A "common sense" proposal that will piss off both sides

[Shangobango]

Well as I have caught up with the comments this morning, I see that the discussion ultimately turned a little tribal. Meh, that’s the world we live in.

What does bother me a little is that so many are willing to give up one freedom for another,curtailing law abiding peoples access to firearms as opposed to actually securing schools for example. I am not sure how securing schools constitutes a loss of freedom and more gun control doesn’t?

Overall though, this discussion has been thought provoking for me, and I don’t think it is a bad thing to listen to views that I may not necessarily agree with and try to see other people’s perspectives. I think that was probably what @VikingsGuy was going for when he posted it, and if that is the case, thank you sir.

 

[ImBillT]

I don't think @Hammsolo is so worried about teachers going postal on their students as he is that in a high-stress school shooter situation, a teacher may or may not respond in a rational manner. Think about the dumb stuff people do when confronted with a big buck while hunting, and that's not even a life or death situation. How do you think it would go over if there was a school shooting situation (or a perceived shooter situation) and a teacher killed a student?

QQ

He used a teacher decking a kid as an example. How was I not supposed to assume that he thought the situation would have been worse if teachers were allowed to be armed?

 

[ImBillT]

Please don’t twist my words. I didn’t say most of what you said, “especially staff becoming murderous.” I am anything but afraid. Your statements are full of assumptions, and a tiny sample size.

I am not anti-trained handlers in school. I don’t believe untrained staff should be carrying in school. I think we should make informed decisions.

We have to get in front of the problem too. The carriers will not prevent what is leading to the shootings.

This isn’t a political issue.

Then please clearly state what your problem is with normal people who are licensed to carry being allowed to carry at work(in school) also? If being afraid of what those teachers would do isn’t your problem, then please clarify your problem.

You brought up an instance where a teacher decked a kid. Yes I assumed you brought that up to say that if the teacher had been carrying it would have been worse. What did you mean?

Yes it is a political issue, because bearing arms is a constitutional right that politicians have taken from certain people in certain situations, and because it is government that A) is supposed to enforce the removal of that right, and B) supposed to fill the role now that the right of teachers to protect themselves and their students has been taken away. And frankly, I’m not aware of a single school shooting being taken care of in a remotely satisfactory manner by law enforcement once a gun has been fired.

 

[QuazyQuinton]

And frankly, I’m not aware of a single school shooting being taken care of in a remotely satisfactory manner once a gun has been fired.

It seems that way, anyway.

But lest we get too cynical, there's always this:

A student came to school with a shotgun. His coach disarmed him with a bear hug -- and it was caught on video

Intense video released by a prosecutor shows a football coach disarming and then hugging a student wielding a gun at a Portland high school.

www.usatoday.com

QQ

 

[ImBillT]

It seems that way, anyway.

But lest we get too cynical, there's always this:

A student came to school with a shotgun. His coach disarmed him with a bear hug -- and it was caught on video

Intense video released by a prosecutor shows a football coach disarming and then hugging a student wielding a gun at a Portland high school.

www.usatoday.com

QQ

I said “after shots were fired” and o said that in reference to “law enforcement”. I’ll go specify “law enforcement” in the comment you quoted. The article you posted actually supports my point that school staff should be allowed to carry if they choose. It is the teachers, principles, band directors, and coaches who have the greatest presence in the schools, and who are best equipped to take care of the children they love if something horrible happens and police are outside deciding on what to do.

Oddly the video didn’t show what was in the headline either. The coach was already holding the gun when he becomes visible. But that had nothing to do with the discussion.

 

[SAJ-99]

What does bother me a little is that so many are willing to give up one freedom for another,curtailing law abiding peoples access to firearms as opposed to actually securing schools for example. I am not sure how securing schools constitutes a loss of freedom and more gun control doesn’t?

I think the point of the thread is about what constraints we are willing to put on 2A freedoms. We have generally deflected (I’m guilty of this as much as anyone) into causes and other solutions. But the thread is about constraints on 2A freedoms. If one’s belief that there should be zero constraints on that freedom, then ‘nuff said only know that over 90% of America believes otherwise. We put limits on all freedoms. Not many places you can walk down the street naked. No one seems to be screaming about a violation of freedom on that. I’m not surprised at the breakdown of responses given the make-up of membership on this board, but I am a little surprised of the lack of understanding on where the rest of Americans are on these questions.

