Other State 2 dead, 4 injured in North Carolina campus shooting

[Geardo]

1. Not going to happen. Attack a line, get killed by the guards very quickly. We know from experience that ALL these bad actor mass murderers don't go where there are armed guards... they are tiny little cowards, that's why they attack schools.

2. Wow! Paranoid much????? Gestapo, really? You're pulling that old saw??? We are talking the same level of security checks that you have at a courthouse... Walk thru the metal detector. Nobody is saying CC holders couldn't keep their weapons, but would be required to show ID and CCW and provide a reason for being there. Is that sooooooo ominous?

3. Nothing protects against all risks. Somebody could bring in a nuke, oh my!! Is that a reason for doing nothing?

4. Please cite data showing this is ineffective supporting your claim in any way. Where is it in place and not working or statistically insignificant?

I'm all for empowering people and letting them defend themselves. How do you plan to empower people? How do young children in grade school defend themselves? Are you saying you want every student to be armed?

1. Kabul blast: At least 7 dead as suicide bomber attacks security checkpoint

There's a common security blind spot at airports—and terrorists keep exploiting it

2. Difference of opinion here, but IMO we already live it a police state, and all this pearl clutching "we have to do something" on both sides of the aisle adds to it. Agree to disagree I guess.

3.

By "doing something" you create other soft spots (see above) , and also increase the risks of people inside to individual attacks (rape, robbery. Etc). You say "CCW holders could go through" but many states do not even have CCW permits anymore, because it is essentially a useless waste of money and way to create a registry, therefore you would either be disarming people, or forcing them to get a permit and have their name put of a registry(that are frequently leaked I might add!)


4. My point was that mass shootings, terrosist attacks. Etc are extremily rare. Like 1 in a million. Not that metal detectors and armed security are innefective, I am saying they are unnecessary expensive security theater.

The Chance of Being Murdered or Injured in a Terrorist Attack in the United Kingdom

So all this hand wringing is essentially the right and left side of virtue signaling.

I don't think we should give gradschoolers bazookas, but teachers and school workers should be allowed to carry if they choose.

 

[dcfranzen]

Israel is not as gun free as many folks believe. They have tight controls on those that can own and carry firearms. Instead of a "ME" culture, Isreal has a "WE" culture; so, when there is an alarming need to draw your weapon you hear more than one weapon racked in the crowd.

There have been so few attacks on Isreali schools that it is a non-issue. There is one armed guard at "the entrance" more to influence terrorists' thoughts and thwart their action.

 

[nammac]

Theoretically yes, at an enormous cost, and someone in a bell tower with a bolt action rifle still did a lot of damage ahooting at people in the open.

Well, unfortunately there's really no way to purge the evil from man's heart or brain, short of death. But perhaps severe punishment, up to and including the death penalty might indeed be a deterrent.

There is no easy answer to the problem, at least from a legislative point of view. Value for human life and morals come to mind, but those things certainly can't be legislated...

 

[nammac]

Israel is often used as a model. However, it is worth noting that Israel primarily defends against terrorist attack from outside... Domestic attacks from Israelis with weapons is rare, and with firearms even rarer.

SCHOOL SECURITY IN ISRAEL

Does Israel have legal abortions?

How about right to die laws?

Just thinking they may have a higher value for human life than do people in this country...

 

[2A2Dend]

A coroner and a black zippered bag.
Equal punishment for the crime.

Nothing to see here

 

[Boboclown]

Crime prevention through environmental design. The less exits and entrances available the softer a target becomes. Alternatively, too many leaves too much to observe.

including the death penalty might indeed be a deterrent.

Death penalty, as it is now, is not a deterrent. The process, if any, takes too long and the convicted have a lot of appeals to go through. So it doesn't do the job of being a deterrent. The process needs to be shortened, punishment needs to be sure and swift. That brings up some arguments on its own though.

 

[partsed]

Capital punishment televised or in a public square, punishment fits the crime. None of this bull$hit of trial and then in prison for "X amount" of years with chance of parole.

 

[Stomper]

1. Not going to happen. Attack a line, get killed by the guards very quickly. We know from experience that ALL these bad actor mass murderers don't go where there are armed guards... they are tiny little cowards, that's why they attack schools.

2. Wow! Paranoid much????? Gestapo, really? You're pulling that old saw??? We are talking the same level of security checks that you have at a courthouse... Walk thru the metal detector. Nobody is saying CC holders couldn't keep their weapons, but would be required to show ID and CCW and provide a reason for being there. Is that sooooooo ominous?

3. Nothing protects against all risks. Somebody could bring in a nuke, oh my!! Is that a reason for doing nothing?

4. Please cite data showing this is ineffective supporting your claim in any way. Where is it in place and not working or statistically insignificant?

I'm all for empowering people and letting them defend themselves. How do you plan to empower people? How do young children in grade school defend themselves? Are you saying you want every student to be armed?

I get where you're coming from & I'm all for armed security ready to tear some terrorist a$$ (yes... this is terrorism), but you must have missed where PSU students are demanding that the campus police be unarmed, and word has it that the PDX city council is toying around with the idea of disarming a good portion of the PPB patrol officers.... so you'd wind up eventually having a bunch of unarmed targets operating metal detectors... if you could even find people desperate enough to fill those positions.



NEXT!!

