School shooting in Parkland, FL

[jalapeno_pretzel]

Wouldn't violence IN GENERAL be a health issue? Study the behavior & it's cause, not the object(s) utilized.

Yes, violence in general is a health issue, and it looks like they do investigate various areas of violence ... bullying violence, partner violence, etc. They just can't investigate it in any relation to firearms.

Maybe they should also only investigate transportation in general as it affects public health, and not cars, motorcycles, or bicycles specifically?

 

[Pea-n-Me]

Sounds like a sad history for the young man.

Reportedly he just lost his mother.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/b...g/fl-school-shooting-cruz-20180214-story.html

 

[luvsJack]

Oh, I wasn't saying you wanted to change the 2nd amendment. I was saying in a general sense that we aren't going to change it so we need to focus on other safety measures.

The shooter is said to have shot through the door glass from the hallway and then shot at the kids that were huddled by the teacher's desk. YMMV, but I would much rather my child find an immediate exterior exit and run away than hide behind a desk. And I suppose there could be 2 shooters like in Columbine, but even in that case the shooters stayed together inside the building. I'm sure there's been one because there's been so many, but I can't recall a school shooter ever waiting outside to shoot children as they exited to the outside (not the interior). The federal govt. has the money to fix the structure of schools to make them safer.

I'm all for armed guards in schools too. The safety officers in my daughter's school aren't armed. That's not even helpful in a situation like this. The federal govt. has the money to fund this too.

Anything we can do outside of the 2nd amendment is doable.

Oh! Ok, I was a bit confused!

Yeah I see what you are saying. In some classrooms at our high school a second exit would work but in many more I just don’t think it would. Too much area that would make them wide open to getting shot.

On our small cc campus we have 4, armed police officers and they are well trained in stuff like this. I honestly feel very safe at all times. And I deal with more angry students than anyone on campus. I honestly think every high school needs at least this many and they need the same training.

And knowing that a school shooter not far from me was stopped due to an armed administrator, just proves to me it’s a good idea to allow them to be armed.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Wouldn't violence IN GENERAL be a health issue? Study the behavior & it's cause, not the object(s) utilized.

This where I fall especially if you are doing the first initial study.

We just had a person go into a local Mexican restaurant where a man entered the restaurant and got into an altercation with an employee and ended up stabbing a person. However, the man was married to someone who used to work there. He walked in with a long knife and headed straight for the kitchen and then started chasing people and attempting to hurt anyone who was in his way.

It wouldn't make sense to study the ease of getting a knife or the knife in general..at least not in the beginning. It still wouldn't make sense in my mind to study it if it was a gun on the basis that it was a gun rather than what led the person to do what they did. There have been incidents of machetes used and hatchets, etc thoughout the country and time as well. Those don't make much sense to study them at the angle of the object used at least at first but rather what led the person to do what they did. However, by the basis of some of the thoughts of some here if it was a shooting that had occurred rather than a stabbing in the Mexican restaurant in my area the conversation would have been center on gun control primarily (though perhaps because it was just one person who ultimately got injured that would change the conversation IDK).

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Yes, violence in general is a health issue, and it looks like they do investigate various areas of violence ... bullying violence, partner violence, etc. They just can't investigate it in any relation to firearms.

Maybe they should also only investigate transportation in general as it affects public health, and not cars, motorcycles, or bicycles specifically?

No, they just can't approach it SPECIFIC to firearms.

 

[rickybobby]

I think the key is keeping guns out of the hands of troubled people. Mental health is a major issue in America at this time, and it needs to be in the discussion. Reports have been that the kids at the school had (jokingly) talked among themselves that if they were to have a school shooter, this guy would be the most likely candidate.

 

[jalapeno_pretzel]

No, they just can't approach it SPECIFIC to firearms.

And why is that? What is there to fear from a study? It will find teachers should all be armed and weapon free zones done away with, right?

 

[Gumbo4x4]

And why is that? What is there to fear from a study? It will find teachers should all be armed and weapon free zones done away with, right?

Of course not. It'll say the same thing the previous studies said.

 

[MamaBelle4]

Strongly disagree. Doing something just to do something does absolutely nothing. Let's do something that will actually help prevent these things from happening.

I don't think anyone is saying "nothing can be done, we simply have to live with this". I think they're saying "We don't know what can be done, and we shouldn't use emotions and knee jerk reactions just so it looks like we're doing something."

Let's start here:

Between 1994-2004, 56 school shootings. Assault rifle ban in effect. Overturned in 2004.

2005- present, 198 school shootings. Let's not pretend there's no correlation.

(Edited to correct my math)

 

[Happyinwonerland]

A bit over 16 years ago, a major weakness in our country's safety was breached. Because of this breach, 2,996 people lost their lives in a matter of hours. As a country, we banded together, developed policies to make air travel safer, and because of this, we haven't had a repeat attack on our airlines. The changes involved were difficult. It takes more time to go through screenings, some people have to jump through hoops to get on airplanes, but we have so far avoided another tragedy.

Why can't we do the same with guns?
Why are we losing 33,000 citizens, 2600 of them children, each year to gun violence, year after year? What does it take to admit a problem? What will it take for all sides of the debate to come together and work on a real solution?

