OT: Gun Control in Virginia

[Michael Terrell]

On Thursday, January 16, 2020 at 9:50:13 AM UTC-5, Tom Gardner wrote:

On 16/01/20 13:30, Michael Terrell wrote:
Look. I've told you that I'm not letting a queer like you wrap your diseased
mouth around it. Go back to your street corner and look for your johns...

Revealing.

Of what? That someone is forging post with my name and email address on other groups where it says much worse things about me?

OTOH I don't how I'd react if I couldn't get enough analgesia.

It was medicine for Diabetes, and Edema. My legs swelled up so bad that the skin was tearing. I couldn't wear my diabetic shoes, without them popping off my swollen feet. How would you like to take a step and have a shoe fly almost 20 feet away as you land face first on Asphalt? How would you like to go without Insulin?

The doctor also canceled the Wound Care supply prescriptions for things that I can't buy over the counter. The last time most of my prescriptions arrived the same day, it was enough to fill two kitchen sized trashcans.

 

[Phil Allison]

Bill Sloman wrote:

-------------------

Places with effective gun control - like Australia - have very few mass shootings.

** But compared to our population and the rarity of handguns - we have had some rippers.

Several in Melbourne, a couple in Sydney and a massive one in Tasmania.


> There are plenty of licensed gun out in the community,

** Mostly in rural areas, few in the major cities where owners cannot justify such ownership.

As the old saying goes, I carry a gun because a policeman is just too heavy.

** ROTFL !!!

With apologies to those in law enforcement who might not have hid behind squad cars while our kids were getting shot up in the school.

** I believe that actually never happened - the shooting was all over before the state police arrived.

The teen gunman threw his AR-15 away when it jammed and joined the throng of students leaving the building. He was later found many streets away.

Law enforcement is rarely in the right place at the right time to stop a lunatic with gun before they kill a few bystanders.

** Except for the recent White Settlement Church shooting.

Horrible as it was, the event was all over in just 2 seconds.

Using law enforcement to stop the lunatic getting the gun in the first place is a lot more effective,

** Lunatics and crims can easily get guns if they want them, plenty here in Australia have them.

A friend an colleague of mine was shot dead with a hand gun at his work bench, a local business woman was shot dead right in front of where I live in broad daylight. I heard the shots, crack, crack crack. Then her teenage son screaming.

My landlord showed me his Colt 9mm automatic one day in his office and I nearly shot him. He was a full on lunatic.

The USA just has more guns and more lunatics.

If you calculate the actual ratios, Americans way more restrained with weapons than we are.



..... Phil

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 10:22:21 PM UTC+11, Phil Allison wrote:

Bill Sloman wrote:

-------------------


Places with effective gun control - like Australia - have very few mass shootings.


** But compared to our population and the rarity of handguns - we have had some rippers.

Several in Melbourne, a couple in Sydney and a massive one in Tasmania.

Phil doesn't seem to have noticed, but the 1996 Port Arthur massacre prompted a substantial change in gun ownership laws. We've done better since then.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australia)

Of course that meant that we've exported at least one gun nut, who killed 51 people in New Zealand, where he could buy the kind of gun he wanted to use.

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

There are plenty of licensed gun out in the community,

** Mostly in rural areas, few in the major cities where owners cannot justify such ownership.

As the old saying goes, I carry a gun because a policeman is just too heavy.


** ROTFL !!!

With apologies to those in law enforcement who might not have hid behind squad cars while our kids were getting shot up in the school.

** I believe that actually never happened - the shooting was all over before the state police arrived.

The teen gunman threw his AR-15 away when it jammed and joined the throng of students leaving the building. He was later found many streets away.

Law enforcement is rarely in the right place at the right time to stop a lunatic with gun before they kill a few bystanders.

** Except for the recent White Settlement Church shooting.

Horrible as it was, the event was all over in just 2 seconds.

Using law enforcement to stop the lunatic getting the gun in the first place is a lot more effective,

** Lunatics and crims can easily get guns if they want them, plenty here in Australia have them.

The Christchurch Mosque killer had to move to New Zealdn to get the gun he wanted.

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

A friend an colleague of mine was shot dead with a hand gun at his work bench, a local business woman was shot dead right in front of where I live in broad daylight. I heard the shots, crack, crack crack. Then her teenage son screaming.

My landlord showed me his Colt 9mm automatic one day in his office and I nearly shot him. He was a full on lunatic.

