Armed "volunteers" in our schools (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


slvemike4u -> Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 11:14:41 AM)

Okay,I'm walking away again I swear I am...but I just caught a State Rep.from Oregon on CNN suggesting that we arm "volunteers" to protect out schools.That it is too expensive to expect law enforcement to do it,but that local leo's could in fact train and vett these proposed volunteers.


I get the idea that many believe that America does not have a gun problem....that instead what we are facing is a shortage of armed responders.
In other words America does not,currently,have quite enough folks walking around with loaded weapons.


Volunteers....I wonder,should such volunteers be armed with assault rifles,I mean the last thing we want is for them to be outgunned in the ensuing gun fights ?




Kirata -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 11:30:56 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

I wonder,should such volunteers be armed with assault rifles,I mean the last thing we want is for them to be outgunned in the ensuing gun fights ?

I wish you'd abandon these "assault rifle" theatrics. The firearms you're on about are no different than any other firearm from the smallest pistol on up that doesn't have to be recycled manually to chamber a fresh round. They are not assault rifles.

K.




OsideGirl -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 11:35:40 AM)

Assault rifle:

[image]http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/images/hiRes/36913.jpg[/image]

Not an assault rifle:

[image]http://cdn2.armslist.com/sites/armslist/uploads/posts/2012/10/17/614342_01_government_model_ruger_mini_14_640.jpg[/image]

Can you tell us the difference between the two?




Rule -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 11:38:36 AM)

FR

Okay so you arm volunteers to be at schools.

The number required ought to be approximately equal with the number of schools, not so? Now let's guesstimate the number of schools
400 million people?
180 million of which go to one or another school?
Say six classes per school with thirty students each.

That makes about a million schools and as many armed volunteers to save say thirty people per year.

Now if these volunteers were paid professionals that would earn say one thousand dollars per month, the total cost to save those thirty people would be twelve billion dollars per year - which said volunteers could also earn if they had a real job instead of a volunteer job.

I recommend to do nothing at all. I have now saved you twelve billion dollars. Please send me my ten percent of commission fee.







jlf1961 -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 11:39:14 AM)

First of all, forget volunteers, I would suggest armed professional security officers, and not the wannabe cop type.

There are many security firms that hire ex law enforcement and ex military.

For that matter, form a police auxiliary unit, with the same training as full time leo's.

As for what to arm them with, I would suggest Red Jacket firearms "Hog Gun" very large caliber rifle based on the AR frame, firing a low velocity round. Even if you dont hit the perp in a vital organ, the tissue damage will be so bad as to make him unable to do anything but bleed.




jlf1961 -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 11:40:33 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl

Assault rifle:

[image]http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/images/hiRes/36913.jpg[/image]

Not an assault rifle:

[image]http://cdn2.armslist.com/sites/armslist/uploads/posts/2012/10/17/614342_01_government_model_ruger_mini_14_640.jpg[/image]

Can you tell us the difference between the two?



Correct, but under the Assault Weapon ban, both would be banned, and since the definition is so vague, so would a few sporting rifle models.




OsideGirl -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 11:42:42 AM)

Actually, the second rifle wouldn't be banned because it does not have the "features" that the government uses to define "assault" rifles.




Rule -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 11:44:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
First of all, forget volunteers, I would suggest armed professional security officers

I suspect that them get paid at least five thousand dollars per month

I still recommend to do nothing.

I have now saved you sixty billion dollars per year. Please send me my ten percent commission fee.




lovmuffin -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 12:02:57 PM)

I've been reading all these threads and there is so much I could respond too but I'll start here.



Do you see anything wrong if a police officer was assigned individual schools ? It's not practical though in some inner big city schools where gang activity is present they do that. For the most part localities don't have enough police man power to take police officers from their current duties. Next I suppose you could hire a security company to place armed security officers at the schools. After that there would be training and arming individual teachers. As much as I hate to tell you this, it's the only short term solution I can think of. It's the only way to nail these idiots on the spot before they can carry out what ever fucked up senerio they have in mind.

