hokiewolf said:

---

---

God... please let her run again... please!

Manny Sanguine said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

why no other developed countries had the volume of school shootings as us?

---

I think we might be making the murders of school children more appealing to the unstable population by the way we react. There is an immediate understandable emotional reaction followed quickly by polarized political reactions to the event before anyone understands much about what happened. The shooter's name and photo is prominently featured in national news coverage for several days. Everyone who is related to the shooter is interviewed. Friends are interviewed. They may see the event as a way of making themselves notoriously famous. For example, the would be shooter of Judge Kavanaugh told police he viewed the assassination as a way to give his life purpose.

In one of the articles I read about the last few school shootings, the shooter was known to be a student of the Columbine shooting with a fascination about those shooters and their methods. Perhaps we ironically increase the frequency of these types of events when politicians try to use them to pass or block legislation for political gain. Copy cats have several examples to follow now and a well established impact on society to pursue.

---

This JAMA article: "Presence of Armed School Officials and Fatal and Nonfatal Gunshot Injuries During Mass School Shootings, United States, 1980-2019" presents some interesting data about 133 school shootings in the US:

• Almost 1/4 had armed security present
• Only 16 shooters were 22 or older
• The mean fatalities when armed security was present was actually higher than overall (2.07 vs. 1.34)
• The number of cases involving an assault-style or semi-automatic rifle was low (14 compared to 92 for handguns) but the mean fatalities was much higher (5.36)

The article also notes: "Prior research suggests that many school shooters are actively suicidal, intending to die in the act, so an armed officer may be an incentive rather than a deterrent." (Citing Peterson J, Densley J. The Violence Project database of mass shootings in the United States. https://www.theviolenceproject.org)

---

Those are interesting stats, Manny. Without reading the link, I wonder how often the armed security presence stood around doing nothing for an hour like that chief in Uvalde. I assume that event counted as armed security present even though they were ineffective.

---

Seems like there are at least two relevant questions:

• To what degree does armed security interrupt or circumvent a shooting incident? (What failed to happen Uvalde.)
• To what degree does armed security act as a deterrent to a shooter. (In 23% of the cases in the JAMA study, it was not a deterrent.)

The first question is hard to answer without a more narrative descriptpion of each case.

---

Well and if the shooter is really looking for a way out, why would security deter them anyway

TheStorm said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

---

God... please let her run again... please!

---

Please please! Well, except you'd have to see her Coach K-ratface and hear that spine-twisting, face crunching, headache-inducing voice again. Is it worth it?

Manny Sanguine said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

why no other developed countries had the volume of school shootings as us?

---

I think we might be making the murders of school children more appealing to the unstable population by the way we react. There is an immediate understandable emotional reaction followed quickly by polarized political reactions to the event before anyone understands much about what happened. The shooter's name and photo is prominently featured in national news coverage for several days. Everyone who is related to the shooter is interviewed. Friends are interviewed. They may see the event as a way of making themselves notoriously famous. For example, the would be shooter of Judge Kavanaugh told police he viewed the assassination as a way to give his life purpose.

In one of the articles I read about the last few school shootings, the shooter was known to be a student of the Columbine shooting with a fascination about those shooters and their methods. Perhaps we ironically increase the frequency of these types of events when politicians try to use them to pass or block legislation for political gain. Copy cats have several examples to follow now and a well established impact on society to pursue.

---

This JAMA article: "Presence of Armed School Officials and Fatal and Nonfatal Gunshot Injuries During Mass School Shootings, United States, 1980-2019" presents some interesting data about 133 school shootings in the US:

• Almost 1/4 had armed security present
• Only 16 shooters were 22 or older
• The mean fatalities when armed security was present was actually higher than overall (2.07 vs. 1.34)
• The number of cases involving an assault-style or semi-automatic rifle was low (14 compared to 92 for handguns) but the mean fatalities was much higher (5.36)

The article also notes: "Prior research suggests that many school shooters are actively suicidal, intending to die in the act, so an armed officer may be an incentive rather than a deterrent." (Citing Peterson J, Densley J. The Violence Project database of mass shootings in the United States. https://www.theviolenceproject.org)

---

Those are interesting stats, Manny. Without reading the link, I wonder how often the armed security presence stood around doing nothing for an hour like that chief in Uvalde. I assume that event counted as armed security present even though they were ineffective.