The USA just has more guns and more lunatics.

If you calculate the actual ratios, Americans way more restrained with weapons than we are.

Not what the statistics say

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

Australia is pretty normal at 0.9 deaths per year per 100,000 people, and the US sticks out like a sore thumb at 12.21. There are places in South America which are even worse, but it is exceptional for an advanced industrial country.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Michael Terrell]

On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 6:22:21 AM UTC-5, Phil Allison wrote:

Bill Sloman wrote:


With apologies to those in law enforcement who might not have hid behind squad cars while our kids were getting shot up in the school.


** I believe that actually never happened - the shooting was all over before the state police arrived.

You don't say which school shooting, but if it is the Parkland Shooting in Florida, it was the County Sheriff that had the Jurisdiction. Florida's 'State Police' is the 'Florida Highway Patrol' which is responsible for accidents on state highways, Hijacked commercial trucks, and now 'Human Trafficking which has become a much larger problem because of so many illegals sneaking over our borders. The Sheriff was removed from office because of poor training of his Deputies, and no clear chain of command during that incident.. He is still trying to get the job back.

Larger cities have their own police who would have Jurisdiction in a case like this, but the can call in other agencies for help, when needed.

 

[Phil Allison]

Michael Terrell wrote:

---------------------------

With apologies to those in law enforcement who might not have hid behind squad cars while our kids were getting shot up in the school.


** I believe that actually never happened - the shooting was all over before the state police arrived.


You don't say which school shooting, but if it is the Parkland Shooting in Florida, it was the County Sheriff that had the Jurisdiction.

** Fair enough - it is not very important to the story who employed the police officers.

FYI: In Australia, each state has their own police and legal system, criminal laws vary quite a bit. The only other force is the Federal Police.

In the Parkland case, it was a school security official who was reluctant to confront the gunman. Fearing there was more and one shooter armed with an assault rifle he was simply no match with his small handgun. So he waited outside for backup to arrive, rather than die pointlessly.

He is now being criminally prosecuted for making that decision.

Classic example of the "sacrificial lamb".

The US legal system is so politicized.


..... Phil

 

[Michael Terrell]

On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 6:48:47 PM UTC-5, Phil Allison wrote:

Michael Terrell wrote:

---------------------------


With apologies to those in law enforcement who might not have hid behind squad cars while our kids were getting shot up in the school.


** I believe that actually never happened - the shooting was all over before the state police arrived.


You don't say which school shooting, but if it is the Parkland Shooting in Florida, it was the County Sheriff that had the Jurisdiction.

** Fair enough - it is not very important to the story who employed the police officers.

FYI: In Australia, each state has their own police and legal system, criminal laws vary quite a bit. The only other force is the Federal Police.

In the Parkland case, it was a school security official who was reluctant to confront the gunman. Fearing there was more and one shooter armed with an assault rifle he was simply no match with his small handgun. So he waited outside for backup to arrive, rather than die pointlessly.

He is now being criminally prosecuted for making that decision.

Classic example of the "sacrificial lamb".

The US legal system is so politicized.`

Thay 'school security official ' is called a School Resource Officer' here in the United States, and they are Deputy Sheriffs. They work for the sheriff's Department, but are assigned to schools rather than other duties.

Our Highway Patrol officers are usually one man patrols, and cover 50 or more miles of territory so they may happen upon a wrecck as it happens, or it could take over a half hour to reach the scene.

It isn't a political division, it is more a case of specialization for different types of response. Most responses for the Sheriff or local police can be cleared up in under a half hour, but a major accident on a highway could shut it down for 24 hours or more as the roadway is cleared, and any damage to the infrastructure is repaired. It's just like in Electronics. Everyone has specialties.

BTW, Welcome back!

 

[mpm]

On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 6:48:47 PM UTC-5, Phil Allison wrote:

Michael Terrell wrote:

---------------------------


With apologies to those in law enforcement who might not have hid behind squad cars while our kids were getting shot up in the school.


** I believe that actually never happened - the shooting was all over before the state police arrived.


You don't say which school shooting, but if it is the Parkland Shooting in Florida, it was the County Sheriff that had the Jurisdiction.

** Fair enough - it is not very important to the story who employed the police officers.

FYI: In Australia, each state has their own police and legal system, criminal laws vary quite a bit. The only other force is the Federal Police.

