OT: Two firefighters shot and killed in Webster,NY

Page 7 of 8  
On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 14:11:46 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@attt.bizz wrote:

That's funny, I feel the same about you.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

The difference is that everyone here knows you're an idiot. You've been advertising the fact for weeks.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 16:15:25 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@attt.bizz wrote:

Same for you.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

"IKWYABWAI" We're so proud of you for your reasoning skills, Douggie!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 19:10:01 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@attt.bizz wrote:

Proud or not, the facts don't change.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

No, which should give you a few more years to learn one. Start your research now.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 10:44:34 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@attt.bizz wrote:

Jealous you can't or won't read. Thought so...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

IKWYABWAI is your only argument, Douggie.
Did you do any more research into the Constitution on CDC.GOV, today?
Douggie, you're mommy must be proud of your education.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 16:12:58 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@attt.bizz wrote:

And your mommy must feel sorry she failed you because you can't or won't read.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Douggie, you're the one who thinks he can read about the Constitution on CDC.GOV. LOL. You are one stupid shit!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Dec 26, 4:10pm, snipped-for-privacy@attt.bizz wrote:

Be careful he'll advance to third grade insults next.
Harry K
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Had the school principal in CT had a shotgun and been trained in it's use, there is a very good chance the massacre never would have occured. His entrance into the building was announced by shots being fired and glass breaking. Adequate time to get the shotgun and figure out what was going on. But, no the answer is to go great an intruder with your bear hands, true lib style.

Are you really, really that dumb? If you research mass murders, of course you're not going to find cases where they were intercepted and nullifiied. If they are interecepted and "nullified", then you have no murders or one or two dead and it's then *not* a mass murder.
Try reading the American Rifleman instead of your usual leftist rags. Every month you'll see a list of violent crimes prevented by legal gun owners that used them.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Noone said arming teachers wouild _stop_ a shooter before he began, only that the victim list would be decreased. The examples you give in your cites were all _at a distance_. Poor chance of success with a handgun. Teachers respondign inside a building would be within reasonable range.
As for no successes, Not surprisingly as you could only find a few isolated cases where the shooters faced ANY opposition early on. the ones you cite were statistically insignificant occurances.
<snip>
Harry K
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote in message news:1f92f1a1-2fa4-485a-a13e-

<<Noone said arming teachers wouild _stop_ a shooter before he began>>
Really? It's been pretty strongly suggested several times. Frankly it's a pipe dream.

The examples I picked were the only instances I could find of ANYONE responding with a weapon. The cases that gun advocates consider "successes" in lowering the carnage aren't very impressive. In the two cases I recall, the shooter had run out of ammo in one instance and in the other instance, he had already left the site of the shooting and was trying to drive away.

So would the kids. Perhaps you recall the shooting in Manhattan a few months ago where police shot 9 innocent bystanders in addition to the man they had targeted. If a man breaks into a classroom with a gun drawn and ready to fire, what do you honestly expect a teacher to do? Reach for her purse or a desk drawer or an ankle holster without getting shot? Where are these magical "ready to fire yet safe from prying little hands" going to be stored? How easy would it be for the madman to pickup a kid and use them as a shield? The idea of arming teachers seems to be extremely poorly thought out.
Even with a fast-access shoulder holster she's still at a serious disadvantage against an armed assailant. Her gun is holstered or locked up, his is not. Who has the "drop?" Which shooter has to care if they overshoot and hit a kid? The teacher or the guy who came there to kill them anyway?
I'm willing to change my mind if someone presents a credible scenario that puts armed teachers in a superior tactical position against a heavily armed assailant attacking with the element of surprise.
The problem is that so far, I've heard just some pretty far fetched ideas about a magical school responder being in the right place in the right time with the right training and the right weapon magically unstowing itself from some child-proof storage locker in the school.
It should be plain to see by now that the probability is that an armed teacher isn't going to be able to do much. Sadly that's especially true now that every school shooter from this day forward will expect teachers to be armed and incorporate neutralizing them as a first order of business in their assault plans. If the research I've been reading is correct, we can expect a copycat shooting or at least one with very similar elements within the next month or two.

