(02-16-2018, 11:13 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: See, I'm not in favor of schools spending the money on security at the expense of an educational environment. I know there are things that can be done to make a school more secure, but to get to the level of security a lot of people think schools should have it would not be very conducive to learning. It wouldn't be a real childhood.

We have been having an ongoing debate in my city over the plans for a new high school as our current one is >500 students beyond its capacity. An astroturf, Koch funded movement called "Students Over Structures" has been fighting it tooth and nail. Their name, though, is one that I like and have to think of when I look at solutions to school shootings. The policies we need should be student centered, not structure centered. Focusing on security isn't going to solve the real problems that cause these shooters to act in the way they do, and may even exacerbate the issues. We need to be focusing on the students to really get at the heart of this.

Quote:Experts say the goal of Russian troll propagandists isn't to sway people's opinions in one way or another. Instead, the accounts seek to exploit divisions in order to break down society into smaller, warring groups. Trolls drum up persona accounts on every side of the ideological spectrum and take advantage of high-impact events to spread confusion and disarray. In particular, they're able to take advantage of how Twitter doesn't require users to verify their identity.

(02-16-2018, 11:04 AM)Au165 Wrote: There is a difference between officers/security guards, and someone who has a high level understanding of facility security best practices. The ones you talked to are right in that many would have to be bulldozed to be "secure", however there are things they can be doing now to make them safer. This happened years ago in courthouses and it has got us to where we are today. Years ago courts were built in the center of town with multiple entry ways and very little security as far as who can enter with what. Over time they realized their flaws and built in extensive security plans to better secure existing building and implement best practices in new buildings. Schools need to look at courts as their blue print because a lot of the same challenges the courts faced we are seeing in schools today.

Again, I am giving my perspective as someone who works in this area every day. Inside the security industry it is no secret that schools have horrible security, they don't have the money to fix it, and when they do find the funding often don't spend the money wisely as they don't have someone properly advising them.

(02-15-2018, 09:24 PM)BengalHawk62 Wrote: I really want someone to tell me why they "need" to own a military grade assault rifle.  I'm not anti-guns, people do have a right to keep one for self defense, hunting, etc.  But I've never met a hunter who needed to shoot deer with an AK-47.

(02-16-2018, 02:29 PM)PhilHos Wrote: You're missing my point. Why does need have to be a reason? There are a LOT of things we don't need that people want to use for a variety of reasons; would you recommend that THOSE things be outlawed simply because they're not needed?

Why should John Q. Citizen who's never broken the law and who would properly maintain and keep safely locked away when not inuse a military grade assault? BESIDES that he doesn't need one? What if he wants to collect one? What if he wants to shoot it at a shooting range? Why do YOU get to choose that he can't have one simply because he doesn't 'need' it?

(02-16-2018, 02:29 PM)PhilHos Wrote: You're missing my point. Why does need have to be a reason? There are a LOT of things we don't need that people want to use for a variety of reasons; would you recommend that THOSE things be outlawed simply because they're not needed?

Why should John Q. Citizen who's never broken the law and who would properly maintain and keep safely locked away when not inuse a military grade assault? BESIDES that he doesn't need one? What if he wants to collect one? What if he wants to shoot it at a shooting range? Why do YOU get to choose that he can't have one simply because he doesn't 'need' it?

(02-16-2018, 02:08 PM)Benton Wrote: Understood, and I appreciate the insight. Unfortunately, it sounds like what you're advocating is new schools or serious retro-fitting, which I couldn't even guess the costs nationally. Trillions?

(02-16-2018, 02:29 PM)PhilHos Wrote: You're missing my point. Why does need have to be a reason? There are a LOT of things we don't need that people want to use for a variety of reasons; would you recommend that THOSE things be outlawed simply because they're not needed?

Why should John Q. Citizen who's never broken the law and who would properly maintain and keep safely locked away when not inuse a military grade assault? BESIDES that he doesn't need one? What if he wants to collect one? What if he wants to shoot it at a shooting range? Why do YOU get to choose that he can't have one simply because he doesn't 'need' it?

(02-16-2018, 03:01 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I've used the correlation of a high-performance automobile. They are designed to do nothing more than break the law and can often lead to death. Why are they not outlawed and hell driving's not even protected under the Constitution.

(02-16-2018, 03:33 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I'm ok with it, including governors on vehicles. Anyone else?

(02-16-2018, 03:01 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I've used the correlation of a high-performance automobile. They are designed to do nothing more than break the law and can often lead to death. Why are they not outlawed and hell driving's not even protected under the Constitution.

(02-16-2018, 03:33 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I'm ok with it, including governors on vehicles. Anyone else?

(02-16-2018, 02:08 PM)Benton Wrote: Understood, and I appreciate the insight. Unfortunately, it sounds like what you're advocating is new schools or serious retro-fitting, which I couldn't even guess the costs nationally. Trillions?

(02-16-2018, 03:01 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I've used the correlation of a high-performance automobile. They are designed to do nothing more than break the law and can often lead to death. Why are they not outlawed and hell driving's not even protected under the Constitution.

Quote:WASHINGTON – As recently as January, the FBI received a tip about Florida school shooting suspect Nikolas Cruz and his "desire to kill people," but the information was never forwarded for investigation, the bureau confirmed Friday.

In a written statement, the FBI said a person close to Cruz contacted the agency's tip line Jan. 5 to report concerns about "Cruz’s gun ownership, desire to kill people, erratic behavior, and disturbing social media posts, as well as the potential of him conducting a school shooting."

"Under established protocols, the information provided by the caller should have been assessed as a potential threat to life," the FBI said.

The protocols call for the information to be forwarded to the FBI Miami field office for investigation, the FBI said.

"We have determined that these protocols were not followed for the information," the statement said. "The information was not provided to the Miami field office, and no further investigation was conducted at that time."

Police arrested Cruz on Wednesday, shortly after the Parkland, Fla., high school massacre and has been charged with all 17 murders.

“We are still investigating the facts," FBI Director Christopher Wray said Friday. "I am committed to getting to the bottom of what happened in this particular matter, as well as reviewing our processes for responding to information that we receive from the public. It’s up to all Americans to be vigilant, and when members of the public contact us with concerns, we must act properly and quickly."

Wray said the bureau has spoken with victims and families, and "deeply regret the additional pain this causes all those affected by this horrific tragedy."

"All of the men and women of the FBI are dedicated to keeping the American people safe, and are relentlessly committed to improving all that we do and how we do it," he said.

(02-16-2018, 04:53 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Well.... shit. The FBI failing to follow protocol is what allowed this latest shooting to happen. If they did, he would have been investigated, and presumably stopped before it could have happened.


https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/02/16/fbi-failed-pursue-january-tip-parkland-school-shooter-suspect/345571002/''

(02-16-2018, 04:53 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Well.... shit. The FBI failing to follow protocol is what allowed this latest shooting to happen. If they did, he would have been investigated, and presumably stopped before it could have happened.


https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/02/16/fbi-failed-pursue-january-tip-parkland-school-shooter-suspect/345571002/''

(02-16-2018, 04:49 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Just because a car is powerful that does not mean it is just designed to break the law.

Ever tried to merge into highway traffic driving or pass a slow moving vehicle in a car with less than 100 HP.  A more powerful car can just be used to accelerate when merging into traffic or passing slower vehicles.  Neither of those are against the law.

(02-16-2018, 03:33 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I'm ok with it, including governors on vehicles. Anyone else?

(02-16-2018, 03:38 PM)Au165 Wrote: A lot of cars actually already have governors that prevent them going their true max speed. I know what you mean, but kind of an interesting side note.