---

Seems like there are at least two relevant questions:

• To what degree does armed security interrupt or circumvent a shooting incident? (What failed to happen Uvalde.)
• To what degree does armed security act as a deterrent to a shooter. (In 23% of the cases in the JAMA study, it was not a deterrent.)

The first question is hard to answer without a more narrative descriptpion of each case.

---

So to your second point, does that mean it was a deterrent 77% of the time?

PackFansXL said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

why no other developed countries had the volume of school shootings as us?

---

I think we might be making the murders of school children more appealing to the unstable population by the way we react. There is an immediate understandable emotional reaction followed quickly by polarized political reactions to the event before anyone understands much about what happened. The shooter's name and photo is prominently featured in national news coverage for several days. Everyone who is related to the shooter is interviewed. Friends are interviewed. They may see the event as a way of making themselves notoriously famous. For example, the would be shooter of Judge Kavanaugh told police he viewed the assassination as a way to give his life purpose.

In one of the articles I read about the last few school shootings, the shooter was known to be a student of the Columbine shooting with a fascination about those shooters and their methods. Perhaps we ironically increase the frequency of these types of events when politicians try to use them to pass or block legislation for political gain. Copy cats have several examples to follow now and a well established impact on society to pursue.

---

Kinda disgusting, if true. Seems so unlikely to the rational mind, but then, you're referring to people who are detached and rationalizing like most people.
Or who are filled with hatred.

But I'm also not sure our reactions to any kind of major event are any different from most countries with a free press?

---

If your assertion that guns are uniquely an American issue is true, then the politicization of guns must also be uniquely prevalent here as well. We are also presently experiencing the most polarizing narrative driven press of my lifetime. Truly ugly times that are about to get even worse.

---

100% agreed on the media-driven division. Guys like Jake Tapper and Chris Cilliza just drive me over the edge and fuel much of the increasing hate.

Steve Videtich said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

why no other developed countries had the volume of school shootings as us?

---

I think we might be making the murders of school children more appealing to the unstable population by the way we react. There is an immediate understandable emotional reaction followed quickly by polarized political reactions to the event before anyone understands much about what happened. The shooter's name and photo is prominently featured in national news coverage for several days. Everyone who is related to the shooter is interviewed. Friends are interviewed. They may see the event as a way of making themselves notoriously famous. For example, the would be shooter of Judge Kavanaugh told police he viewed the assassination as a way to give his life purpose.

In one of the articles I read about the last few school shootings, the shooter was known to be a student of the Columbine shooting with a fascination about those shooters and their methods. Perhaps we ironically increase the frequency of these types of events when politicians try to use them to pass or block legislation for political gain. Copy cats have several examples to follow now and a well established impact on society to pursue.

---

This JAMA article: "Presence of Armed School Officials and Fatal and Nonfatal Gunshot Injuries During Mass School Shootings, United States, 1980-2019" presents some interesting data about 133 school shootings in the US:

• Almost 1/4 had armed security present
• Only 16 shooters were 22 or older
• The mean fatalities when armed security was present was actually higher than overall (2.07 vs. 1.34)
• The number of cases involving an assault-style or semi-automatic rifle was low (14 compared to 92 for handguns) but the mean fatalities was much higher (5.36)

The article also notes: "Prior research suggests that many school shooters are actively suicidal, intending to die in the act, so an armed officer may be an incentive rather than a deterrent." (Citing Peterson J, Densley J. The Violence Project database of mass shootings in the United States. https://www.theviolenceproject.org)

---

Those are interesting stats, Manny. Without reading the link, I wonder how often the armed security presence stood around doing nothing for an hour like that chief in Uvalde. I assume that event counted as armed security present even though they were ineffective.

---

Seems like there are at least two relevant questions:

• To what degree does armed security interrupt or circumvent a shooting incident? (What failed to happen Uvalde.)
• To what degree does armed security act as a deterrent to a shooter. (In 23% of the cases in the JAMA study, it was not a deterrent.)

The first question is hard to answer without a more narrative descriptpion of each case.

---

So to your second point, does that mean it was a deterrent 77% of the time?

---

No. 23% of the time there was armed security present that was not a deterrent. 77% of the time there was no armed security present.