 

[HandgunHunter]

Ever listen to Jocko’s podcasts about cognitive bias? This thread is an interesting window into the human mind.

I could get on board with many of the suggestions floated here. The original list seems pretty pragmatic.

Don’t remember who brought up the classes of firearms with varying levels of regulation. Intriguing idea I had never heard or thought of before. I could also get on board with a federal opt-in license and skip the transaction-based background check system we have now. The main benefit I get from my concealed permit is to avoid that whole hassle.


Sounds like incarceration to me also. Not sure why so many view this as a long term solution. It’s a bandaid and solves nothing.

Strange how many self proclaimed freedom lovers are willing to basically lock up innocent folks “to keep them safe” rather than accept any level of even minor inconvenience to purchase or own a firearm. The freedom argument loses a lot of credibility with me when I see those types of suggestions. They strike me as incredibly callous and selfish. I also struggle with the incongruent arguments that we can’t trust teachers to provide instruction about sex, race, religion, or history but we should trust them to be armed in a classroom with children every day?

I think our society’s fundamental unwillingness to empathize or compromise is just as much a root cause of these continued occurrences as anything else.

No one is advocating turning schools, workplaces, or anything else into a prison.

Guests come in the front door….

You don’t walk in the back door of the grocery store or bank.

Controlled access is used in literally every establishment.

If the teacher wouldn’t have propped open the door to the school it’s highly likely this most recent event would have resolved outside.

 

[ImBillT]

Here’s one for everyone who believes that an untrained person with a pistol is no match for a gunman with an AR-15. And by the way, she didn’t harm a single bystander.

Armed woman kills man who fired rifle into crowd at West Virginia birthday party

Authorities say an armed woman in West Virginia fatally shot a man who began firing an AR-15-style rifle into a crowd at a birthday-graduation party.

www.usatoday.com

 

[ImBillT]

I think the point of the thread is about what constraints we are willing to put on 2A freedoms. We have generally deflected (I’m guilty of this as much as anyone) into causes and other solutions. But the thread is about constraints on 2A freedoms. If one’s belief that there should be zero constraints on that freedom, then ‘nuff said only know that over 90% of America believes otherwise. We put limits on all freedoms. Not many places you can walk down the street naked. No one seems to be screaming about a violation of freedom on that. I’m not surprised at the breakdown of responses given the make-up of membership on this board, but I am a little surprised of the lack of understanding on where the rest of Americans are on these questions.

Currently the restraint on 2A freedom in the classroom is a problem.

 

[Shangobango]

I think the point of the thread is about what constraints we are willing to put on 2A freedoms. We have generally deflected (I’m guilty of this as much as anyone) into causes and other solutions. But the thread is about constraints on 2A freedoms. If one’s belief that there should be zero constraints on that freedom, then ‘nuff said only know that over 90% of America believes otherwise. We put limits on all freedoms. Not many places you can walk down the street naked. No one seems to be screaming about a violation of freedom on that. I’m not surprised at the breakdown of responses given the make-up of membership on this board, but I am a little surprised of the lack of understanding on where the rest of Americans are on these questions.

To be fair, there were a lot of points raised in the OP that were not related to 2A.

Also, at least on my part, I realize that some restrictions on 2A are allowable and necessary. My view is that the restrictions that are currently in place aren’t being prioritized or enforced to their maximum potential. We should try making that happen before moving forward with more restrictions that may or may not have an impact on the issue at hand.

There seem to have been several system failures related to this most recent school shooting. I don’t think it is unreasonable to want those addressed on a consistent basis before moving forward with adding more restrictions to a constitutional right.

 

[SAJ-99]

There seem to have been several system failures related to this most recent school shooting. I don’t think it is unreasonable to want those addressed on a consistent basis before moving forward with adding more restrictions to a constitutional right.

What system failures specifically related to a mentally unstable person (in hindsight) being able to obtain firearms?

