# General > General Guns & Ammo >  Armed guards in schools - thoughrs.

## Old Professor

Since the Florida shooting there once again has been calls for armed teachers/guards in schools. As both a certified instructor for concealed   carry and a teacher with some police experience, I have some concerns/observations. First of all, a concealed carry permit does not mean that that person (a teacher in this case) is trained well enough to exchange gunfire with an active shooter armed with an AR 15.  Most can not afford the money for ammo or the range time. IF you favor armed guards walking the school hallways, most articles I have read say or infer that that guard is armed with a hand gun. BAD IDEA! What I think would be needed , if you are really serious about safety, is the European model of Para-mllitary guards armed at a minimum with long guns, not handguns.  I know such a proposal would set off the liberal snowflakes (love that term) into mass hysteria.  But we are even having churches having armed guards now. Knowing that the schools and churches have armed guards would not totally prevent active shooters but would certainly deter most.

----------


## Rick

I have no problem with armed guards with hand guns. Any weapon is better than no weapon, which is what they armed with at the moment. When we do away with "NO GUN" zones we give everyone a fighting a chance. Why do you think arming with a hand gun is a bad idea? Being concealed does not broadcast and gives the defender the the advantage of surprise. The reverse is also true. You can arm a guard with a long gun and a conceal carry bad guy walk in a drop them simply because the bad guy knows who they are. 

We need to start by hardening the building and zoning fire alarms. That might have saved kids.

----------


## madmax

I wouldn't want to go up against an AR 15 with a handgun.

Fence the schools.  One entrance.  Metal detector.  Properly armed and trained guards. 

Good luck getting the money from a tax increase for schools from retired people.  They tend to vote against that.  And we have a ton of retired folks.

----------


## rfmanning

I think all should read "Terror at Beslan: A Russian Tragedy with Lessons for America's Schools" You can read the Wiki here; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beslan_school_siege

----------


## Phaedrus

Like Madmax said good luck getting the funds for genuine security.  Every time we have an incident like this upset people call for further restrictions on firearms and/or more security in schools.  But after a couple months emotions die down and people's opinions return to the resting point near where they were before the shooting.  Security sounds great- lots of things sound great in the abstract- but when actually called to fund those things people tend to balk.  It comes down to the actual risks involved vs the public perceptions, too.  I don't have access to the statistics right now but as bad as the shooting was (17 dead IIRC) I wouldn't be surprised if 17 or more kids died in traffic accidents across the US on the same day.  Just as it's unreasonable to ban ten millions ARs (IMO) due to a handful being misused it's probably also unreasonable to turn half a million schools into fortresses because of a handful of incidents in a few of them.

We can have a high degree of freedom to live as we choose or a high degree of freedom from street crime but probably not both.  We as a society need to have a sober discussion as to where we want to set our thermostat.  If we want to be free to conduct our lives without a lot of intrusion upon it from the State then we'll have to accept that sometimes bad people will do bad things.  If we want the government to protect us from every possible harm then we must be willing to accept that a lot of our life choices will no longer be our own.

I think the US needs to do a lot better job of root cause mitigation.  The guy that did this was well known to everyone and had a long history of issues.  Yet no one had the resources or ability to do anything until he shot up a school.  We need to figure out how to interdict the worst cases before things come down to gunfire.

----------


## Alan R McDaniel Jr

As a former Educator/Administrator, I have some opinions on this subject.  I know a good many teachers who would perform the task of carrying a handgun concealed throughout the day.  Some of them might be able to effectively thwart an attack.  I know a LOT of teachers who I would not want to be in the building with them if they had a gun.

School districts have janitors who perform a needed task.  It seems there is another needed task that needs to be addressed.  We need armed security guards(specialists) who have one function, Security.  They need to be commissioned by the local law enforcement agency.  They then will choose from Teacher/Administrator/et volunteers who will likewise be armed.  Teachers go to classes to get all kinds of certifications to enhance education.  We need to have them becoming certified LEOs as well.  

This last little bugger was not like many previous school shooters.  He didn't, nor did he have any intention of offing himself when he was through.  He even devised and escape plan, got away, had snack and went about his business.  We will see more like him.  

There is no doubt something needs to be done, and more gun laws aren't it.  School shooters could care less about laws.  Take away their guns and they'll move on to bombs.  The only way to stop them is to stop them before they do any damage.  Of course calling the FBI may not be a good start, but call local LE and let them know if something untoward is seen, read, heard, or whatever.

Alan

----------


## randyt

In the school in my town there is a safety officer, he is a deputy from the sheriff office. He is there during school hours and at school functions. He is armed

----------


## kyratshooter

Every school I taught in, since the mid-1970s, has had an armed deputy on site.

It is only in the snowflake zones that do not have this provision where the debate is going on.

They want to "be safe" but they do not have a concept of self defense or understand what makes them safe.

----------


## LowKey

Hardening the buildings would go far. When an incident occurs like this, the security gets all tight, then with time it relaxes, doors get left unlocked, windows open, etc. I can't remember the last time I had to be buzzed into a school building to do an installation. 

Possibly having a hardened panic room between each two or 4 classrooms might be a consideration. Or it might be a deathtrap depending on what the terrorist has with him. 

Yes, these pukes should be considered terrorists.

The snowflakes totally derided the NRA when armed officers were first suggested by them after Sandyhook. Seems quite a number of schools have quietly followed that advice though, calling them "resource officers." We do have them here in the Snowflake zone. They are uniformed and armed.

