Elementary school shooting

[eddie_dane]

Originally Posted by supermonkey

I was specifically referencing the new ordinance that was just passed in Nelson, Georgia. Certainly Nelson is not the first to go down this path. Other cities across the nation have similar laws (both recent and pre-existing)

It also occurs to me that such laws presume distinct characters. The city ordinance requires that we (the good guys) must be armed so as to defend against them (the bad guys). What such laws fail to address is just who the bad guys are. Rarely do you hear of some crime in which everyone shrugs and says, "Oh, him? Yeah, we knew all along that he was a bad guy." The narrative that usually plays out is one in which the bad guy turns out to be an upstanding member of society, or that quiet kid who nobody seemed to know, or the stressed office worker who finally cracked under the pressure of losing his job while his wife was pregnant.

A common phrase you hear in the gun control debate is that if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. It seems to me that if you require everyone to own a gun, then you ensure that every future bad guy will be armed.

Well, Kenessaw passed this ordinance back in the early-80's (The Dead Milkman even ridiculed it in a song). So we have decades of actual real-life experience to compare to the fictional anecdotal stories you invision. The experience in Kenessaw simply doesn't play your scenario out. Literally an entire generation has been raised in this environment.

So before you render all innocent people defenseless, it would be more helpful to supply facts rather than posibilities on the fringe of reality that fly in the face of who actually perpetrates gun violence.

Just because the husband snapping and using a weapon splashes across the news for days and 23 murders in Chicago in one weekend goes relatively unreported doesn't change the nature of gun violence in the real world.

[eddie_dane]

Originally Posted by Nexxo

Nobody buys a gun "just as an additional option for when we get burgled".

What are you basing that on?

Without getting into a too much personal detail. Someone in my home has been both the victim of physical assault and rape. In both cases the person didn't have a weapon, mearly overpowered them. I suppose your right burglary isn't the only reason. But for those people who would have personal experience of not being able to defend themselves from just one unarmed male adult, I would need your insight into the mind of every gun buyer/owner and their automatic propensity to just go looking for trouble. Just doing the math on the number of guns in the US, we'd all be dead by now if we were possessed by the spirit of objects - gun shows and stores would look like the Nazi Ark of the Convenant seremony scene from Raiders of the Lost Ark.

I leave the choice in the hands of the innocent people who directly pay the price of being a victim to decide the best means to protect themselves.

[walle]

My point was that I think more people would take that role today knowing that if they didn’t, chances are that they would die.

I think hijackers would find a way if motivated enough, not to suggest cockpit doors would be easy to breach.

Originally Posted by Nexxo

Yup, that's why they never drink before a flight.

Ah now that was a sheap shot trying to make a point, Nexxo. Well, there's always the co-pilot and autopilot to fall back on I guess.

[eddie_dane]

Originally Posted by walle

My point was that I think more people would take that role today knowing that if they didn’t, chances are that they would die.

I think hijackers would find a way if motivated enough, not to suggest cockpit doors would be easy to breach.


Ah now that was a sheap shot trying to make a point, Nexxo. Well, there's always the co-pilot and autopilot to fall back on I guess.

My cousin is an airline pilot and is a true pacifist. If his plane had a would-be hijacker onboard, he would be unwilling or unable to do anything about it. However, most airline pilots are ex-military pilots (because they have the most flight hours - both my Dad and my uncle were both ex military career airline pilots). These people have some of the best training in the world in handling weapons and horrible airborne situations.

[supermonkey]

I also have a relative who is a former Marine pilot, and now a pilot for a major airline. I asked him a couple of years ago how he felt about guns in the cockpit. He said that if he ever had someone trying to take over the plane, he would be more likely to cause a sudden drop to put the hijacker on the floor.

[eddie_dane]

Originally Posted by supermonkey

I also have a relative who is a former Marine pilot, and now a pilot for a major airline. I asked him a couple of years ago how he felt about guns in the cockpit. He said that if he ever had someone trying to take over the plane, he would be more likely to cause a sudden drop to put the hijacker on the floor.

And if it was captured on video it would get 10,000,000,000,000,000 views on YouTube

[supermonkey]

Only if it had the Harlem Shake music in the background, with some cheesy sound effects for additional laughs.

[Nexxo]

Originally Posted by eddie_dane

What are you basing that on?

Without getting into a too much personal detail. Someone in my home has been both the victim of physical assault and rape. In both cases the person didn't have a weapon, mearly overpowered them. I suppose your right burglary isn't the only reason. But for those people who would have personal experience of not being able to defend themselves from just one unarmed male adult, I would need your insight into the mind of every gun buyer/owner and their automatic propensity to just go looking for trouble. Just doing the math on the number of guns in the US, we'd all be dead by now if we were possessed by the spirit of objects - gun shows and stores would look like the Nazi Ark of the Convenant seremony scene from Raiders of the Lost Ark.