 

[Shangobango]

What system failures specifically related to a mentally unstable person (in hindsight) being able to obtain firearms?

From what I have read there were tons of warning signs from the individual that killed all of those people and law enforcement was well aware of them. I think I read that local law enforcement had visited his residence 30+ times before this all took place.

I got that info from mainstream media sources so how accurate it is, who knows?

How did this person end up with those firearms? I don’t know that. If what I said above is true then that is a potential system failure in itself.

Other potential system failures that I am aware of are the propped open door, law enforcements bungling of the situation at the school, etc.

 

[HandgunHunter]

From what I have read there were tons of warning signs from the individual that killed all of those people and law enforcement was well aware of them. I think I read that local law enforcement had visited his residence 30+ times before this all took place.

I got that info from mainstream media sources so how accurate it is, who knows?

How did this person end up with those firearms? I don’t know that. If what I said above is true then that is a potential system failure in itself.

Other potential system failures that I am aware of are the propped open door, law enforcements bungling of the situation at the school, etc.

This.

The mental health sector was completely decommissioned decades ago.

We lack the institutions and other mental health facilities required to work with society.

I watched this time and time again when trying to get someone help in LE.

 

[longbow51]

What system failures specifically related to a mentally unstable person (in hindsight) being able to obtain firearms?

OK, while I said I was finished with this, a system is not a single event. While it's easy enough to google, I attach the following reference re James Reason's Swiss Cheese model. Anyone who has worked with any safety issue will be familiar.

Obvious steps here could be, as referenced by @Shangobango, the lack of reporting mental health/police interactions, propped doors, etc., but doesn't stop there. The idea is to have layers which encompass most of the ideas here. The reasoning is that one single intervention will not stop an untoward event, so you build layers.

The problem is that you have to actually seek a good outcome, which physicians, engineers, fire control officers, etc., do, but politicians often don't; they would rather have a campaign issue than a solution.

The other caveat is that the steps taken to prevent incidents must be based in sound reasoning based on systems theory, or, better, strong evidence. That's why proposed Swiss cheese models for Covid didn't work; many of the "preventions" were not evidence based, nor based on logic.

The James Reason Swiss Cheese Failure Model in 300 Seconds

James Reason Swiss Cheese Model. Source: BMJ, 2000 Mar 18:320(7237): 768-770A while ago I was part of the Cardiff pilot of Practical Strategies for Learning from Failure (#LFFdigital). My job was t…

whatsthepont.blog

 

[SAJ-99]

From what I have read there were tons of warning signs from the individual that killed all of those people and law enforcement was well aware of them. I think I read that local law enforcement had visited his residence 30+ times before this all took place.

I got that info from mainstream media sources so how accurate it is, who knows?

How did this person end up with those firearms? I don’t know that. If what I said above is true then that is a potential system failure in itself.

Other potential system failures that I am aware of are the propped open door, law enforcements bungling of the situation at the school, etc.

He purchased the guns legally the week before. So even if the police visited the house 30 times, there were no guns to take. You seem to be willing to have a check in the background check process where police can “flag” an individual as a potential threat? I am pretty sure the question on the current check is self-determined. So basically you can lie and say “I’m fine” but still be crazy. The current background check is incomplete for this kind of situation. So are we agreeing it needs to be updated so these systems talk to each other and the FFL dealer can see that law enforcement has been to the buyer’s house 30times?

 

[SAJ-99]

OK, while I said I was finished with this, a system is not a single event. While it's easy enough to google, I attach the following reference re James Reason's Swiss Cheese model. Anyone who has worked with any safety issue will be familiar.

Obvious steps here could be, as referenced by @Shangobango, the lack of reporting mental health/police interactions, propped doors, etc., but doesn't stop there. The idea is to have layers which encompass most of the ideas here. The reasoning is that one single intervention will not stop an untoward event, so you build layers.

The problem is that you have to actually seek a good outcome, which physicians, engineers, fire control officers, etc., do, but politicians often don't; they would rather have a campaign issue than a solution.