 

[tarheelmjfan]

I can think of several ways to better protect our kids in school. Sadly, most states don't want to spend the money to properly educate our kids. They're definitely not going to be willing to spend what it takes to keep them safe. We need reassess our priorities.

 

[Hikergirl]

Let's start here:

Between 1994-2004, 56 school shootings. Assault rifle ban in effect. Overturned in 2004.

2005- present, 136 school shootings. Let's not pretend there's no correlation.

It expired in 2004, it was not overturned.
It banned 18 specific models, high capacity mags (among other things) but it was still perfectly legal to own an assault weapon that was manufactured before the ban was enacted. There were 1.5 million of those, and 24 million high capacity mags in the population at the time.

But, maybe you are correct, it is worth looking at.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Let's start here:

Between 1994-2004, 56 school shootings. Assault rifle ban in effect. Overturned in 2004.

2005- present, 136 school shootings. Let's not pretend there's no correlation.

That's REALLY oversimplified.

A) you're leaving out the PRE-ban rate that was even lower.

B) the ban wasn't really a ban at all. Manufacturers made minor cosmetic changes to the guns in their lineup in order to get around the ban. Pre-ban, ban era, and post-ban assault style weapons function EXACTLY the same. They only look different (and only slightly at that).

C) the homicide rate in the US is not higher today than 2004. In fact, it's lower.

D) the VAST majority of mass shootings (and firearms related homicides in general) are connected to handguns, not rifles.

 

[JaneBanks]

Why bother.

There will always be a reason...

 

[robinb]

It expired in 2004, it was not overturned.
It banned 18 specific models, high capacity mags (among other things) but it was still perfectly legal to own an assault weapon that was manufactured before the ban was enacted. There were 1.5 million of those, and 24 million high capacity mags in the population at the time.

But, maybe you are correct, it is worth looking at.

It would be interesting to see how many of the mass shootings after 2004 used weapons that would have been illegal previously but were purchased legally after the ban expired. How many people have died just because of the ban was not renewed?

 

[Hikergirl]

It would be interesting to see how many of the mass shootings after 2004 used weapons that would have been illegal previously but were purchased legally after the ban expired. How many people have died just because of the ban was not renewed?

We would first need to look at what weapons were used, they may not all have been what was considered assault weapons.
I'm not really sure how many states have their own ban other than mine, that is worth looking into too, if any of the shootings were in states with bans.

 

[MamaBelle4]

That's REALLY oversimplified.

A) you're leaving out the PRE-ban rate that was even lower.

B) the ban wasn't really a ban at all. Manufacturers made minor cosmetic changes to the guns in their lineup in order to get around the ban. Pre-ban, ban era, and post-ban assault style weapons function EXACTLY the same. They only look different (and only slightly at that).

C) the homicide rate in the US is not higher today than 2004. In fact, it's lower.

D) the VAST majority of mass shootings (and firearms related homicides in general) are connected to handguns, not rifles.

You know, maybe I am oversimplifying. I (and I'm sure you do too) remember the horror and terrible pain I felt after the Sandy Hook massacre. And nothing changed. And it continues. And nothing changes. And kids keep losing their lives. Innocent people are concerts. People at night clubs. Keep losing their lives for no reason.

Maybe instituting an assault rifle ban would do nothing. Fine. Let's try it for 10 years. If I'm wrong about it being effective, at all, I will personally send an "I'm sorry" letter to every gun enthusiast the assault ban inconvenienced for a decade.

 

[Happyinwonerland]

For those wondering about references for all the school shootings this year, I found this resource:

http://www.wkyt.com/content/news/WKYT-Interactive--2018-School-Shootings-474092833.html

 

[Hikergirl]

You know, maybe I am oversimplifying. I (and I'm sure you do too) remember the horror and terrible pain I felt after the Sandy Hook massacre. And nothing changed. And it continues. And nothing changes. And kids keep losing their lives. Innocent people are concerts. People at night clubs. Keep losing their lives for no reason.

Maybe instituting an assault rifle ban would do nothing. Fine. Let's try it for 10 years. If I'm wrong about it being effective, at all, I will personally send an "I'm sorry" letter to every gun enthusiast the assault ban inconvenienced for a decade.

Again, that is not true that nothing was done. It may not have been at the federal level but things at the state levels have been done.
Maybe instead of everyone expecting those in Congress to start acting when it is clear you don't believe they will, people should go to their State legislators and go from there. They do have the power to make gun laws within their states.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

It would be interesting to see how many of the mass shootings after 2004 used weapons that would have been illegal previously but were purchased legally after the ban expired. How many people have died just because of the ban was not renewed?

Pretty much none. As mentioned before, there's no functional difference between a pre ban gun, a ban era gun, and a post ban gun. The ban was all about cosmetics and hit a tiny fraction of the firearms on the market. AR-15's were sold all during the ban years. Moreover, the ban itself only applied to new firearms. Existing guns and magazines were grandfathered in.

And to add complexity, the worst recent shootings have involved shooters who stopped to reload 20 or more times without interruption. So, it would be very difficult to "prove" a smaller magazine would have saved lives. On the flip side, those who have used firearms in self defense would have a similarly difficult chore "proving" their large capacity magazines helped save them.