In reply to hybridmomentspass :
FWIW, I know of one case in Colorado where the person lied, and has now ended up convicted of perjury. So, anecdotally, abusing an Extreme Risk Protection Order does happen, AND getting convicted for doing it ALSO happens.
Legislators universally do a crap job when it comes to anything technical about firearms, but you have to expect that page 2 of "Lawmaking for Dummies" tells them "every law must include 'if you lie to authorities, it's perjury'".
Related content below. Although this thread is not specifically about school shootings, this podcast from yesterday's 1A on NPR is packed full of fact-checked stats so I figured I would link it.
Like, in the 2000 or so school shootings since the late 70s, about 200 of them (10%) were from accidental discharges from teachers carrying firearms. Another [I forget]% were from school-employed security firing on the wrong person, including several where the security mistook a non-uniformed cop for the shooter and ended up shooting the cop and sometimes shooting students. There was also a rather dismal percentage of times where a school security officer prevented any deaths or actually neutralized any threats, and in the 2000 shootings since the 70s, there are zero examples of an armed teacher neutralizing a single school shooter. Zero. Start at 17:15 for the most condensed stats
Can't get it to embed, so.... LINKY
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:... in the 2000 shootings since the 70s, there are zero examples of an armed teacher neutralizing a single school shooter. Zero.
I'm not pro/against armed teachers but isn't that stat a tad misleading? There have probably been zero cases of armed teachers neutralizing a school shooter because:
A. School shootings are exceedingly rare.
B. Districts that allow teachers to carry weapons are exceedingly rare and as far as I know a very recent idea to try and implement on a larger scale.
C. What percentage of school shootings happened at a school where teachers were permitted to and were actively carrying firearms? If that has never overlapped then that stat shows either a detterent effect that teachers carrying firearms didn't have to neutralize a school shooter because they prevented it (doubtful) or it doesn't prove anything because a school shooting hasn't happened at an armed teacher school.
In reply to crankwalk (Forum Supporter) :
Nicely said!
In statistical circles we say, think about the data points you don't have as much as the data points you do have.
35 pages and still civil. This has to be some kind of record. 
In reply to QuasiMofo (John Brown) :
Canadian Metropolitan Area murder rate screenshot:
RX Reven' said:In reply to crankwalk (Forum Supporter) :
Nicely said!
In statistical circles we say, think about the data points you don't have as much as the data points you do have.
In other news, there have been ZERO cases of Rivians needed their lower balljoints replaced. Is that because Rivians lower balljoints are indestructable and a great design or because they are all BRAND NEW and haven't had a chance to fail? A stat on that wouldn't be super meaningful.
Its interesting that you guys are focusing on the zero teachers thing and not that people with guns that are charged with student safety have shot students.
crankwalk (Forum Supporter) said:Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:... in the 2000 shootings since the 70s, there are zero examples of an armed teacher neutralizing a single school shooter. Zero.
I'm not pro/against armed teachers but isn't that stat a tad misleading? There have probably been zero cases of armed teachers neutralizing a school shooter because:
A. School shootings are exceedingly rare.
B. Districts that allow teachers to carry weapons are exceedingly rare.
C. What percentage of school shootings happened at a school where teachers were permitted to and were actively carrying firearms? If that has never overlapped then that stat shows either a detterent effect that teachers carrying firearms didn't have to neutralize a school shooter because they prevented it (doubtful) or it doesn't prove anything because a school shooting hasn't happened at an armed teacher school.
Um.... I said that. 200 equalling about 10%. That was actually my point... The fact that there have been 200 school shootings CAUSED by armed teachers
In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :
Hi Curtis, I understand the point you were making and it's a really alarming number.
What is critical to know and can't be accurately measured is how many shootings were prevented because the teachers were armed...if that number is greater than 200, we have net savings of lives.
Honestly, I'm not a big gun guy...I've lived my whole life in a low crime town in California (although that's changing) so I haven't felt the need to be armed and the culture out here is very anti-gun.
