ADVERTISEMENT

School Shooting - Coral Springs

No correlation?

The killer this week got off 150 plus shots (means he reloaded at least 4-5 times) and did not encounter ONE person shooting back at him (because it's against the law to have a weapon on campus).

You think mass killers don't choose soft targets on purpose?

I think he chose that location because he had some mental health issues and that place was a place that triggered those issues. He obviously had many issues there in the past.

At universities, there's whole police forces on campus that are armed, at my high school, there was always some on-duty police officers outside - I would be a bit shocked if there wasn't there as well.

Pulse for example - he chose it because of the clientele there, not because no one would have a gun. They didn't check you at Pulse prior to what happened.

The matter of fact is - even if you were allowed to carry a gun - the vast majority of people wouldn't be carrying one. They choose locations that have some sort of significance or familiarity to them, where they know they can kill a lot of people, EVEN IF someone was there to stop them pretty quickly.

Sorry - I don't think arming more people will do anything to stop these attacks - it runs WAY deeper than that.
 
The students that survived at this HS are calling out Senators on social media and t.v. And they have the right to be frustrated and angry at Government. I think Orlando-Vegas-Parkland all happening within 18 months has anger boiling over.
 
I think he chose that location because he had some mental health issues and that place was a place that triggered those issues. He obviously had many issues there in the past.

At universities, there's whole police forces on campus that are armed, at my high school, there was always some on-duty police officers outside - I would be a bit shocked if there wasn't there as well.

Pulse for example - he chose it because of the clientele there, not because no one would have a gun. They didn't check you at Pulse prior to what happened.

The matter of fact is - even if you were allowed to carry a gun - the vast majority of people wouldn't be carrying one. They choose locations that have some sort of significance or familiarity to them, where they know they can kill a lot of people, EVEN IF someone was there to stop them pretty quickly.

Sorry - I don't think arming more people will do anything to stop these attacks - it runs WAY deeper than that.

One single person in one of these classrooms, with a gun, could have absolutely altered the horrific outcome of what happened. At the very least, it would have put the dipshit into retreat mode instead of advance, and could have at least spared the number of people hit.

University police forces are a "for show" force only. UCF has a small handful of cops for a massive campus and 66,000 kids. By the time the police respond to a situation it will likely be over.
 
The students that survived at this HS are calling out Senators on social media and t.v. And they have the right to be frustrated and angry at Government. I think Orlando-Vegas-Parkland all happening within 18 months has anger boiling over.

They're emotional and have every right to be. Legislation should never be created and passed because of emotions though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UCFWayne
fbi should just permanently monitor 4chan

Nah - in this case - it looks really bad on the FBI.

Someone close to him called them in January and told them he had a gun, wanted to kill people, etc. No protocols were followed and now people are dead.

Not good.
 
One single person in one of these classrooms, with a gun, could have absolutely altered the horrific outcome of what happened. At the very least, it would have put the dipshit into retreat mode instead of advance, and could have at least spared the number of people hit.

University police forces are a "for show" force only. UCF has a small handful of cops for a massive campus and 66,000 kids. By the time the police respond to a situation it will likely be over.

...and that school likely had 3,500 kids in it. There was probably an armed cop right outside, once he started shooting he could easily kill tons of people in a minute.

Arming more people isn’t the answer.
 
Is it time for a change? Old current sign on the left with a new sign on the right? (Note: I would have written "might prevent" instead of will)

FB_IMG_1518787974540.jpg
Neither - it's a sign.
Then why do they have the sign on the left all over our school campuses?
Maybe instead of signs, they could come up with new laws like "Murder is Illegal".
@bqknight - What @Knight_Light is trying to point out is this ...

Gun tragedies will always happen. But let's look at the reality.
  • The first one tells anyone who wants to commit a mass shooting is that they will go unchallenged for a good period of time
  • The second one tells anyone who wants to commit a mass shooting that they will be challenged very quickly
What do mass shooters want to do? They want to be unchallenged and inflict as much carnage as possible. So when they see the former, it's an invitation. When it's the latter, they go elsewhere.

