Armed security

[Tommy Tainant]

If all schools need armed security to protect children. And places of worship now need armed security to protect worshippers.

That is a lot of armed security. No doubt there are other places that would need this type of cover.

Where are all of these low wage protectors coming from ?

And who will pay for them ?

Anyone who advocates for more guns and armed security as a ‘solution’ to the problem of gun crime and violence is being intellectually lazy.

That was the implicit point in my posting. All of these security measures are basically a load of shit in a society awash with guns and nutters. Build a fence and metal detectors etc................fine, I will wait till school is over and mow them down when they come out. Its blindingly obvious what the problem is.

 

[Anathema]

Trigger happy yahoos. Fyi.

I wish that were truly so. If it were they wouldn’t come here and sully our land with their presence.

 

[Anathema]

Its blindingly obvious what the problem is.

Yep, and it’s not guns; as 13 pipe bombs proved last week. The problem is the existence of Liberals/Progressives who need to be eradicated.

 

[sparky]

the problem is cultural warfare instigated from our top political leaders.

 

[2aguy]

You guys..... keep jinxing those countries.... their gun control laws do not protect them, their populations are becoming more violent, and they have just as much access to guns as our criminals do...once they decide to commit mass shootings, they will be even more helpless because in a lot of those places, the normal police are not armed....

Even while our rate of mass shootings remains much lower than that of the US. There must be some other explanation, eh?

Primary among "other explanations" is the fetish facet of fascination with firearms. Why is the AR 15 the weapon of choice for mass murderers when, as we so often see insisted, it is 'only' a rifle like others? It is the faux-military appeal. There is a sick mindset of many who dwell in the land of armed rebellion fantasies. When their frustrations reach an unforeseen level, disasters occur. It is definitely a mental health issue, and those so devoted to the Second Amendment need to be in the forefront of addressing it.

It is not the weapon of choice for mass murderers....hand guns are..... and it isn't the weapon that is the issue, it is the gun free zone that allows them the time to kill a lot of people....

And had he wanted to murder even more people he would have used a rental truck...a muslim terrorist in France used a Rental truck to murder 86 people and wound 450.......

In Crimea last week a shooter killed 21 people with a pump action shotgun, not an AR-15...and the shooter at the synagogue had 3 pistols with him so banning an AR-15 would have saved no one.

 

[2aguy]

The NRA should put their money where their mouth is and pay for and train armed guards where they are needed.

As far as armed security goes, the alt-right guy that shot up the synagogue shot up the cops too. So having a bunch of armed guards everywhere, or expecting everyone to be carrying is an unrealistic solution. Maybe we have to lock down everywhere all the time now, I dunno.

Repealing the 2nd amendment or banning guns isn't going to happen, I live out in the country and need a gun, plenty of others in the US do too. Prohibiting crazies from owning guns is a good idea but how do you police that? If someone with no previous arrests says something crazy once on twitter are they barred from gun ownership? The answers aren't easy.

Hey, dipstick, they already do....they have a school safety program where they send in people to help schools with safety issues, and they give out cash to help them do it....on top of teaching gun safety to civilians and training the first responders who go in to stop mass shooters....

 

[2aguy]

Moron....Crimea had a mass shooting at a college this week....the shooter used a pump action shotgun and murdered 21 students...... they have strict gun control laws there...you doofus....

As a result of their strict gun control laws I bet they have a lower rate of mass shootings than the US with its lax gun control laws. Anyone would think it rocket science.

You guys keep saying that it is gun control that keeps these shootings down and that isn't the case....as these other countries develop their social welfare states and race young males in fatherless homes....you are going to see more mass shootings...Britain used to average 1 every 10 years, now they almost had 3 ....stopped not by gun control but by pure, dumb luck..... and what gun control laws stopped the muslim terrorists in France from murdering 130 people at the Paris Rock concert with illegal, fully automatic military weapons? Or the muslims who killed the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists with fully automatic military weapons....or the shooting in Toronto, and Australia with its gun control has had close to a dozen public shootings after they banned and confiscated guns....they haven't gotten media attention because the shooters decided not to shoot 3 or more people or simply through dumb luck...again....failed to kill 3 or more people...

You guys think that those countries are safe...they are just about to catch up...and a lot of their police forces are unarmed....which will mean even worse body counts....

 

[Wry Catcher]

Actually eliminating gun free zones goes a long way in making shooter's targets safer.

Great Idea (jnot)

I bet you want others to believe you thought this foolishness all by yourself.

The fact is that there is no such thing as a ‘gun free zone.’

If a private property owner designates his venue to be ‘gun free,’ there’s nothing to stop his patrons from carrying concealed firearms.

