Outrage after NY paper publishes names of gun permit holders

Deerherd · Dec 28, 2012

Pity the fool who uses this list of red dots to determine who has a gun or not. It deals ONLY with handguns. There are many more long guns owned compared to handguns in the state. You can own any number of AR type firearms and not have a "red dot" home.

IslandTractor · Dec 28, 2012

k0ua said:
There was an armed security officer at Columbine he was a Deputy Sheriff. He was outside the school observing students at the "smokers pit" in his car. He returned to the school grounds, and exchanged gunfire with one of the shooters.

At 11:22, the custodian called Deputy Gardner on the school radio, requesting assistance in the Senior parking lot. The only paved route took him around the school to the east and south on Pierce Street, where, at 11:23 he heard on his police radio that a female was down, struck by a car, he assumed. He turned on his lights and siren. While exiting his patrol car in the Senior lot at 11:24, he heard another call on the school radio, "Neil, there's a shooter in the school". Harris, at the West Entrance, immediately fired his rifle at Gardner, who was sixty yards away. Gardner returned fire with his service pistol.

Thus, five minutes after the shooting started, and two minutes after the first radio call, Gardner was engaged in a gun fight with the student shooters. There were already two dead and ten wounded. Harris fired ten shots and Gardner fired four, before Harris ducked back into the building. No one was hit. Gardner reported on his police radio, "Shots in the building. I need someone in the south lot with me!

Note the time , 11:22 the shooting starts. The two killers committed suicide at 12:08. Law enforcement started to enter the building an hour later. and a little over 2 hours later had made it to the Library. Just remember when seconds count, the police are just minutes (or hours as in this case) away. I was a law enforcement officer. And this account disgusts me.

James K0UA

By noon, SWAT teams were stationed outside the school, and ambulances started taking the wounded to local hospitals. Meanwhile, families of students and staff were asked to gather at nearby Leawood Elementary School to await information.
A call for additional ammunition for police officers in case of a shootout came at 12:20 p.m. The killers had ceased shooting just minutes earlier. Authorities reported pipe bombs by 1:00 p.m., and two SWAT teams entered the school at 1:09 p.m., moving from classroom to classroom, discovering hidden students and faculty. All students, teachers, and school employees were taken away, questioned, and offered medical care in small holding areas before being bussed to meet with their family members at Leawood Elementary. Officials found the bodies in the library by 3:30 p.m

So, as Columbine was not prevented by the assignment of an armed professional police officer to the school, how will the NRA proposal be different?

More concerning to me than simply being a failed idea, there is the risk of harm from placing well meaning but potentially unstable volunteers into schools. Professional cops interact daily with their colleagues and supervisors who can notice stress or unusual behavior and remove them from assignments if necessary. Who notices that an armed volunteer shows up at his school deranged or drunk? Of course that would be a rare event but with 10,000 schools and perhaps a total of 50,000 volunteers to keep track of, does anyone think it is unlikely? (Those numbers are pure guesstimates if anyone wonders where I got them).

daugen · Dec 28, 2012

More concerning to me than simply being a failed idea, there is the risk of harm from placing well meaning but potentially unstable volunteers into schools. Professional cops interact daily with their colleagues and supervisors who can notice stress or unusual behavior and remove them from assignments if necessary. Who notices that an armed volunteer shows up at his school deranged or drunk? Of course that would be a rare event but with 10,000 schools and perhaps a total of 50,000 volunteers to keep track of, does anyone think it is unlikely? (Those numbers are pure guesstimates if anyone wonders where I got them).

would we get a TSA grade result? And where is the discussion of non lethal alternatives? Can we get away from guns vs. no guns and think defensive "systems"? Guns as a last resort?

aczlan · Dec 28, 2012

daugen said:
would we get a TSA grade result? And where is the discussion of non lethal alternatives? Can we get away from guns vs. no guns and think defensive "systems"? Guns as a last resort?

That seemed to be the NRA's proposal, a defensive system for the school including (if desired by the school system) armed guards

Aaron Z

k0ua · Dec 28, 2012

IslandTractor said:
So, as Columbine was not prevented by the assignment of an armed professional police officer to the school, how will the NRA proposal be different?

More concerning to me than simply being a failed idea, there is the risk of harm from placing well meaning but potentially unstable volunteers into schools. Professional cops interact daily with their colleagues and supervisors who can notice stress or unusual behavior and remove them from assignments if necessary. Who notices that an armed volunteer shows up at his school deranged or drunk? Of course that would be a rare event but with 10,000 schools and perhaps a total of 50,000 volunteers to keep track of, does anyone think it is unlikely? (Those numbers are pure guesstimates if anyone wonders where I got them).

