Reports of a shooting in a Florida school

Scroll to see replies

Reply 80

DarkKnight06

There are so much gun crimes in USA, something that should be addressed- ie banned.

Reply 81

Joep95

Original post by Snufkin

Well, I know you read it - I've seen you say so on TSR and elsewhere. But whatever, I don't want to argue with you, I was just interested in your opinion on the thread.

Fine I read infowars about 2 years ago to laugh at the articles they created, didn’t do it a lot do you remember everything you read 2 years ago?

Reply 82

Andrew97

Entertainment Forum Helper, Debate & Current Affairs Helper

This must be the first time for a while that the gunman survived. Be interesting to see the punishment.

Reply 83

MrSuavetopia

Original post by drtfml1c2d3e

they should put more money more public health mental care...........not weapons.........

Trump signed into law a repeal to an Obama-era rule, that would've placed people who receive mental health benefits onto the FBI background check list for purchasing weapons. Whilst not perfect, it's a step that could've have potentially helped, and in all honesty, should be in place considering the gun lovers cry out for it whenever 'gun control' is mentioned.

So you know, Republicans and those on the right can't even cite that whole 'b-but the problem is mental health' line without looking like fools.

Reply 84

Stiff Little Fingers

Original post by Notoriety

A cop should not shoot to kill in order to end a situation like this, unless there is an immediate risk to themselves or others. They will give commands for the suspect to drop the weapon, put their hands in the air, and to get on the ground. They'd give that opportunity to victims, as well as the suspect.

It really has nothing to do with my abilities as a gunman. I do not agree with gun ownership, the use of guns, nor do I suppose myself expert in their use. A wild assumption from you. The basis of my argument is understanding how people react in these situations. I know it might seem paradoxical to you who is arguing a priori, but go research more of these shootings and try to understand the mechanics of a) how they're done and b) how the spree is ended.

In this case, the students were cowering in their classrooms waiting for their turn (as it were), with the sound of gunfire in the background. The suspect was arrested by a police officer with a side arm issuing commands to surrender -- seemed self-preservation was on his mind.

There have been spree killings ended by an armed civilian. Note I was not suggesting an armed civilian per se would improve the situation. I suggested a designated protector, with the implication that they have been trained hence "designated".

PS: I am making this argument because it is paradoxical to Brits, even though there is a sound basis to it. I am not sure why you're responding with long-held superficial beliefs, given the whole point of my post was to dispel them. Yes, I know you don't agree with my point; that's why I made it in the first place! The next thing you have to do is try to consider my point and not dismiss it with ad hominem, straw man and generally being rude.

You should go research shootings and see what happens when the vaunted "good guy with a gun" gets involved. You'll see that more often than not, it doesn't end an active shooting, and it exacerbates it more often than it ends it. The answer is of course gun control, Americans won't be receptive to it because "muh constitution" - as if something written when the most powerful technology available was a blunderbuss could still be relevant and not in need of review when weapons capable of unloading hundreds of rounds per minute are now out there - but it remains the truth. You want to resolve shootings, you tackle gun culture, not arm more people.

As for your complaints of ad hominems, beyond jokingly giving an example of one, which came after your initial (incorrect) complaint, I've not engaged in them at all...

Reply 85

NJA

People get angry and act irrationally. If guns are available some will get used and innocent people will get shot.

The solution?

(a) arm everyone who wants to be armed so there is more chance someone can shoot the shooter

(b) outlaw guns to all but licensed people

(a) doesn't work ... 18 school shootings so far this year in the USA
(b) works better and is used by the all other civilised nations

America considers itself a "Christian" nation, maybe it should consider the Lord's prayer:
"lead us not into temptation . . "

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 86

Joep95

Original post by NJA

People get angry and act irrationally. If guns are available some will get used and innocent people will get shot.

The solution?

(a) arm everyone who wants to be armed so there is more chance someone can shoot the shooter

(b) outlaw guns to all but lisenced people

(a) doesn't work ... 18 school shootings so far this year in the USA
(b) works better and is used by the all other civilised nations

America considers itself a "Christian" nation, maybe it should consider the Lord's prayer:
"lead us not into temptation . . "

Saying A doesn’t work because of school shootings doesn’t stand up to reasoning based on the fact that schools are gun free zones

Reply 87

erratic_deus

He is a white supremacist!!!!!!!!

Nikolas Cruz wanted to be a 'professional school shooter', attended white supremacist training schools and had a twisted obsession for guns and hurting animals

Reply 88

NJA

Original post by joecphillips

Saying A doesn’t work because of school shootings doesn’t stand up to reasoning based on the fact that schools are gun free zones

Your reasoning is duff.

Angry shooters don't take a blind bit of notice of someone designating schools as "gun free zones"

Reply 89

Joep95

Original post by NJA

Your reasoning is duff.

Angry shooters don't take a blind bit of notice of someone designating schools as "gun free zones"

That’s exactly my point, they don’t care about gun free zones but law abiding citizens do so “arm everyone who wants to be armed so there is more chance someone can shoot the shooter” isn’t in play in school shootings

Reply 90

NJA

Original post by joecphillips

It is the availability to guns that ensures that some angry people will use them. That's the elephant in the room, all other arguments are excuses, just dusting the mantle-piece with the elephant remaining.

You cannot separate schools from wider society (except by building walls with watchtowers or cameras around every one of them and having high-grade security).