----------


## Solar Geek

I had the yuck job of convincing the Catholic school that my went to that they needed to 'lock down' the 7 open entrances. That's right 7 open entrances all day including coming in from the completely wide open church that was attached. No cameras, no intercoms, just a welcome into the school.

Well it took 2 years, lots of fund raising, and I lost a bunch of "friends" over it, but it is now in lockdown at all times with bullet proof glass and many many safety drills and precautions. We should all remember Laurie Dann in Illinois, 1986-1988. She was one of if not THE first to shoot up a school. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurie_Dann
s

----------


## Phaedrus

> Every school I taught in, since the mid-1970s, has had an armed deputy on site.
> 
> It is only in the snowflake zones that do not have this provision where the debate is going on.
> 
> They want to "be safe" but they do not have a concept of self defense or understand what makes them safe.


That strikes me as very odd.  Did you teach in very wealthy areas?  I grew up in a red state that's probably almost as hillbilly as KY and I'd never heard of any school having armed security back in those days, even in the "big cities" (meaning 55,000 and 120,000 respectively).  Heck, I don't think they even have any now!  Of course I went to school in a one-horse town, maybe even a half-a-horse town, so there was certainly no money in the budget for armed guards! On the other hand, I took my hunting rifle to show-and-tell when I was in 8th grade and the teacher had a go at dry firing it himself so guns didn't freak anyone out.

It was a different time, of course.  I had never heard of a school shooting although there probably were some.  We were so naive that it never even occurred to us to call people 'snowflakes' for disagreeing with us.  It was a different, more civilized age I suppose.

----------


## BENESSE

Yes to all measures, including armed guards, metal detector entrances and especially taking reports of suspicious activities more seriously, The FBI dropped the ball on this one big time and they should be ashamed of themselves. What's the point of promoting "when you see something, say something", if it doesn't get the follow through it needs? They gave up too soon. (we know they can pursue leads with no merit when it suits them...but that's a political topic)

As far as funding security: I am guessing every parent in every school will be happy to pay extra $ toward keeping their kids safer. Just ask the parents who lost children...what they wouldn't have sacrificed to have them back. I know I would. Just because we can't save every life doesn't mean we shouldn't try to save the few we can.

----------


## Rick

People think this is a brand new phenomenon. It isn't. It is just new to them. School shootings go all the way back to the 1700s when indians massacred a school in Pennsylvania (Enoch School Massacre). They didn't actually shoot them but they wound up dead none-the-less.

Since then there have been school shootings every decade. Most of you probably don't remember Charles Whitman in the University of Texas Massacre. He took out 17 in 1966 and wounded 31 with a hunting rifle. He proved you don't need high capacity mags or uber ugly AR 15s to take out a lot of people but we forget about things like that.

----------


## BENESSE

Well, it's not a new phenomenon but it does seem to have picked up with some frequency. We can debate the reasons till the cows come home and won't ever get to the bottom of it as we haven't so far. But that should not be the reason to do nothing, even the smallest measures can make some difference. Any life saved is worth it.

----------


## JohnLeePettimore

> Most of you probably don't remember Charles Whitman in the University of Texas Massacre. He took out 17 in 1966 and wounded 31 with a hunting rifle. He proved you don't need high capacity mags or uber ugly AR 15s to take out a lot of people but we forget about things like that.


I was only 4 years old when that happened, but it was talked about for a long time because I remember hearing about it when I was little.

----------


## Old Professor

I read on the news that there was an armed security guard on duty in that school in Florida, He was in another part of the building when the shooting started and of course, the shooter fled quickly.  What does that tell you about putting ONE armed security guard to cover an entire building?   Did any one else read or hear that the shooter tried to shoot through one classroom window and the bullets bounced off?  While bullet prof glass is useless if the doors are nor locked, it is a much cheaper security  measure that paying armed guards. (Not that I advocate only bullet prof glass)

----------


## Old Professor

I just read an item on FOX News TV, that a high school student has invented a door barring mechanism that prevents anyone from forcing a door, even if they shoot off the lock.  He is manufacturing them and selling them to schools. One school district in Florida has purchased 50 at a cost of $95 a piece. Another school district in Wisconsin has also bought 50.

----------


## crashdive123

> I read on the news that there was an armed security guard on duty in that school in Florida, He was in another part of the building when the shooting started and of course, the shooter fled quickly.  What does that tell you about putting ONE armed security guard to cover an entire building?   Did any one else read or hear that the shooter tried to shoot through one classroom window and the bullets bounced off?  While bullet prof glass is useless if the doors are nor locked, it is a much cheaper security  measure that paying armed guards. (Not that I advocate only bullet prof glass)


Armed security only works when access points are controlled.  Just like a courthouse, Congress, sporting event.....If there are limited access points, then they are far easier to control and screen.

----------


## Alan R McDaniel Jr

Access points are a huge problem.  Most schools were built and added on to without consideration of security (why should there be that consideration, it's a school).  I spent a lot of time locking doors that were left unlocked by people too lazy to turn a key.  Even if you can't get in all you have to do is knock,  a student will let you in.

Anyway, nobody is really much concerned about security until something bad happens.  Then it is only used to find someone to blame.  Kids already complain that the school is like a prison.....  Now they're walking out down in Florida to get tougher gun laws.  People who cannot follow rules want more laws.

Alan

----------


## Rick

I love Randy's Signature....


so the definition of a criminal is someone who breaks the law and you want me to believe that somehow more laws make less criminals?

