Nikolas Cruz 'remorseful' as police report claims he confessed to Florida school shooting massacre

[The Romulan Republic]

I don't know, but there's a reason why melee weapons in general tended to fade into obsolescence after the advent of effective, widespread firearms.

For one thing, you'd have to keep the shield facing the gunman at all times. Rush the shooter, they can take two steps to the side and shoot you. It would only work in very confined spaces at close range.

[MKSheppard]

So, I was wondering yesterday. I think everyone here but Shep agrees that arming teachers with guns as a matter of policy is a dumb idea, and I'm pretty sure he's trolling.

Actually, I'm dead serious. Everyone keeps coming up with unrealistic objections to teachers having guns at school if they want to; like demanding unrealistically perfect shooting scores, or OMG, TEACHER-STUDENT MURDER SUICIDE.

There have only been a few serious realistic objections to it, like Fenix (sp?) pointing out that if some nervous ninnies found out about his wife's CCW permit; they'd start shitflinging around -- "I'm so worried Ms. Fenix will shoot timmy!"

That's why there shouldn't be a formal program, to avoid paper trails leading to the above issue.

Are there any other options for arming teachers that would be if not good then at least not stupid and actively harmful? I'm thinking of something like a large, bulletproof shield to rush a shooter with if they barge into a classroom. Relatively simple to grab and use (bearing in mind that the shooter has the advantage of not being surprised, having a plan and having had time to psych himself up), no chance of accidentally shooting a student and as a bonus it would be like a sign for the police saying "Not the shooter."

You know....they had that? Bulletproof kevlar blankets? That the JROTC detachment was using to shield other students with? And got shot to pieces doing so?

That's another idea. Issue M-1 Garands to the JROTC detachments across schools for drill and "ancillary purposes".

[The Romulan Republic]

Oh, so not only do you want guns in schools, you want guns in schools with no oversight whatsoever, to avoid a "paper trail" (ie, so that people who might disagree with your preferred policy will be kept in the dark so they won't be able to object).

Got to love that Right wing "freedom".

[MKSheppard]

Oh, so not only do you want guns in schools, you want guns in schools with no oversight whatsoever, to avoid a "paper trail" (ie, so that people who might disagree with your preferred policy will be kept in the dark so they won't be able to object).

Got to love that Right wing "freedom".

There's already oversight -- the process to obtain and hold a valid CCW permit. Said databases are in a lot of states kept as confidential/restricted information for valid reasons. So I'm not exactly changing anything regarding oversight/paper trail.

Having no formal program in the school system also avoids that inconvenient issue of the school shooter volunteering in the main office as an aide, fucking around on the computer,and finding the TOP SEKRIT list of people authorized to carry firearms within the school; and giving him an easy hitlist for the start of his murder death kill spree.

[The Romulan Republic]

So don't keep a list on computers students can easily access, if you're that paranoid.

[aerius]

So don't keep a list on computers students can easily access, if you're that paranoid.

IT security in a school. Surely you can't be serious?

[GuppyShark]

It stopped being serious when the idea of 'arm the teachers' was floated. Now it's just a farce.

[Tribble]

Arm the students who are 18 as well, just in case. Why should their rights to bear arms be infringed upon just because they are in school?You can join the army at 16, so clearly it's possible to train an 18 year old. Shooters will probably think twice if a good 1/4 of the school is potentially packing heat. It's the 'Murican way.

[GuppyShark]

Cut out the middle man: replace schools with military barracks.

[Broomstick]

Fucking hell. The lone officer on scene choosing to withdraw and wait for reinforcements might or might not be justified in this case but I can at least envision circumstances where it's the right call. But three additional units showing up and apparently doing nothing but take cover and wait for someone else to show up?

Whether it was the right call or not they guys are going to be targeted for scapegoating. They're fucked.

[Broomstick]

So lots of talking about raising the age to own "assault weapons" to 21.

That has...problems.

Actually, what I've been hearing is not "assault weapons" but guns. As in, any and all guns. Why do you think that would be a problem?

Either way, a direct conflict with the bill(s) and the 2nd and 26th Amendments are coming. *popcorn*

Please, expand upon this. And the 26th Amendment deals solely with voting age, it has jack-all to do with age limits or lack of for anything else.

[Ralin]

I don't know, but there's a reason why melee weapons in general tended to fade into obsolescence after the advent of effective, widespread firearms.