 

[nammac]

I get where you're coming from & I'm all for armed security ready to tear some terrorist a$$ (yes... this is terrorism), but you must have missed where PSU students are demanding that the campus police be unarmed, and word has it that the PDX city council is toying around with the idea of disarming a good portion of the PPB patrol officers.... so you'd wind up eventually having a bunch of unarmed targets operating metal detectors... if you could even find people desperate enough to fill those positions.



NEXT!!

And PPB wonders why they have 160+ positions unfilled. Who in their right mind would want to be part of that clown show. Disarm them, then they can go apprehend gang bangers... I'll watch...

 

[Stomper]

And PPB wonders why they have 160+ positions unfilled. Who in their right mind would want to be part of that clown show. Disarm them, then they can go apprehend gang bangers... I'll watch...

Make the pencil-necks on the city council do their own dirty work....

 

[partsed]

I may be wrong but I heard that "Wimpy" Ted Wheeler is going run for mayor of P-town again (P meaning piss and poop)

 

[Stomper]

I may be wrong but I heard that "Wimpy" Ted Wheeler is going run for mayor of P-town again (P meaning piss and poop)

They should elect Triumph the puppet dog as mayor. I can hear Triumph now, "Portland is the perfect city.... for me to poop on!!"

 

[DivCurlGrad72]

Disarm them, then they can go apprehend gang bangers... I'll watch...

After they're disarmed, Portland city council should proceed by giving them non-threatening uniforms and dopey British-style helmets. 'Ello gov'na!

 

[bbbass]

1. Kabul blast: At least 7 dead as suicide bomber attacks security checkpoint

There's a common security blind spot at airports—and terrorists keep exploiting it

2. Difference of opinion here, but IMO we already live it a police state, and all this pearl clutching "we have to do something" on both sides of the aisle adds to it. Agree to disagree I guess.

3.

By "doing something" you create other soft spots (see above) , and also increase the risks of people inside to individual attacks (rape, robbery. Etc). You say "CCW holders could go through" but many states do not even have CCW permits anymore, because it is essentially a useless waste of money and way to create a registry, therefore you would either be disarming people, or forcing them to get a permit and have their name put of a registry(that are frequently leaked I might add!)


4. My point was that mass shootings, terrosist attacks. Etc are extremily rare. Like 1 in a million. Not that metal detectors and armed security are innefective, I am saying they are unnecessary expensive security theater.

The Chance of Being Murdered or Injured in a Terrorist Attack in the United Kingdom

So all this hand wringing is essentially the right and left side of virtue signaling.

I don't think we should give gradschoolers bazookas, but teachers and school workers should be allowed to carry if they choose.

You're probably right, at least partially, er, somewhat, err... Tho I dislike dog whistle trendy jargon like "pearl clutching". (See what I did there? )

I'm OK with the concept of an acceptable level of casualties.

What I think we need to do for school security is hire nuns with rulers... nobody messes with them!!! Or establish Sharia patrols, those guys carry axe handles and can order stoning for clothing violations and such.... they have a much better behaved society.

 

[bbbass]

Israel is not as gun free as many folks believe. They have tight controls on those that can own and carry firearms. Instead of a "ME" culture, Isreal has a "WE" culture; so, when there is an alarming need to draw your weapon you hear more than one weapon racked in the crowd.

There have been so few attacks on Isreali schools that it is a non-issue. There is one armed guard at "the entrance" more to influence terrorists' thoughts and thwart their action.

According to what I have read/researched, what you say is very accurate. They do have a different society than ours and as a result have less worry about their citizens attacking each other.

 

[bbbass]

Value for human life and morals come to mind, but those things certainly can't be legislated...

Yes, I've said the same in the past. It's a long road back and I'm disheartened that many things are getting worse instead of better.

 

[bbbass]

I get where you're coming from & I'm all for armed security ready to tear some terrorist a$$ (yes... this is terrorism), but you must have missed where PSU students are demanding that the campus police be unarmed, and word has it that the PDX city council is toying around with the idea of disarming a good portion of the PPB patrol officers.... so you'd wind up eventually having a bunch of unarmed targets operating metal detectors... if you could even find people desperate enough to fill those positions.



NEXT!!

Portlandia!

 

[RicInOR]

'His sacrifice saved lives' | Riley Howell killed by UNC Charlotte gunman as he tried to stop him.

 

[DivCurlGrad72]

I'm OK with the concept of an acceptable level of casualties.

Just about everyone in society is, either implicitly or explicitly. That's why we still allow people to drive cars, despite 30k deaths/year, why we allow alcohol, despite continued third party deaths from DUI, why we don't (yet) have a 100% surveillance state despite high levels of homicide and continued threats of terrorism. However, when it comes to firearms, a large portion of society has no tolerance for any level of casualties because, unlike firearm owners, they can't, or refuse to understand the cost/benefit associated with firearm ownership. I strongly believe the benefits of firearm ownership far outweigh the costs. It's an issue I tried (unsuccessfully?) in an earlier post to resolve.

 

[bbbass]

I strongly believe the benefits of firearm ownership far outweigh the costs. It's an issue I tried (unsuccessfully?) in an earlier post to resolve.

Yup, I'm surprised I haven't been lambasted for that comment. However, I slyly slipped it between two jestful statements. Camo!! LOL