Texas shooting.
-
@Horace Actually it is falsifiable. Blacks commit the overwhelming majority of mass shootings (>70%) despite being only 13% of the population.
At least as defined by ‘4 or more people shot’.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/23/us/americas-overlooked-gun-violence.html
It just is covered differently. Think of all the headlines like “8 people were shot in Chicago this weekend in two separate incidents involving firearms, including a young girl….”
Another difference is that the lone white crazy guy sticks around and finishes off the wounded and is often prepared to confront police. The typical black shooter intends to lie low at grandma’s until everything blows over, so he runs at the first sign of sirens.
Generalizing of course but that’s how it nets out in aggregate.
wrote on 28 May 2022, 14:56 last edited by@jon-nyc said in Texas shooting.:
@Horace Actually it is falsifiable. Blacks commit the overwhelming majority of mass shootings (>70%) despite being only 13% of the population.
At least as defined by ‘4 or more people shot’.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/23/us/americas-overlooked-gun-violence.html
It just is covered differently. Think of all the headlines like “8 people were shot in Chicago this weekend in two separate incidents involving firearms, including a young girl….”
Another difference is that the lone white crazy guy sticks around and finishes off the wounded and is often prepared to confront police. The typical black shooter intends to lie low at grandma’s until everything blows over, so he runs at the first sign of sirens.
Generalizing of course but that’s how it nets out in aggregate.
Point taken, but we should admit the difference in kind between gang shootings and school shootings. The motivations are completely different.
I was more referring to the blame on the white male patriarchy. Which is directly falsifiable by the fact that this shooter was not a white male. But such falsifiability is not possible.
-
Texas Tribune article talking about proposals to "harden schools" with "single entrance" design:
https://www.texastribune.org/2022/05/28/uvalde-shooting-school-doors/
wrote on 28 May 2022, 14:56 last edited by@Axtremus said in Texas shooting.:
Texas Tribune article talking about proposals to "harden schools" with "single entrance" design:
https://www.texastribune.org/2022/05/28/uvalde-shooting-school-doors/
Actually, I gave you recommendations the other day from a guy that did executive security. Entrance and egress were among his evaluation.
-
@Horace said in Texas shooting.:
@Doctor-Phibes said in Texas shooting.:
@Mik said in Texas shooting.:
So does my niece. And not just men, white men. She posted this. There is so much fallacious there that one scarcely knows where to start.
How is this worse than blaming it on trans-sexuals?
The trans sexual thing appears to have gone away with some fact checking. That’s why it’s not as bad. Because it was falsifiable. This gentlelady”s opinion on the other hand is religious and not falsifiable. And of course mainstream adjacent, it not entirely mainstream.
In both cases, the facts are falsifiable, but the opinions that led to the claim remain, in spite of the facts. Jolly essentially said that even though the shooter wasn't trans, he believes that trans people shouldn't be allowed to own guns as they're all 'mentally ill'.
'Mentally ill' is such a massively broad term. Hey, let's stop the 'mentally ill' from owning guns. Even if they show no additional threat? The subset of the mentally ill that actually constitute a threat is very small. Let's expel people who get in a fight! Seriously? How many people didn't get in a fight at school?
How about let's expel teenagers with a disdain for authority? That would pretty effectively end school shootings, for sure, since homeschooling would become the norm, and good luck!
wrote on 28 May 2022, 14:59 last edited by@Doctor-Phibes said in Texas shooting.:
In both cases, the facts are falsifiable, but the opinions that led to the claim remain, in spite of the facts. Jolly essentially said that even though the shooter wasn't trans, he believes that trans people shouldn't be allowed to own guns as they're all 'mentally ill'.
So? How is that an insistence on blaming trans people for this shooting? It's not. Nobody's dug into that claim. People just mistakenly believed this guy was trans, and their minds changed upon some fact checking.