But are still used in specific circumstances

For one thing, you'd have to keep the shield facing the gunman at all times. Rush the shooter, they can take two steps to the side and shoot you. It would only work in very confined spaces at close range.

Situational, but possible. I've never taught in the US, but I'm picturing the classrooms I use at my current school and that's a fairly accurate description of the space between the door and the teacher's podium/computer desk in most of them.

I'm spit-balling ideas here and I don't have any illusions that this would be likely to work, but bear in mind that we're comparing this to "Nothing other than running away and whatever happens to be within easy reach."

You know....they had that? Bulletproof kevlar blankets? That the JROTC detachment was using to shield other students with? And got shot to pieces doing so?

Kevlar doesn't stop rifle bullets, or at least not most kinds. Pretty sure you know that. I'm not anything like a gun person and I knew it off the top of my head.

[Wicked Pilot]

That's another idea. Issue M-1 Garands to the JROTC detachments across schools for drill and "ancillary purposes".

Among many other problems with that idea, I'd like to point out that Nikolas Cruz was a JROTC cadet.

[Simon_Jester]

There's already oversight -- the process to obtain and hold a valid CCW permit. Said databases are in a lot of states kept as confidential/restricted information for valid reasons. So I'm not exactly changing anything regarding oversight/paper trail.

Having no formal program in the school system also avoids that inconvenient issue of the school shooter volunteering in the main office as an aide, fucking around on the computer,and finding the TOP SEKRIT list of people authorized to carry firearms within the school; and giving him an easy hitlist for the start of his murder death kill spree.

That would be an oddly specific and failure prone element to add into the necessary steps to carry out a school shooting.

Among other things, it trips over the obstacle that a rapidly growing number of school districts have increasingly background check requirements for anyone who works in the building, even in a paraprofessional capacity that would not normally involve contact with students.

[Zaune]

So, I was wondering yesterday. I think everyone here but Shep agrees that arming teachers with guns as a matter of policy is a dumb idea, and I'm pretty sure he's trolling. Are there any other options for arming teachers that would be if not good then at least not stupid and actively harmful? I'm thinking of something like a large, bulletproof shield to rush a shooter with if they barge into a classroom. Relatively simple to grab and use (bearing in mind that the shooter has the advantage of not being surprised, having a plan and having had time to psych himself up), no chance of accidentally shooting a student and as a bonus it would be like a sign for the police saying "Not the shooter."

Rather than mess around with ballistic shields, why not retrofit school buildings with reinforced, lockable classroom doors that can stand up to small-arms fire, and are rigged to all swing shut as soon as someone hits a panic button? As long as someone bothered to notice an unauthorised person on the property before they started shooting, they'd be left wandering around a lot of empty corridors with nothing much to shoot at until they got arrested or gave up and went home.

[The Romulan Republic]

So, I was wondering yesterday. I think everyone here but Shep agrees that arming teachers with guns as a matter of policy is a dumb idea, and I'm pretty sure he's trolling. Are there any other options for arming teachers that would be if not good then at least not stupid and actively harmful? I'm thinking of something like a large, bulletproof shield to rush a shooter with if they barge into a classroom. Relatively simple to grab and use (bearing in mind that the shooter has the advantage of not being surprised, having a plan and having had time to psych himself up), no chance of accidentally shooting a student and as a bonus it would be like a sign for the police saying "Not the shooter."

Rather than mess around with ballistic shields, why not retrofit school buildings with reinforced, lockable classroom doors that can stand up to small-arms fire, and are rigged to all swing shut as soon as someone hits a panic button? As long as someone bothered to notice an unauthorised person on the property before they started shooting, they'd be left wandering around a lot of empty corridors with nothing much to shoot at until they got arrested or gave up and went home.

Well, the people in the halls would be fucked, but it might cut down on the death toll, and it would make "shelter in place" mean something other than "Be fish in a barrel."

[Elheru Aran]

I'll just note that a standard .223 AR round will *easily* penetrate standard American drywall construction without batting an eye. Now if the school is built with cinder block walls, that's marginally better. Proper concrete block will be far stronger. And I will admit that in my experience (2 grades in Savannah, GA) most schools are built of either cinder or concrete block (can't really tell much difference once it's all up, plastered and painted over). I don't know if schools elsewhere are built with drywall though.