BTW, a woman that runs a pet rescue business in my community (Thousand Oaks) made the national news a few days ago by including a question on her screening form about what the potential adopters position on gun laws was. She had no problem going on T.V. and admitting that pro gun people wouldn't be getting a pet. 
From the 80's to the early 2000's my town had the distinction of having the largest population in the entire U.S. that didn't have a single homicide many more years than not.
We don't have that honor often now which makes that pet rescue woman appear to be living in the past...as am I.
Mr_Asa said:Its interesting that you guys are focusing on the zero teachers thing and not that people with guns that are charged with student safety have shot students.
Because I'm making a distinction between tragic but accidental discharges of firearms and a crazy person coming in to a school to inflict as much damage as possible. When you count a school resource officer discharging a pistol accidentally with no injuries as a "school shooting" the same as Sandy Hook, you muddy the waters. I just don't like using statistics to prove a point when the sample size of a teacher who is permitted to carry a weapon at school and hasn't prevented a massacre is super tiny. I'm not saying arm the staff or not, I'm just saying I disagree with how that data is presented.
Basically, there are very small percentages of situations where teachers or armed security has guns.
And even among those very rare situations, they pretty much always EFF it up.
Now, the question would be - how many of those shootings results in death or injury? If so, can you extrapolate that data out to what it might look like if every school had armed teachers or security?
For example, if among those schools that had armed teachers, 1 student was killed out of the thousands that had gone through that school during the period in question (say 10 years) you could probably extrapoloate that number out to thousands of dead kids at the hands of teachers nationwide.
There is some pretty solid data that police officers in countries without widespread gun ownership, or very strict gun regulations, feel safer, and makes them better able to handle most domestic law enforcement with a clearer head. Police in the USA, by comparison, are trained that pretty much everyone has a gun and should be seen as a threat. (hyperbole is mine) Do we really want teachers adopting that same mindset?
From Curtis's link (paraphrased a bit):
A study of the 2000 school shootings from 1970, 200 of those where accidental discharges, as he noted. No information if anyone was hit by any bullets or killed by these discharges (except one, where he shot himself)
They also note a study from 1999-2018 68 examples of shootings where an school security officer was present (they did not say if they where armed, but I guess we can assume?). Only 2 cases where the security officer gunned down active shooter (no info on if this was before or after they killed / shot anyone).
This is very incomplete data, especially when you consider what are being called "school shootings" (e.g. many of which in the last year where gun fights in parking lots, as shown in a previous posts link, which very much could have been a neighborhood thing). Not well defined at all for what I think the point is here, so less than useful.
How many people where killed in all these discharges / shootings? How many where injured? How many people would have been shot or killed in the cases where the security officer gunned them down (obviously no real way to know that). And as noted, no way to know if shootings where avoided because they knew they where there.
These obviously are meant to speak to the increase danger in simply having weapons on campus, but as noted, they really say nothing of the obvious trade off, which is really what we are talking about here: Yes, putting guns in the hands of security officers increases the danger of those guns being used, but is there a net benefit (e.g. more lives would have been lost / more shot, if they were not there). This data cannot reasonably conclude that from what I can tell.
The "arming teachers" thing also seems to get heavily conflated with the concept of "requiring them to carry" rather then the far more reasonable (and likely I would hope) "let them carry if they want to and they are well trained".
I am sorry to say, but the "stats" this guy stated seem to be more of a way to confirm what he believes than an actual objective analysis of the situation (no need for a shocked face, it's pretty much the norm). A true statistician would never present such data as a way to draw a reasonable conclusion (one actually already stated that above).
ddavidv said:35 pages and still civil. This has to be some kind of record.
ddavidv said:35 pages and still civil. This has to be some kind of record.
It's all in who starts the thread. When it's started by a guy everyone likes, it goes well. I need to start more threads. Let's see, so far I started a religion one, and guns, I'll try abortion next 
In reply to RX Reven' :
We don't deal with net savings for lives, though. The original recipe for airbags killed .5% as many people as they saved, so they were changed. And (please) let's not bring up "fwd:fwd:fwd: this vaccine causes (X)" causing people to rather let their children die of preventable illness.