But let's put schools aside ... the Aurora theater shoot was a perfect, non-school example.

Of the six (6) theaters in the area, he did not go to the closest. He did not even go for the biggest, to have the potential to have the most targets. He went to the theater that had the first sign, which allowed him to inflict more carnage, unchallenged, with more time, than the biggest!

This is what law enforcement repeatedly points out. This is why the 1990s invention of the 'gun free zone' is the biggest joke to law enforcement.

It's why I do not patronize establishments with the sign, even though I do not own a gun at all. It's basically a sign to mass shooters that says, "maximum kills here."
 
@bqknight - What @Knight_Light is trying to point out is this ...

Gun tragedies will always happen. But let's look at the reality.
  • The first one tells anyone who wants to commit a mass shooting is that they will go unchallenged for a good period of time
  • The second one tells anyone who wants to commit a mass shooting that they will be challenged very quickly
What do mass shooters want to do? They want to be unchallenged and inflict as much carnage as possible. So when they see the former, it's an invitation. When it's the latter, they go elsewhere.

But let's put schools aside ... the Aurora theater shoot was a perfect, non-school example.

Of the six (6) theaters in the area, he did not go to the closest. He did not even go for the biggest, to have the potential to have the most targets. He went to the theater that had the first sign, which allowed him to inflict more carnage, unchallenged, with more time, than the biggest!

This is what law enforcement repeatedly points out. This is why the 1990s invention of the 'gun free zone' is the biggest joke to law enforcement.

It's why I do not patronize establishments with the sign, even though I do not own a gun at all. It's basically a sign to mass shooters that says, "maximum kills here."

I get what he was trying to point out - I just don't agree with it. Many of these people are sick - they are going to kill, if it's not at one place - it'll be somewhere else. If you can go far enough to want to mass murder people - a sign is not going to deter you in the slightest. This isn't a basic robbery case where an alarm goes off. These people have dark, dark minds and a sign isn't going to solve it. Neither is arming more more people.
 
We can't expect the FBI to waste time stopping mass murderers when they have their resources devoted to chasing Russian ghosts amongst the Trump campaign.
 
I get what he was trying to point out - I just don't agree with it.
You do not agree with law enforcement?! I'm sorry, but this is fact.

Many of these people are sick - they are going to kill, if it's not at one place - it'll be somewhere else.
Correct, we agree on that!

I teach IT security. It's not that you won't be hacked, it's ...
A) Make yourself a smaller target than others
B) Deploy multiple levels of network (and, if possible, system) security for different applications and roles
C) Deploy intrusion detection so you know when you're hacked (the worst liability is not knowing), and can provide the legal trail for prosecution (or foreign counter if not legally accessible)
D) Optionally leave an isolated honeypot or other 'detractor' (ideal with "A")

We want criminals to have limited options, and most important, not where our kids go!

When the 1990s laws came out with 'gun free zones,' the cops were livid. And now we're paying the price.

If you can go far enough to want to mass murder people - a sign is not going to deter you in the slightest.
It's going to deter you from the location! Again, I do not patronize places with that sign. It's a "here, shoot me here" sign!

So law enforcement keeps asking ... why are we putting these up around schools?!

This isn't a basic robbery case where an alarm goes off.
No, it's exactly the same case! Sick people are not idiots. They are cunning.

In fact, you just proved how this guy was much smarter and more knowledgeable than you!

These people have dark, dark minds and a sign isn't going to solve it.
"Solve" what?

You keep talking about stopping all gun crime so it never happens. You live in a dream world. What we have to do is deter, mitigate and prevent as much as possible.

Of course he's finally going to go 'off the deep end.' So when he does, why are you in favor of making schools the biggest targets?!

Neither is arming more more people.
Wrong!

Again, mass shootings 101 training in law enforcement ... 2 minutes ... 2 minutes ... 2 minutes!!! And within 90 seconds is the most crucial.