In the Parkland case, it was a school security official who was reluctant to confront the gunman. Fearing there was more and one shooter armed with an assault rifle he was simply no match with his small handgun. So he waited outside for backup to arrive, rather than die pointlessly.

He is now being criminally prosecuted for making that decision.

Classic example of the "sacrificial lamb".

The US legal system is so politicized.


.... Phil

Your facts are a little off.
The school resource officer, Scot Peterson, was outside the building when the shooting began, and rather than rush to confront the gunman, stayed outside, took cover, and directed other arriving officers to do the same. These other officers were from Broward County. Meanwhile, the Coral Springs police department also arrived and immediately went inside, while the Broward police stayed outside.

The US Supreme Court has ruled that police DO NOT have a duty to protect people from harm.

As for (former) resource officer Scot Peterson, I personally think he's a scumbag. So that out of the way.. he was arrested of several charges that will probably never amount to anything once he has day in court. But that's still a lot of time spend in jail waiting, and bond hearings, etc... (BTW: I think he was just allowed to go home to North Carolina and no longer has to wear a GPS ankle monitor while his case is pending.) I expect all the CRIMINAL charges will be dropped because there's no merit to them. But that won't stop all the families from pursuing CIVIL wrongful death, child neglect, etc.. cases.

Peterson may indeed by a "sacrificial lamb", (and legally in the clear), but he's still a scumbag.

 

[Rick C]

On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 10:18:31 PM UTC-5, mpm wrote:

Peterson may indeed by a "sacrificial lamb", (and legally in the clear), but he's still a scumbag.

Why is he a scumbag? What exactly did he do?

--

Rick C.

-+-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Phil Allison]

Michael Terrell wrote:

---------------------------

----

** I believe that actually never happened - the shooting was all over before the state police arrived.


You don't say which school shooting, but if it is the Parkland Shooting in Florida, it was the County Sheriff that had the Jurisdiction.

** Fair enough - it is not very important to the story who employed the police officers.

FYI: In Australia, each state has their own police and legal system, criminal laws vary quite a bit. The only other force is the Federal Police.

In the Parkland case, it was a school security official who was reluctant to confront the gunman. Fearing there was more and one shooter armed with an assault rifle he was simply no match with his small handgun. So he waited outside for backup to arrive, rather than die pointlessly.

He is now being criminally prosecuted for making that decision.

Classic example of the "sacrificial lamb".

The US legal system is so politicized.`


Thay 'school security official ' is called a School Resource Officer' here in the United States, and they are Deputy Sheriffs. They work for the sheriff's Department, but are assigned to schools rather than other duties.

** In Australia, police office have a full range of duties and powers.

They investigate crimes, carry out arrests, deal with the aftermath of accidents and write tickets for driving offences, perform drug and alcohol tests in random and specific event cases and lay charges when required.

They carry guns and can use then to defend themselves and others.

But there is no need for them to act like martyrs in a shooter situation - self preservation is allowed.

It isn't a political division,

** My comment was that it must have been a political decision to prosecute an officer for merely choosing to preserve his own life.

The scorn poured by so many on him and other deputies is absurd.



..... Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

mpm wrote:

-------------

Your facts are a little off.

** Not much.

The school resource officer, Scot Peterson, was outside the building when the shooting began, and rather than rush to confront the gunman, stayed outside, took cover, and directed other arriving officers to do the same.

** The location of the shooter was not known, the fire alarm was ringing and the hallways were full of students who thought it was a false alarm.

The shooting was over in 6 minutes.

The first police arrived after 5 minutes and went inside just as the shooting stopped.

The shooter blended into the crowd and simply walked out the door un-noticed by all hang tossed away his rifle.


> The US Supreme Court has ruled that police DO NOT have a duty to protect people from harm.

** Goes against he who idea of having police.

> I expect all the CRIMINAL charges will be dropped because there's no merit to them.

** So you agree with my point.

> But that won't stop all the families from pursuing CIVIL wrongful death, child neglect, etc.. cases.

** They should sue the school for having open, unattended doors, no bag checking and a useless video system that did not work in real time.

I believe there was a 20 minute delay before any vision could be viewed.

What was that all about?

Peterson may indeed by a "sacrificial lamb", (and legally in the clear),
but he's still a scumbag.

** It's true he lied about certain things, terrified for his life I expect.


...... Phil

 

[mpm]

On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 10:49:43 PM UTC-5, Rick C wrote:

On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 10:18:31 PM UTC-5, mpm wrote:

Peterson may indeed by a "sacrificial lamb", (and legally in the clear), but he's still a scumbag.

