It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Florida sheriff refuses to resign during heated CNN interview

page: 6
36
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 27 2018 @ 10:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: kelbtalfenek

Not a bad idea, but I can still see tons of things that could go wrong. Where does the culpability lie if the "POST" volunteer freezes and doesn't intervene in a shooting?

I don't know, but generally speaking, if a volunteer in that situation froze, I don't see any legal culpability that can come from it. It's not their primary job to have the intestinal fortitude to engage an active shooter--what they would be volunteering to do is to have that capability in the tiny, miniscule chance that they were confronted with an active shooter.

I would think that they would have the same culpability as a concealed-weapon carrier who doesn't engage a shooter in public if they found themselves in that situation. You must remember, at least from what I understand, the burden and training and all costs involved are the responsibility of the volunteer, so whether or not they are capable of implementing said training should not be a question for the legal system or have any sort of repercussion.

It's about having that option, not the guarantee that it will work.


What if the POST volunteer intervenes and in the fog of combat shoots the wrong kid? Kills the wrong kid? Who is liable?

That would depend on the state and their laws concerning prosecuting or protecting good-Samaritan accidents like that. For the most part, to be an offense against really serious crimes, there must be a "knowingly" or "willingly" aspect involved in the crime--accidents usually do not meet the requirements for criminal charges.

However, that doesn't absolve the volunteer from civil liability in many states, so it's absolutely a pertinent question, and one that needs to be discussed with the volunteers during or even before training. All of the possibilities need to be discussed in-depth in this type of program, to give the volunteer all of the knowledge that they need to make an informed decision on whether or not to be a participant in the program.


I understand your concern that "no gun zones" are basically a murderers paradise. But try to understand my point that having guns in classrooms, armed citizens in hallways or whereever in the schools doesn't and won't reliably reduce the threat. An armed police officer didn't reduce the threat in Parkland.

I understand your point completely, but I don't feel that it outweighs the option to have that defensive ability in place. In the school district in which I live, we had an idiot kid make a threat against their school and was arrested yesterday. In this case, the kid was just pissed off about something but had not actual intent or means to follow through with this threat, but if he did, things could have turned out differently.

I'm glad to know that our Sheriff's office didn't sit on their hands concerning this threat, and strict enforcement of laws surrounding making threats is a part of security (a deterrent that should diminish non-realistic threats over time), but that's only part of it. Our Sheriff has also pledged an armed officer at ever elementary school (that's all that they can do with their manpower) through the end of the school year during school hours every day. Again, a good measure, but like you point out, not a guarantee.

I see zero reason not to put further insurance in place, even if it's not a guarantee, as long as they are properly trained. The what-if scenario is a good discussion, but again, it's all hypothetical. What IS a guarantee is that if we do not allow programs like POST, there will be a guarantee that there will NOT be any protection in many cases.


I kinda prefer reducing the chances that a mental case, or a person with violent tendencies, or a person that has been investigated several times and actually threatened to be "a professional school shooter" can legally purchase a weapon.

I agree with that as well.

These, IMO, are all pieces of the puzzle. I'm mostly concerned, though, with the affect of medication that nearly every mass shooter is taking at the time of their atrocities.

ETA:

Here are a few good discussions on legal issues for concealed-carriers:

General Legal Considerations for Use of Firearms in Self Defense

Myth: Dead People Don’t Talk or Sue You – So Shoot To Kill
edit on 27-2-2018 by SlapMonkey because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 27 2018 @ 10:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy


I want that Bronco, with or without the Minigun.

"Keep your booger hook off the bang switch."

LOL



posted on Feb, 27 2018 @ 02:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: SlapMonkey


These, IMO, are all pieces of the puzzle. I'm mostly concerned, though, with the affect of medication that nearly every mass shooter is taking at the time of their atrocities.