I am glad I have no idea who those guys are. The only way I know anything about something said on CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, PBS, FOX, or NBC is when someone on here posts it or it appears in an article on NR. I completely checked out of the mainstream press at the beginning of Obama's 2nd term. This may explain why HWSNBN bother(ed/s) you so much more than me. I didn't begin my subscription to National Review until the pandemic either; so, I was generally clueless about what the mainstreamers thought during the last administration. Based on your reactions alone, I am confident my decision reduced frustration in my life back then by at least an order of magnitude.

Manny Sanguine said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

why no other developed countries had the volume of school shootings as us?

---

I think we might be making the murders of school children more appealing to the unstable population by the way we react. There is an immediate understandable emotional reaction followed quickly by polarized political reactions to the event before anyone understands much about what happened. The shooter's name and photo is prominently featured in national news coverage for several days. Everyone who is related to the shooter is interviewed. Friends are interviewed. They may see the event as a way of making themselves notoriously famous. For example, the would be shooter of Judge Kavanaugh told police he viewed the assassination as a way to give his life purpose.

In one of the articles I read about the last few school shootings, the shooter was known to be a student of the Columbine shooting with a fascination about those shooters and their methods. Perhaps we ironically increase the frequency of these types of events when politicians try to use them to pass or block legislation for political gain. Copy cats have several examples to follow now and a well established impact on society to pursue.

---

This JAMA article: "Presence of Armed School Officials and Fatal and Nonfatal Gunshot Injuries During Mass School Shootings, United States, 1980-2019" presents some interesting data about 133 school shootings in the US:

• Almost 1/4 had armed security present
• Only 16 shooters were 22 or older
• The mean fatalities when armed security was present was actually higher than overall (2.07 vs. 1.34)
• The number of cases involving an assault-style or semi-automatic rifle was low (14 compared to 92 for handguns) but the mean fatalities was much higher (5.36)

The article also notes: "Prior research suggests that many school shooters are actively suicidal, intending to die in the act, so an armed officer may be an incentive rather than a deterrent." (Citing Peterson J, Densley J. The Violence Project database of mass shootings in the United States. https://www.theviolenceproject.org)

---

Those are interesting stats, Manny. Without reading the link, I wonder how often the armed security presence stood around doing nothing for an hour like that chief in Uvalde. I assume that event counted as armed security present even though they were ineffective.

---

Seems like there are at least two relevant questions:

• To what degree does armed security interrupt or circumvent a shooting incident? (What failed to happen Uvalde.)
• To what degree does armed security act as a deterrent to a shooter. (In 23% of the cases in the JAMA study, it was not a deterrent.)

The first question is hard to answer without a more narrative descriptpion of each case.

---

So to your second point, does that mean it was a deterrent 77% of the time?

---

No. 23% of the time there was armed security present that was not a deterrent. 77% of the time there was no armed security present.

---

So in 77% of the school shootings there was not an armed individual, staff/faculty/SRO, on campus?

23% of the time there was an armed individual. Out of those 23% how many of the shooters died by "suicide by cop?" Show your work.

Do you have the stats on shooters that looked at the states that have armed faculty, staff, SROs and changed their minds on entering and shooting up the school?

By your methodology, which we know is cherry picked and subjective given your penchant for regurgitating MSM/DNC talking points, if the 77% of schools that were victimized there is a better than 23% chance of the shooter never entering in the first place.

But, you do you. You have an agenda and talking points. Good for you.

PackFansXL said:

---

I am glad I have no idea who those guys are. The only way I know anything about something said on CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, PBS, FOX, or NBC is when someone on here posts it or it appears in an article on NR. I completely checked out of the mainstream press at the beginning of Obama's 2nd term. This may explain why HWSNBN bother(ed/s) you so much more than me. I didn't begin my subscription to National Review until the pandemic either; so, I was generally clueless about what the mainstreamers thought during the last administration. Based on your reactions alone, I am confident my decision reduced frustration in my life back then by at least an order of magnitude.

---

I stopped watching MSM news about 6 months into Trump's term... I got sick and tired of the first 15 minutes every night being about nothing but Trump this, Trump that, Trump, Trump, Trump!

Oh boy, we've really got him this time! Right?

Two impeachments later and now another pseudo-impeachment going on a year and a half after he left office...

And Joe Biden says "SQUIRREL!"

Good retort. This guy is an interesting dude.....probably 23-24........still at State.....groomed and indoctrinated like many of the rest. I think he'll have some reasons to disappear in a few months.

Just a little funnin'.

PackFansXL said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

why no other developed countries had the volume of school shootings as us?