The private property owner doesn’t know his patrons are carrying firearms because they’re concealed – rendering the notion of a ‘gun free zone’ unenforceable.

In other locations where the carrying of firearms is prohibited, such as courthouses and police stations, ample armed security is already in place.

And if those citizens are caught carrying a gun into those gun free zones, they can be arrested......

You know so much that just isn't true, factual or remotely accurate...

And rightly they should be. BUT, the reason for Gun Free Zones is not to arrest someone for the possession of the gun, but to add an enhancement to the sentence when someone with a gun is arrested for another crime.

Probable cause is necessary to search is required, and due process is required to impose the additional penalty.

Trespass is a misdemeanor, anyone who enters a school (for example) without permission and convicted of 602 (L) (Criminal Trespass, CA LAW) can be charged with an infraction, a misdemeanor or even a felony depending on the situation.

If they are in possession of any deadly weapon an infraction is not likely, if the person has the deadly weapon concealed, a misdemeanor is more likely, and if the weapon is carried along with extra large capacity magazines or extra speed loaders, has a former felony conviction, or a protective order issue by a judge, expect the charge to be a felony.

The law cannot prevent the carrying of a gun in a gun free zone when in the possession of a School resource office or other law enforcement officer, deputy or agent, and a security guard licensed to carry a firearm and hired by the school district.

 

[2aguy]

If all schools need armed security to protect children. And places of worship now need armed security to protect worshippers.

That is a lot of armed security. No doubt there are other places that would need this type of cover.

Where are all of these low wage protectors coming from ?

And who will pay for them ?

Anyone who advocates for more guns and armed security as a ‘solution’ to the problem of gun crime and violence is being intellectually lazy.

That was the implicit point in my posting. All of these security measures are basically a load of shit in a society awash with guns and nutters. Build a fence and metal detectors etc................fine, I will wait till school is over and mow them down when they come out. Its blindingly obvious what the problem is.

Yes......as we learned from France, a muslim terrorist used a rental Truck to murder 86 people...and wound 450 people....far more than any mass shooter in our country were killed with that rental truck than with a rifle, pistol or shotgun.....and you simply need a drivers license to have that weapon of mass murder....

 

[2aguy]

Actually eliminating gun free zones goes a long way in making shooter's targets safer.

Great Idea (jnot)

I bet you want others to believe you thought this foolishness all by yourself.

The fact is that there is no such thing as a ‘gun free zone.’

If a private property owner designates his venue to be ‘gun free,’ there’s nothing to stop his patrons from carrying concealed firearms.

The private property owner doesn’t know his patrons are carrying firearms because they’re concealed – rendering the notion of a ‘gun free zone’ unenforceable.

In other locations where the carrying of firearms is prohibited, such as courthouses and police stations, ample armed security is already in place.

And if those citizens are caught carrying a gun into those gun free zones, they can be arrested......

You know so much that just isn't true, factual or remotely accurate...

And rightly they should be. BUT, the reason for Gun Free Zones is not to arrest someone for the possession of the gun, but to add an enhancement to the sentence when someone with a gun is arrested for another crime.

Probable cause is necessary to search is required, and due process is required to impose the additional penalty.

Trespass is a misdemeanor, anyone who enters a school (for example) without permission and convicted of 602 (L) (Criminal Trespass, CA LAW) can be charged with an infraction, a misdemeanor or even a felony depending on the situation.

If they are in possession of any deadly weapon an infraction is not likely, if the person has the deadly weapon concealed, a misdemeanor is more likely, and if the weapon is carried along with extra large capacity magazines or extra speed loaders, has a former felony conviction, or a protective order issue by a judge, expect the charge to be a felony.

The law cannot prevent the carrying of a gun in a gun free zone when in the possession of a School resource office or other law enforcement officer, deputy or agent, and a security guard licensed to carry a firearm and hired by the school district.

Wrong.... you guys tell us that a gun free zone protects people from mass public shooters, since guns are not allowed..... now you are changing the goal post by saying it is only so they can add a charge... you are lying.....

A gun free zone keeps law abiding people unarmed in the face of mass shooters....and as we know from actual experience and police protocol.....as soon as an armed citizen or police officer confronts the shooter, they run away, surrender or commit suicide..ending the attack and saving lives.

 

[2aguy]

Actually eliminating gun free zones goes a long way in making shooter's targets safer.

Great Idea (jnot)

I bet you want others to believe you thought this foolishness all by yourself.

The fact is that there is no such thing as a ‘gun free zone.’