We'll just keeping banning the next tool de jour until there is nothing left to ban. China is suppose to have 600 million CCTV cameras in place by 2020. That should make for a much safer country. Yeah, that's the ticket.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170630/07045437703/chinas-surveillance-plans-include-600-million-cctv-cameras-nationwide-pervasive-facial-recognition.shtml

----------


## Pinsc

I think its time to offer more online options for families to use. I think having guarded entry points makes sense in buildings.

----------


## LowKey

We already have a generation of social misfits who can't interact with other people at work or in real life. Kids need to be socialized. More internet isn't the answer to everything.

----------


## WalkingTree

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P89CBU8E6jU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hR3t7j2tUec

----------


## Alan R McDaniel Jr

Evidently having an armed security guard doesn't work if he's a coward.

Alan

----------


## madmax

> Evidently having an armed security guard doesn't work if he's a coward.
> 
> Alan


I was thinking somewhat along those lines while reading all the babbling of the rabble on the net.  I am not taking a poke at any police,  but I'm not sure the typical "School Resource Officer"  is the answer.  On the other end of the spectrum would be a battle hardened vet.  But I'm really skeptical that they would be satisfied with performing that duty.  Then again, I'm blowing smoke because I have no experience in any of that. 

 Our superintendent of schools came from teaching pre-K.  She super nice.  I taught next door to her.  And she has no clue as to how to choose armed guards in our schools.  Unless the shooter is 5 years old.

----------


## Rick

When it comes to people under pressure the old adage of "you can't judge a book by its cover," is never truer.

----------


## Manwithnoname

My two cents worth, most of it's already been covered but you can't secure a building (s) with multiple points of ingress/egress without a small army. One entry/exit. Metal detector and no one gets in without proper id and/or prior authorization.   As for the who, there's a ton of unemployed vets nation wide. The job would give them purpose and be an honor to them to protect a building full of kids.

----------


## edr730

I heard of a man on a city council or what ever. He said they had a problem with meeting the budget so they put a satellite police station within the school buildings to save money. They increased security and saved money at the same time.

----------


## Pinsc

I heard that caller on Rush also, great idea I thought. They could make it a hub for police, sherif, and state patrol. That way a constant unknown stream of law enforcement coming and going.

----------


## edr730

Yes, it was on Rush...it seemed a reasonable idea to me. At least it was working for them.

----------


## jim Glass

Having teachers conceal carry on a voluntary basis could be a deterrent for school shooter.  This is somewhat of a backward approach to the problem.    We need to find the root  cause of these mass shootings.    Guns have not changed but society has.   The root cause is mental illness something our society has neglected with budget cuts.   Also we have set limits on what discipline  teachers can apply to keep order in the class room.   Now we talk about arming the teachers with guns.  I think the news media is also a source of our problems.

Another concern is the police officers at the school, 4 of them, decided not to enter the school during the shooting.   Other police agencies had a heads up on this shooter as well and did little or nothing about it.  So....if people aren't going to do their jobs then where does that leave us.   Pawn the job onto the teachers??  However, if it takes the police 5+ minutes to respond to a school shooting maybe the school administration should have defensive weapons locked up, they could respond to a shooting in a minute or two.  Police departments within the schools is a very attractive idea and cost effective.

People under age 21 should not have rifles or handguns unless a parent or guardian is present.    If little Johnny wants  to go duck hunting he can carry a shotgun.   Kids now days are to immature to buy or have access to a rifle or pistol.   This is not a cure all but a first step.   Don't get me wrong, I support the 2nd amendment but there are weapons that I'm not aloud to buy, build or posses and do not feel my  2nd amendment rights are infringed upon.

----------


## Rick

My son and I were talking about this yesterday. When I was a kid it was nothing for a bunch of us to have guns in the car in the school parking lot because we were going hunting after school. Kids were even known to carry shotguns on the school bus because they were going to go with someone after school. I walked off to the woods as a kid with a 12 gauge and a couple of shells. Walked down the street with it over my shoulder and out to the woods. None of us sat in front of a TV for hours on end blowing stuff up and killing. I don't know if that has anything to do with it but it seems like de-sensitizing must play a role. Movies seem to be more violent although John Wayne always seemed to kill his fair share of Germans or Injuns. (They weren't indigenous back then). So, yeah, society has changed. He suggested locking guns away in a school and I asked him if he wanted teachers to stroll past the shooter to get to the guns. If you are going to arm people inside a school then they need to be on the person. That's sort of like a cop having his/her weapon in the cruiser. At least to me. It doesn't have to be the teacher either. There are janitors, administrators, principles, and the person that really needs to be there, the school police officer(s). IMHO.

----------


## Old Professor

You hit it right on the head , Rick. I could not agree more!

----------


## Seniorman

> " ... People under age 21 should not have rifles or handguns unless a parent or guardian is present.    If little Johnny wants  to go duck hunting he can carry a shotgun.   Kids now days are to immature to buy or have access to a rifle or pistol.   This is not a cure all but a first step.   Don't get me wrong, I support the 2nd amendment but there are weapons that I'm not aloud to buy, build or posses and do not feel my  2nd amendment rights are infringed upon.


So, you're "first step" is to outlaw young men and women from owning and carrying their rifles and pistols hunting, or for other outdoor activities, unless mommy or daddy were along, to supervise.  

Also, you believe young veterans under 21 should have their Second Amendment Rights outlawed, too.  Spent two or three years with an M16 (full auto) in hand, but once out of military service, can't own a rifle or pistol without mommy's or daddy's supervision.  