---

I think we might be making the murders of school children more appealing to the unstable population by the way we react. There is an immediate understandable emotional reaction followed quickly by polarized political reactions to the event before anyone understands much about what happened. The shooter's name and photo is prominently featured in national news coverage for several days. Everyone who is related to the shooter is interviewed. Friends are interviewed. They may see the event as a way of making themselves notoriously famous. For example, the would be shooter of Judge Kavanaugh told police he viewed the assassination as a way to give his life purpose.

In one of the articles I read about the last few school shootings, the shooter was known to be a student of the Columbine shooting with a fascination about those shooters and their methods. Perhaps we ironically increase the frequency of these types of events when politicians try to use them to pass or block legislation for political gain. Copy cats have several examples to follow now and a well established impact on society to pursue.

---

Kinda disgusting, if true. Seems so unlikely to the rational mind, but then, you're referring to people who are detached and rationalizing like most people.
Or who are filled with hatred.

But I'm also not sure our reactions to any kind of major event are any different from most countries with a free press?

---

If your assertion that guns are uniquely an American issue is true, then the politicization of guns must also be uniquely prevalent here as well. We are also presently experiencing the most polarizing narrative driven press of my lifetime. Truly ugly times that are about to get even worse.

---

'Politicization' has basically lost its meaning at this point.

Politicians are our representatives in the legislative process and we hold them accountable electorally for their stances and decisions on important issues.

Issues that both lack consensus and are important are going to garner more attention electorally for obvious reasons.

Can we think of issues that are both important and lack consensus and that aren't described as politicized?

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Chem, lost in the post above is your question. Please post your question and I will try and respond.

---

Already know your answer -- you don't care about other countries (US #1), so the fact we have this unique issue doesn't matter.

---

Chem, funny... I thought you wanted to engage in a conversation. If you are going to perceive how I will respond, then, that's on you. You might be right; however, I may be more willing to listen than you might think.

That doesn't mean I will agree; rather, I will listen. To create a dialogue, one must listen. I'm listening...

---

Sorry, I can see why that came across more harshly than intended. I thought I'd added a smiley face emoji to the top, but it doesn't appear to have come thru....it was a take on your comment yesterday when I asked why no other developed countries had the volume of school shootings as us, and you said you didn't care about any others, because it was all about the USA for you. You told me to repost my question and you'd answer....but it was the same exact question, so I was trying to save you the need to respond again.

---

To answer your question…. I really don't know. To add more context, I'm not sure we should care. I do think school shootings appear to be out of control, so, I want to focus on things here.

Well and if the shooter is really looking for a way out, why would a gun ban, magazine ban, waiting period, red flag law deter them anyway?

Werewolf said:

---

Good retort. This guy is an interesting dude.....probably 23-24........still at State.....groomed and indoctrinated like many of the rest. I think he'll have some reasons to disappear in a few months.

Just a little funnin'.

---

HA! I wish I was 23-24. My kids are older than that. Also not still at NC State. Graduated almost 40 years ago. Been posting on these boards all the way back to WolfChat, and just about everything since, but changed user names a few months ago.

Maybe don't quit your job to be an FBI profiler.

Manny Sanguine said:

---

Werewolf said:

---

Good retort. This guy is an interesting dude.....probably 23-24........still at State.....groomed and indoctrinated like many of the rest. I think he'll have some reasons to disappear in a few months.

Just a little funnin'.

---

HA! I wish I was 23-24. My kids are older than that. Also not still at NC State. Graduated almost 40 years ago. Been posting on these boards all the way back to WolfChat, and just about everything since, but changed user names a few months ago.

Maybe don't quit your job to be an FBI profiler.

---

So was I... I also was on the old ACC Boards.... Statefans.com... PP until the regime change occurred... And I'm sure you know that.

If you can appreciate this link... I will give you props...

https://brentroad.com/

What was your handle if you don't mind sharing... Mine is on display.

BBW12OG said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

why no other developed countries had the volume of school shootings as us?

---

I think we might be making the murders of school children more appealing to the unstable population by the way we react. There is an immediate understandable emotional reaction followed quickly by polarized political reactions to the event before anyone understands much about what happened. The shooter's name and photo is prominently featured in national news coverage for several days. Everyone who is related to the shooter is interviewed. Friends are interviewed. They may see the event as a way of making themselves notoriously famous. For example, the would be shooter of Judge Kavanaugh told police he viewed the assassination as a way to give his life purpose.