Gun control as you are suggesting in all these threads and banning semi autos would be a long term solution assuming you think it would eventually dry up the supply. I can see why gun control won't work, at least in the USA. I would suggest to you it would work as well as banning drugs and narcotics except it could be worse. Unlike the Drug culture that requires a constant supply which seems not to be a problem, ya can't snort an AK47 up your nose so its more permanent not to mention the total supply of these weapons all ready out there.



As far as being out gunned, I have to tell that a simple revolver should be suffient (at least as powerful as a357 magnum) in most cases. Contrary to the popular narrative, you can only be out gunned if you miss or if you are outnumbered. Anyone who can hit a deer running through the woods can outgun an individual with semi auto using a muzzle loader.




Kirata -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 12:04:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl

Assault rifle:

That's not an assault rifle. That is a Smith & Wesson M&P 15R AR-15 (you can see the markings if you look closely). The straight-line design puts the recoil force directly in-line with the shoulder, reducing point of aim losses when firing. Consequently, it's a popular configuration. But the AR-15 is just like any other non-bolt action rifle that doesn't need to be manually cycled to chamber a fresh round.

An assault rifle is a full-auto close combat weapon capable of continuous fire when the trigger is held back. Set on full auto, an M-16 will eat a 30-round magazine in 2 seconds.

K.




jlf1961 -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 12:05:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl

Actually, the second rifle wouldn't be banned because it does not have the "features" that the government uses to define "assault" rifles.



The second rifle is an M1A, I have one. However it is available in configurations that, even though they do not confirm to the term, could and were banned under the law Clinton signed.




jlf1961 -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 12:07:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl

Assault rifle:

That's not an assault rifle. That is a Smith & Wesson M&P 15R AR-15 (you can see the markings if you look closely). The straight-line design puts the recoil force directly in-line with the shoulder, reducing point of aim losses when firing. Consequently, it's a popular configuration. But the AR-15 is just like any other non-bolt action rifle that doesn't need to be manually cycled to chamber a fresh round.

An assault rifle is a full-auto close combat weapon capable of continuous fire when the trigger is held back.

K.




hey, finally someone that actually had the balls to put out the actual definition of assault rifle.

Not as though it is going to make a damn bit of difference to the general person who cant tell the difference between them.




epiphiny43 -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 12:11:42 PM)

None of the stupidity in the name of protecting for our children has any hope of changing the dynamics of America's mass killings. The more the Dems posture and bluff, knowing no real change in Federal gun laws can get through this congress, the less likely they will have a majority in either house come next election cycle. And Lieberman is leading the Harikiri move, the man who sabotaged the critical element in making Obamacare an effective alternative to the predatory health insurance industry.
That the gun banners focus on the appearance of weapons with no understanding of their actual function says all that needs saying about their competence to address a deadly serious dilemma. And their cowardice facing the large mass of hunters and sport shooters who do understand the terms that define firearm functions.
Actual assault rifles have always been restricted for private ownership, (Since the '30s, anyway, Class III license required.) being fully automatic weapons. And in case anyone doesn't know, there are Thousands if not more already out there. Ask anyone associated with a National Guard armory how they account for the inevitable 'inventory shrinkage' of their M16s? The DoD refuses to inventory or explain the disappearances. We hear one discharge a magazine or two (Hopefully out to sea) in the neighborhood every New Years.

Elect Rule to Congress? Maybe he can teach some basic arithmetic to Lawyers and politicians? And how do they vet the armed school volunteers? Which one of them goes postal first? The same money spent on training actually competent mental health professionals to be in schools would make real changes in the society, not a perfect solution, but catching a lot more at risk kids who still have potential for a good life and being contributing citizens.




OsideGirl -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 12:12:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl

Assault rifle:

That's not an assault rifle. That is a Smith & Wesson M&P 15R AR-15 (you can see the markings if you look closely). The straight-line design puts the recoil force directly in-line with the shoulder, reducing point of aim losses when firing. Consequently, it's a popular configuration. But the AR-15 is just like any other non-bolt action rifle that doesn't need to be manually cycled to chamber a fresh round.

An assault rifle is a full-auto close combat weapon capable of continuous fire when the trigger is held back.

K.