What exactly are you saying? The whole "kids being killed by mass shooters" is statistically insignificant compared to the ways most youngsters die or get seriously injured. How could any information that's a subset of that small universe being more statistically significant?
In all the attacks that have occurred in the last 20 years, no one's managed to even dent the carnage with a firearm. With ownership levels approaching 1 gun per person, you'd think *someone* would have been able to intervene. The fact that these events can unfold in 15 seconds means that some people are asking more of grade school teachers than trained LEO could deliver. Add to the equation that they never signed up to be armed guards. Further add 70,000 or more guns to the nation's elementary schools and tell me that accidentally shootings will not rise. I won't believe you. Accident rates stay pretty constant so that more guns in circulation means more accidents. A sad fact of statistics and human nature.
I just watched an interview with a soldier back from Afghanistan talking about clearing rooms of the Taliban, house by house. He said "You don't have one second. In one second, the fight is over." That's what a confrontation between a teacher and a mass killer would be like.
Hostage rescue teams train for months and years to do a very difficult task. I don't think it's one we can ask of teachers, who just a few months ago Republicans were complaining bitterly about being vastly overpaid. Has anyone really asked them?
http://www.google.com/search?q=what+do+teachers+think+about+arming+themselves%3F
Doesn't return a lot of "YEAH! We're ready to load up and teach strapped" supporting hits.
I really think this is like the Birther issue - it's going to cordon off yet another chunk of conservatives who believe in things that most other people find absolutely bizarre. That's not going to help the Republican party in the midtems. Sure didn't help them much in 2012.
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 06:31:37 -0500, "Robert Green"

So your position is that they should remain advertised "free" targets. Amazing.
<more claptrap snipped>
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Dec 26, 7:35am, snipped-for-privacy@attt.bizz wrote:

Actually his stance is that the victims should just surrender and be shot peacefully.
I must say I hadn't seen such juvenile reasoning in a long time.
Harry K
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Are you delusional? Find where I ever said schools should remain free targets. You worry me, running around with guns and not being able to make sense of what you read.
My issue is with *arming teachers.* I happen to believe "gun free zones" are a stupid liberal invention meant to make them feel good about their efforts but which have negative impact on the problem. I do, however, believe that as our forefathers discovered, it's not a good idea to allow people to bring guns into saloons where people are likely to be drunk. That should be handled with a law known to all CCW holders - no guns in bars unless you're a licensed security guard. Not with a "gun free zone" sign that basically says "Mad Gunman Target Zone."