In one of the articles I read about the last few school shootings, the shooter was known to be a student of the Columbine shooting with a fascination about those shooters and their methods. Perhaps we ironically increase the frequency of these types of events when politicians try to use them to pass or block legislation for political gain. Copy cats have several examples to follow now and a well established impact on society to pursue.

---

This JAMA article: "Presence of Armed School Officials and Fatal and Nonfatal Gunshot Injuries During Mass School Shootings, United States, 1980-2019" presents some interesting data about 133 school shootings in the US:

• Almost 1/4 had armed security present
• Only 16 shooters were 22 or older
• The mean fatalities when armed security was present was actually higher than overall (2.07 vs. 1.34)
• The number of cases involving an assault-style or semi-automatic rifle was low (14 compared to 92 for handguns) but the mean fatalities was much higher (5.36)

The article also notes: "Prior research suggests that many school shooters are actively suicidal, intending to die in the act, so an armed officer may be an incentive rather than a deterrent." (Citing Peterson J, Densley J. The Violence Project database of mass shootings in the United States. https://www.theviolenceproject.org)

---

Those are interesting stats, Manny. Without reading the link, I wonder how often the armed security presence stood around doing nothing for an hour like that chief in Uvalde. I assume that event counted as armed security present even though they were ineffective.

---

Seems like there are at least two relevant questions:

• To what degree does armed security interrupt or circumvent a shooting incident? (What failed to happen Uvalde.)
• To what degree does armed security act as a deterrent to a shooter. (In 23% of the cases in the JAMA study, it was not a deterrent.)

The first question is hard to answer without a more narrative descriptpion of each case.

---

So to your second point, does that mean it was a deterrent 77% of the time?

---

No. 23% of the time there was armed security present that was not a deterrent. 77% of the time there was no armed security present.

---

So in 77% of the school shootings there was not an armed individual, staff/faculty/SRO, on campus?

23% of the time there was an armed individual. Out of those 23% how many of the shooters died by "suicide by cop?" Show your work.

Do you have the stats on shooters that looked at the states that have armed faculty, staff, SROs and changed their minds on entering and shooting up the school?

By your methodology, which we know is cherry picked and subjective given your penchant for regurgitating MSM/DNC talking points, if the 77% of schools that were victimized there is a better than 23% chance of the shooter never entering in the first place.

But, you do you. You have an agenda and talking points. Good for you.

---

I looked for a study of US school shootings, particularly looking at the presence of armed security. This appears to be comprehensive and comes from a non-political source. (Hint: the "M" in "JAMA" isn't for MARXIST.)

If you believe that the analysis in this study somehow cherrypicks the data then point to data that is more comprehensive. If there is a study that you believe contradicts the conclusions of this study then point to it. If the analysis and conclusions of this study are so obviously wrong then it should be easy to find something to contract it.

This study does not break down the fate of the shooter as to: survived, death by suicide, killed by armed security, or kiiled by others. I would be interested in that breakdown, though.

Obviously there is no data for things that didn't happen.

Civilized said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

why no other developed countries had the volume of school shootings as us?

---

I think we might be making the murders of school children more appealing to the unstable population by the way we react. There is an immediate understandable emotional reaction followed quickly by polarized political reactions to the event before anyone understands much about what happened. The shooter's name and photo is prominently featured in national news coverage for several days. Everyone who is related to the shooter is interviewed. Friends are interviewed. They may see the event as a way of making themselves notoriously famous. For example, the would be shooter of Judge Kavanaugh told police he viewed the assassination as a way to give his life purpose.

In one of the articles I read about the last few school shootings, the shooter was known to be a student of the Columbine shooting with a fascination about those shooters and their methods. Perhaps we ironically increase the frequency of these types of events when politicians try to use them to pass or block legislation for political gain. Copy cats have several examples to follow now and a well established impact on society to pursue.

---

Kinda disgusting, if true. Seems so unlikely to the rational mind, but then, you're referring to people who are detached and rationalizing like most people.
Or who are filled with hatred.

But I'm also not sure our reactions to any kind of major event are any different from most countries with a free press?

---

If your assertion that guns are uniquely an American issue is true, then the politicization of guns must also be uniquely prevalent here as well. We are also presently experiencing the most polarizing narrative driven press of my lifetime. Truly ugly times that are about to get even worse.

