[BREAKING] School Shooting in Conn. at Elementary School

How should school security be improved at malls, temples and movie theatres?

 

I think you are missing a significant portion of what happened when the guy entered the school. Hence, the obvious discussions about it.

 

I don't know for sure yet but you ever notice how amusement parks/museums/ sporting events never have any shootings??? Maybe we need to work around building it in that nature, I don't know?

 

That's exactly what I was going to say. All these shootings and "security" at these places is what's questioned? You mean readily available firearms have NOTHING to do with it...amirite?

Apparently we need to double and triple security everywhere in the United States to watch out for weirdos with guns...or we could just do what every other civilized country does that doesn't have this problem and make it extremely difficult for a normal person to own weapons that can kill masses in seconds.

Meh, Nope don't want to go against that there 2nd amendment...you know the one that was created when the most dangerous weapon you could own was a musket...I'm sure our forefathers intended all citizens to own assault rifles and semi automatic handguns with 20 round clips...you never know when England plans to retake Merica again...

 

What are you talking about? It was clearly the school's fault because they didn't run it like a maximum security prison...

 

There's great irony in the fact your sarcastic statement is 100% correct.

Turning our schools and other public places into prisons is a reactive and wasteful idea that comes at a great loss and detriment to our society.

Placing effective and reasonable regulations on deadly weapons is proactive and targets a large part of the problem, which is accessibility and abundance.

Thank you for pointing this out.

P.S. Anybody else noticing that the "take it to teh D&D!!!1" crowd are almost universally pro-gun? I guess the common thread here is that they don't like these kinds of discussion to take place at all, because it might actually open the doors to these common sense laws they so desperately fear. Shameful selfishness masquerading as "respect".

 

Ignoring the absurdity of your argument, this statement isn't even true. It's unclear at this point when or how he entered the school:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/15/us/connecticut-school-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t1


Lanza forced his way into the school, Vance revealed Saturday, though he wouldn't say how or whether Lanza used weapons to do it.

It's also not clear whether Lanza entered before or after 9:30 a.m., the time each day when the school would lock its doors as part of a security system introduced this year. Authorities say the first emergency call about the shooting came in at "approximately" 9:30 a.m. Friday.

 

I don't recall any of those places being shot up yesterday. Obviously my comment on school security only applies to this latest incident. Security, in general, is the issue that's going to give you quick and significant results. The Batman shooter entered how? Unsecured door. Deterring possible shooters is the best way to prevent this now, not by disarming them or arming others months/years later.

So, what, if the door had been monitored and locked, the guy would have just shot his way in? the Batman shooter would have came in through the front doors and battled it out with guards/employees? These guys are trying to accomplish something specific and in a surprising manner. They are unlikely to risk being identified that early on.

It's not about adding security necessarily, but simply having it. Again, this guy knew when the doors weren't secured and that's when he struck. They didn't need the U.S. Army out front, just a locked door and maybe one person as a greeter /monitor.

I didn't say firearms had nothing to do with it. Obviously they do, but focusing on that isn't going to make things more secure now. Its like flopping in the NBA. For immediate results you tell the refs to stop calling it, rather than wait a season for the fine penalty to be implemented.

LOL, I don't even own a gun or know how to handle one. Maybe shot one once in my life. I'm probably more anti than pro guns. If you read more closely, i've pointed out that neither of the two sides will bring immediate results. I've worked at various elementary schools and know how easy it is to enter them undetected. That is what has to change immediately. I'm concerned about what we can do for tomorrow, not next year.

You guys act like schools are already heavily secured and anything extra would turn them into a max security prison. Not even close. Schools, for the most part, are not that secure, despite what they lead you to believe. Minor changes would go a long way.

 

People will just pick the location that provides easy access. Secure the school and they'll just pick the grocery store. So if I'm understanding right, your solution to the problem - instead of looking at access to weapons - is to redesign every single building and venue in the country to only have one secured entry or exit point?

 

da fuq...do you really think a psychopathic killer is going to go jiggle the door handle and say "woops not getting in that way, well nevermind then" and go on about his day? A locked door wouldn't deter him, an 80 year old woman monitoring the door at the school yesterday wouldn't have deterred him, there is no way you believe that.

 

another smart read:

http://qz.com/37069/the-deadliest-s...ry-was-in-1927-why-its-aftermath-matters-now/

The deadliest school massacre in US history was in 1927. Why its aftermath matters now

In the end there were 38 children dead at the school, two teachers and four other adults.

I’m not talking about the horrific shooting in Connecticut today. I’m talking about the worst school murder in American history. It took place in Michigan, in 1927. A school board official, enraged at a tax increase to fund school construction, quietly planted explosives in Bath Township Elementary. Then, the day he was finally ready, he set off an inferno. When crowds rushed in to rescue the children, he drove up his shrapnel-filled car and detonated it, too, killing more people, including himself. And then, something we’d find very strange happened.

Nothing.

No cameras were placed at the front of schools. No school guards started making visitors show identification. No Zero Tolerance laws were passed, nor were background checks required of PTA volunteers—all precautions that many American schools instituted in the wake of the Columbine shootings, in 1999. Americans in 1928—and for the next several generations —continued to send their kids to school without any of these measures. They didn’t even drive them there. How did they maintain the kind of confidence my own knees and heart don’t feel as I write this?

They had a distance that has disappeared. A distance that helped them keep the rarity and unpredictability of the tragedy in perspective, granting them parental peace.