Why is he a scumbag? What exactly did he do?

Nothing. (Other than hiding.)

Well, actually worse that nothing.
He directed other arriving officers at the scene to take cover rather then enter the building. And he lied to investigators about exactly what had happened.

I think if you ask the officer of Coral Springs PD (who DID enter the building), they'd have a pretty low opinion of Peterson also.

 

[dcaster@krl.org]

On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 11:20:35 PM UTC-5, Phil Allison

** They should sue the school for having open, unattended doors, no bag checking and a useless video system that did not work in real time.

I believe there was a 20 minute delay before any vision could be viewed.




..... Phil

I think you are not realistic. All the schools I went to had open unattended doors , no bag check and no video system at all. In addition the all the schools I volunteered at and the schools I taught at also had open unattended doors , etc. Providing those things costs a lot of money and makes almost no difference.

Dan

 

[Rick C]

On Saturday, February 8, 2020 at 9:20:01 AM UTC-5, mpm wrote:

On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 10:49:43 PM UTC-5, Rick C wrote:
On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 10:18:31 PM UTC-5, mpm wrote:

Peterson may indeed by a "sacrificial lamb", (and legally in the clear), but he's still a scumbag.

Why is he a scumbag? What exactly did he do?

Nothing. (Other than hiding.)

Well, actually worse that nothing.
He directed other arriving officers at the scene to take cover rather then enter the building. And he lied to investigators about exactly what had happened.

So why does taking cover make him a scumbag? Didn't everyone other than the shooter take cover? Didn't everyone call for others to take cover? Why do you hold him responsible for the other officers actions? Some police did what his said, others didn't. Why hold him responsible for some and not all?


> I think if you ask the officer of Coral Springs PD (who DID enter the building), they'd have a pretty low opinion of Peterson also.

Low opinions are rampant.

I don't know what the established procedure is for such events.

--

Rick C.

-++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Rick C]

On Saturday, February 8, 2020 at 9:04:07 AM UTC-5, dca...@krl.org wrote:

On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 11:20:35 PM UTC-5, Phil Allison



** They should sue the school for having open, unattended doors, no bag checking and a useless video system that did not work in real time.

I believe there was a 20 minute delay before any vision could be viewed..




..... Phil

I think you are not realistic. All the schools I went to had open unattended doors , no bag check and no video system at all. In addition the all the schools I volunteered at and the schools I taught at also had open unattended doors , etc. Providing those things costs a lot of money and makes almost no difference.

I think it makes a difference. But this is largely an emotional response. If the risk from a school shooting is less than the risk from using transportation to get to school, aren't we over reacting?

The problem is school shootings result in terrible scenes and strong emotions, but the reality is we accept more frequent but less visible causes of death as acceptable.

There are around 10 deaths due to active shooters in schools in the US each year on the average. In contrast each year some 700 school students kill themselves with guns. The death rate from school shootings is comparable to children dying from lightning. The list can go on.

I get it. It's an emotional issue. Everyone thinks we need to do something about it. Yet we do so little to prevent much more likely deaths.

--

Rick C.

-+-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Phil Allison]

dca...@krl.org wrote:

------------------------

** They should sue the school for having open, unattended doors, no bag checking and a useless video system that did not work in real time.

I believe there was a 20 minute delay before any vision could be viewed.



I think you are not realistic.

** You trimmed too much, removing the context.

All the schools I went to had open unattended doors

** Shame I do not know when and were that was, so is irrelevant.

no bag check and no video system at all.

** I understand many schools in the US have that right now.

In the Parkland case it would have made all the difference, so a law suit against the school may well be successful.

Suing the Deputies is an absurd idea as they were powerless to prevent or halt the shooting.



..... Phil

 

[Rick C]

On Saturday, February 8, 2020 at 5:24:30 PM UTC-5, Phil Allison wrote:

dca...@krl.org wrote:

no bag check and no video system at all.


** I understand many schools in the US have that right now.

In the Parkland case it would have made all the difference, so a law suit against the school may well be successful.

Suing the Deputies is an absurd idea as they were powerless to prevent or halt the shooting.

While there are a number of mass shootings each year, few of them are in schools. The total number of people killed by guns each year are comparable to autos, but the number in mass shootings are much fewer. The number of students killed in schools in mass shootings are even fewer, I believe comparable to the number that die by lightning strikes. At some point the question becomes what measures do we take and how much money do we spend to prevent these events knowing they are few and that we won't prevent them all.