This kid was done in 3 minutes. Damn he was very, very knowledgeable. He puts you to shame, sadly enough. You represent the Progressive media sheep.
 
We can't expect the FBI to waste time stopping mass murderers when they have their resources devoted to chasing Russian ghosts amongst the Trump campaign.
Luckily, they have nothing to do with each other and no one handling the Russia thing would deal with a potential mass murder case. Hooray for different departments!
 
You do not agree with law enforcement?! I'm sorry, but this is fact.

Correct, we agree on that!

I teach IT security. It's not that you won't be hacked, it's ...
A) Make yourself a smaller target than others
B) Deploy multiple levels of network (and, if possible, system) security for different applications and roles
C) Deploy intrusion detection so you know when you're hacked (the worst liability is not knowing), and can provide the legal trail for prosecution (or foreign counter if not legally accessible)
D) Optionally leave an isolated honeypot or other 'detractor' (ideal with "A")

We want criminals to have limited options, and most important, not where our kids go!

When the 1990s laws came out with 'gun free zones,' the cops were livid. And now we're paying the price.

It's going to deter you from the location! Again, I do not patronize places with that sign. It's a "here, shoot me here" sign!

So law enforcement keeps asking ... why are we putting these up around schools?!

No, it's exactly the same case! Sick people are not idiots. They are cunning.

In fact, you just proved how this guy was much smarter and more knowledgeable than you!

"Solve" what?

You keep talking about stopping all gun crime so it never happens. You live in a dream world. What we have to do is deter, mitigate and prevent as much as possible.

Of course he's finally going to go 'off the deep end.' So when he does, why are you in favor of making schools the biggest targets?!

Wrong!

Again, mass shootings 101 training in law enforcement ... 2 minutes ... 2 minutes ... 2 minutes!!! And within 90 seconds is the most crucial.

This kid was done in 3 minutes. Damn he was very, very knowledgeable. He puts you to shame, sadly enough. You represent the Progressive media sheep.

Yes, baaah. Sheep.

Why do people get so up in arms (pun intended) when anyone brings up gun laws/violence?

I don't want to take away your guns. I'm not in favor of banning guns or anything of the sort. I'm simply pointing out that a sign is not the problem. In many of these situations there is someone with a gun VERY close to the killer but in those 1-3 minutes - people are already going to be dead.

The issue is deeper than a sign. Sorry buddy - it just is.
 
Luckily, they have nothing to do with each other and no one handling the Russia thing would deal with a potential mass murder case. Hooray for different departments!

Thanks I had no idea the FBI has different departments
 
I honestly believe there is no correlation. They happen at those places because of the large volume of people there and/or they happen at a location that "triggered" their violence. In this case, school obviously was not his favorite place in the world. In the case of Pulse - gay people obviously weren't his favorite people in the world. So on, so forth.
Will you please talk to law enforcement on this?! Turn off the TV. Even forget us. Go talk to law enforcement!

Also ... the Pulse Nightclub got 50%+ of their revenue from alcohol, and for that reason, it was required to be a gun free establishment. That's a bigger issue.

What I want in Florida is a 'sober carry' law. You cannot carry without being sober, or it's just like a drunk driving violation. That will force the only the 'designated driver' being able to carry. We should really push the 'designated carrier-driver'.

You laugh, but that's what most people thought of the 'designated driver' when it was first pushed.
 
Yes, baaah. Sheep.
Why do people get so up in arms (pun intended) when anyone brings up gun laws/violence?
Because you're spewing ignorant TV media sheep BS, while those of us work with law enforcement!

I don't want to take away your guns. I'm not in favor of banning guns or anything of the sort. I'm simply pointing out that a sign is not the problem.
And we're pointing out that law enforcement universally agrees ... it is why schools are attacked!

You can be an ignorant TV media sheep, or you can talk to the experts in law enforcement. They deal with this as their jobs!

In many of these situations there is someone with a gun VERY close to the killer but in those 1-3 minutes - people are already going to be dead.
Yes, but not only will less people die, but ...

