what laws were "ignored"?Originally Posted by TenYards
|
|
what laws were "ignored"?
Under Connecticut law,[65] the 20-year-old Lanza was old enough to carry a long gun,[66] but too young to legally own or carry handguns.[67]
The following users like this post: TenYards
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-actio...n-in-your-guns
and prohibit the keeping of a loaded firearm in any premises where there is a risk that the firearm could harm a child.
****
TSA supporters, I humbly present "The Fallacy of the Rock"
A nice illustration of a fallacy from The Simpsons:
After a single bear wandering into town has drawn an over-reaction from the residents of Springfield, Homer stands outside his house and muses, “Not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol is working like a charm!”
Lisa sees through his reasoning: “That’s specious reasoning, dad.” Homer, misunderstanding the word “specious”, thanks her for the compliment.
Optimistically, she tries to explain the error in his argument: “By your logic, I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away.” Homer is confused: “Hmm; how does it work?” Lisa: “It doesn’t work; it’s just a stupid rock!” Homer: “Uh-huh.” Lisa: “… but I don’t see any tigers around, do you?”
Homer, after a moment’s thought: “Lisa, I want to buy your rock…”
Correlation does not imply causation. Just because two things occur together, does not mean that one caused the other. Homer argues that as the Bear Patrol vans are correlated with an absence of bears, the former must have caused the latter. Lisa, tongue in cheek, argues that as the presence of her rock is correlated with an absence of tigers, the former must have caused the latter.
At least Homer recognises that the two arguments are on a par, even if he fails to recognise that both are examples of the correlation not causation fallacy.
TSA is "Security Theater" that is supposed to make us "feel" safer, while actually doing nothing at all. Except violating our rights and expanding the notion that it's OK to live in a Police State.
That works just fine, except for common sense and all. The TSA is not a rock, and potential threats are not tigers. It would be more like a sophisticated electric net around a campsite made especially to keep tigers out that works 90% (or whatever) of the time.
Yet here you are, telling us that the net is just a show. That they can't (and don't care to) stop any meaningful terrorist plot.
I'm not saying the TSA is anything wonderful, but you're a lot smarter than your above post would indicate, The.
Or the fact that plane hijacking is extremely rare and can be better handled by air marshals, passengers, and locked ****pit doors than a high school drop out feeling up 8 year olds.
?
So what you're saying here is that if the hijackers couldn't gain access to the ****pits, they couldn't hijack the planes? That's crazy talk.
I edited to flesh out the point.
The TSA is not a rock, and potential threats are not tigers. It would be more like a sophisticated electric net around a campsite made especially to keep tigers out that works 90% (or whatever) of the time.
Yet here you are, telling us that the net is just a show. That they can't (and don't care to) stop any meaningful terrorist plot.
I'm not saying the TSA is anything wonderful, but you're a lot smarter than your above post would indicate, The. Common sense alone says the presence of TSA deters at least to some small degree, but here you are trying to piss on our heads and tell us it's raining.
I know, right?
Better to spend $8.1 Billion on a bunch of people to feel us up or dose us with x-rays. Because, Freedom.
How many American planes were hijacked before 9/11?
A bunch. Until we quit negotiating with terrorists.
And, here's data about how ineffective the TSA is in even doing their job (which I argue is ineffective to begin with. So, they're ineffective at being ineffective..... lulz)
Lonks.
About a year ago, Houston businessman Farid Sief accidentally brought his loaded Glock on a flight from Houston’s Bush Intercontinental Airport. The loaded gun, which Seif carries for protection, was tucked away in his laptop case, and should have been clearly visible since he had to take his laptop out of the bag, which was practically empty.
“I mean, this is not a small gun,” Seif said. “It’s a .40 caliber gun.” … “There’s nothing else in there. How can you miss it? You cannot miss it,” Seif said. [ABC News]
Seif was shocked when he realized halfway through his flight that the gun was still in his bag. He reported it as soon as he landed. Not that we haven’t seen this before with things like six-inch hunting knives or 12-inch razor blades, but aren’t x-ray machines put in place specifically to detect bulky chunks of metal like guns? The scary part is that a TSA spokesperson told ABC news that this isn’t an uncommon lapse of security:
Authorities tell ABC News the incident is not uncommon, but how often it occurs is a closely guarded government secret. Experts say every year since the September 11 attacks, federal agencies have conducted random, covert tests of airport security. A person briefed on the latest tests tells ABC News the failure rate approaches 70 percent at some major airports. Two weeks ago, TSA’s new director said every test gun, bomb part or knife got past screeners at some airports. [ABC News]
The following users like this post: TenYards
So your issue with the TSA is the touchy feely at security checkpoints, not air marshals. I totally understand that. It's the air marshal part that I think is the most applicable to be carried over to schools, not necessarily feeling people up and making sure they don't bring more than 3 oz of liquid into the elementary school.
