The Police arrive to perform a full rummaging search for any weapons that are listed in the order (or found in the search.)
- The court hearing could be months away and possibly delayed for over a year.
- The Defendant will be barred from many jobs and much civil access until the matter is resolved (if resolved in his/her favor.)
- Try getting the confiscated weapons back from a police department that will only respond to the most specific of court orders, if even then.
I know personally that if such a rule existed, there are family members, several who are SJWs, who would gleefully employ such an order against my right to bear arms.
agreed, wide open to abuse with little or no consequences for the abuser and the agencies.
President French comes up with a dumb solution.
LOL, always the first thing that comes to mind.
I find it interesting that we don’t have these shootings in inner city schools, for the very reason that they DO have much higher security at entrances.
And one problem with this whole thing is that it is a but like that “Cops are shooting unarmed blacks” thing. i.e. Social media and the news make it appear to be a real problem when it really is nothing like people perceive it.
Most people’s opinion does not jibe with the stats. For example, cops shoot far more whites than blacks and, in similar situations, are more likely to shoot a white than a black man. Further, It only happens a few dozen times nationwide in a year.
And regarding school shooting victims, there are over 100,000 public schools with an average of 500-600 students (or more) in each one. i.e. statistically, your risk of getting shot in school, if you are a public school student, is lower than your chance of getting killed travelling to and from school.
But also, how do you set up metal detectors and armed guards at 100,000 schools when the risk of this happening at any particular school is so small as to not be a concern - until it happens in YOUR school.
My take on this whole thing is that we really don’t need to do ANYTHING other than allow staff and parents to carry at school as they are allowed to carry anywhere else. That is the cost effective solution. Checkpoints are killing a fly with a shotgun.
i.e. my option 1 is the only practical solution here of the two I proposed. And those are the only two that are worth discussing, regarding what can be done AT the school.
“We have to do something.” is reactionary and ignorant. “We must solve this problem” is more responsible.
Identify dangerous mental patients. Prevent them from owning weapons. Keep seriously disturbed mental cases out of normal schools and workplaces. Fill up mental institutions.
“In the 50’s we had kids driving to school with guns in gun racks in their pickups. We did NOT have all these massacres.”
We had guns in gun racks in the mid ‘70s. Didn’t even need to lock the truck.
There aren’t any mental institutions. Thank the ACLU. And a few Hollyweird movies back in the 50’s.
It used to be that every now and then the cops would sweep up the human debris and drop it off at the funny far. After a few weeks of sleeping on a mattress out of the rain and not being drunk all day, many people returned to civilized society, at least for a while.
But, a person cannot be involuntarily detained unless one has already harmed themselves or others or such harm is imminent.
Hence, wackos on the streets.
“I agree with improvements needed to get guns out of the hands of the mentally ill, but they don’t even want to discuss mental illness.”
Multiple problems there. Look at the $billions made keeping boys on Ritalin, etc. And it isn’t just the money, it keeps them from having inspiration. Not to mention any serious discussion of mental illness would have to call in to question the left’s love affair with sexual devients: homos and trannies.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.