Reply 91

Joep95

Original post by NJA

Why is it that Chicago with strict gun laws has a lot of gun crime? Why is there no correlation between gun ownership rates and homicide between states? Why did the murder rate increase when we banned handguns? Austria and Switzerland have relaxed gun laws why don’t they have a high murder rate?

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 92

Notoriety

Original post by Stiff Little Fingers

The answer is of course gun control, Americans won't be receptive to it because "muh constitution" - as if something written when the most powerful technology available was a blunderbuss could still be relevant and not in need of review when weapons capable of unloading hundreds of rounds per minute are now out there - but it remains the truth. You want to resolve shootings, you tackle gun culture, not arm more people.

I think you are conflating two issues. What we would live to be the law with What we should do with the law as it is. Yes, the American militarised culture is hugely dangerous and it makes life incredibly cheap in that country. It is has little relevance to the question of how you move forward, once you accept the law is not going to change. As you elegantly put it "muh constitution", which isn't going to change. What could be done is to have people, like the green cop, trained and able to intercede in these most deadly scenarios in the most vulnerable of places.

In fact, this is an ideal example of why a trained member of the school staff would likely have some effect. Firstly, the attack was prolonged and people were waiting around for the attacker to reach them, while knowing the attacker's location. A distal attacker, whose location you know, is vulnerable to challenge. Secondly, the attacker surrendered to cops when confronted, which suggests any show of force (e.g. from the teachers who used their bodies to shield their students) could have ended the attack much earlier.

Typically, school attackers are weak unsuccessful people who did not have the force of character in normal life, so had to rely on firearms to secure any acknowledgement from others. With any bully, a stern challenge usually rebuts their confidence.

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 93

Muhammad999

very upsetting :frown:

Reply 94

Stiff Little Fingers

Original post by Notoriety

I know you think that. I have explained why your intuitive a priori answer does not work in fact and gave you the example of a green police officer, whom you'd accept would rightly end the situation. If you have any way to rebut the premises, and the adduced logic of my post, I am very willing to hear it.

It's not that I think that at all, it's that those are the facts. 1 in 160 active shootings are ended by the "good guy with a gun" (21 by unarmed civilians), interference with more fire arms causes problems more regularly that the 1/160 success rate. The idea that arming more people is the solution is clearly false, as also shown by states with more gun control (cooling off periods etc.) having lower rates of gun crime, and a line trotted out by the gun lobby to pretend they've got a solution. This year alone so far there's been a school shooting every 2.5 days, yet no one has tried arming teachers despite it being shouted about like it has any merit every time this happens. Why? Because it is a bad idea and everyone knows it.

I think you are conflating two issues. What we would live to be the law with What we should do with the law as it is.

The answer to the latter is easy, change the law. You do not need to repeal the second amendment to tackle it. Proper licensing and background checks, limits on number or ammo owned. Tell the NRA to get ****ed and be a sensible country for once.

Reply 95

Napp

People seem to be forgetting one simple problem with trying to ban guns in america, or atleast limiting them, they're already so obscenely prevalent and people are so loath to give them up it would be quite impossible. Half of these kooks own guns specifically to stop the government trying such a thing - i perish the thought of what would happen if their government tried to forcibly disarm some of these lot who are better armed than most national armies.

Reply 96

CountBrandenburg

Original post by Ninja Squirrel

I cannot believe America still has harder any gun laws in place after all this time. 18th school shooting and it's only mid February.

Original post by NJA

Original post by erratic_deus

He is a white supremacist!!!!!!!!

Nikolas Cruz wanted to be a 'professional school shooter', attended white supremacist training schools and had a twisted obsession for guns and hurting animals

To address some of the rumours being perpetrated: there have not been 18 school shootings since the beginning of the year. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/no-there-havent-been-18-school-shooting-in-2018-that-number-is-flat-wrong/2018/02/15/65b6cf72-1264-11e8-8ea1-c1d91fcec3fe_story.html many of the incidents claimed by Everyman only vaguely fit the description of a school shooting and thus suggesting that there have been 18 shootings is flat out wrong
As for the white supremacist rumour, officials doubt the connection and Jordan Jereb, the man who fuelled the rumour by being confused, has gone back on his comment, noting that there are a few Nikolas’ in his organisation. Context is key when looking at sources and Jereb’s record isn’t great.
Might I also remind you that we did at one point have the freedom to have firearms, but it took only one school shooting, Dunblane, to effectively criminalise having a firearm in private property. In hindsight, that may be because of hysteria in the period immediately afterwards and thus remains the only school shooting in our history. Britain has always had people who aren’t too concerned about guns, and this contrasts with the US where there is the active pursuit for individual liberties. From what I’ve been able to establish, previous reports about our shooter suggest that he shouldn’t have been able to obtain his gun ( or have a licence) but the background checks on that overlooked this issue. Perhaps the problem in the US is not gun culture itself but instead the nature of how regulation is carried out and to what extent that regulation exists.
Feel free to correct me though

Reply 97

erratic_deus

Original post by CountBrandenburg

Not correcting you but he is a white supremacist.
He joined a white supremacist group, one of the 300 operating in America and the over 45 groups that train people to become white supremacists.

Reply 98

CountBrandenburg

Original post by erratic_deus

Not correcting you but he is a white supremacist.
He joined a white supremacist group, one of the 300 operating in America and the over 45 groups that train people to become white supremacists.

But I thought that was now just rumoured... yes supposedly comments came from a YouTube account saying they wanted to be a professional school shooter, whether that’s just Internet Trolling or not, I don’t know.
If you have a source to your information could I see it?