Common Sense Gun Legislation

originally posted by: PorkChop96
a reply to: quintessentone

Then tell me, how are you going to find a 100% unbiased person to do the evals?

I'm not saying we should not have them, but you are going to have such an array of opinions ranging from "yes absolutely you can carry" to "absolutely not, you are too unstable". And those answers could be given to the same person from two different doctors.

I would like to see a multi-disciplinary team approved by the persons/levels of government that are dealing with all issues of this, is that good enough for you?

a reply to: quintessentone


Most shooters expect to die anyway by police, so armed teachers would not be a deterrent.

I’ll use the Pulse nightclub shooting as one example of why you’re totally wrong.
The shooter had plans to target Disney but was spooked by the cops and had to find a softer/less protected target.
Even though some shooters know they’re going to die, they will still seek softer/less protected targets.

"The target of that terrorist attack was not the Pulse nightclub," Sweeney said. "The target of the attack was Disney."
Sweeney showed a video of the Disney Springs complex that captured Mateen walking near the House of Blues club in the hours before the Pulse attack. In it, he looks behind him at police officers standing nearby.
"He had to choose a new target," she said.
www.cbsnews.com...

originally posted by: Vermilion
a reply to: quintessentone


Most shooters expect to die anyway by police, so armed teachers would not be a deterrent.

I’ll use the Pulse nightclub shooting as one example of why you’re totally wrong.
The shooter had plans to target Disney but was spooked by the cops and had to find a softer/less protected target.
Even though some shooters know they’re going to die, they will still seek softer/less protected targets.

"The target of that terrorist attack was not the Pulse nightclub," Sweeney said. "The target of the attack was Disney."
Sweeney showed a video of the Disney Springs complex that captured Mateen walking near the House of Blues club in the hours before the Pulse attack. In it, he looks behind him at police officers standing nearby.
"He had to choose a new target," she said.
www.cbsnews.com...

There are always exceptions to every situation but what do the majority of school shooters expect to happen to them?

a reply to: quintessentone

It’s irrelevant what the shooter thinks will happen to them.

They want soft targets so they can do maximum damage.
Is this really too hard for you to comprehend?

originally posted by: Vermilion
a reply to: quintessentone

It’s irrelevant what the shooter thinks will happen to them.

They want soft targets so they can do maximum damage.
Is this really too hard for you to comprehend?

You don't know what every shooter wants nor how a shooter will behave in that situation, nobody does.

a reply to: quintessentone

What are the disciplines you want covered?

And why do you want those specific ones covered?

originally posted by: quintessentone
You don't know what every shooter wants nor how a shooter will behave in that situation, nobody does.

SO WHAT?

The teacher doesn't have to psychoanalyze a shooter that comes into his/her classroom. All they have to do is look at the shooter, know that the shooter shouldn't be there and can shoot things up, and then center mass shoot the hell out of the shooter before he/she can hurt anyone in the room.

Very simple.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: quintessentone
You don't know what every shooter wants nor how a shooter will behave in that situation, nobody does.

SO WHAT?

The teacher doesn't have to psychoanalyze a shooter that comes into his/her classroom. All they have to do is look at the shooter, know that the shooter shouldn't be there and can shoot things up, and then center mass shoot the hell out of the shooter before he/she can hurt anyone in the room.

Very simple.

What if the nutcase decides to use bombs or a flamethrower instead?

a reply to: quintessentone

The shooting that sparked this law to be drawn up was not supposed to happen at the the Covenant School. There was another target but due to high security measures/presence, the shooter moved to a softer target.

Most shooters want path of least resistance, that is why they hit soft targets with little to no security, you don't see a mass shooter hitting up a gun show, sporting goods store, or anywhere else there is a high likelihood of an armed resistance.

originally posted by: PorkChop96
a reply to: quintessentone

The shooting that sparked this law to be drawn up was not supposed to happen at the the Covenant School. There was another target but due to high security measures/presence, the shooter moved to a softer target.

Most shooters want path of least resistance, that is why they hit soft targets with little to no security, you don't see a mass shooter hitting up a gun show, sporting goods store, or anywhere else there is a high likelihood of an armed resistance.

Right, so all I am suggesting is remove the soft targets first what's difficult to understand about that reasoning?

As for the psych. eval. I am sure the psych. experts will chime in to educate everyone on what needs to be evaluated.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: quintessentone
You don't know what every shooter wants nor how a shooter will behave in that situation, nobody does.

SO WHAT?

The teacher doesn't have to psychoanalyze a shooter that comes into his/her classroom. All they have to do is look at the shooter, know that the shooter shouldn't be there and can shoot things up, and then center mass shoot the hell out of the shooter before he/she can hurt anyone in the room.