You know Ed, you can" nit pick" and "what if" this to death.. What if the security guard/voluteer shows up and kills the children?.. What if he does it today while he is not a security gurard? what if, what if.. Geez. no one said putting a guard in a school is a panacea for everything..yes the Columbine guard was caught with his pants down, checking up on kids smoking, and yes he did NOT have an assualt rifle, he was armed with a revolver. IF he had been armed with an assault rifle, Eric Harris would have been dead before he could have killed all the kids in the Library. IF IF IF.. You know you are against any reasonable proposal to possibly stop a killer.. so be it. You hate guns, you distrust ANYONE with a gun, qualified or not, so be it. All you can focus on is "getting rid of assault weapons" what ever the he77 they are. All the facts people have tried to show you have fallen on your deaf ears. Well you may get your wish, but it won't fix the evil in our society. We will continue the struggle with good and evil just like we always have for all these thousands of years.

James K0UA

TripleR · Dec 28, 2012

k0ua said:
You know Ed, you can" nit pick" and "what if" this to death.. What if the security guard/voluteer shows up and kills the children?.. What if he does it today while he is not a security gurard? what if, what if.. Geez. no one said putting a guard in a school is a panacea for everything..yes the Columbine guard was caught with his pants down, checking up on kids smoking, and yes he did NOT have an assualt rifle, he was armed with a revolver. IF he had been armed with an assault rifle, Eric Harris would have been dead before he could have killed all the kids in the Library. IF IF IF.. You know you are against any reasonable proposal to possibly stop a killer.. so be it. You hate guns, you distrust ANYONE with a gun, qualified or not, so be it. All you can focus on is "getting rid of assault weapons" what ever the he77 they are. All the facts people have tried to show you have fallen on your deaf ears. Well you may get your wish, but it won't fix the evil in our society. We will continue the struggle with good and evil just like we always have for all these thousands of years.

James K0UA

Good points, I believe it will require a multilayer approach and no "one size fits all" plan will work everywhere. I also don't believe anything we do, no matter how well designed can totally eliminate such attacks. There are simply too many places school children or others gather where they will be vulnerable. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try, we just need to be realistic.

I won't even pretend to know the answer, but some pretty simple steps could be incorporated to mitigate attacks such as personal body alarms, pepper spray etc. We were constantly drilled on the "Continuum of Force" and defensive tactics which included our clerical staff. These things are not complicated and should be acceptable to most people who get all weak in the knees at the thought of deadly force.

I am not discounting security guards or armed school personnel, I will leave that debate to others. I just think James has a good point, we can nit pick and what if these things to death.

IslandTractor · Dec 28, 2012

k0ua said:
You know Ed, you can" nit pick" and "what if" this to death.. What if the security guard/voluteer shows up and kills the children?.. What if he does it today while he is not a security gurard? what if, what if.. Geez. no one said putting a guard in a school is a panacea for everything..yes the Columbine guard was caught with his pants down, checking up on kids smoking, and yes he did NOT have an assualt rifle, he was armed with a revolver. IF he had been armed with an assault rifle, Eric Harris would have been dead before he could have killed all the kids in the Library. IF IF IF.. You know you are against any reasonable proposal to possibly stop a killer.. so be it. You hate guns, you distrust ANYONE with a gun, qualified or not, so be it. All you can focus on is "getting rid of assault weapons" what ever the he77 they are. All the facts people have tried to show you have fallen on your deaf ears. Well you may get your wish, but it won't fix the evil in our society. We will continue the struggle with good and evil just like we always have for all these thousands of years.

James K0UA

No, I don't think removing rapid fire weapons is the only issue but it is part of a comprehensive solution and the element this discussion has focused on. I don't hate guns. I hate making some types of guns easily available. I have little respect for an organization that thinks the answer to gun violence is more guns. Not sure who first said it but I agree with the adage than a good definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over but expecting a different result. The NRA is a very powerful one trick pony that promotes an insane vision for how to limit these mass murders. Why won't the NRA discuss an Australian type solution which appears to have worked?

RadarTech · Dec 28, 2012

It is sad to say this.....

But the evil that exists knows that we value out kids more than anything... They also know that will be how to "get to us"....
Look around, it really does not matter what means these people take... Guns, bombs, knives, car crashes, poison, they all will wrench out guts out...

Then look at this:
Chicago has the strictest gun laws in the nation and just minutes ago I read how they had 500 homocides this year!

I am willing I bet 99% of the shootings are with unregistered and illegal acquired guns!

RadarTech · Dec 28, 2012

IslandTractor said:
No, I don't think removing rapid fire weapons is the only issue but it is part of a comprehensive solution and the element this discussion has focused on. I don't hate guns. I hate making some types of guns easily available. I have little respect for an organization that thinks the answer to gun violence is more guns. Not sure who first said it but I agree with the adage than a good definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over but expecting a different result. The NRA is a very powerful one trick pony that promotes an insane vision for how to limit these mass murders. Why won't the NRA discuss an Australian type solution which appears to have worked?

How can we say it worked? There are NO stats from before the gun ban...
If there were 5 shootings before the ban an now they have 3 does it really mean it is a success?