If a private property owner designates his venue to be ‘gun free,’ there’s nothing to stop his patrons from carrying concealed firearms.

The private property owner doesn’t know his patrons are carrying firearms because they’re concealed – rendering the notion of a ‘gun free zone’ unenforceable.

In other locations where the carrying of firearms is prohibited, such as courthouses and police stations, ample armed security is already in place.

And if those citizens are caught carrying a gun into those gun free zones, they can be arrested......

You know so much that just isn't true, factual or remotely accurate...

And rightly they should be. BUT, the reason for Gun Free Zones is not to arrest someone for the possession of the gun, but to add an enhancement to the sentence when someone with a gun is arrested for another crime.

Probable cause is necessary to search is required, and due process is required to impose the additional penalty.

Trespass is a misdemeanor, anyone who enters a school (for example) without permission and convicted of 602 (L) (Criminal Trespass, CA LAW) can be charged with an infraction, a misdemeanor or even a felony depending on the situation.

If they are in possession of any deadly weapon an infraction is not likely, if the person has the deadly weapon concealed, a misdemeanor is more likely, and if the weapon is carried along with extra large capacity magazines or extra speed loaders, has a former felony conviction, or a protective order issue by a judge, expect the charge to be a felony.

The law cannot prevent the carrying of a gun in a gun free zone when in the possession of a School resource office or other law enforcement officer, deputy or agent, and a security guard licensed to carry a firearm and hired by the school district.

Yes...someone shoots up a school and now we can enhance the multiple felonies for murder with carrying a gun into a gun free zone....wow, you guys work really hard to be stupid....

 

[2aguy]

You guys..... keep jinxing those countries.... their gun control laws do not protect them, their populations are becoming more violent, and they have just as much access to guns as our criminals do...once they decide to commit mass shootings, they will be even more helpless because in a lot of those places, the normal police are not armed....

Even while our rate of mass shootings remains much lower than that of the US. There must be some other explanation, eh?

Yep.... you guys are about to catch up.... you anti gunners think that your gun control laws are stopping mass shootings but the truth is you simply haven't had people who wanted to commit mass shootings.....once they do, they will do them no matter what gun control laws you have..... fully automatic military weapons are the weapon of choice in Europe for mass shootings.....and you don't have enough armed police to deal with the new threat...

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It is the faux-military appeal.

Well, its large mag capacity will have a bit to do with it, as will its ubiquity.

That the AR platform is modular is the primary appeal.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

Actually eliminating gun free zones goes a long way in making shooter's targets safer.

Spoken like a well trained NRA parrot. Have a cracker. Actually making gun free zones gun free solves the problem doesn`t it or do you think kids should go to school with guns in their backpacks? Does a lifetime supply of stupid pills come with an NRA membership or do you have to buy your own? If these questions are too difficult for you try laying off the pills for a few days.

Oh my god all this time all we had to do in cities like Chicago is put up signs everywhere declaring a gun free zone and there would be no more shootings.

 

[there4eyeM]

It is the faux-military appeal.

Well, its large mag capacity will have a bit to do with it, as will its ubiquity.

That the AR platform is modular is the primary appeal.

Just like the 'real thing'. In their minds, it's an M16.

 

[idb]

If all schools need armed security to protect children. And places of worship now need armed security to protect worshippers.

That is a lot of armed security. No doubt there are other places that would need this type of cover.

Where are all of these low wage protectors coming from ?

And who will pay for them ?

Anyone who advocates for more guns and armed security as a ‘solution’ to the problem of gun crime and violence is being intellectually lazy.

That was the implicit point in my posting. All of these security measures are basically a load of shit in a society awash with guns and nutters. Build a fence and metal detectors etc................fine, I will wait till school is over and mow them down when they come out. Its blindingly obvious what the problem is.

Yes......as we learned from France, a muslim terrorist used a rental Truck to murder 86 people...and wound 450 people....far more than any mass shooter in our country were killed with that rental truck than with a rifle, pistol or shotgun.....and you simply need a drivers license to have that weapon of mass murder....

And yet...despite all your obviously well-reasoned arguments...the US leads the world in mass shootings.

 

[idb]

You guys..... keep jinxing those countries.... their gun control laws do not protect them, their populations are becoming more violent, and they have just as much access to guns as our criminals do...once they decide to commit mass shootings, they will be even more helpless because in a lot of those places, the normal police are not armed....

Even while our rate of mass shootings remains much lower than that of the US. There must be some other explanation, eh?