Claptrap? Isn't that your daddy's name for your momma's pudenda 'cause of all the VD she brought home swimming after troop ships? She told me about it while I was shaving her back.
See, it's pretty easy to act like an insulting, dismissive idiot rather than address substantive issues. So many ultra-conservatives here claim to be engineers, but can't seem to do the basic "how would this really work?" analysis that good engineering solutions require.
So instead of working through how armed teachers might *really* react in a terrorist attack, you dismiss it with an insult. Pure KRW. Even Trader's got your MO. When cornered, start with the insults. You are a liberal's dream. While your ultra-conservative buddies are slapping you on the back, intelligent conservatives wince at the bad name you give their cause. Keep up the good work and help the liberals retake the House!
It's pretty clear which side wants to spend money like water *again* without doing the hard analysis required. I can understand why you're afraid to determine whether the plan is feasible or would merely produce more deaths by accidents than it would prevent from mass-shootings. I suspect you already know the answer and it doesn't line up with your politics.
Special operators are constantly in training. They put 100's of rounds of ammo through their primary weapons every week to maintain "the feel" of the weapon. Entering a classroom full of hostages is one of the worst case scenarios they can encounter in terms of potential collateral damage. Yet some people would have us believe elementary school teachers are going to become highly trained, amazingly accurate, cool-headed, psych-tested warriors like our Special Forces members. Common sense alone should tell people that's not likely to happen and that arming teachers is a bad idea.
Ever see a really amped up private citizen trying to hold a gun steady on someone as their pulse and BP skyrocket and their adrenaline pumps? I have. Arming teachers isn't the answer unless they are willing to train daily in classroom hostage simulations and become professional anti-terrorist operatives. Not bloody likely.
The real problem is the relatively small but extremely overplayed chance of death of schoolchildren at the hands of madmen. There are plenty of areas we could spend money that would be far more effective in reducing child deaths. Ironically, one of those measures turned out to be trigger locks and laws that *seriously* punish adults if their minors get hold of their weapons. Child gun access laws have apparently reduced the number of deaths in Florida, at least. There haven't been enough kids killed elsewhere - yet - to draw reliable conclusions about other states:
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/106/6/1466.abstract
<<Conclusions. Florida's CAP law-1 of only 3 such laws allowing felony prosecution of violators-appears to have significantly reduced unintentional firearm deaths to children.>>
I think those here that can be honest with themselves know that the more guns in circulation, the more accidental deaths, the more suicidal deaths and the more guns that end up in the hands of criminals and madmen.
Unlike the words you tried (unsuccessfully) to stuff in my mouth, I don't have an argument with having armed guards on the premises that are specifically trained and tasked to do one thing and do it well. I don't believe that schools or most other places should be advertised as "gun free zones." Sadly, that's a liberal creation that has backfired. As for putting armed guards *capable* of dealing with an armed terrorist attack in a school, there are two important questions: "Who will pay for it?" and "will it solve the problem?"
Considering the statistical realities of preventing children's deaths, the highly publicized mass shootings, while they garner headlines, don't represent the most serious death vectors by any means. Spending ourselves senseless like we did after 9/11 isn't likely to change the outcome of events like Newtown unless they start happening on a monthly basis and there's no indication that's happening.
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Close enough to having schools remain free targets. After all, we wouldn't want that principal in CT wallking down the hall with a weapon to confront the madman, right? Better she should go unarmed, to her death. Better not watch the news tonight. There is a story showing some teachers in FL being trained to use handguns.

Of course. That's pretty much the case with ALL liberal ideas. Just look what the trillions we've spent on welfare for 40 years has gotten us.

Nice, real nice.

Actually, we've done the analysis. Nothing you libs are talking about would have prevented the tragedy in CT that you're using. Ban "assault rifles", whatever that is, the madman uses a shotgun. Same result. Ban shotguns, madman uses a pistol.
And we know this crap doesn't work, because we already let you try it in 1993. You had your "assault weapons" ban. You had your large capacity magazine ban. Even the CDC concluded there was no evidence it made any difference. And that is the CDC, not the NRA.

Classic lib nonsense. Better to leave the principal in CT unarmend so she dies and you can bitch on, then have her armed.

LOL. Now conservatives are intelligent as long as they aren't "ultra conservatives". Translation: As long as they are Rhinos who pretend to be conservatives, then they are cool.

Like the hard analysis Joe Biden is doing in, what 10 days, before coming up with the solution? They can't do anything in DC in years, but well gun control, that's special.
How about we tell that moron Biden to figure out how to cut some spendings and avoid the next cliff on the debt ceiling? Think he could do THAT in 10 days?

We do already know the answer. Just look at all the lives saved, crimes prevented by legal gun owners every day.

Hostages? Swat teams? WTF? Did any of that happen in CT? But you're right. The principal might have missed. God forbid she might have hit a kid or teacher. So, better that she and 25 kids should all be dead.


Did you train daily when you had a concealed carry weapon? Put 100s of rounds a week through it? Why of course not. But you didn't have to, did you.? You're special, a true limousine liberal. Preach to those you look down on about what they should do. But you have your own set of rules. Kind of like Al Gore and Michael Moore.

Well you sure like it both ways. It's not small or overplayed when you want to use the dead school children to ban guns or limit magazines. But when it comes to arming teachers, why then it's extremely small.

OK, then stop bitching about the massacres.