That's another gordian knot that needs to be dissected. When a high percentage of mass murderers are taking meds that have possible side effects of "psychotic behavior" and it seems to be a very common thread, there's a serious problem that warrants discussion. I think that this link is being pushed under the rug.



posted on Feb, 27 2018 @ 02:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: kelbtalfenek

originally posted by: SlapMonkey


These, IMO, are all pieces of the puzzle. I'm mostly concerned, though, with the affect of medication that nearly every mass shooter is taking at the time of their atrocities.





That's another gordian knot that needs to be dissected. When a high percentage of mass murderers are taking meds that have possible side effects of "psychotic behavior" and it seems to be a very common thread, there's a serious problem that warrants discussion. I think that this link is being pushed under the rug.


This is something you'd think we could all agree on.



posted on Feb, 27 2018 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: kelbtalfenek really? Because here in Texas we have 170 school districts with armed teachers. Know what else we don’t have? Gangs jumping other students in those districts and bullying is at the minuscule level. Before you say, but teachers aren’t supposed to protect their students, my Mom is a teacher and I’m all for it. So is she. The thing is, it isn’t like ALL teachers are armed, only the ones who want to be. They do routine training with yearly checks AND target practice on the regular. Lots of ranges here give them free ammo and range time to hone their skills and I think it’s a beautiful, selfless thing for all involved.



posted on Feb, 27 2018 @ 06:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: ColdChillin
a reply to: kelbtalfenek really? Because here in Texas we have 170 school districts with armed teachers. Know what else we don’t have? Gangs jumping other students in those districts and bullying is at the minuscule level. Before you say, but teachers aren’t supposed to protect their students, my Mom is a teacher and I’m all for it. So is she. The thing is, it isn’t like ALL teachers are armed, only the ones who want to be. They do routine training with yearly checks AND target practice on the regular. Lots of ranges here give them free ammo and range time to hone their skills and I think it’s a beautiful, selfless thing for all involved.



What were the end of the world predictions like when that began? Teachers were gonna be blowing students away left and right, I'd imagine?



posted on Feb, 27 2018 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: kelbtalfenek

I can understand why some people don't believe that SSRI's can cause psychotic breaks or hostility, because I didn't believe it until it happened to me personally. Sometimes it has to be up close for someone to really see it.



posted on Feb, 27 2018 @ 09:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: ColdChillin
a reply to: kelbtalfenek really? Because here in Texas we have 170 school districts with armed teachers. Know what else we don’t have? Gangs jumping other students in those districts and bullying is at the minuscule level.

So there's no gangs in those 170 school districts? None?



Before you say, but teachers aren’t supposed to protect their students, my Mom is a teacher and I’m all for it. So is she. The thing is, it isn’t like ALL teachers are armed, only the ones who want to be. They do routine training with yearly checks AND target practice on the regular. Lots of ranges here give them free ammo and range time to hone their skills and I think it’s a beautiful, selfless thing for all involved.



Where would you get the idea that I would say "teachers aren't supposed to protect their students?" We've been having a pretty nice discussion talking about just that...Surprisingly enough making some progress in our dialogue, which I'm quite enjoying.

As far as the programs in those 170 districts, got any links? Any references to said programs? Anything that I could research?



posted on Feb, 27 2018 @ 09:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Autorico
a reply to: kelbtalfenek

I can understand why some people don't believe that SSRI's can cause psychotic breaks or hostility, because I didn't believe it until it happened to me personally. Sometimes it has to be up close for someone to really see it.


Would you mind sharing some of your experience? Were there any triggers? Were there any warning signs? Is there anything you would feel comfortable sharing? I understand if you don't feel like sharing. I think it's important to discuss everything that could possibly help eliminate the mass murders for which the US is becoming famous.



posted on Feb, 28 2018 @ 05:58 PM
link   
a reply to: kelbtalfenek

I don't wanna derail this thread, I talked about it a bit in this thread www.abovetopsecret.com...

I stared into the abyss and it scared the crap outta me, lol.
edit on 28-2-2018 by Autorico because: added stuffs




top topics



 
36
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join