Very simple.

What if the nutcase decides to use bombs or a flamethrower instead?

Ok dude.
It’s time to step back from your keyboard and take a break from posting in this thread.
Give it a few hours, or a day.
Then get back to us with a rational argument if you’re able to then.

In recent years, mass shooters have increasingly targeted a range of venues – churches, synagogues, grocery stores, movie theaters – that have minimal security.

“That’s no surprise, experts who study violence and mass shootings say. These attackers, including the one last weekend in Buffalo, choose so-called “soft targets” where people are largely unprotected and where their bullets will have maximum impact.”
www.cnn.com...
I don’t usually quite CNN but even a broken clock is right twice a day.

a reply to: quintessentone

I don't think you understand what a soft target is......

High security = hard target

Little to no security = soft target

The only way to "remove the soft target" is to add security/armed employees.


Figures, you want to demand things but when asked to elaborate you default to "TPTB will make that call" You are an endless loop of floundering and bs.

originally posted by: PorkChop96
a reply to: quintessentone

I don't think you understand what a soft target is......

High security = hard target

Little to no security = soft target

The only way to "remove the soft target" is to add security/armed employees.


Figures, you want to demand things but when asked to elaborate you default to "TPTB will make that call" You are an endless loop of floundering and bs.

I default to the people who know their stuff unlike you or I regarding psych, evaluations.

originally posted by: Vermilion

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: quintessentone
You don't know what every shooter wants nor how a shooter will behave in that situation, nobody does.

SO WHAT?

The teacher doesn't have to psychoanalyze a shooter that comes into his/her classroom. All they have to do is look at the shooter, know that the shooter shouldn't be there and can shoot things up, and then center mass shoot the hell out of the shooter before he/she can hurt anyone in the room.

Very simple.

What if the nutcase decides to use bombs or a flamethrower instead?

Ok dude.
It’s time to step back from your keyboard and take a break from posting in this thread.
Give it a few hours, or a day.
Then get back to us with a rational argument if you’re able to then.

In recent years, mass shooters have increasingly targeted a range of venues – churches, synagogues, grocery stores, movie theaters – that have minimal security.

“That’s no surprise, experts who study violence and mass shootings say. These attackers, including the one last weekend in Buffalo, choose so-called “soft targets” where people are largely unprotected and where their bullets will have maximum impact.”
www.cnn.com...
I don’t usually quite CNN but even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Just reading the modus operandi of shooters from those who study shooters, but hey just ignore any preparedness safety measures Alabama is putting in place and just keep your focus on arming teachers who will not receive enough training, as stated by law enforcement trainors.

a reply to: quintessentone

Then you don't get to demand anything if you aren't willing to back up your claims and demands. Kind of how that works in the real world bud

We all know you have nothing of real substance to add to this thread accept some dreams about a "bulletproof wall", psych evals (that you refuse to elaborate on), and that arming teachers will endanger more kids than it will help with the only proof being the polling of %20 of the nationwide teachers and claiming it as a majority.

a reply to: quintessentone

An EXPERIMENTAL pilot program that will cost $50-60k per unit.

It's also one school, not the entire state of Alabama.

originally posted by: PorkChop96
a reply to: quintessentone

Then you don't get to demand anything if you aren't willing to back up your claims and demands. Kind of how that works in the real world bud

We all know you have nothing of real substance to add to this thread accept some dreams about a "bulletproof wall", psych evals (that you refuse to elaborate on), and that arming teachers will endanger more kids than it will help with the only proof being the polling of %20 of the nationwide teachers and claiming it as a majority.

The real substance is in all the data and facts I posted, if you want to ignore it all, which you always do, then keep posting what you consider real substance, that being, having armed teachers learn how to shoot straight in a wild western shoot 'em up scenario where the good guy aways wins.

a reply to: quintessentone

You are the only one with the fantasy that it is a "wild western shoot'em up" scenario.

People with more than Hollywood knowledge on firearms know the reality of this, you choose to ignore those people and follow those who also have little to no knowledge on the subject matter.

originally posted by: PorkChop96
a reply to: quintessentone

You are the only one with the fantasy that it is a "wild western shoot'em up" scenario.

People with more than Hollywood knowledge on firearms know the reality of this, you choose to ignore those people and follow those who also have little to no knowledge on the subject matter.

The same can be said for you who has very little knowledge on the subject of preparedness safety measures in schools and if law enforcement, parents, and most teachers are against arming teachers then I am in good company.

a reply to: quintessentone

You have no idea what I know

Again, %20 is not "most teachers". Basic math really isn't your strong suite

I have asked you several times to share your links of protests and you have not been able to do that. You ignore and move on to other goalpost moving arguments.

I am still waiting to see these "protests"