How many times we see the gun control crowd who sanctimoniously state, "Don't get me wrong, I support the 2nd amendment *but* ...." There's always that modifying word "*BUT*,"and then go on to lay out their "first step," or "second step" or "third step," ad nauseum in order to EVENTUALLY destroy the Second Amendment. 

There is an old saying, "Life is hard by the yard but a cinch by the inch."  The anti-Second Amendment Left say, "Inch by inch by inch by inch by inch to achieve our goal."

Perhaps you're not in that crowd, yet, but you're definitely traveling on the edge of it.




> _"JIM GLASS - Kids now days are to immature to buy or have access to a rifle or pistol."_


Some are, but many are not.  Then some adults are too immature to own not only guns, but cars, alcohol, or the right to vote.  But we don't demonize all adults because of the irresponsibility of a few, do we.  Do we?????

S.M.

----------


## jim Glass

Seniorman: I cannot disagree with what you say particularly on the veterans.   I'm just saying age limits on certain firearms is something I could accept.   Age limits on certain firearms will not change what adults do with guns.   You are right about that. I'm afraid of what the politicians will come up with because it won't be anything that will work and won't be anything intelligent.

I'll give an inch or two to the gun control liberals to avoid what Australia did.   They have a graduated system where some guns are easy to obtain and other more difficult.   Semi-auto almost impossible to obtain.   I have know idea how they got such a bill passed and the information on how well their gun control works is mixed.

----------


## jim Glass

News from Florida:

Florida lawmakers shot down an amendment on Monday that would have banned semi-automatic assault weapons like the AR-15 used in the Parkland school massacre.

They did, however, agree to raise the legal age for purchasing a firearm to 21  and approved legislation that would give teachers the right to carry guns in school, NBC-2 reports.

Not sure how long this link will work :https://nypost.com/2018/02/26/florid...to-carry-guns/

----------


## Rick

Too bad they didn't bother to vote to harden their schools. When some guy walks in with 5 gallons of gas and a road flare they might think about it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cologne_school_massacre

----------


## edr730

I don't believe police officers have ever entered a building during a mass shooting in recent years. They have always waited outside. I am not defending or condemning anyone just stating the facts that I believe to be true. If I am wrong I will stand corrected. I do support hardening of the schools, however, I'm not sure that some things like better locks on glass doors would help. I support rifles or concealed carry in the schools. I don't support stopping the 10's of thousands of youths who hunt during deer season.

----------


## Grizz123

You guys dont understand that the real problem is the NRA


LOL, just trying to lighten things up a bit.

I like the idea of teachers CCW. They know the kids and know which ones to look out for and most likely the first ones to report the bad/questionable kids to the authorities but the absolute LAST thing anyone one of them want is to be forced into a position of shooting any kid to defend other kids

----------


## jim Glass

> I don't support stopping the 10's of thousands of youths who hunt during deer season.


I don't support stopping youths who hunt deer either but the youths can still hunt deer with a shotgun/rifled slug.    In Florida an 18 Year old "was" able to buy an AR-15, 5 round magazine and use it for deer hunting.   Doesn't seem right to me but I'm from Illinois where everyone hunts deer with a rifled slug not AR-15s.   Don't get me wrong I shot a wild hog an hour ago with an AR-15, in Florida at night.

----------


## Alan R McDaniel Jr

Decide on what is age one has to attain to be considered an adult.  At that age a person gets to enjoy all the "perks" of adulthood.  Buying/owning a gun, any gun,  should not be limited to adults.  Somewhere along the line, parents stopped teaching gun safety.  In fact teaching gun safety at all became taboo.  I tried to no avail to get an "Eddy Eagle" program started in our schools.  The idea was continually rejected.  I told them that it was a gun safety class.  All they heard was "gun"...

I, like many others of my generation, were taught early on the rules of gun safety.  Violations, if any, were dealt with swiftly and severly (as were any other vilolations) so we learned quickly.  No one gave it a second thought to see me walking through town with my shotgun headed for the woods.  I kept that same shotgun in my dorm room at college and the cafeteria ladies fried my squirrels for me.  I'd walk down the dorm hallway, get on the elevator, ride down, cross the tracks and I was hunting in five min.  I never once entertained the thought of shooting anyone, or anything that I wasn't supposed to shoot.  Never  crossed my mind.  I had been taught NOT to shoot people or things I did not intend to eat.

THAT is what's wrong today, not the age at which a person buys a gun.  I've seen old men do stupid things with guns.  Age is possibly the worst gage of a persons maturity.

Alan

----------


## randyt

in our school there are hunter safety classes which in reality are firearm safety classes.

----------


## Seniorman

> " *I don't support stopping youths who hunt deer either but the youths can still hunt deer with a shotgun/rifled slug.*   In Florida an 18 Year old "was" able to buy an AR-15, 5 round magazine and use it for deer hunting.   Doesn't seem right to me but I'm from Illinois where everyone hunts deer with a rifled slug not AR-15s. ..."


So a .223 bullet from an AR15 will kill a large hog but will not kill a deer, huh?  

You've never been hunting out here in the west, have you?  Anyone who comes out here to the great, vast, western country and hunts elk, Mule deer, antelope, wolves, coyotes, etc., with a shotgun and rifled slugs, will never take home meat.

Perhaps your ol' twelve bore with rifled slugs works for you and others in your area to kill a whitetail deer in the thick Illinois woods in which you hunt, but out here, you and anyone who comes out with nothing but a shotgun and a rifled slug, will be eating "tag soup."  I suggest you save your money and don't come.  

