...a couple staffers had been armed?

Views: 9706

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

@Unseen - Again, I guess I was incorrect in my thoughts that I was clear enough.  You made the statement that a bunch of guys with rifles could not stand up to a full on military (Thats the jist, right?), and my reply was to merely indicate that the Taliban and Al Quaeda are doing just that.  And on top of that, they are going to be successful, because in an insugency, all you have to do is survive and wait out the occupying force.  Once they leave you have won, on the other hand, the do-gooders have to completely erradicate you from the country in order to claim a victory.  THAT is what I was talking about.  But nice try attempting to twist what I replied to you. :)

@Blaine - Read above.

@ Blaine,

I'm thinking that since Tim here has a picture up from Afghanistan, has been in 13 years, and is on a 5th deployment. Also, given the fact that he's got a full beard, is stationed out of NC, and is up on a lone ridge without any body armor... I'm going to venture to say that there is nothing you can tell him about military operations in Afghanistan that he hasn't lived through.

@Hawk - Thank you for actually taking the time to look at who is talking and recognizing those things, I do have the obligation to point out I am wearing body armor, but it is a plate carrier and does not really show in the picture. :-)   

@ Tim

My bad I didn't recognize it. I'm used to IBAs and IOTVs.

@Blain - The sad part about this conversation.... I was supporting your argument.  Good job.

Why would we want to use a nonlethal way of stopping an active shooter? (And what are you talking about? a net?) And most of the nonlethal ways I can think of lack the immediate stopping power of killing him before he gets another shot off.

School room doors should be windowless and hardened and able to be firmly locked. That should be standard in all schools. 

A hostage takers dream!

Consider the alternative. There are always tradeoffs.

I would love to have a functional 9mm nonlethal round for my daily carry, much lower legal liability for me.

I haven't seen one yet, but it's sure a wet dream for me.  To be able to stop a perpetrator without the need for lethal force is a very sensible idea.

My dad had an interesting idea; build classroom so that there is more than one exit. Right now, all classes open up into a hallway that in a shooter incident is effectively a killzone. If there was another way out of the classroom, all those kids could be removed from harms way. Granted, this would only work in a single-shooter incident and not in a situation like Columbine, but it is an option.

Its not unfathomable that guns become computerized, fingerprint activated and transmit secure encrypted GPS coordinates and ID every time they are fired to some ATF database. In fact an unauthorized user attempt could be transmitted as well. Cartridges could be coded to only work in a particular gun. You could also limit the rounds per minute. Oh what the hell, throw a camera on there and transmit a live video on youtube so we can all see what you are shooting.

You're basically talking about the Lawgiver, the Judge's trusty weapon.



© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service