I was in agreement that actions need to be taken, until I saw the low numbers and put them in context of other student death rates that we can do much more about, but instead just accept as inevitable.

This is a hugely emotional issue for parents and students and educators. But that's the point. It's about emotion, not logic.

--

Rick C.

-+++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Phil Allison]

Rick C wrote:

--------------

Phil Allison wrote:

no bag check and no video system at all.


** I understand many schools in the US have that right now.

In the Parkland case it would have made all the difference, so a law suit against the school may well be successful.

Suing the Deputies is an absurd idea as they were powerless to prevent or halt the shooting.

While there are a number of mass shootings each year, few of them are in schools. The total number of people killed by guns each year are comparable to autos, but the number in mass shootings are much fewer. The number of students killed in schools in mass shootings are even fewer, I believe comparable to the number that die by lightning strikes. At some point the question becomes what measures do we take and how much money do we spend to prevent these events knowing they are few and that we won't prevent them all.

I was in agreement that actions need to be taken, until I saw the low numbers and put them in context of other student death rates that we can do much more about, but instead just accept as inevitable.

This is a hugely emotional issue for parents and students and educators. But that's the point. It's about emotion, not logic.

** As usual, arrogant dopes like Rick C completely fail to see the logic and the point.

Accidents and lighting deaths are not even faintly comparable with gun murders of innocent folk, particularly children in school.

Enormous effort and funds are is put into reducing the former and the latter is an "act of god ".

Churches and schools are particularly vulnerable to mass shootings - due to the architecture, number of persons and seating arrangements.

FYI:

Despite the very low ownership of guns and almost zero ability for citizens to have carry licenses EVERY court and government run tribunal in Australia has security officers at the entrance AND walk through metal detectors.

It is nor a major burden nor a great expense.

People need to feel safe when going about their daily business, so they must know that all reasonable precautions are being taken.

The USA's solution is to add more guns.

Purest insanity.


..... Phil

 

[Rick C]

On Saturday, February 8, 2020 at 9:34:30 PM UTC-5, Phil Allison wrote:

Rick C wrote:

--------------

Phil Allison wrote:


no bag check and no video system at all.


** I understand many schools in the US have that right now.

In the Parkland case it would have made all the difference, so a law suit against the school may well be successful.

Suing the Deputies is an absurd idea as they were powerless to prevent or halt the shooting.

While there are a number of mass shootings each year, few of them are in schools. The total number of people killed by guns each year are comparable to autos, but the number in mass shootings are much fewer. The number of students killed in schools in mass shootings are even fewer, I believe comparable to the number that die by lightning strikes. At some point the question becomes what measures do we take and how much money do we spend to prevent these events knowing they are few and that we won't prevent them all.

I was in agreement that actions need to be taken, until I saw the low numbers and put them in context of other student death rates that we can do much more about, but instead just accept as inevitable.

This is a hugely emotional issue for parents and students and educators.. But that's the point. It's about emotion, not logic.


** As usual, arrogant dopes like Rick C completely fail to see the logic and the point.

As usual Phil shows he can't even discuss an issue without tossing out personal insults. But that is entirely about him and his limitations rather than who or what he is commenting on. It's rather a universal response by... Phil. I can't think of anything I can call other person than to refer to him as "Phil".


> Accidents and lighting deaths are not even faintly comparable with gun murders of innocent folk, particularly children in school.

Of course they are comparable. I just did. See above.


> Enormous effort and funds are is put into reducing the former and the latter is an "act of god ".

"Enormous" or not, the efforts don't often include something as simple as seat belts. We are required to wear seatbelts in every state of the union while we drive our personal cars, but we don't care enough to protect our school children from death and disfigurement in traffic accidents. In other words, we accept the death rate of school buses without trying harder.

That lightning is considered to be an "act of God" by insurance companies is irrelevant. Not sure what you mean by stating this. The point is we accept certain levels of risk as being acceptable. People are seldom struck by lightning under clear skies. We are nearly always outdoors when it happens. Actions could be taken to make it safer to exit the building and enter the school bus or our mom's car instead of exposing our children to death and injury from lightning. But we don't. Many would laugh at the idea... only because it is so seldom that it is a problem... like school shootings. So clearly shootings are an emotional issue.