I've hunted big game all over the Rocky Mountain west and the Sierra and Trinity Mountains of Calif., and I have *NEVER* seen anyone, man or woman or youth (under 21), using a shotgun.  Suggest to the several millions hunters hunting for big game in the west they use a shotgun and rifled slugs and they'll look at you like you fell out of a tree on your head. 

Your "No rifles or pistols for anyone under 21," is just another step in the step-by-step-by-step tactics of the far Left gun grabbers.

S.M.

----------


## jim Glass

For the most part gun control is a state issue.  There are 20 million people in Florida, 12 million people in Illinois, 3 million in Iowa, 1.6 million in Idaho.   I'm not saying Idaho has do be like Florida or any other state.    I sincerely hope nothing changes in Idaho, sounds like a great place

----------


## crashdive123

To anybody that *truly* believes that raising the age to purchase a rifle (or pistol as has already been done) to the age of 21 will help, I would ask.......Since words have started more conflicts, wars, etc. why don't we then make it a law that nobody can speak out until they are 21.  I mean if we are going to curtail the Second Amendment, we may as well do it to the First as well.

----------


## madmax

I hate to think about when Generation Z starts voting.

----------


## BENESSE

If it's OK to use an AR-15 for hunting, then why not claymore mines or dynamite? 
Is there a line or does ANYthing go?

----------


## crashdive123

Miss B --- an AR-15 or any of the variants of it from other manufacturers is nothing more than a semi-automatic rifle - just as the Ruger 10-22 is and hundreds of others.  It is not a military weapon.  IMO it receives so much ire because of the way it looks.  The way it works is no different than any other semi-automatic rifle.

----------


## Rick

Jim has been using an AR 15 to hunt hogs just fine. It's just another rifle. Please don't take this as anything other than an attempt to educate. The difference between an AR15 and any other hunting rifle is knowledge.

----------


## kyratshooter

deleted......

----------


## Alan R McDaniel Jr

As much as I think all the hoopla on Gun Control is Horse$#!t, and how much I dislike anything that is being planned in our government dealing with it, I just close my eyes for a moment and allow myself to slip into that alternate reality where Hillary Clinton is President of the United States right now....

I open my eyes and come back to REAL reality and all this doesn't seem so bad...

Alan

----------


## BENESSE

@ Crash: Believe it or not, I don't have a problem with AR-15 when it comes to self-defense, nor do I think it should be banned. Since I am not a hunter, I was only bringing it up in that context, nothing more.

----------


## BENESSE

> As much as I think all the hoopla on Gun Control is Horse$#!t, and how much I dislike anything that is being planned in our government dealing with it, I just close my eyes for a moment and allow myself to slip into that alternate reality where Hillary Clinton is President of the United States right now....
> 
> I open my eyes and come back to REAL reality and all this doesn't seem so bad...
> 
> Alan


You can say that again!

----------


## Alan R McDaniel Jr

I've hunted with two of my ARs.  They are not my first choice.  I prefer other configurations for hunting.  

One of the scariest rifles mankind has ever produced weighs 9.5#, holds only 8 rounds (2 fewer than a "high capacity" mag"), does not have a detachable magazine, and could produce untold carnage in a crowded room or hallway, can shoot through cinder block walls with ease, and IS NOT BLACK or have handle or a pistol grip.

I've hunted with one of those too.  Not my first choice either.

Alan

----------


## crashdive123

> @ Crash: Believe it or not, I don't have a problem with AR-15 when it comes to self-defense, nor do I think it should be banned. Since I am not a hunter, I was only bringing it up in that context, nothing more.


I do not question your motives, nor your sentiments.  I am not a hunter either, but I do own a few AR style rifles.  Having done a bit of research, there are a lot of hunters that use an AR style rifle for hunting, depending on what they are hunting.  For many hunting applications the AR-15 is under powered for the target game.  Yes, there are other calibers available in the AR style in addition to the 223/5.56, but the 223/5.56 is what most refer to.

----------


## Seniorman

For those who think that the left doesn't want to ban and confiscate ALL your/our firearms, take a look at this towering pyramid of intellect.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018...plete-gun-ban/

S.M.

----------


## Bishop

So if you have to be 21 to buy or own a rifle or shot gun then are you not allowed to join the services until your 21 no drafts until your 21 funny I enlisted in the Marines at 16 went to boot camp at 17 knew more about weapons than the men that were in the army and Navy that had swapped over to the Marines this whole country all f Ed up hey I know let's make drugs legal take guns away from everyone it really don't matter to me I don't need a gun I just think that the fact ever one thinks the gun makes people shoot other people

----------


## Antonyraison

> Miss B --- an AR-15 or any of the variants of it from other manufacturers is nothing more than a semi-automatic rifle - just as the Ruger 10-22 is and hundreds of others.  It is not a military weapon.  IMO it receives so much ire because of the way it looks.  The way it works is no different than any other semi-automatic rifle.


what I know of rifles and firearms is poorly lacking...
But what I do know is I have shot with an Ar-15... and shot with more traditional hunting rifles like .22 bolt action and 303 rifles
And we have hunted with Ar-15.
I whole heatedly agree with this statement...
An Ar15 is a semi auto rifle and is not much different than any rifle.
It is getting a lot of hype likely because of its looks..
But the .223 round that goes in these things is small in comparison to some other rifles... its just the velocity I would imagine that makes it so effective etc.. its really overly hyped..
Its really decent to hunt with.
And this is coming from An extreme noob in fire-arms.. I dont even own a fire-arm..
But even I can see and tell its overly hyped.