Primary among "other explanations" is the fetish facet of fascination with firearms. Why is the AR 15 the weapon of choice for mass murderers when, as we so often see insisted, it is 'only' a rifle like others? It is the faux-military appeal. There is a sick mindset of many who dwell in the land of armed rebellion fantasies. When their frustrations reach an unforeseen level, disasters occur. It is definitely a mental health issue, and those so devoted to the Second Amendment need to be in the forefront of addressing it.

It is not the weapon of choice for mass murderers....hand guns are..... and it isn't the weapon that is the issue, it is the gun free zone that allows them the time to kill a lot of people....

And had he wanted to murder even more people he would have used a rental truck...a muslim terrorist in France used a Rental truck to murder 86 people and wound 450.......

In Crimea last week a shooter killed 21 people with a pump action shotgun, not an AR-15...and the shooter at the synagogue had 3 pistols with him so banning an AR-15 would have saved no one.

It's a lot harder to get a rental truck through the doors of a school.

 

[2aguy]

You guys..... keep jinxing those countries.... their gun control laws do not protect them, their populations are becoming more violent, and they have just as much access to guns as our criminals do...once they decide to commit mass shootings, they will be even more helpless because in a lot of those places, the normal police are not armed....

Even while our rate of mass shootings remains much lower than that of the US. There must be some other explanation, eh?

Primary among "other explanations" is the fetish facet of fascination with firearms. Why is the AR 15 the weapon of choice for mass murderers when, as we so often see insisted, it is 'only' a rifle like others? It is the faux-military appeal. There is a sick mindset of many who dwell in the land of armed rebellion fantasies. When their frustrations reach an unforeseen level, disasters occur. It is definitely a mental health issue, and those so devoted to the Second Amendment need to be in the forefront of addressing it.

It is not the weapon of choice for mass murderers....hand guns are..... and it isn't the weapon that is the issue, it is the gun free zone that allows them the time to kill a lot of people....

And had he wanted to murder even more people he would have used a rental truck...a muslim terrorist in France used a Rental truck to murder 86 people and wound 450.......

In Crimea last week a shooter killed 21 people with a pump action shotgun, not an AR-15...and the shooter at the synagogue had 3 pistols with him so banning an AR-15 would have saved no one.

It's a lot harder to get a rental truck through the doors of a school.

And why would you try to take it into a building...? You have to stop mixing your meds with booze...it makes you even more stupid than you already are.....

You would run people over at the start or end of the day.......making it far deadlier than any rifle...

 

[2aguy]

If all schools need armed security to protect children. And places of worship now need armed security to protect worshippers.

That is a lot of armed security. No doubt there are other places that would need this type of cover.

Where are all of these low wage protectors coming from ?

And who will pay for them ?

Anyone who advocates for more guns and armed security as a ‘solution’ to the problem of gun crime and violence is being intellectually lazy.

That was the implicit point in my posting. All of these security measures are basically a load of shit in a society awash with guns and nutters. Build a fence and metal detectors etc................fine, I will wait till school is over and mow them down when they come out. Its blindingly obvious what the problem is.

Yes......as we learned from France, a muslim terrorist used a rental Truck to murder 86 people...and wound 450 people....far more than any mass shooter in our country were killed with that rental truck than with a rifle, pistol or shotgun.....and you simply need a drivers license to have that weapon of mass murder....

And yet...despite all your obviously well-reasoned arguments...the US leads the world in mass shootings.

No, actually, we don't.....

Fact Checker Snopes.com's big mistakes in comparing mass public shootings in the US and Europe - Crime Prevention Research Center

Looking at individual countries in Europe is a lot like examing individual states in the United States. Snopes.com thinks one should look at the median yearly rate that mass public shootings occur. If you want to compare median yearly rates that there are deaths in different countries in Europe, why not compare individual countries in Europe to individual states in the US. The countries in Europe that had a mass public shooting had an average population of 23.5 million. The total US was 323.3 million.

We can break down the US into individual states just as Europe is broken down into individual countries (click on the table below to enlarge). Snopes makes much of the fact that while Europe as a whole has mass public shootings every year, most European countries didn’t.


Indeed, eleven of the fifteen European countries shown had only one year from 2009-2015 where they had a mass public shooting (if you include Russia, it would be eleven out of sixteen countries). But the same pattern holds true for US states, where 14 of the 18 states that had a mass public shooting experienced only one year with such deaths from 2009-2015. To put it differently, 73% of the European countries had deaths from a mass public shooting in only one year (69%, including the European part of Russia). By contrast, 78% of the states with a mass public shooting had deaths in only one year.