> Churches and schools are particularly vulnerable to mass shootings - due to the architecture, number of persons and seating arrangements.

The reality is many other places are equally susceptable due to the large numbers of people. While a dozen or two might die in a school or church, many more died because they were within sight of a sniper in Las Vegas. A sniper in Austin killed an equivalent number as a school. Likewise a similar number in a McDonald's. There is nothing special about schools and churches other than we'd like to think they should be safe. Again, it's emotional.

FYI:

Despite the very low ownership of guns and almost zero ability for citizens to have carry licenses EVERY court and government run tribunal in Australia has security officers at the entrance AND walk through metal detectors.

It is nor a major burden nor a great expense.

No, not the one inspection at a court room. But multiply that by the number of entrances at a school and the number of schools it turns into something real. Clearly many schools find it to be a problem or they would be using them.


> People need to feel safe when going about their daily business, so they must know that all reasonable precautions are being taken.

Is there any reason to carry a gun into a McDonalds? Why not do weapon check there? How about at Costco? They have some forty to 100 people in line at the checkouts at any given time. It would be an easy target... as long as the door watchers don't come after you with their pens.

The USA's solution is to add more guns.

Purest insanity.

One gun cancels another. Maybe, maybe not. For sure we already have too many guns in the wild to do much about. Also too many who see gun control as evil, even the obvious things like registration and background checks. We had a tense day in Virginia recently over that.

--

Rick C.

+--- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+--- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Phil Allison]

Rick C wrote:

------------

no bag check and no video system at all.


** I understand many schools in the US have that right now.

In the Parkland case it would have made all the difference, so a law suit against the school may well be successful.

Suing the Deputies is an absurd idea as they were powerless to prevent or halt the shooting.

While there are a number of mass shootings each year, few of them are in schools. The total number of people killed by guns each year are comparable to autos, but the number in mass shootings are much fewer. The number of students killed in schools in mass shootings are even fewer, I believe comparable to the number that die by lightning strikes. At some point the question becomes what measures do we take and how much money do we spend to prevent these events knowing they are few and that we won't prevent them all.

I was in agreement that actions need to be taken, until I saw the low numbers and put them in context of other student death rates that we can do much more about, but instead just accept as inevitable.

This is a hugely emotional issue for parents and students and educators. But that's the point. It's about emotion, not logic.


** As usual, arrogant dopes like Rick C completely fail to see the logic and the point.


As usual Phil shows he can't even discuss an issue without tossing out personal insults.

** Rick C see has been a massive troll and total PITA on this NG for years.

The bullshitting prick has no right to claim anyons'e respects WHATSOEVER.

Accidents and lighting deaths are not even faintly comparable with gun murders of innocent folk, particularly children in school.

Of course they are comparable.

** You made an entirely FALSE comparison.

Which your idiot opinion entirely rests on.

I just did. See above.

Enormous effort and funds are is put into reducing the former and the latter is an "act of god ".

"Enormous" or not, the efforts don't often include something as simple as seat belts.

** A "red herring " is just a colourful fish to this ranting moron.

That lightning is considered to be an "act of God" by insurance companies is irrelevant.

** It is massively relevant.

The term refers to harmful events that are neither malicious, negligent or even the result of misadventure.

Not sure what you mean by stating this.

** Explanation:

Rick C has a below average IQ, no empathy but with a monstrous ego.

He think's he thinks, but he doesn't.

Churches and schools are particularly vulnerable to mass shootings - due to the architecture, number of persons and seating arrangements.

The reality is many other places are equally susceptable

** None a quite the same in the three above factors.

FYI:

Despite the very low ownership of guns and almost zero ability for citizens to have carry licenses EVERY court and government run tribunal in Australia has security officers at the entrance AND walk through metal detectors.

It is nor a major burden nor a great expense.

No, not the one inspection at a court room.

** Inspection points usually cover dozens of court rooms and on multiple floors. Much the same as a school.

People need to feel safe when going about their daily business, so they must know that all reasonable precautions are being taken.

Is there any reason to carry a gun into a McDonalds?

** Totally irrelevant question.

A sly way of introducing a "straw man" false arguement.

The USA's solution is to add more guns.

Purest insanity.

One gun cancels another. Maybe, maybe not.

** Who here suspects Rick C is is a member of the NRA, has a number of guns at home and fantasizes about shooting some dope intruder ?

Or any hapless Zombie who dares to rebel ?