----------


## Antonyraison

> I don't support stopping youths who hunt deer either but the youths can still hunt deer with a shotgun/rifled slug.    In Florida an 18 Year old "was" able to buy an AR-15, 5 round magazine and use it for deer hunting.   Doesn't seem right to me but I'm from Illinois where everyone hunts deer with a rifled slug not AR-15s.   Don't get me wrong I shot a wild hog an hour ago with an AR-15, in Florida at night.


we have hunted rooibok/ Impala with an Ar15.. just fine..
and I am pretty sure a deer would be likely a similar size..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impala

----------


## BENESSE

> I do not question your motives, nor your sentiments. I am not a hunter either, but I do own a few AR style rifles. Having done a bit of research, there are a lot of hunters that use an AR style rifle for hunting, depending on what they are hunting. For many hunting applications the AR-15 is under powered for the target game. Yes, there are other calibers available in the AR style in addition to the 223/5.56, but the 223/5.56 is what most refer to.


Thanks, Crash. 
My access to a variety of firearms is extremely limited here and theoretical knowledge is just that-theoretical. As with any tool, you have to actually use it in order to appreciate what it's all about. 

Several months ago I bought myself a nail gun. I was working alongside a carpenter who was doing some work in our apartment and he thought I should try it out. It was heavy, unwieldy and it seemed to have a lot power that could inflict some damage if not used correctly. I almost gave up but he kept encouraging me. Well, once I got the hang of it, I wondered how I managed to live without it all these years. So I got one...from Santa.

----------


## kyratshooter

There you have it Mrs B.

The root cause of our concerns.

Putting 25 people that don't known $h!t about a gun in a room to decide what laws will be imposed on the rest of the nation.

----------


## BENESSE

> There you have it Mrs B.
> 
> The root cause of our concerns.
> 
> Putting 25 people that don't known $h!t about a gun in a room to decide what laws will be imposed on the rest of the nation.


I totally agree, kyrat.
Something has to be done, but banning certain firearms ain't it. Enforcing the existing laws, however, would be a great start, imho.

----------


## 2dumb2kwit

> Thanks, Crash. 
> My access to a variety of firearms is extremely limited here and theoretical knowledge is just that-theoretical. As with any tool, you have to actually use it in order to appreciate what it's all about. 
> 
> Several months ago I bought myself a nail gun. I was working alongside a carpenter who was doing some work in our apartment and he thought I should try it out. It was heavy, unwieldy and it seemed to have a lot power that could inflict some damage if not used correctly. I almost gave up but he kept encouraging me. Well, once I got the hang of it, I wondered how I managed to live without it all these years. So I got one...from Santa.


Police:  Why does this robber/rapist have 37 nails sticking out of his chest and head?

Ms. B: I didn't have time to reload.

----------


## BENESSE

> Police:  Why does this robber/rapist have 37 nails sticking out of his chest and head?
> 
> Ms. B: I didn't have time to reload.


 :Lol:  
Nice to see you 2D, where you been?

----------


## edr730

At one time we had the broken window theory now we have the promise program.

----------


## Desert Rat!

https://www.browardprevention.org/behavior/promise/  It looks like the Florida School shooter may have been part of this program, maybe a reason for no criminal record,( just my thoughts no proof that's the case)

----------


## BENESSE

> https://www.browardprevention.org/behavior/promise/ It looks like the Florida School shooter may have been part of this program, maybe a reason for no criminal record,( just my thoughts no proof that's the case)


Yeah, but there was a "mental" record a mile long and so many "heads up" about his potential danger that it boggles the mind how he wasn't stopped. People said something because they saw plenty...and it meant nothing. That's what I'm mad about.

----------


## Desert Rat!

I'm with you missB , something is truly wrong here.

----------


## crashdive123

Government failed at every level to prevent this shooting that was very preventable.  Now, many want that same government to take away our guns with the caveat that we'll protect you.  I don't think so.

----------


## madmax

The promise program is yet another attempt to parent children that have no or rotten parents.

There seems to be a backlash to the backlash of gun violence.  It's heating up.

My wife is a elementary school PE teacher.  She is asking for a gate at the back of the field so that if they have to evacuate they don't have to go through the school.  Evacuation is the last ditch act to try and escape the shooter in the A.L.I.C.E. program in place.  Alert.  Lockdown.  Inform.  Counter.  Evacuate.  The first 3 are admins actions.  The last 2 are up to the teacher.  Counter is locking the door.  Lay down.  Silence.  If the shooter is trying to get in anyway... Evacuate any way you can.  Break a window and get out for example.  Here is where the fence around the school with one entrance and exit fails.   The shooter will likely know that one exit.  There's no easy fix.

----------


## LowKey

This state is trying to fast-track two laws described as "extreme risk protection orders." Here is the state gun-owners association legislative alert:
http://blog.goal.org/goal-alert-oppose-erpo/

I'd watch out for these types of things. 
While they may sound good, they only really target licensed gun owners in their wording. There is no provision in the text to search a felon's living accommodations for illegal weapons and no other license revocations are mentioned. It gives law enforcement officers the power of "diagnosis" but gives no outline as to what qualifications the LEO should use or have. In a place where quite a few police chiefs believe "only crazy people want to own guns," this opens new doors for them, while providing no help and might possibly precipitate attacks given the long action sequence required.