As for whether gender confusion is a mental illness, I daresay 99.9% of us wouldn't have sniffed that out as a bit of raging hatred if it'd been presented to us as a clinical, sterile idea 30 years ago. Now we've all been told and cajoled that that idea is a bit of raging hatred, and now most of us believe that that idea is a bit of raging hatred. That's how that works.
-
The author points out rather trivial objections and situations that might make this an imperfect solution in some cases. My belief is it is the low hanging fruit and should be taken seriously. It works quite well in our district and can be done without the time and effort involved in firearm legislation.
wrote on 28 May 2022, 16:08 last edited by@Mik said in Texas shooting.:
The author points out rather trivial objections and situations that might make this an imperfect solution in some cases. My belief is it is the low hanging fruit and should be taken seriously. It works quite well in our district and can be done without the time and effort involved in firearm legislation.
I wouldn't characterize all the objections as trivial. Indeed similar design concepts are being evaluated by/for schools here as well. Given the sizes of the school buildings and student populations here, though, actual proposals are more along the line of "multiple entrances, open just around school opening times to let students in quickly, then locked down all but one entrance during class hours." During class hours, the school may have select entrances opened to accommodate specific field/PE traffic, but otherwise will effectively have only one usable entrance that has other security design features to screen all comers.
Even that sort of design concept costs a good sum to implement, and that's reflected in bond proposals and property tax discussions. Wanna guess who are the ones most likely to argue/vote against school bond proposals and against raising property taxes to fund these things? Yeah, the same folks most likely to vote/argue against stricter gun control regulations. It's like the rest of the population has to bear the non-trivial extra cost of "hardening school security" to accommodate the feelings of the pro-gun/anti-tax crowd, just to keep everyone's children safe.
-
@Axtremus said in Texas shooting.:
Texas Tribune article talking about proposals to "harden schools" with "single entrance" design:
https://www.texastribune.org/2022/05/28/uvalde-shooting-school-doors/
Actually, I gave you recommendations the other day from a guy that did executive security. Entrance and egress were among his evaluation.
wrote on 28 May 2022, 16:14 last edited by@Jolly said in Texas shooting.:
Actually, I gave you recommendations the other day from a guy that did executive security.
How well does "executive security" translates to "public school security"?
Security for a billionaire, his/her immediate family, and his/her entourage has got to have many significant differences than security for hundreds and thousands of public school children, right? The difference in cost of security $ per protected person has got to be huge, right?
-
@Mik said in Texas shooting.:
The author points out rather trivial objections and situations that might make this an imperfect solution in some cases. My belief is it is the low hanging fruit and should be taken seriously. It works quite well in our district and can be done without the time and effort involved in firearm legislation.
I wouldn't characterize all the objections as trivial. Indeed similar design concepts are being evaluated by/for schools here as well. Given the sizes of the school buildings and student populations here, though, actual proposals are more along the line of "multiple entrances, open just around school opening times to let students in quickly, then locked down all but one entrance during class hours." During class hours, the school may have select entrances opened to accommodate specific field/PE traffic, but otherwise will effectively have only one usable entrance that has other security design features to screen all comers.
Even that sort of design concept costs a good sum to implement, and that's reflected in bond proposals and property tax discussions. Wanna guess who are the ones most likely to argue/vote against school bond proposals and against raising property taxes to fund these things? Yeah, the same folks most likely to vote/argue against stricter gun control regulations. It's like the rest of the population has to bear the non-trivial extra cost of "hardening school security" to accommodate the feelings of the pro-gun/anti-tax crowd, just to keep everyone's children safe.
wrote on 28 May 2022, 16:19 last edited by@Axtremus said in Texas shooting.:
@Mik said in Texas shooting.:
The author points out rather trivial objections and situations that might make this an imperfect solution in some cases. My belief is it is the low hanging fruit and should be taken seriously. It works quite well in our district and can be done without the time and effort involved in firearm legislation.
I wouldn't characterize all the objections as trivial. Indeed similar design concepts are being evaluated by/for schools here as well. Given the sizes of the school buildings and student populations here, though, actual proposals are more along the line of "multiple entrances, open just around school opening times to let students in quickly, then locked down all but one entrance during class hours." During class hours, the school may have select entrances opened to accommodate specific field/PE traffic, but otherwise will effectively have only one usable entrance that has other security design features to screen all comers.