One thing to consider is that US schools are frequently built somewhat harder than local norm residential construction for a simple reason-- disaster protection and relief. They serve as natural hubs for such a purpose, and in the event of natural disaster, they serve as shelter for the students, teachers, and any local residents who happen to be there. So if they are built of materials strong enough to resist .223, then bulletproof doors are *probably* a decent notion. I will note that I can't find much data in a cursory Google upon the subject of what schools are generally built with, though.

If not... there's not much to stop a gunman from just sweeping the walls at roughly knee level, which should take out pretty much anybody not completely flat on the floor. And even if they don't know the doors are bulletproof, once they bounce a few rounds off them, it doesn't take a genius to figure out they won't get through those.

At least it's easier to protect against handguns than full-on rifles...

[The Romulan Republic]

Cut out the middle man: replace schools with military barracks.

I half-seriously think that's where this is ultimately going. Republicans like Trump want to turn the schools into an extension of the police/armed forces, as another step in their efforts to turn American from a pseudo-democractic republic to a full-blown autocracy or oligarchy along the lines of Putin's Russia.

First they say "Give teachers a bonus for carrying guns." Then it'll be "Require teachers to carry guns." When something goes wrong, it'll be "We need more training", and the obvious way to do that is "Favor ex-military or ex-cops for teaching jobs" (the military and law enforcement tend to be disproportionately pro-Trump fields, at least among the rank and file).

Its what I'd expect an aspiring autocrat to do, really.

Edit: And if America's police are any indication, those guns will be used recklessly, and disproportionately on minority students.

[Zaune]

Well, the people in the halls would be fucked, but it might cut down on the death toll, and it would make "shelter in place" mean something other than "Be fish in a barrel."

Ideally the people in the halls would be able to duck into the nearest classroom before the potential spree killer, estranged parent violating their restraining order or other security threat managed to force their way into the school in the first place.

This obviously depends on there being a limited number of strictly monitored ways in or out of campus, but that that's already a solved issue in most schools.

[Zixinus]

I'm thinking of something like a large, bulletproof shield to rush a shooter with if they barge into a classroom.

Not really going to solve the problem.

The main problem is taking on rifle ammunition and taking on multiple hits. I think you can create a shield that can take on a few rifle hits but not much after. A teacher rushing up with a shield will be an open target. Even if it can, the shield will be heavy.

But say I'm wrong and you can create such a shield that your average teacher can carry, take on all the enemy fire. The teacher with a shield reaches the shooter. Now what? Hit the shooter with a stick/baton? The shooter can simply angle around the shield and shoot the teacher, whose hand is occupied. Maybe a taser would work but then, a taser in of itself would also be good. That is not going into the limitations of tasers, which I am unsure of.

Yet there is also an even bigger, worse problem: what happens if the school shooter also thinks of the shield? Now you have a school shooter that is even HARDER to take out by having a bulletproof shield.
And you can't really prevent that if you have ballistic shields around. It can't be a secret if the teacher can reach it quickly (you'd need one in every bigger classroom). You can put it in a locker, but the locks can be simply shot off, or compelled by the shooter to be opened.

[Elheru Aran]

Well, the people in the halls would be fucked, but it might cut down on the death toll, and it would make "shelter in place" mean something other than "Be fish in a barrel."

Ideally the people in the halls would be able to duck into the nearest classroom before the potential spree killer, estranged parent violating their restraining order or other security threat managed to force their way into the school in the first place.

This obviously depends on there being a limited number of strictly monitored ways in or out of campus, but that that's already a solved issue in most schools.

You sure?

A lot of campuses are only fenced on a couple of sides. Most are pretty open, just sitting in the middle of a big patch of land with parking lots all around and the gym/football field/athletic center on one side.

It certainly wouldn't be very unusual for someone to just walk off the street onto campus, particularly as most US schools tend to maintain pedestrian access for the few students that live within walking distance. And with the open floor plan that a lot of schools have-- blocks of buildings connected by covered walkways rather than singular large buildings-- you don't even have to pass the administration area to enter campus, depending on what direction you come in.

Oh, I saw something earlier about 'shooting off the lock' on bulletproof doors. That's just nonsense. You aren't doing that without something the size of a 12-gauge shotgun or bigger. With an AR type rifle you're more likely to just break it in place, and then the door will just be stuck.