And once you do something with the ones that act out (multiple police visits, incarcerations, or violent history,) what do you do about the ones who are true psychopaths who shows no signs until the moment of the crime?

----------


## crashdive123

Not only do they target legal gun owners, they violate their Constitutional rights at several levels.

----------


## WalkingTree

My sister's boyfriend's son...he's 10 or 12 or something like that, she says that he's "_SO_ smart and grown-up" (over the phone, me and my sister are separated by a few U.S. states). She puts a lot of emphasis on it, that it boggles her mind. Him and his dad are outdoorsy...fishing, hunting, etc. She says that he is so absolutely intelligent and "together". I think that he was simply exposed to things early and taught right.

I think that they should focus more on education and qualification. As in you have to demonstrate a high standard of responsibility and proficiency before legally allowed to own a firearm (not necessarily including marksmanship). Whether you think of one then the other as a right or a privilege...it's like with having a driver's license. I think that it's too easy to get one. The things that you have to demonstrate in your driving test, and the questions that you have to answer in your written test...don't come close to what's needed to operate a motor vehicle alongside of others, which itself can be deemed a deadly weapon. There's a befuddlement here - the thing that's called a privilege is easy to get, and the thing that's called a right is a little harder to get (? I think, going by what many say).

Of course, after requiring some demonstration of responsibility and knowledge, we're still left with a person's intentions or psychological stability. That's harder to test for or recognize, and leaves a big door open for ambiguity and subjectivity. Even abuse.

On a wacky note: Was channel surfing. Ran across the original Battlestar Galactica. Pilot was on some planet, in some village of humans wherein there was a malfunctioning Cylon (a robot dude. Cylons want to kill all humans.) And this cylon was just obeying a particular wanabe gangster type human, like he was a hired gunslinger. The pilot was thinking of confronting this cylon, with his laser gun on his hip...

...this woman and the pilot were arguing, and she was saying "my husband was killed by a laser", not wanting the lazer gun to be in the house or carried into town. And then when someone potentially hostile was approaching the house, she ran to grab the rifle that was hanging over the fireplace.

Struck me as so funny. And made me think of all this. My husband was killed by a lazer. Not the robots out to kill all humans, but the laser. Y'all will be happy to know that the Viper pilot responded with "my wife was killed with a laser", and proceeded to say something about the hand that wielded the lazer.

- - - -

Kinda sorta off topic, but very related (work places versus schools, but can still apply): I worry about how we always focus on how bad the shooter is...or the one trying to stab people, or whatever, in some group setting. They are always bad or messed up in some way...always their fault completely. Not that it's okay for someone to do that, and not that they aren't apparently messed up in some way for deciding to do such a thing. But we almost never hear any commentary on what may be going on socially within a given group that someone ends up targeting...except for attention given to "bullying" in social media or in a school, I guess.

That'd be really hard to do and nail down, of course, and even be quite awful after such an incident. But, for example, every industry in general, and every workplace in particular, is quite prone to having a kind of culture and bubble of it's own. Even in the same school, one year's class and another's can be very different from each other, concerning total behavoral zeitgeist. It often turns out that these kinds of bubbles intrinsically encourage certain bad tendencies in human nature, for the group collectively. I've seen it happen a lot, my whole life, in different workplaces and other settings. An individual will get done very wrong, and the group be completely in the wrong. Whenever you have this happen on an extreme scale and/or in an ongoing fashion, and combine it with someone who might be more prone to having this kind of response for a variety of reasons...I'm sure that some cases are like this and the group was asking for it (so to speak). It doesn't make it ok, and I'm not downplaying any victims or their tragedy, but I think that's something that gets forgotten when people think of this stuff because of the coverage...that in a mass killing there may be some instances wherein it wasn't "just because he/she was unstable or disgruntled".

Just like how the metoo movement worries me. Hate those double-edged swords: Metoo would go a long way to help things, yet I bet that many people are way too quick to believe accusers, and way too willing to lie and abuse the power this movement gives them.

----------


## Alan R McDaniel Jr

I don't think that the government, at any level, should be in the business of deciding when a person can legally own a firearm.  "The Government" is already up to its eyebrows in our business anyway.  They can't perform the functions to which they have been assigned by The Constitution, so what they do is get in our business to smoke screen the fact that they are incompetent.

Alan

----------


## Rick

Because they can.

----------


## hayshaker

kids and safty are nothing more than selling points. the real message is
the wholesale banning of firearms in america. children are but pawns in this
war to disarm america. as for safety that's a joke. our govt allows drug companies
to push phychotropics drugs to children. full well knowing for over 3 decades
that they cause people to go on rampages and commit suicide as well.
always it's get the guns get the guns it's a mantra of the left.

----------


## highlo

The nutjobs could be doing far more damage with more easily-obtained, more deadly weapons, of which I will not speak, and get away with it, to repeat. Move the cops and metal detectors from the courthouse, DMV, SS, etc, to the schools where they are actually needed.. Adults can carry their own guns. Kids cannot.

----------


## fmools

We need to start by hardening the building and zoning fire alarms. That might have saved kids.

----------


## Alan R McDaniel Jr

I've said it before...

My dad went to Texas A&M.  He had a ring.  On the ring is an eagle and shield.  I have little eagle/shields tattooed all over the back of my head.  Every time I even thought about doing something stupid, much less unsafe with a gun, .... whap! another tattoo.  

If there was more tattooing from an early age there would be fewer problems all around.