Even that sort of design concept costs a good sum to implement, and that's reflected in bond proposals and property tax discussions. Wanna guess who are the ones most likely to argue/vote against school bond proposals and against raising property taxes to fund these things? Yeah, the same folks most likely to vote/argue against stricter gun control regulations. It's like the rest of the population has to bear the non-trivial extra cost of "hardening school security" to accommodate the feelings of the pro-gun/anti-tax crowd, just to keep everyone's children safe.
Like the author, your approach is assuming defeat at the hand of some imagined enemy simply because you won’t agree to anything but impossible gun control laws.
-
@Axtremus said in Texas shooting.:
@Mik said in Texas shooting.:
The author points out rather trivial objections and situations that might make this an imperfect solution in some cases. My belief is it is the low hanging fruit and should be taken seriously. It works quite well in our district and can be done without the time and effort involved in firearm legislation.
I wouldn't characterize all the objections as trivial. Indeed similar design concepts are being evaluated by/for schools here as well. Given the sizes of the school buildings and student populations here, though, actual proposals are more along the line of "multiple entrances, open just around school opening times to let students in quickly, then locked down all but one entrance during class hours." During class hours, the school may have select entrances opened to accommodate specific field/PE traffic, but otherwise will effectively have only one usable entrance that has other security design features to screen all comers.
Even that sort of design concept costs a good sum to implement, and that's reflected in bond proposals and property tax discussions. Wanna guess who are the ones most likely to argue/vote against school bond proposals and against raising property taxes to fund these things? Yeah, the same folks most likely to vote/argue against stricter gun control regulations. It's like the rest of the population has to bear the non-trivial extra cost of "hardening school security" to accommodate the feelings of the pro-gun/anti-tax crowd, just to keep everyone's children safe.
Like the author, your approach is assuming defeat at the hand of some imagined enemy simply because you won’t agree to anything but impossible gun control laws.
wrote on 28 May 2022, 16:36 last edited by@Mik said in Texas shooting.:
@Axtremus said in Texas shooting.:
@Mik said in Texas shooting.:
The author points out rather trivial objections and situations that might make this an imperfect solution in some cases. My belief is it is the low hanging fruit and should be taken seriously. It works quite well in our district and can be done without the time and effort involved in firearm legislation.
I wouldn't characterize all the objections as trivial. Indeed similar design concepts are being evaluated by/for schools here as well. Given the sizes of the school buildings and student populations here, though, actual proposals are more along the line of "multiple entrances, open just around school opening times to let students in quickly, then locked down all but one entrance during class hours." During class hours, the school may have select entrances opened to accommodate specific field/PE traffic, but otherwise will effectively have only one usable entrance that has other security design features to screen all comers.
Even that sort of design concept costs a good sum to implement, and that's reflected in bond proposals and property tax discussions. Wanna guess who are the ones most likely to argue/vote against school bond proposals and against raising property taxes to fund these things? Yeah, the same folks most likely to vote/argue against stricter gun control regulations. It's like the rest of the population has to bear the non-trivial extra cost of "hardening school security" to accommodate the feelings of the pro-gun/anti-tax crowd, just to keep everyone's children safe.
Like the author, your approach is assuming defeat at the hand of some imagined enemy simply because you won’t agree to anything but impossible gun control laws.
What's your idea?
-
wrote on 28 May 2022, 16:38 last edited by Mik
I already have said the first and easiest thing is to harden ingress to schools.
-
wrote on 28 May 2022, 16:41 last edited by
@Mik said in Texas shooting.:
I already have said the first and easiest thing is to harden ingress to schools.
Hey, I'm down. I don't see how that would actually help against people who really want to commit some violence, but it'd be something to try.
-
wrote on 28 May 2022, 16:45 last edited by
It would have kept Ramos out.
