Ca. school district buys 14 high powered rifles to defend against school shootings

Hi all
sry if this has been posted I did a search and found nothing

This is a better idea then arming teachers in my opinion.. At least the guns will be kept in a safe and only for the police on the campuses..

ktla.com...

FONTANA, Calif. (KTLA) — The Fontana Unified School District is arming its school police with new high-performance rifles.

The district bought 14 Colt rifles valued at $1,000 each. The weapons are designed to provide accuracy over long distances.

“In the event of an active shooter on campus, this weapon provides our officers with the tools they need to respond appropriately and mitigate the loss of life,” school police Chief Billy Green said.

He added that his officers attended 40 hours of special training over the winter break


Read more: ktla.com...
Read more at ktla.com...

[editby

wait wait wait.. so they want to use 'assault rifles' to keep the school safe now? That makes no sense, assault rifles are the problem how will more of them help solve the problem?

/sarcasm off

Hopefully the officers also have a pistol on them at all times because guns kept in a central location in a safe would unfortunately take too long to get to unless these officers solely sit in a room monitoring video screens where the safe would be kept.

reply to post by goou111


I don't even know what to think of this. Good, that will deter a shooter. Bad, will it be easily accessible for the school cop, if not, is it practical, and can a student force there way to it, and end up with a high powered rifle? Also a bit shocking this is what we are becoming as a country. Now schools are going to have heavily armed guards.

Could someone please explain what is so great about the fact that these are good for use at long distances?

What is the point of that in a confined space such as a school shooting?

I'm not saying this is not a good choice of firearm, i've never used one so maybe one of our US members can chip in there. I just wonder whats the point of the "long distance" comment.

CX.

reply to post by dc4lifeskater


No, don't be a dummy.
It is only safe in the hands of the approved Govt official, not for the US citizen.

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by dc4lifeskater

 

No, don't be a dummy.
It is only safe in the hands of the approved Govt official, not for the US citizen.

Didn't this happen in Europe around the 1940's?

Originally posted by CX
Could someone please explain what is so great about the fact that these are good for use at long distances?

What is the point of that in a confined space such as a school shooting?

I'm not saying this is not a good choice of firearm, i've never used one so maybe one of our US members can chip in there. I just wonder whats the point of the "long distance" comment.

CX.

IMHO, Shotguns are much better in interior confined or close quarters defence. Additionally alternating slug and buckshot shells would be a show stopper.

Now were I attempting to hold a perimeter OUTSIDE then the rifle would be advantageous, but we're not holding a perimeter are we? I think someone just wants to put on a show rather than be practicle.

reply to post by CX


Well this particular assault weapon is the civilian type of the military M4 carbine. Which is a shorter version of the M16. The reason it was made shorter was to increase its effectiveness in close quarters and urban environments while maintaining the high accuracy of the M16.

reply to post by goou111


Still pondering this, but first thought is that an arms race with "crazy" leads to no good.

It might also be useful to look to research which has shown that the presence or armed security in schools actually leads to students feeling less safe..Counter-intuitive I know, but still borne out in research. If a child arrives at school and someone is standing guard there with an assault rifle...then obviously the childs thoughts center on immenent danger.

It also makes me think of the psuedo-freakonomics studies which have shown that in schools with metal detectors...crime actually rises. Something about being screened for weapons as they enter school, tells the students that there is an expectation that they will act criminally and leads to students meeting those expectations.

Lastly, since studies have shown that the presence of armed school guards leads to greater feelings of "insecurity"...and those feelings have been linked to lower academic performance...

There is a risk/return to be calculated. Of course if the risk is high that a school shooting might occur, then the trade-off is worth it, but if the risk is low...is it worth the lower academic performance and climate of insecurity?

I know well that many folks here are not interested in intelligent debate or discussion...but here's to hoping otherwise

THEY HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME?!???!?

What kind of complete IDIOTS are buying M-16/AR-15 platform rifles for SCHOOL SECURITY?!

Unless they are using 100% frangible ammunition ..and ONLY EVER frangible ammunition in those rifles, then they are a direct hazard to the lives of every child on campus if one is EVER fired. .223 / 5.56 are HIGH POWER with HIGH penetration. They go through walls...windows...doors..and MULTIPLE. It depends on whether it hits a stud or other solid object inside a wall.

How about they stop bargain shopping for the best deal ....with NO regard for how safe or sensible it is?? MP-5's may be more costly but they are 9mm/.40/.45 calibers and those DO NOT over-penetrate with near the frequency or sure outcome as a high power, long range rifle.

That rifle, as proven at the Camp Perry shooting competitions, is perfectly capable of making 1,200 yard shots to win awards with. WTH do School Police need with a rifle this powerful?? Are they planning to meet body armored super-soldiers in a classroom or something?? If it's gone that far, that rifle isn't stopping it anyway.

California really knows NO limits to simple minded stupidity sometimes and I'm beside myself on this one. I WILL literally attend school board meetings and become an activist against it if that ever comes into schools here. If that doesn't stop it? I'll pull my kid OUT and home school. I feel THAT strongly about THAT HIGH POWER a rifle being in and among children in a school setting. It's over-kill to a reckless level.

By far the most sensible thing to happen to California since Ronald Regan.

this will last as long as it takes until the person points the weapon at or fires on an innocent...,.and then the county will pay out a big settlement, maybe someone goes to jail, and the school board ends up doing mea clupas as they are voted out or quit.

reply to post by CX


Its easy to shoot quickly. The AR has such little recoil that you can keep firing accurate shots while a shotgun or a higher caliber rifle like the AK will shake and be harder to shoot quickly.

Originally posted by SixX18
reply to post by goou111

 

I don't even know what to think of this. Good, that will deter a shooter. Bad, will it be easily accessible for the school cop, if not, is it practical, and can a student force there way to it, and end up with a high powered rifle? Also a bit shocking this is what we are becoming as a country. Now schools are going to have heavily armed guards.

I don't see this as a deterent for a school shooter. They are not thinking sanely to begin with, almost always plan suicide, come armed to the teeth, and are engaged in irrational thinking/fantasy.

At most this would theoretically give better tools to school cops to stop a shooter once it had begun.

Originally posted by Miraj
reply to post by CX

 

Its easy to shoot quickly. The AR has such little recoil that you can keep firing accurate shots while a shotgun or a higher caliber rifle like the AK will shake and be harder to shoot quickly.

I have to disagree here. The only way your argument makes sense is if they are buying to the lowest common denominator that may have to use it.

Given proper training on a pass/fail standard? Any firearm can be mastered for accurate use. I'd also note, the MP-5 9mm is more recoil friendly than the AR-15 by a great deal.

Originally posted by SixX18

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by dc4lifeskater

 

No, don't be a dummy.
It is only safe in the hands of the approved Govt official, not for the US citizen.

Didn't this happen in Europe around the 1940's?

History is repeating itself.

So one of the most anti-gun states in the nation demands all of you disarm, mocks the suggestion that the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun then proceeds to hand out AR's to school guards.

Sounds about right.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I am some what surprised also. May be person signing the order just figured that's what the talk is about so we go with that rifle.

They may end up doing more damage than the bad guy..

There are a few school districts in California that have had rifle programs for years. This isn't exactly new.

They were ordered back in Oct, so it's not in response to Sandy Hook.

I think the money could've been spent on better things, but that's just me

www.huffingtonpost.com...