They won't go to schools in the first place! They'll hit somewhere else.

The issue is deeper than a sign. Sorry buddy - it just is.
And yet ... school shootings became far more popular after they "gun free zones" went up in the '90s!' It's the perfect example of a law being passed and making things worse!

Not my view ... but law enforcement.
 
I think he chose that location because he had some mental health issues and that place was a place that triggered those issues. He obviously had many issues there in the past.
And ... it was a 'gun free zone.'

At universities, there's whole police forces on campus that are armed, at my high school, there was always some on-duty police officers outside - I would be a bit shocked if there wasn't there as well.
That changed in the '90s at most schools. Even cops were originally banned from carrying on many.

Sigh ... there are not enough police. The police are the first to point that out. And even if 1 is nearby, who does the shooter shoot first?! The uniformed officer.

This is concealed carry 101. It's why cops prefer to be non-uniformed in social settings too.

Pulse for example - he chose it because of the clientele there, not because no one would have a gun. They didn't check you at Pulse prior to what happened.
Pulse was a gun free zone per law, they made more than 50% on alcohol.

But beyond that ... he was already identified for illegally 'open carry' before he got into the club. But he ran inside.

The matter of fact is - even if you were allowed to carry a gun - the vast majority of people wouldn't be carrying one.
Correct. But all it takes is 1 person in the vicinity ... one a criminal won't be able to identify.

Again, this is concealed carry 101. The police are the most pro-concealed carry for a reason.

They choose locations that have some sort of significance or familiarity to them, where they know they can kill a lot of people, EVEN IF someone was there to stop them pretty quickly.
Sigh ... he wasn't going to be challenged. He knew that.

Sorry - I don't think arming more people will do anything to stop these attacks - it runs WAY deeper than that.
Listen for the last time, because you're arguing with an argument we did not make ...

It deters, it mitigates. You live in this dream world about stopping all attacks.

Police live in the real world of ending attacks ... before they are worse. Wake up!
 
sounds like the part about him being involved with neonazis/white supremacists was fabricated.

looks like the fbi dropped the ball on this one. first they get word of this guy via a youtube video comment and then an actual phone call from someone close to him. i guess they were too busy with russia crap to worry about a potential school shooter.

also cops have been to his house 39 times from 2010 until present...
 
while you guys continue your bitch fest, some actual news was released about the case.
Nothing is worse than a majority of media sheep who want facts, while the US media flat out lies. It's their assumption that the US media is telling the truth, even though the analysts are making things up, and will air a retraction at 3am a few weeks later ... although that's not even happening any more.

sounds like the part about him being involved with neonazis/white supremacists was fabricated.
If he had a MAGA hat or shirt on, that's good enough for the US media to assume he's a Neo-nazi and White supremacist. I'm shocked how many people now believe this, but they do.

looks like the fbi dropped the ball on this one. first they get word of this guy via a youtube video comment and then an actual phone call from someone close to him. i guess they were too busy with russia crap to worry about a potential school shooter.
The FBI is overworked. The watch lists are unmanageable. And yes, that was actually Obama's fault. Everyone is now militia.

The person that gave the tip to the FBI didn't know him personally. Unless there is now a 2nd one who tipped off the FBI (I only know of 1).
 
Will you please talk to law enforcement on this?! Turn off the TV. Even forget us. Go talk to law enforcement!

Also ... the Pulse Nightclub got 50%+ of their revenue from alcohol, and for that reason, it was required to be a gun free establishment. That's a bigger issue.

What I want in Florida is a 'sober carry' law. You cannot carry without being sober, or it's just like a drunk driving violation. That will force the only the 'designated driver' being able to carry. We should really push the 'designated carrier-driver'.

You laugh, but that's what most people thought of the 'designated driver' when it was first pushed.

There was an armed police man right outside Pulse when it happened. He tried to stop him but couldn't on his own.
 