While it’s true that all European countries have a median mass public shooting death toll of zero, it is also zero for all but one of the 50 US states — California. Looking at average deaths among states and European countries, we find that six of the ten worst are European countries.
----------
Snopes.com makes it look like our analysis only compared the US to individual countries in Europe. They completely ignore that we also compared the US to the EU and Europe as a whole. For four of these seven years, the total number of deaths from mass public shootings is greater in these European countries than in the US. If one compares the yearly median for Europe to the yearly median for the US, they are virtually the same. With or without France, the median for Europe is 19. For the US, it is 18.
----

Norway has a population of about 5 million people. Seven states in the US have populations between 4.4 million (Kentucky) and 5.7 million (Wisconsin). The other states are Louisiana (4.7 million), Alabama (4.9 million), South Carolina (4.9 million), Colorado (5.5 million), and Minnesota (5.5 million).

Three of those states had no mass public shootings.

The other four each had one mass public shooting, just like Norway.

The big difference is that those seven states had a total of 33 deaths from mass public shootings, while Norway had 69.


Even if you look at the mass public shootings in all the ten states between 4 and 7 million, the total number of deaths from mass public shootings is 48, with a total population of 78.5 million. Their total population is 15.5 times greater than Norway’s. Does Snopes.com really want to argue that Norway should only be compared to the US as a whole?

 

[Tommy Tainant]

If all schools need armed security to protect children. And places of worship now need armed security to protect worshippers.

That is a lot of armed security. No doubt there are other places that would need this type of cover.

Where are all of these low wage protectors coming from ?

And who will pay for them ?

Anyone who advocates for more guns and armed security as a ‘solution’ to the problem of gun crime and violence is being intellectually lazy.

That was the implicit point in my posting. All of these security measures are basically a load of shit in a society awash with guns and nutters. Build a fence and metal detectors etc................fine, I will wait till school is over and mow them down when they come out. Its blindingly obvious what the problem is.

Yes......as we learned from France, a muslim terrorist used a rental Truck to murder 86 people...and wound 450 people....far more than any mass shooter in our country were killed with that rental truck than with a rifle, pistol or shotgun.....and you simply need a drivers license to have that weapon of mass murder....

And yet...despite all your obviously well-reasoned arguments...the US leads the world in mass shootings.

No, actually, we don't.....

Fact Checker Snopes.com's big mistakes in comparing mass public shootings in the US and Europe - Crime Prevention Research Center

Looking at individual countries in Europe is a lot like examing individual states in the United States. Snopes.com thinks one should look at the median yearly rate that mass public shootings occur. If you want to compare median yearly rates that there are deaths in different countries in Europe, why not compare individual countries in Europe to individual states in the US. The countries in Europe that had a mass public shooting had an average population of 23.5 million. The total US was 323.3 million.

We can break down the US into individual states just as Europe is broken down into individual countries (click on the table below to enlarge). Snopes makes much of the fact that while Europe as a whole has mass public shootings every year, most European countries didn’t.


Indeed, eleven of the fifteen European countries shown had only one year from 2009-2015 where they had a mass public shooting (if you include Russia, it would be eleven out of sixteen countries). But the same pattern holds true for US states, where 14 of the 18 states that had a mass public shooting experienced only one year with such deaths from 2009-2015. To put it differently, 73% of the European countries had deaths from a mass public shooting in only one year (69%, including the European part of Russia). By contrast, 78% of the states with a mass public shooting had deaths in only one year.

While it’s true that all European countries have a median mass public shooting death toll of zero, it is also zero for all but one of the 50 US states — California. Looking at average deaths among states and European countries, we find that six of the ten worst are European countries.
----------
Snopes.com makes it look like our analysis only compared the US to individual countries in Europe. They completely ignore that we also compared the US to the EU and Europe as a whole. For four of these seven years, the total number of deaths from mass public shootings is greater in these European countries than in the US. If one compares the yearly median for Europe to the yearly median for the US, they are virtually the same. With or without France, the median for Europe is 19. For the US, it is 18.
----

Norway has a population of about 5 million people. Seven states in the US have populations between 4.4 million (Kentucky) and 5.7 million (Wisconsin). The other states are Louisiana (4.7 million), Alabama (4.9 million), South Carolina (4.9 million), Colorado (5.5 million), and Minnesota (5.5 million).

Three of those states had no mass public shootings.

The other four each had one mass public shooting, just like Norway.

The big difference is that those seven states had a total of 33 deaths from mass public shootings, while Norway had 69.


Even if you look at the mass public shootings in all the ten states between 4 and 7 million, the total number of deaths from mass public shootings is 48, with a total population of 78.5 million. Their total population is 15.5 times greater than Norway’s. Does Snopes.com really want to argue that Norway should only be compared to the US as a whole?