Steve_Jones said:ddavidv said:35 pages and still civil. This has to be some kind of record.
It's all in who starts the thread. When it's started by a guy everyone likes, it goes well. I need to start more threads. Let's see, so far I started a religion one, and guns, I'll try abortion next
We already had a thread about the 3000GT VR4, it went very civilly too.
I will have to say, I am generally VERY happy to see such a conversation remain reasonable civil (yes there have been some bumps)!
I have said it a few times: Such discussions are VERY much needed. We are not going to solve anything, but the discussion is certainly useful in some way!
Gives me a bit of hope....
Some news on the topic.
It should be stripped of the paywall.
I don't think the issue is the actual guns but a terrible E36 M3ty gun culture and an NRA that changed course in the 70's.
In reply to Brett_Murphy (Agent of Chaos) :
It seems like a pretty smart compromise. It addresses much of what both sides agree on. No doubt the recent Supreme Court ruling on concealed carry relaxed the pro 2A side, as well as convincing those looking for stronger restrictions to go with the compromise. Of course, implementation is key.
RX Reven' said:In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :
BTW, a woman that runs a pet rescue business in my community (Thousand Oaks) made the national news a few days ago by including a question on her screening form about what the potential adopters position on gun laws was. She had no problem going on T.V. and admitting that pro gun people wouldn't be getting a pet.From the 80's to the early 2000's my town had the distinction of having the largest population in the entire U.S. that didn't have a single homicide many more years than not.
We don't have that honor often now which makes that pet rescue woman appear to be living in the past...as am I.
I wouldn't put a whole lot of credence on what one animal rescue group might or might not require. I have founded two successful dog rescue groups in my lifetime and have been a member of several others. I have saved over 100 dogs. Yet there are several dog rescue groups in town that will not adopt a dog to me because nobody is home at my house during the day and another one because my house has no doggie door into the backyard. There is yet another group in town who won't adopt to people who have doggie doors because they consider them unsafe. Anybody can file the incorporation papers, print out business cards and claim to be an animal rescue group.
In reply to crankwalk (Forum Supporter) :
Are you at all involved at Rivian or in Illinois?
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:crankwalk (Forum Supporter) said:Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:... in the 2000 shootings since the 70s, there are zero examples of an armed teacher neutralizing a single school shooter. Zero.
I'm not pro/against armed teachers but isn't that stat a tad misleading? There have probably been zero cases of armed teachers neutralizing a school shooter because:
A. School shootings are exceedingly rare.
B. Districts that allow teachers to carry weapons are exceedingly rare.
C. What percentage of school shootings happened at a school where teachers were permitted to and were actively carrying firearms? If that has never overlapped then that stat shows either a detterent effect that teachers carrying firearms didn't have to neutralize a school shooter because they prevented it (doubtful) or it doesn't prove anything because a school shooting hasn't happened at an armed teacher school.
Um.... I said that. 200 equalling about 10%. That was actually my point... The fact that there have been 200 school shootings CAUSED by armed teachers
That's really good numbers compared to cars and water, the 2 leading causes of childrens accidental deaths. There were almost 20,000 accidental deaths of kids in 2018, most drowning and auto wrecks, but only 200 accidental teacher related shootings in 40 years? 200 accidents in 40 years would make OSHA shoot a load. Wait, is it deaths, or shootings, and kids or adults? How many injuries vs deaths? Any accidental shootings is bad, but if the good is calculated in like with cars and water, guns are worth far more than they're given credit for.
Steve_Jones said:ddavidv said:35 pages and still civil. This has to be some kind of record.
It's all in who starts the thread. When it's started by a guy everyone likes, it goes well. I need to start more threads. Let's see, so far I started a religion one, and guns, I'll try abortion next
whoa whoa whoa let's not get so full of ourselves....I seem to recall maybe not threads you've started , but responses that have gotten you B'slapped simmer down now braheen... oh and sent you a PM
You'll need to log in to post.
