Florida School Shooting

[Jedidiah]

I would want to be in whatever group doesn't offer impotent answers that have already failed.

The only ones who offer impotent answers that have already failed are the liberal gun grabbers.

[Bill the Cat]

The Mandalay Bay Hotel had an armed security team.

No they didn't. In fact, one of them, Jesus Campos, was shot by the gunman BEFORE he started shooting the crowd. Campos was unarmed.

Stoneman Douglas High School and the Pulse nightclub both had an armed police officer acting as security.

And WRT Pulse, the officer traded fire with the suspect. Probably saved several lives by forcing him deeper into the club bathroom, allowing many to escape.

Fort Hood is a military base.

Spanning 214,000 acres, and where only the Military Police are allowed to have live rounds.

Armed security is no guarantee of stopping a spree shooter.

But in many cases, as exampled above, it reduces the potential damage.

[carpedm9587]

Here is a list of smilies for those who don't remember or know them:
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...milies-for-now

Bless you!

(and from a heathen - that's sayin' sumpfin!)

[Tassman]

The only ones who offer impotent answers that have already failed are the liberal gun grabbers.

On the contrary, the only ones who don't have answers are the conservatives led by the NRA. They seem to think it reasonable that everyone has the right to own assault weapons. It's not, it's insanity.

[Darth Executor]

I would want to be in whatever group doesn't offer impotent answers that have already failed.

Welcome to the right!

[guacamole]

No they didn't. In fact, one of them, Jesus Campos, was shot by the gunman BEFORE he started shooting the crowd. Campos was unarmed.

While that guard was clearly unarmed, I've never heard of a casino that doesn't have an armed security team. Articles I've read indicate that Mandalay Bay was no different.

fwiw,
guacamole

[Cow Poke]

On the contrary, the only ones who don't have answers are the conservatives led by the NRA. They seem to think it reasonable that everyone has the right to own assault weapons. It's not, it's insanity.

I'm not led by the NRA, Trumpman, and I don't believe it's reasonable that everyone has the right to own assault weapons. In fact, I doubt you'll find a single NRA member who believes it's reasonable for a mentally ill person to own any firearm at all. You're so goofy.

And so incredibly wrong.

[Cow Poke]

Stoneman Douglas High School and the Pulse nightclub both had an armed police officer acting as security.

According to West Palm Beach TV, the armed security officer at the school never even went in to engage the shooter.

Deputy at Florida high school where 17 were killed 'never went in,' resigns

The Broward County Sheriff's deputy who was assigned to be the school resource officer at Stoneman Douglas High School during last week's massacre that left 17 dead resigned this morning after being suspended without pay, Sheriff Scott Israel announced on Thursday.

Israel said that Deputy Scott Peterson was outside of the building during the time of the shooting. According to Israel, video evidence suggested that Peterson remained outside for four minutes. The entire mass shooting lasted an estimated six minutes, Israel said.

"Scott Peterson was absolutely on campus through this entire event," Israel said. "He was armed, he was in uniform. After seeing video, witness statements, and Scott Peterson's very own statement, I decided this morning to suspend Scott Peterson without pay pending an internal investigation. As is his right, Scott Peterson chose to resign."

Israel claimed that Peterson "clearly" knew there was a shooting, and was seen doing "nothing" on video. Israel added that there were no known issues with communication.

[KingsGambit]

According to West Palm Beach TV, the armed security officer at the school never even went in to engage the shooter.

Deputy at Florida high school where 17 were killed 'never went in,' resigns

The Broward County Sheriff's deputy who was assigned to be the school resource officer at Stoneman Douglas High School during last week's massacre that left 17 dead resigned this morning after being suspended without pay, Sheriff Scott Israel announced on Thursday.

Israel said that Deputy Scott Peterson was outside of the building during the time of the shooting. According to Israel, video evidence suggested that Peterson remained outside for four minutes. The entire mass shooting lasted an estimated six minutes, Israel said.

"Scott Peterson was absolutely on campus through this entire event," Israel said. "He was armed, he was in uniform. After seeing video, witness statements, and Scott Peterson's very own statement, I decided this morning to suspend Scott Peterson without pay pending an internal investigation. As is his right, Scott Peterson chose to resign."

Israel claimed that Peterson "clearly" knew there was a shooting, and was seen doing "nothing" on video. Israel added that there were no known issues with communication.

DE posted that several pages back. I was surprised nobody else picked up on it; this is a game changer.

[Adrift]

Yes it is.