-
wrote on 28 May 2022, 16:48 last edited by
Another suggestion? Keep classroom windows 6’ above grade or narrow enough to prevent a wide field of fire. Now this would only apply to schools built in the future, but it would work well if ingress was taken away.
-
wrote on 28 May 2022, 16:51 last edited by
@Mik said in Texas shooting.:
It would have kept Ramos out.
Show up during bus arrival and it doesn't really matter.
-
wrote on 28 May 2022, 16:53 last edited by jon-nyc
Uvalde cops confront the trolly problem.
-
wrote on 28 May 2022, 17:02 last edited by
The country is going to take such a massive shit on those cops.
-
@Mik said in Texas shooting.:
It would have kept Ramos out.
Show up during bus arrival and it doesn't really matter.
wrote on 28 May 2022, 17:04 last edited by@Aqua-Letifer said in Texas shooting.:
@Mik said in Texas shooting.:
It would have kept Ramos out.
Show up during bus arrival and it doesn't really matter.
His planning for this attack didn't seem advanced enough to coordinate with bus schedules. And the death count would likely have been lower if he had done it that way.
-
@Aqua-Letifer said in Texas shooting.:
@Mik said in Texas shooting.:
It would have kept Ramos out.
Show up during bus arrival and it doesn't really matter.
His planning for this attack didn't seem advanced enough to coordinate with bus schedules. And the death count would likely have been lower if he had done it that way.
wrote on 28 May 2022, 17:44 last edited by@Horace said in Texas shooting.:
@Aqua-Letifer said in Texas shooting.:
@Mik said in Texas shooting.:
It would have kept Ramos out.
Show up during bus arrival and it doesn't really matter.
His planning for this attack didn't seem advanced enough to coordinate with bus schedules.
It doesn't take much to decide to show up at 4:00.
And the death count would likely have been lower if he had done it that way.
I doubt it.
-
wrote on 28 May 2022, 17:53 last edited by Mik
No approach is going to be foolproof. But locked doors would have helped or prevented this situation. Nothing you can suggest for gun control will be foolproof either and will be far more difficult.
It is said politics is the art of the possible.
-
wrote on 28 May 2022, 17:57 last edited by
@Horace said in Texas shooting.:
The country is going to take such a massive shit on those cops.
Deserved, no?
-
@Horace said in Texas shooting.:
The country is going to take such a massive shit on those cops.
Deserved, no?
wrote on 28 May 2022, 18:08 last edited by Horace@jon-nyc said in Texas shooting.:
@Horace said in Texas shooting.:
The country is going to take such a massive shit on those cops.
Deserved, no?
Probably deserved by one of them, some decision maker. Then the others fell in line, as is their job. It's easy to say each individual should go renegade and be dirty harry, but I think it's ignorant to think that would be the obvious decision in the moment. Unless you also think each individual who failed to make that obvious decision is a cowardly dirt bag. More likely that they're normal people, making normal decisions in an abnormal moment. But shitting on all of them will teach their counterparts throughout the country a lesson, so it's probably for the best.
-
@jon-nyc said in Texas shooting.:
@Horace said in Texas shooting.:
The country is going to take such a massive shit on those cops.
Deserved, no?
Probably deserved by one of them, some decision maker. Then the others fell in line, as is their job. It's easy to say each individual should go renegade and be dirty harry, but I think it's ignorant to think that would be the obvious decision in the moment. Unless you also think each individual who failed to make that obvious decision is a cowardly dirt bag. More likely that they're normal people, making normal decisions in an abnormal moment. But shitting on all of them will teach their counterparts throughout the country a lesson, so it's probably for the best.
wrote on 28 May 2022, 18:35 last edited by@Horace said in Texas shooting.:
@jon-nyc said in Texas shooting.:
@Horace said in Texas shooting.:
The country is going to take such a massive shit on those cops.
Deserved, no?
Probably deserved by one of them, some decision maker. Then the others fell in line, as is their job.
Ah, the Nuremberg defense.