---

'Politicization' has basically lost its meaning at this point.

Politicians are our representatives in the legislative process and we hold them accountable electorally for their stances and decisions on important issues.

Issues that both lack consensus and are important are going to garner more attention electorally for obvious reasons.

Can we think of issues that are both important and lack consensus and that aren't described as politicized?

---

Civ, my point remains that the unstable are frequently looking for a major score for their final act. The fact that guns have become such a prominent political item means politicians will respond in automatic fashion to provide the glorification sought by the sick individual who is copying other sick individuals. An argument can be made that the hyper focus on gun control raises the profile of shooters who use guns to cause destruction of innocent lives. At some point, the emphasis should just be on a generic shooting that cost lives without mention of the name of the perpetrator or the method they used to cause damage. IMHO, that would be a step in the right direction. Perhaps it would reduce the thoughts from sick folks that their lives could be made more meaningful by killing others.

Most politicians are working hard to get re-elected. Those who are from heavily gerrymandered districts don't need to worry about re-election. They can do almost anything they please and say almost anything without repercussions. I believe these folks are the least likely to govern in ways that help the country. See Pelosi, AOC, etc.

Manny Sanguine said:

---

BBW12OG said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

why no other developed countries had the volume of school shootings as us?

---

I think we might be making the murders of school children more appealing to the unstable population by the way we react. There is an immediate understandable emotional reaction followed quickly by polarized political reactions to the event before anyone understands much about what happened. The shooter's name and photo is prominently featured in national news coverage for several days. Everyone who is related to the shooter is interviewed. Friends are interviewed. They may see the event as a way of making themselves notoriously famous. For example, the would be shooter of Judge Kavanaugh told police he viewed the assassination as a way to give his life purpose.

In one of the articles I read about the last few school shootings, the shooter was known to be a student of the Columbine shooting with a fascination about those shooters and their methods. Perhaps we ironically increase the frequency of these types of events when politicians try to use them to pass or block legislation for political gain. Copy cats have several examples to follow now and a well established impact on society to pursue.

---

This JAMA article: "Presence of Armed School Officials and Fatal and Nonfatal Gunshot Injuries During Mass School Shootings, United States, 1980-2019" presents some interesting data about 133 school shootings in the US:

• Almost 1/4 had armed security present
• Only 16 shooters were 22 or older
• The mean fatalities when armed security was present was actually higher than overall (2.07 vs. 1.34)
• The number of cases involving an assault-style or semi-automatic rifle was low (14 compared to 92 for handguns) but the mean fatalities was much higher (5.36)

The article also notes: "Prior research suggests that many school shooters are actively suicidal, intending to die in the act, so an armed officer may be an incentive rather than a deterrent." (Citing Peterson J, Densley J. The Violence Project database of mass shootings in the United States. https://www.theviolenceproject.org)

---

Those are interesting stats, Manny. Without reading the link, I wonder how often the armed security presence stood around doing nothing for an hour like that chief in Uvalde. I assume that event counted as armed security present even though they were ineffective.

---

Seems like there are at least two relevant questions:

• To what degree does armed security interrupt or circumvent a shooting incident? (What failed to happen Uvalde.)
• To what degree does armed security act as a deterrent to a shooter. (In 23% of the cases in the JAMA study, it was not a deterrent.)

The first question is hard to answer without a more narrative descriptpion of each case.

---

So to your second point, does that mean it was a deterrent 77% of the time?

---

No. 23% of the time there was armed security present that was not a deterrent. 77% of the time there was no armed security present.

---

So in 77% of the school shootings there was not an armed individual, staff/faculty/SRO, on campus?

23% of the time there was an armed individual. Out of those 23% how many of the shooters died by "suicide by cop?" Show your work.

Do you have the stats on shooters that looked at the states that have armed faculty, staff, SROs and changed their minds on entering and shooting up the school?

By your methodology, which we know is cherry picked and subjective given your penchant for regurgitating MSM/DNC talking points, if the 77% of schools that were victimized there is a better than 23% chance of the shooter never entering in the first place.

But, you do you. You have an agenda and talking points. Good for you.

---

I looked for a study of US school shootings, particularly looking at the presence of armed security. This appears to be comprehensive and comes from a non-political source. (Hint: the "M" in "JAMA" isn't for MARXIST.)