..... Phil

 

[Rick C]

On Saturday, February 8, 2020 at 11:17:39 PM UTC-5, Phil Allison wrote:

Rick C wrote:

------------



no bag check and no video system at all.


** I understand many schools in the US have that right now.

In the Parkland case it would have made all the difference, so a law suit against the school may well be successful.

Suing the Deputies is an absurd idea as they were powerless to prevent or halt the shooting.

While there are a number of mass shootings each year, few of them are in schools. The total number of people killed by guns each year are comparable to autos, but the number in mass shootings are much fewer. The number of students killed in schools in mass shootings are even fewer, I believe comparable to the number that die by lightning strikes. At some point the question becomes what measures do we take and how much money do we spend to prevent these events knowing they are few and that we won't prevent them all.

I was in agreement that actions need to be taken, until I saw the low numbers and put them in context of other student death rates that we can do much more about, but instead just accept as inevitable.

This is a hugely emotional issue for parents and students and educators. But that's the point. It's about emotion, not logic.


** As usual, arrogant dopes like Rick C completely fail to see the logic and the point.


As usual Phil shows he can't even discuss an issue without tossing out personal insults.


** Rick C see has been a massive troll and total PITA on this NG for years.

The bullshitting prick has no right to claim anyons'e respects WHATSOEVER..


Accidents and lighting deaths are not even faintly comparable with gun murders of innocent folk, particularly children in school.

Of course they are comparable.

** You made an entirely FALSE comparison.

Which your idiot opinion entirely rests on.

It's always interesting to discuss an issue with someone as insane as Phil. Well, maybe "interesting" isn't the right word. It's like watching a three legged dog walk down the street. You see him getting along, but wonder how he manages to actually survive and get by.

I just did. See above.



Enormous effort and funds are is put into reducing the former and the latter is an "act of god ".

"Enormous" or not, the efforts don't often include something as simple as seat belts.


** A "red herring " is just a colourful fish to this ranting moron.

Lol! So it makes perfect sense to hire hundreds of thousands of cops to police schools and spend hundreds of millions of dollars on equipment for all the entrances to prevent 10 killings a year. But it doesn't make sense to put seat belts in the school buses that bring the students to school?

What a whack job you are.

That lightning is considered to be an "act of God" by insurance companies is irrelevant.

** It is massively relevant.

The term refers to harmful events that are neither malicious, negligent or even the result of misadventure.

And of course that makes a death ok, but one that is by "misadventure" must be stopped at all costs?

Not sure what you mean by stating this.


** Explanation:

Rick C has a below average IQ, no empathy but with a monstrous ego.

He think's he thinks, but he doesn't.

Lol. What a whacko. Maybe not. Maybe he is just so bad at thinking that he can't discuss a topic any better than DLUNU, the one who is clearly demented.

Churches and schools are particularly vulnerable to mass shootings - due to the architecture, number of persons and seating arrangements.

The reality is many other places are equally susceptable

** None a quite the same in the three above factors.

And yet there are more shootings at restaurants than in schools. Try using Google. You might learn something. No, that is unlikely. Your learning days are behind you.

FYI:

Despite the very low ownership of guns and almost zero ability for citizens to have carry licenses EVERY court and government run tribunal in Australia has security officers at the entrance AND walk through metal detectors.

It is nor a major burden nor a great expense.

No, not the one inspection at a court room.


** Inspection points usually cover dozens of court rooms and on multiple floors. Much the same as a school.

Not in any of the courts I've been in. They have a single entrance and exit for the entire building which has a large metal detector and x-ray machine. They aren't going to duplicate that at more than one entrance.

But I suppose in your alternate reality the courts would rather make it easy to get in and out and money isn't an issue.

People need to feel safe when going about their daily business, so they must know that all reasonable precautions are being taken.

Is there any reason to carry a gun into a McDonalds?


** Totally irrelevant question.

A sly way of introducing a "straw man" false arguement.

Totally relevant to the issue of security for the children. They need to be safe in a school but not in a restaurant?

The USA's solution is to add more guns.

Purest insanity.

One gun cancels another. Maybe, maybe not.



** Who here suspects Rick C is is a member of the NRA, has a number of guns at home and fantasizes about shooting some dope intruder ?

Or any hapless Zombie who dares to rebel ?

The one and only Phil. Who else rants the way he does? No one.

--

Rick C.

+--+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+--+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209