The other caveat is that the steps taken to prevent incidents must be based in sound reasoning based on systems theory, or, better, strong evidence. That's why proposed Swiss cheese models for Covid didn't work; many of the "preventions" were not evidence based, nor based on logic.

https://whatsthepont.blog/2018/05/3...iss-cheese-failure-model-in-300-seconds/[/URL

It’s not set up to work that way. There are laws in place preventing it from working that way. Therein lies the problem. I think we actually could agree on some of @VikingsGuy measures but it is important to understand how it works before declaring failures in the system.[/url]

 

[hank4elk]

We don't pay teachers enough to just teach.
We do not train or pay or fully vet LE staff enough.
We do not do full background checks and keep data updated,nationally.
We have a National health problem, mental included.

We have elected the criminally insane to run the country.

 

[Shangobango]

He purchased the guns legally the week before. So even if the police visited the house 30 times, there were no guns to take. You seem to be willing to have a check in the background check process where police can “flag” an individual as a potential threat? I am pretty sure the question on the current check is self-determined. So basically you can lie and say “I’m fine” but still be crazy. The current background check is incomplete for this kind of situation. So are we agreeing it needs to be updated so these systems talk to each other and the FFL dealer can see that law enforcement has been to the buyer’s house 30times?

No, I was thinking more along the lines of, if the police had been to his house 30 times there was an obvious issue which in conjunction with the obvious signs of mental instability should have been documented in a way in which would have put a hold on his ability to purchase a firearm without some sort of additional scrutiny.

I don't think we have a huge problem with the systems talking to each other. Any reporting system is only as good as the information put in to that system.

 

[woods89]

Here's something I wonder about surrounding armed teachers.

How does someone without a lot of training engage an active shooter, who may be blasting away at them with an AR, in a school, surrounded by kids on all sides, without serious risk of unintended death or injury? How do they make a split second judgment on who's behind the wall behind the shooter while the 5.56 bullets are coming their way? I know some teachers, and the welfare of their kids is paramount in their minds.

I don't personally carry for personal defense, for my own reasons. But hunting has had me using a firearm in some sort of high pressure situations, relatively. What we are talking about is on a completely different level. If I apply my own mental acumen in the situations I've been in, there is no way on earth that I would want be in a school trying to decide safe shot angles.

And just how is it going to play when a teacher kills a student accidentally for the first time with the general public, and certainly their fellow teachers?

 

[HandgunHunter]

Here's something I wonder about surrounding armed teachers.

How does someone without a lot of training engage an active shooter, who may be blasting away at them with an AR, in a school, surrounded by kids on all sides, without serious risk of unintended death or injury? How do they make a split second judgment on who's behind the wall behind the shooter while the 5.56 bullets are coming their way? I know some teachers, and the welfare of their kids is paramount in their minds.

I don't personally carry for personal defense, for my own reasons. But hunting has had me using a firearm in some sort of high pressure situations, relatively. What we are talking about is on a completely different level. If I apply my own mental acumen in the situations I've been in, there is no way on earth that I would want be in a school trying to decide safe shot angles.

And just how is it going to play when a teacher kills a student accidentally for the first time with the general public, and certainly their fellow teachers?

Those are the same questions one could ask about any use of a gun or other implement in any self defense situation.

Every situation is different. Every environment is different.

Your average beat cop doesn’t have a lot of firearms training. Most departments are just one day a year. (Yes I was in LE). And those cops have handguns, rifles, and other weapons. Count on the average patrolman all you want…..

In a time where violence is necessary to stop a threat then it always comes down to the right person being in the right place making the right decisions….and being willing to use as much or more violence than the threat.

No one knows how anyone is going to react to that for the first time.

Anyone trying to imagine how someone is going to react is probably wrong. That also goes for anyone who has never been there and done that trying to imagine how they themselves would react….they have no idea.

Complacency kills….wether it’s failing to follow the building security training, failing to be observant, failing to act(as it sounds like the responding officers failed to do, and so on.

I would never advocate that anyone be forced to be armed. But some sort of lethal security is warranted.

We already have controlled access systems in every school in the nation….use them properly and don’t prop doors open as a teach did here.

One more layer of security is warranted.

I’d rather see a dedicated professional to do so, but I also think that a persons right to self defense shouldnt change going into a government building.