I think air marshalls make sense.
I am 100% opposed to armed guards at schools.
I believe an anonymous air marshal would probably be shockingly cheaper than the TSA--even if we put one on every single flight over the US.
Common sense also said that you should defer to hijackers, because in most cases, they just a ransom and will safely land the plane at some point. Then 9/11 happened, for a large part because the hijackers could exploit "common sense" to ensure a fairly compliant crew.
Point is, when you're dealing with extremely extraordinary circumstances, such as those surrounding a terrorist threat or m**** shooting, "common sense" is of extremely limited use, because common sense would dictate that this sort of situation isn't ever going to happen.
Same. I do think it's stupid though that I can carry my pistol everywhere I go, except to my kid's school.
Do you think it's immediately comparable, now that the entire world knows you can knock down skyscrapers with a jetliner? It went from a hostage-taking tactic to a jihadist flying damned missile capable of taking down the World Trade Center towers. And all you needed was a decent plan, a box cutter, and the most basic of flying lessons.
I think we can agree that today is different than pre-9/11.
But the short answer is: I don't know how many American planes were hijacked before 9/11. I do like how you avoided what I said in my post, though.
Gun to your head, you're going to ****ing die immediately based on the statement "The TSA is at least to some degree effective in making our skies safer than if they didn't exist," you're telling me you think in your heart of hearts, your ball of balls, that you'd say that it unequivocally FALSE? That it's all theater meant to sedate the masses?
We'll miss you.
You're talking about something completely different Val.
BTW, are we getting snow or not for XMas?
I am not a big fan of TSA....
The week after 9/11 I was flying one way from Memphis to Manchester, NH...single guy, one way, no checked bags...
I was in line behind a couple with two young kids...
The couple and kids were all taken aside and had their carry one baggage searched...I was told to go ahead...(I know, it was early in the deal and, like now, they were poorly trained)
we had school resource officers where i went to school. they are sworn officers of the local police department, but focus on schools.
Were they packing?
So to be clear, most high schools (at least where I came from in Virginia) have a sheriff's deputy there and he is armed. This was as far back as 2004. They didn't "stand guard", but were on campus for a variety of reasons. You are opposed to that as well?
As evidenced by the FAA's test runs, it's just as easy to get a loaded firearm onto a plane today as it was before 9/11. TSA is 100% useless.
Point being: If someone is intelligent, has a well structured plan, and is willing to die to accomplish said plan, there is little any security measure can do to prevent it.
In white schools, yes.
/bruthaman bait.
The following users like this post: pphilfran
Yep. Deer Creek uses an Oklahoma County Deputy Sheriff as their resource officer . . .
yes. they wore the same uniform and had the same power as regular cops.
Here's a simple idea. We've tried living together in peace and harmony with relatively few restrictions on gun ownership because we need a standing militia and our woods are full of unnecessary living things. That hasn't worked out as well as we'd like to see it as a general social policy. So, let's try banning the common ownership of guns, with a few exceptions, for the next couple of hundred years and then evaluate how that policy works out.
Armed guards is not what I would want either. I think what you do is take two or three teachers, the principal and vice principal and, as long as they p**** the necessary background checks, over the summer you send them to the FBI Academy in Quantico and have them go through a two week tactical training course developed specifically for active shooter, active threat situations in schools. They receive intensive training in gun safety, gun mechanics, gun handling, shooting, etc. You also have them go through simulations of active shooters scenarios with real guns and simulated ammo (blanks) and all different kinds of weapons, etc., so they have an idea of what an active shooter situation would be like. You certify everyone who completes and passes the course and you require yearly re-certification. You give that school who has complete the training, two or three guns and a good solid gun safe or secured room to store them in. You make sure that the only people that can access the safe or room are those who have completed the training and that they are the only ones who know about it. You also require that at least two of those trained are on campus at all times the school is open and kids are there so you never have a time when a trained person is not there. Once a year, during the summer, you require that those trained, the school staff, local law enforcement, fire department, hospital, etc., all participate in a simulated active shooter situation at one of the local schools.