“In 1928, the odds are that if people in this country read about this tragedy, they read it several days later, in place that was hard to get to,” explains Art Markman, author of “Smart Thinking” (Perigee Books, 2012). “You couldn’t hop on a plane and be there in an hour. Michigan? If you were living in South Carolina, it would be a three-day drive. It’s almost another country. You’d think, ‘Those crazy people in Michigan,’ same as if a school blows up in one of the breakaway Republics.”

Time and space create distance. But today, those have compressed to zero. The Connecticut shooting comes into our homes–even our hands–instantly, no matter where we live. We see the shattered parents in real time. The President can barely maintain composure. This sorrow isn’t far away, it’s local for every single one of us.

And of course it brings up Columbine. Two horrors, separated by years and miles, are now fused into one. It feels like terrible things are happening to our children all the time, everywhere. Nowhere is safe.

As a result, I expect we will now demand precautions on top of precautions. More guards. More security cameras. More supervision. We will fear more for our kids and let go of them even more reluctantly. Every time we wonder if they can be safe beyond our arms, these shootings will swim into focus.

Will this new layer of fear and security make our children any safer? Probably not, but for a reassuring reason: A tragedy like this is so rare, our kids are already safe. Not perfectly safe. No one ever is. But safe.

That’s a truth the folks in 1928 America understood. We just don’t feel that way now.

Not when there’s no distance between us and the parents in Newtown.

 

For the most part, i'm worried about schools. That's the current topic and really the most important. There's a reason why this/these shootings hit people so much harder than others. It's innocent kids getting killed. Small changes in schools would produce significant results.

As for other places, there's definitely room for improvement in a lot of places. I understand you can't rebuild or remodel every building, but there is always something extra they can do immediately. Gun reform is not an immediate process. I'm not saying don't talk about it, i'm saying don't just wait for it or focus entirely on it, because, meanwhile, shootings are continuing to happen.

So just because he's psychotic he's lost all sense of logic, common sense, etc.? If these guys were just brain dead they wouldn't pull off what they have. He obviously knew ahead of time the doors weren't locked that early. Do you think he would have still picked that place if he knew he'd be met with resistance at the front door? Again, was he going to just shoot the door down and risk being stopped before even reaching his target?

 

My goodness you are embarrassing yourself. When someone wants to kill they will find another way to kill. Wait for recess, wait for hundred of kids coming out after school. What's next? No recess? Put kids in bullet proof bus to take them home?

I'm getting sick and tired of guns being swept under the rug and people are already looking for a scapegoat. Blaming medical drugs, autism, video games ect...Sure that might be part of a personal disorder. But a personal disorder person is not that much dangerous when they don't have easy access to deadly firearms. No matter how great or good a person is all his/her life. Anyone can break down at any time and the worst thing is for that person to have easy access to dangerous firearms.

 

I agree with this - but I believe its very much about solving the last problem. Unless you secure all public places, you don't really solve anything because your criminal will just attack the place that is unsecured. And I don't believe it's possible to secure everything, so this is sort of like TSA's bodyscanners - a way to make people feel better but not actually accomplish anything.

Also agree that gun control (or licensing or whatever else) is not an immediate solution - but it's a very real possible long-term solution.

 

Remember most of these shooters had a connection to the place they stormed. This guy wanted to shoot up this school for a reason. I dont think he was simply going to go to the next school, if this one had been secure. Same goes for the batman shooter, he probably wouldnt have gone to Costco, if the theatres were secure.

Again, i'm looking for what can be done now to produce significant results. Yes, there's going to be places that can't be secured and people who don't care who they kill or where, but it seems like they're going to be the exception, not the norm. We can do a lot now, if the focus is in the right place.

Embarassing myself? Why? Because i think it's important to secure the areas where children have no protection and nowhere to run? Surely you understand the increased danger of facing a gunman inside 4 walls, that are within other walls, as oppose to being in an open area, where there's probably more adults and it's easier for police to step in quickly.

As for the other stuff, you are embarassing yourself, since I wasn't the one who mentioned any of that.

 

Are you out of your mind? What resistance??? He was packing 3 high powered weapons. The hell do you think the teachers watching the front door were gonna do to stop him huh? Do YOU think he picked the elementary school because he knew the back door wasn't going to be locked? He wanted to go there and he wanted to kill kids. You're ridiculous. Forget mental health or gun control, we need us some good old fashioned door control.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/15/us/connecticut-school-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

 

Yes, i'm out of my mind for wanting the guy to face as much resistance as possible, it's not like a minute or two, or even seconds, would have saved lives.

And we still don't know how he forced his way in. That quote can mean he forced his way through the front gate, door or hallway. There's a difference between facing resistance as soon as he opens the front door and facing it at the gate (if there was one).

Keep focusing on gun control. I'm sure the future parents and family of murdered children will be glad the focus is on one of the longer roads to prevention, if not the longest.

 

You heard it here first folks, the solution to stopping armed psychos from shooting up public places...is door control. I'm sure the present parents and families of the murdered children are lamenting the schools severe lack of door preparedness. Spread the word.

 

Actually, what they heard here first is an increase in school's physical security and security protocol, which both have room for improvement, will bring quick and significant results, and that's why it should be the immediate point of focus.

Ask parents what they want the focus to be on, securing their childrens' schools this week or waiting for the gun control debate to play out and then hope the outcome is truly the better one?