Train and arm the teachers who are willing to do so. Give them an extra $2000 a year. Will it solve the problem? Not totally, but it's a major step and will help. It's been done in some parts of the country for awhile already. And guess what? There isn't a pile of dead children or you libs would have found it by now.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Of course, because you went looking for mass murders where responders with a weapon prevented it. Now, how DUMB is that? If someone with a firearm STOPPED the mass murder, why, then it's *not* a mass murder.
How dumb can you be?
The cases that gun advocates consider "successes"

Wow. The ones that *you* recall. How statistically significant and unbiased is that?


OK, so the police in NYC happened to hit a number of bystanders. Following your convoluted logic, we should disarm the police. Or at least find out if they had a 15 round magazine and then limit to say 10, right?
What a maroon. Of course if the shooter in NYC had not been stopped, you'd be here citing it as another example of mass murder. PS: none of those injured by the richoceting bullets was killed.
<How easy would it be for the madman to pickup a kid and use them as

OK, so let's ban kids.
The idea of arming teachers seems to be extremely poorly thought

Actually, they are well thought out and already in use in parts of the USA. It's *your* ideas that are half-baked.

Yeah, if it's an ambush and for the first 10 seconds. The case in CT was no such thing. The principal was in her office, herd the shots. SHE chose the timeframe for response. If she had a shotgun available, no question she could have taken it before heading down the hall to confront the shooter. SHE confronted the shooter. Capiche? How dumb can one lib be?
Which shooter has to care if they

OK, so let's just let the shooter kill eveyone. Typical lib stupidity. And we're supposed to wait for the police, right? What about if the police overshoot and hit a kid? YOU just pointed out a case in nyc where the police wounded some bystanders. So, what's your point? Disarm everyone? What a clueless lib. Anyone with any intelligence knows that there is always the possibility of collateral damage, but ending it before 26 are dead is preferable. Capiche?

You can't change you're mind because there simply are not enough connected brain cells. It's like a rabbit saying it can become a lion.

What is far fetched is your dragging up every possible case against persons using firearms to save lives while ignoring all the cases where that occurs.
Typical of your methods, you say you looked at mass murders and can't find one that was prevented with the use of a firearm. How unbelievably dumb that is. If the mass murder was prevented, then it;s not a mass murder. It's like looking at the scene of fires with fatalities, then claiming that smoke detectors don't work, because you can't find any fire fatalities with working smoke detectors. Capiche?

No, it's plain to see by now you're a fool.
Sadly that's especially true now

WTF? Where did that come from?
If the research I've been reading is correct, we can

The "research" you've been reading isn't research. It's pure lib crap as demonstrated above. What is sad is that you don't even have the intelligence to see it for what it is. You think "research" is looking at mass murders and then not finding any that were prevented by a firearm. Hint: If they were prevented, well then they are not mass murders. But clueless libs like you swallow that whole.

No, he's saying you're clueless as to the most basic element of statistical analysis.
> How could any information that's a subset of that

Hint: Stop looking at mass murders and look at all the crimes committed, those that were prevented by the use of a firearm. IF an event ends with no deaths, or one or two dead, then it's *not* a mass murder.


The even in CT took 10 mins fool.

Who says they all have to be armed. Make it voluntary and give them some extra pay. Boy are you dumb.
Further

It's being done in schools already. No accidental shootings. IF there were, you'd be here telling us all about it. How one accidental gun discharge is worse than 26 dead in CT.

The killer in CT wasn't the Taliban, trained, combat experienced. He was a wuss of a kid, probably a lot like you.

Yes they have. There are armed teachers in some schools in the USA right now.

Sure, go try to turn this into a "birther" thing. Or a Republican thing. Why didn't Obama do your lib thing on gun control first term? Why, he knows there are a lot of Democrats that are pro-gun rights.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What difference would it make? My request still stands. Explain how he wouild know to deploy it in time.
Whether or not it was on him at the time is an idiots question as it could nto have been used.
Or are you trying to say "lookee lookee, CCW wouldn't have helped so why carry?" Perhaps that is what you are trying to slyly work up to?.
Harry K
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.