At least that's what I would be discussing if I were a part Crazy Joe's new commission.
Not at all. Merely suggesting that the common sense of following procedures may not actually lead to expected outcomes, because of how unusual the situation is inherently. If you're proposing that the TSA works, the burden is on you to demonstrate how it works, rather than appeal to common sense, because in these sorts of situations, common sense is the first thing to break down.
As far as the snow goes, it's looking good
That would likely cost at least $6 billion in up-front costs, and at least a billion every year afterwards. Not that it's a bad idea, but it would be very expensive.
You're relying on test runs to make your point? TEST runs? Like, tests to see how we're doing then presumably to improve? 100% useless? There's no way even some small quantum of good comes from the TSA in practice or just by its existence?!
Dude, don't make yourself look stupid just because your ego won't cede even the smallest ground.
Added to the fact that we can't adequately fund schools as it is.
When I went to school there was no security...you could go outside or roam the halls with ease...not that I ever did....
We had multiple stabbing in the halls..one shooting (missed) in the parking lot...pot was smoked in the bathrooms...beer and booze bottles would litter the inside courtyard...
In fact they had a picture of some broken Coors bottles in the yearbook...1970
Tough ****...I bet it happens...just open your wallet just a liiiiiiiiiiiiiiitle wider.....
No, I just disagree with your contention that the TSA does any good whatsoever. It's not ego, it's looking at the evidence.
Yup. It wouldn't take long before people started saying "do we really need to pay that much? These things are extremely rare, even as it is"
Hell, what would happen is a state legislature would approve it, because who want to run for reelection as the guy that "wants your kids to be murdered"? Then, they would fail to p**** a tax increase to pay for it because no one wants to run as the "guy that raised your taxes".
So then, you cut into funds for education to fund guns and gun training.
That's why any sort of defense program for schools would come from the defense budget, not education.
Well, we'll agree to disagree then. The officer being added on staff was a big change for my high school because I grew up in the sticks with no sort of gang violence or major problems of any sort. But he does more than just stand guard. Does it justify his salary? I don't know. But the presence of one or two armed and trained "offices" doesn't constitute "1984" conditions to me. Times have changed.
Good point. The NRA would be sure to lobby hard for this program in every state, now that you mention it. Probably even suggest that instead of a central state training regimen, there would be a whole number of licensed training programs, following state protocols. 'Cuz, you know, free market.
It would turn into your typical state government cluster**** in no time at all.
That's about as likely as a full ban on semiautomatics.
Yes, I was there after Katrina. No, I didn't know any of them. I knew the police were doing this but not guardsmen.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
You might be right, but it makes no damn sense to me. People need to remember something called "civil defense". The sure knew about it during the Cold War.
Open up your magazine well and get ready to have a 50 round magazine rammed home....Biden is on the job!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/1...6pLid%3D247755
Spurred by a horrific elementary school shooting, President Barack Obama vowed to send Congress new policy proposals for reducing gun violence by January. "This time, the words need to lead to action," Obama said Wednesday. He tasked Vice President Joe Biden with leading an administration-wide effort to create the new recommendations and pledged to push for their implementation without delay.,,,,
Obama also tasked the Biden-led team with considering ways to improve mental health resources and address ways to create a culture that doesn't promote violence....
Biden's prominent role in the process could be an ****et for the White House in getting gun legislation through Congress. The vice president spent decades in the Senate and has been called on by Obama before to use his long-standing relationships with lawmakers to build support for White House measures....
On, and last point I'll make in re: TSA:
I know a lot of you don't get the opportunity to fly general aviation. You know what I like most about flying private? I can walk directly on board without being hassled by anybody. One could bring an ****ton of high explosives with oneself onto a larger jet with an unprotected ****pit, if one were so inclined.
Now tell me again about how TSA is making us safer.
The following users like this post: pphilfran
That would technically fall under DHS. Maybe we could shut down the TSA and allocate the funds there instead?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