Nothing is worse than a majority of media sheep who want facts, while the US media flat out lies. It's their assumption that the US media is telling the truth, even though the analysts are making things up, and will air a retraction at 3am a few weeks later ... although that's not even happening any more.

If he had a MAGA hat or shirt on, that's good enough for the US media to assume he's a Neo-nazi and White supremacist. I'm shocked how many people now believe this, but they do.

The FBI is overworked. The watch lists are unmanageable. And yes, that was actually Obama's fault. Everyone is now militia.

The person that gave the tip to the FBI didn't know him personally. Unless there is now a 2nd one who tipped off the FBI (I only know of 1).

It's like you started out trying to make good points but have slowly just gone all "tin-foil hat".

I get it, I get it, you don't like the "MSM" as you like to call it but news is still news.

It's not the media's fault that some neo-nazi came out yesterday and said, in quotes, that he was part of their group. If he was, he was, in this case it doesn't really matter imo - his motivation wasn't race.
 
Damn. You sound almost reasonable in this post.

I'd love to respond to your post and the basketball game is over but now I'm getting ready to go camping with some family and friends. I slapped a new Vortex Razor AMG UH-1 holographic sight on my AR and I need to sight it in. Excited.

If I get done in time, I'll reply.

Have fun jerking your gun off! Like I said, fetishizing guns.

BTW, that does sound fun, and I kinda wish I could do that too. Instead I'll be going to some touch-a-truck thing with my kid.
 
It's like you started out trying to make good points but have slowly just gone all "tin-foil hat".

I get it, I get it, you don't like the "MSM" as you like to call it but news is still news.

It's not the media's fault that some neo-nazi came out yesterday and said, in quotes, that he was part of their group. If he was, he was, in this case it doesn't really matter imo - his motivation wasn't race.

Did you actually read his stuff? I thought everyone just scrolled right past his i’m a LIBERTARIAN manifesto like thesis statements.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chemmie
Damn. You sound almost reasonable in this post.

I'd love to respond to your post and the basketball game is over but now I'm getting ready to go camping with some family and friends. I slapped a new Vortex Razor AMG UH-1 holographic sight on my AR and I need to sight it in. Excited.

If I get done in time, I'll reply.
still trying to figure out which optic im going to throw on my evil black ar15. im leaning towards magnified, but cant deny how awesome red dots can be.
 
Did you actually read his stuff? I thought everyone just scrolled right past his i’m a LIBERTARIAN manifesto like thesis statements.
"Hey, guys. Have I told you lately that I'm a Libertarian?"

Classic stuff. Even funnier because I used to be that guy.
 
I own an AR-15 and shoot it a few times per year. Not as much fun as my M1 Garand but still a good time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UCFWayne
I own an AR-15 and shoot it a few times per year. Not as much fun as my M1 Garand but still a good time.

My Colt LE6920 guards my home. But I’m with you- I like shooting the old stuff. I’ve got a vintage Winchester 30-30 lever action that I’ve only shot a few times but I bought a Marlin cheap version to plink with.

I like bolt action rifles a lot too
 
  • Like
Reactions: crambone
Bolt Action is all I buy anymore in rifles . Best hunting setup there is and great from a safety factor also imo . I do eventually want to harvest a deer with a lever action carbine one day . A throwback to the old days

Gun owner and hunter??

SMALL DICK ASSHOLE WITH A FETISH!!!!
 
My Colt LE6920 guards my home. But I’m with you- I like shooting the old stuff. I’ve got a vintage Winchester 30-30 lever action that I’ve only shot a few times but I bought a Marlin cheap version to plink with.

I like bolt action rifles a lot too
Speaking of rifles . You ever shoot or own a 6.5 Creedmore . My buddy says they are money at long range
 
Speaking of rifles . You ever shoot or own a 6.5 Creedmore . My buddy says they are money at long range

Another birdie says the US Army is going to 6.5mm

It also says I’ve seen the Squad Rifle and Carbine designs

:)
 
  • Like
Reactions: btbones
ADVERTISEMENT