[Zaune]

My firsthand experience is only with British schools. The last one I attended only really had one main entrance through the car park; you could theoretically bypass the main Reception desk and slip into one of the buildings but in doing so you'd have to walk by a lot of classroom windows. There was one small side gate I know of but that was kept locked except for about half an hour before school started and another half-hour after it let out. The playing fields had a fence around them, not a particularly high or strong one but not easy to climb without being seen from the main road that went right past the school itself. A couple of local primary schools I walk past occasionally are even more thoroughly secured: Only one or two entrances, both staffed, and surrounded by either a brick wall and some railings or a very tall and very tough-looking steel fence.

None of these are in exceptionally rough neighbourhoods, either. I suspect it might be something to do with the time someone in Wolverhampton attacked a bunch of elementary school kids with a machete; I remember seeing a number of local schools erecting much bigger and sturdier fences around that time.

[Elheru Aran]

To be fair, I shouldn't generalize. Schools in an urban context are more likely to be large single buildings given the limited real estate available, while out in the country or in more sprawling cities (particularly on the outskirts), you're more likely to see the compounds of multiple buildings which may or may not be connected by covered walkways or enclosed hallways. There are usually a few different areas which students are *supposed* to use to enter the school-- drop-off areas, pedestrian entrances, bus lines, things like that-- but there are always multiple entrances and exits, not all alarmed or monitored. Gyms for example frequently have simple doors to the athletic compound, which may or may not be fenced off.

Generally there is some effort made to control access outside of starting and ending hours for obvious reasons of security, but it's not improbable that a student familiar with his own school could figure out how to enter with minimal risk of discovery. It's notable that you never (as far as I know) see a school shooter attack a school *not* their own. Perhaps the Charles Whitman shooting at the University of Texas or whatever it was all the way back in the sixties or seventies.

[GuppyShark]

You need to address the situation before you have a school shooter. An ounce of prevention, not a pound of cure. By the time there is a student stalking the halls of a place of learning killing their fellow students, you've already lost. No amount of tactical fixes will reverse that.

Debating the best response to an active shooter is an attempt to solve the wrong problem.

[Ralin]

Rather than mess around with ballistic shields, why not retrofit school buildings with reinforced, lockable classroom doors that can stand up to small-arms fire, and are rigged to all swing shut as soon as someone hits a panic button? As long as someone bothered to notice an unauthorised person on the property before they started shooting, they'd be left wandering around a lot of empty corridors with nothing much to shoot at until they got arrested or gave up and went home.

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. The shoot through the wall thing could be an issue (my classrooms actually have windows facing out into the hall and I'm theoretically required to keep the curtains open at all times), but if you can install a bulletproof door you should be able to install a bulletproof wall. If only just by putting it next to the existing wall.

But say I'm wrong and you can create such a shield that your average teacher can carry, take on all the enemy fire. The teacher with a shield reaches the shooter. Now what? Hit the shooter with a stick/baton? The shooter can simply angle around the shield and shoot the teacher, whose hand is occupied. Maybe a taser would work but then, a taser in of itself would also be good. That is not going into the limitations of tasers, which I am unsure of.

Shove them off balance or against a wall while others tackle him or rush past out of the room. Knock him off balance and flee out the door yourself if you don't care greatly about your students' well-being.

Yet there is also an even bigger, worse problem: what happens if the school shooter also thinks of the shield? Now you have a school shooter that is even HARDER to take out by having a bulletproof shield.

The police would have numbers on their side and could surround him. As TRR said, there's a reason why this isn't something people use against guns in most situations.

My firsthand experience is only with British schools. The last one I attended only really had one main entrance through the car park; you could theoretically bypass the main Reception desk and slip into one of the buildings but in doing so you'd have to walk by a lot of classroom windows. There was one small side gate I know of but that was kept locked except for about half an hour before school started and another half-hour after it let out. The playing fields had a fence around them, not a particularly high or strong one but not easy to climb without being seen from the main road that went right past the school itself. A couple of local primary schools I walk past occasionally are even more thoroughly secured: Only one or two entrances, both staffed, and surrounded by either a brick wall and some railings or a very tall and very tough-looking steel fence.

None of these are in exceptionally rough neighbourhoods, either. I suspect it might be something to do with the time someone in Wolverhampton attacked a bunch of elementary school kids with a machete; I remember seeing a number of local schools erecting much bigger and sturdier fences around that time.

This is something that would vary a lot between schools. I live in China and schools here are routinely walled/fenced off with security guards at the front gate. Not sure how much that increased after those elementary school stabbing murder sprees in 2012, but the guards definitely have batons, shields, helmets and some sort of forked pole thing for immobilizing people laying around.