No it isn't.

You're one of the people who routinely dismisses the easy path and goes for nearly impossible policy with massive resistance.

What easy path? Solving the gun problem by making sure there are more people packing? That's not easy, that's insanity.

If you cared about stopping shootings you wouldn't pick the issue that antagonizes conservatives the most to push the hardest.

I have absolutely nothing to gain by randomly antagonizing conservatives.

Let's face it, you just like to argue and actually ending massacres would remove a topic of debate from your repertoire.

That makes zero sense. I want massacres so I can have something to argue about? That's one of the stupidest things you've said in a long history of stupid things. And Jedidiah, you should be ashamed of yourself for Amening this nonsense. I thought you were better than that.

[Cow Poke]

DE posted that several pages back. I was surprised nobody else picked up on it; this is a game changer.

Don't know how I missed it.

Reminds me, KG, of the scripture about the hireling...

But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, sees the wolf coming, and leaves the sheep, and flees: and the wolf catches them, and scatters the sheep. John 10:12

It can't just be "hired guns" to work in the schools - those who are the protectors must have a real stake in the safety of the kids.

[Darth Executor]

btw this is a good time to remind everyone that the Obama administration sold guns to murderous cartels that ended up being used to kill at least one US citizen. This is the government fartlight, pms and tardman think is gonna protect you.

[Jedidiah]

On the contrary, the only ones who don't have answers are the conservatives led by the NRA. They seem to think it reasonable that everyone has the right to own assault weapons. It's not, it's insanity.

That is pretty much a lie. The NRA has never said, to my knowledge, that assault weapons were everone's right. But then you may not know what an assault weapon is - in spite of the countless times it has been explained right here on TWeb, as well as all over the news and such.

[Darth Executor]

What easy path? Solving the gun problem by making sure there are more people packing? That's not easy, that's insanity.

No, I'm talking about things like improving our ability to find spree killers before they go on killing sprees.

I have absolutely nothing to gain by randomly antagonizing conservatives.

It's not random and I explained what you have to gain.

That makes zero sense.

It makes zero sense for an easily laid out case to make "zero sense". If that's your first line of defense then boy did I nail it.

I want massacres so I can have something to argue about? That's one of the stupidest things you've said in a long history of stupid things.

That's not what I said (illiteracy, or willful stupidity seems to be a recurring problem with you). I didn't say you want massacres, I said you don't care about ending them. And objectively you don't because you want to disarm an entire population and leave them at the mercy of what they consider an existential threat, an obviously difficult and time consuming task (if it's successful at all). I've seen you repeatedly brush aside perfectly reasonable bipartisan suggestions like improved law enforcement tracking and action against potential spree shooters before a spree happens, and the obvious explanation is that you couldn't care less about ending massacres. Combined with your love of debating and it's not difficult to figure out your motivations.

And Jedidiah, you should be ashamed of yourself for Amening this nonsense. I thought you were better than that.

Grampa Jed knows what's up.

[Adrift]

No, I'm talking about things like improving our ability to find spree killers before they go on killing sprees.

Huh? I'm perfectly fine with improving our ability to find spree killers before they go on killing sprees.

It's not random and I explained what you have to gain.

Yes it would be, and no you haven't.

It makes zero sense for an easily laid out case to make "zero sense". If that's your first line of defense then boy did I nail it.

That might have sounded better in your head than it does in print. I have no idea what you're going on about.

That's not what I said (illiteracy, or willful stupidity seems to be a recurring problem with you). I didn't say you want massacres, I said you don't care about ending them.

That's essentially the same thing, especially when you add that "ending massacres would remove a topic of debate from your repertoire" because I "like to argue", which obviously implies that I want massacres to continue so that I have something to argue about. Don't blame me because you don't think through the stupid things you post.

And objectively you don't because you want to disarm an entire population and leave them at the mercy of what they consider an existential threat, an obviously difficult and time consuming task (if it's successful at all).

I don't want to disarm an entire population so that they'll be at the mercy of an existential threat. Why in the world would I want that? I want to disarm the population so that we can finally put an end to gun violence in America.

I've seen you repeatedly brush aside perfectly reasonable bipartisan suggestions like improved law enforcement tracking and action against potential spree shooters before a spree happens, and the obvious explanation is that you couldn't care less about ending massacres.

Hmm. I don't remember doing that. Show me where you've seen me do that.

Combined with your love of debating and it's not difficult to figure out your motivations.

Your accusation is absurd. It doesn't make a lick of sense.