Yeah, but the government definition of assault rifle for the purpose of banning isn't based on whether it is fully auto or not. It's based on the barrel shroud, the telescoping stock and the pistol grip, etc. (Full auto is banned in a lot states already)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl

Actually, the second rifle wouldn't be banned because it does not have the "features" that the government uses to define "assault" rifles.



The second rifle is an M1A, I have one. However it is available in configurations that, even though they do not confirm to the term, could and were banned under the law Clinton signed.


No, it's not. The second is a Ruger Mini 14. A semi-automatic, .223 caliber rifle.




jlf1961 -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 12:26:20 PM)

[image]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-CUglbCN_vtU/TbhNrN1uyrI/AAAAAAAAEOE/DfFSiTcIPXE/s1600/m1a-rifle.gif[/image]
[image]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/18/Mini14GB.jpg[/image]

I only gave it a quick glance, you can see they closely resemble each other.




Kirata -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 12:27:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl

Yeah, but the government definition of assault rifle for the purpose of banning isn't based on whether it is fully auto or not. It's based on the barrel shroud, the telescoping stock and the pistol grip, etc. (Full auto is banned in a lot states already)

Exactly. In other words, whether or not what it chooses to style an "assault rifle" is actually an assault rifle doesn't matter. I mean, we're down the fucking rabbit hole here folks. These people are crazy.

But I don't want to go among crazy people. ~Alice

K.




lovmuffin -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 12:29:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl

Assault rifle:

[image]http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/images/hiRes/36913.jpg[/image]

Not an assault rifle:

[image]http://cdn2.armslist.com/sites/armslist/uploads/posts/2012/10/17/614342_01_government_model_ruger_mini_14_640.jpg[/image]

Can you tell us the difference between the two?




Actually I sort of can. The AR type rifle at the top I can't be sure because I can't see if there is a safety/selector switch on the other side. On the Rugar below, the device half way up the barrel would indicate it is indeed an assult rifle as I have only seen it on the select fire Rugar AC556. This rifle didn't win any military contracts but there are some out there in police arsonaels and in the supply of legally registered civillian machine guns. By definition it's an assult rifle but only similar cosmetically to the common Rugar mini 14 semi auto. I can't remember what the divice on the barrel is or its purpose.




jlf1961 -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 1:00:18 PM)

the difference with the ruger is the lack of a bayonet lug.

However you can get large cap mags for the Ruger.




OsideGirl -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 1:05:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl

Yeah, but the government definition of assault rifle for the purpose of banning isn't based on whether it is fully auto or not. It's based on the barrel shroud, the telescoping stock and the pistol grip, etc. (Full auto is banned in a lot states already)

Exactly. In other words, whether or not what it chooses to style an "assault rifle" is actually an assault rifle doesn't matter. I mean, we're down the fucking rabbit hole here folks. These people are crazy.

But I don't want to go among crazy people. ~Alice

K.



Yup, all the people screaming about "assault" rifles don't realize what makes a weapon classified as an assault rifle by the government is purely cosmetic.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

However you can get large cap mags for the Ruger.


Not in California, you can't. In CA both are limited to a 10 round magazine.




Raptorsc -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 1:17:38 PM)

You can get Large cap anything anywhere, do you truly belive making something "illegal" stops people, especially crazy people from having it? Gun laws are a band-aid on cancer. No matter how stringent, oppressive, or downright rediculous a law is, someone is willing to break it.

Automobile deaths far outweigh most gun related homicides in most states but noones screaming about banning automobiles. You could melt down every gun in the world and people will still knife each other, going to ban those next? when those are gone well be bludgeoning each other with rocks, ban those next? banning anything doesn't solve the problem.

Require firearms purchasers to register and get licenced like you would any other piece of dangerous equipment. make them take safety courses in the storage and operation of their "tools" because thats all a firearm is, a tool, like a hammer, like a screwdriver, like pot or a kitchen knife, all can be wielded to cause horrific harm.

This country has been giving up rights in the name of safety for years now when all it takes is the personal responsibility that your fathers and mothers had to ensure you didn't get your little fingers on firearms growing up.





Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625