Alan

----------


## Alan R McDaniel Jr

I got up 188 mornings of 24 years and went off to work with one of my thought processes centering around "what if" scenarios involving students with guns.  I only, personally, had to take two guns from children who had brought them to school with a specific purpose in mind.  I was involved in obtaining several more while helping others.  There were a number more that were simply brought out of negligence (notice I did not say "by accident").  In those 24 years there was never a shot fired.  I feel fortunate.  

In those 24 years I never once had a firearm at school or even on the school grounds.  That would have been against the law.  I had my two hands and my wits to protect a school full of children.... There are those who believe that is woefully lacking in effectiveness.  

The thing that prevents school shootings is ridged parenting and home schooling of moral and ethical behavior and thought, so that education can take place at school.  Until we return to teaching children strong moral and ethical values, our spiral into the pit will continue.  It will not matter what laws are passed or bans that occur.  Criminals and reprobates don't follow laws or have moral and ethical values by their very nature.  

Oh, and NOT killing people IS a moral issue, not a legal one.  In fact it's in the "Top Ten" moral No-No's.

Alan

----------


## jim Glass

[QUOTE=BENESSE;510213]If it's OK to use an AR-15 for hunting, then why not claymore mines or dynamite? 
Is there a line or does ANYthing go?[/QUOTE

Actually I was told by Fish & Wildlife Officer in Florida that I could kill wild hog on private property with any weapon I can legally  posses including dynamite.   Now I don't use dynamite out of consideration of the neighbors although they hate the hogs they might be ok with it.

I have covered lots of ground since this thread was started.   I marched on the Illinois state capital with the gun owners of Illinois and just last weekend went to Lincolnshire Illinois to a meeting a politician that writes proposed gun control was having.   I figure I shouldn't miss this opportunity so I went.   Lincolnshire is an exclusive Northwestern Chicago suburb neighborhood where homes start at 500K and up.    The people that live there are so different I felt a little like I was in a foreign county.   They hate guns and their minds are made up.   They actually believe an AR-15 is made for the sole purpose of killing people and AR-15's are also machine guns.    I finally had a chance to speak for about 15 seconds  before I was identified as pro-gun and was cut off.    I did say this, "AR-15's are not machine guns, Machine guns are prohibited by federal law, I have documents here that show more people are killed with hammers than rifles of all kinds, I also hunt with and AR-15".   That was it.

There were high school students at the meeting that spoke of being afraid in school.  The students coming from these high tech schools didn't speak very well.   Weak getting the point across.   Pro-gun people advocated armed guards in school.

Here is what I think:   If people are afraid for their well being they should learn self defense.   Self defense isn't always about guns either although I have seen old frail people that have guns for self defense.    People are in danger of many things besides hostile people with guns.   People need to learn self defense against all possibilities of being harmed.    Taking guns away is not going to make people 100% safe.

Most importantly people need to listen to each other and not dig in their heals for a one way conversation.     Something I have observed in the last year or two.

----------


## jim Glass

> The nutjobs could be doing far more damage with more easily-obtained, more deadly weapons, of which I will not speak, and get away with it, to repeat. Move the cops and metal detectors from the courthouse, DMV, SS, etc, to the schools where they are actually needed.. Adults can carry their own guns. Kids cannot.


I agree, metal detectors pickup all thinks made of metal not just guns.   Metal detectors can also be automated with cameras so if metal is detected a photo of the student can be taken.   More effective and more cost effective than armed guards.   It will be to late by the time an armed guard sees a problem.    Always best to confront a problem at the source before it becomes a problem.

----------


## Rick

Actually, Jim, machine guns are NOT prohibited by federal law. They are just more tightly restricted. You can own one if you wish. You just need to pay the tax and the the $$$ to purchase one. About the only thing you cannot own in this country are crew mounted weapons. That's a pretty broad generalization but close. Just about everything else is legal if you own the tax for it. 

On the schools issue, the problem is not guns, it's hearts without God, homes without discipline, schools without prayer and courtrooms without justice. You cannot regulate morality by passing laws. We've gotten to the point in this country that our leaders aren't even well meaning any more. They just want to impose their will upon us because they have grown up without the values I listed above.

----------


## jim Glass

I thought I read recently the federal government ban machine guns.   They are so restricted only certain police departments can have machine guns.   I read just now new machine guns made after 1986 cannot be purchased legally.    I guess it is possible to own a machine gun but will take lots of money and paperwork.    A machine gun will cost $20,000 regardless of condition according to what I just read.   Either way the average gun owner and the average criminal is not likely to own a machinegun legally.

----------


## Rick

Well, they are expensive but it depends on the weapon, condition, age, etc. Some are 20k, some are much less, some are much more. Just depends on where your jollies lie. Some people buy night vision  :Whistling:  Some people buy bass boats. I guess it depends on what you want to play with. Here's just one site that offers them. You can see there are LOT with sale pending. 

https://www.davidspiwak.com/guns/

----------


## LowKey

By federal law you can only own a pre-1986 machine gun. Makes them an expensive commodity. They did ban ownership of "new" machine guns.
Several states have special licensing requirements too. Here, the police chief in the town you live in gets to decide if he'll sign off on a machine gun license. There are very very few towns in MA with chiefs that'll do that.

----------


## jim Glass

Machine guns are forbidden in Illinois, must have been what I was thinking.    Besides, how does a man tell his family he spent $20,000 on a firearm

----------


## Rick

The same way you tell them you spent $20k on a bass boat. From a distance.  :Innocent:

----------