I leave the choice in the hands of the innocent people who directly pay the price of being a victim to decide the best means to protect themselves.

I'm not saying that gun owners look for trouble. But your point supports mine: people buy a gun with specific usage scenarios (usually self-defence) in mind. It's not like buying a box of all-purpose tissues; it's like buying toilet roll. When someone who has been raped or assaulted buys a gun, they do so with the scenarios or rape and assault in mind, and how they are going to respond to that by using a gun.

Originally Posted by walle

My point was that I think more people would take that role today knowing that if they didn’t, chances are that they would die.

My point is that there are lots of internal psychological hurdles that have to be overcome before a person can acknowledge the reality of that situation. Think of it as a grief process. Then there are group dynamics: somebody has to be the first person to take the initiative for others to follow. Better hope there's some leaders on that plane.

Originally Posted by walle

I think hijackers would find a way if motivated enough, not to suggest cockpit doors would be easy to breach.

That's an assumption, not fact. You cannot get through an armour-played door with the sort of tools you can bring or find on board a plane. Terrorists tend not to be MacGyver types. They are more likely to rely on social engineering: morally blackmail the pilot into opening the door lest they cut that pretty stewardess' throat (you know, the one that the pilot had been flirting with before take-off, while chatting about family and holidays), or kill that innocent little child still clutching its teddy in wide-eyed terror.

Originally Posted by eddie_dane

My cousin is an airline pilot and is a true pacifist. If his plane had a would-be hijacker onboard, he would be unwilling or unable to do anything about it. However, most airline pilots are ex-military pilots (because they have the most flight hours - both my Dad and my uncle were both ex military career airline pilots). These people have some of the best training in the world in handling weapons and horrible airborne situations.

That could make things worse, not better. They are trained to confront the enemy, and to feel confident with weapons. Do you think they are going to stay put in their locked cabin while terrorists kill the stewardess or child? Hell no, the hero warrior in them won't allow it. There would be pressure of expectation from themselves, their comrades, the public. Ex-military pilots hold themselves to a higher standard than civilians. And so does the public.

If however they have no gun, but have been trained to rely on other techniques to overpower the terrorists they are by the nature of their cool-under-pressure training and background in the best position to respond effectively.

[walle]

Originally Posted by Nexxo

My point is that there are lots of internal psychological hurdles that have to be overcome before a person can acknowledge the reality of that situation. Think of it as a grief process. Then there are group dynamics: somebody has to be the first person to take the initiative for others to follow. Better hope there's some leaders on that plane.

I'm well aware of those hurdles there's no disagreement, but despite those hurdles I believe that more would overcome them and act, that's all.

Originally Posted by Nexxo

That's an assumption, not fact. You cannot get through an armour-played door with the sort of tools you can bring or find on board a plane. Terrorists tend not to be MacGyver types. They are more likely to rely on social engineering: morally blackmail the pilot into opening the door lest they cut that pretty stewardess' throat (you know, the one that the pilot had been flirting with before take-off, while chatting about family and holidays), or kill that innocent little child still clutching its teddy in wide-eyed terror.

Perhaps an assumption, but assumptions are part of the process when trying to counter something. They learned how to pilot passenger jets well enough to fly them into two buildings. That shows determination.

Here's some information about fortified cockpit doors.
http://www.secure-skies.org/fortifieddoors.php

Ex-military pilots making things worse I'm not so sure, yes they are trained to confront the enemy but that is in a cockpit environment, in which they are to engage enemy fighters, not as soldier taking on an enemy on the ground. The Captain will not be alone in the cockpit either, a co-pilot will be present. They would have to make that call together.

Another thing worth pointing out here is that fighter pilots have more stick time than commercial pilots, which means (should mean) that in an emergency they would not only be better able to actually fly the plane, but to also cope with stress, which you also recognized.

[Nexxo]

Originally Posted by walle

I'm well aware of those hurdles there's no disagreement, but despite those hurdles I believe that more would overcome them and act, that's all.

Perhaps if they're Glaswegian.

Originally Posted by walle

Perhaps an assumption, but assumptions are part of the process when trying to counter something. They learned how to pilot passenger jets well enough to fly them into two buildings. That shows determination.

But they weren't interested in learning how to land. Terrorists, especially the religious extremist ones, are very linear thinkers. Not much creativity going on in their heads. Determination alone does not get you through armoured doors.

[Bogomip]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/vide...er-rifle-video

5 year old shoots 2 year old with gun he got given for his birthday.

[Nexxo]

On the upside, he has learned a valuable lesson about guns.

[DXR_13KE]

Guns don't kill people.

[mucgoo]

But twitching your index finger does. Something unique to firearms.