If you believe that the analysis in this study somehow cherrypicks the data then point to data that is more comprehensive. If there is a study that you believe contradicts the conclusions of this study then point to it. If the analysis and conclusions of this study are so obviously wrong then it should be easy to find something to contract it.

This study does not break down the fate of the shooter as to: survived, death by suicide, killed by armed security, or kiiled by others. I would be interested in that breakdown, though.

Obviously there is no data for things that didn't happen.

---

Thank You. I appreciate your response.

Especially the last sentence.

• There's no data to support the hyperbole that if you ban AR-15's the number of school shootings will go down.
• There's no data to support the hyperbole that if you ban guns the number of school shootings will go down.
• There's no data to support the hyperbole that if you arm faculty/staff in schools the number of accidental gun related incidents on campus will increase.

You see where I am going with this?

There are over 300 million LEGALLY owned guns in the United States. There are billions of legally owned rounds of ammunition in the United States. If law abiding citizens who own these guns wanted to do something to overthrow the government, cause chaos, initiate a coup... do you honestly not think it wouldn't have already happened?

We can play these games all night and you won't like the final result.

The left operates on "what ifs," "hyperbole," "fear mongering," in order to scare an uneducated on the subject base. Largely of whom have never seen a firearm in person. i.e. the Coastal Elites, city dwellers, soccer moms and the urban city dwellers.

In the real world, main stream America, we tend to dwell in facts and real life experiences.

And linking a ultra-liberal activist website is par for the course with arguments coming from the left.

Dr. Jillian Peterson and Dr. James Densley.... Really??? Unbiased??? LOL...

https://www.hamline.edu/faculty-staff/jillian-peterson/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Densley

Damn dude.... just damn....

PackFansXL said:

---

Civilized said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

why no other developed countries had the volume of school shootings as us?

---

I think we might be making the murders of school children more appealing to the unstable population by the way we react. There is an immediate understandable emotional reaction followed quickly by polarized political reactions to the event before anyone understands much about what happened. The shooter's name and photo is prominently featured in national news coverage for several days. Everyone who is related to the shooter is interviewed. Friends are interviewed. They may see the event as a way of making themselves notoriously famous. For example, the would be shooter of Judge Kavanaugh told police he viewed the assassination as a way to give his life purpose.

In one of the articles I read about the last few school shootings, the shooter was known to be a student of the Columbine shooting with a fascination about those shooters and their methods. Perhaps we ironically increase the frequency of these types of events when politicians try to use them to pass or block legislation for political gain. Copy cats have several examples to follow now and a well established impact on society to pursue.

---

Kinda disgusting, if true. Seems so unlikely to the rational mind, but then, you're referring to people who are detached and rationalizing like most people.
Or who are filled with hatred.

But I'm also not sure our reactions to any kind of major event are any different from most countries with a free press?

---

If your assertion that guns are uniquely an American issue is true, then the politicization of guns must also be uniquely prevalent here as well. We are also presently experiencing the most polarizing narrative driven press of my lifetime. Truly ugly times that are about to get even worse.

---

'Politicization' has basically lost its meaning at this point.

Politicians are our representatives in the legislative process and we hold them accountable electorally for their stances and decisions on important issues.

Issues that both lack consensus and are important are going to garner more attention electorally for obvious reasons.

Can we think of issues that are both important and lack consensus and that aren't described as politicized?

---

Civ, my point remains that the unstable are frequently looking for a major score for their final act. The fact that guns have become such a prominent political item means politicians will respond in automatic fashion to provide the glorification sought by the sick individual who is copying other sick individuals. An argument can be made that the hyper focus on gun control raises the profile of shooters who use guns to cause destruction of innocent lives. At some point, the emphasis should just be on a generic shooting that cost lives without mention of the name of the perpetrator or the method they used to cause damage. IMHO, that would be a step in the right direction. Perhaps it would reduce the thoughts from sick folks that their lives could be made more meaningful by killing others.

Most politicians are working hard to get re-elected. Those who are from heavily gerrymandered districts don't need to worry about re-election. They can do almost anything they please and say almost anything without repercussions. I believe these folks are the least likely to govern in ways that help the country. See Pelosi, AOC, etc.

---

I agree with everything you say here.

Relatedly I've read over the last few years that media outlets now do attempt to curtail mentions of the shooter's name and other details that may lead to unintentional glorification or imitation.

Here's an article describing that practice by media dating back to at least 2012:

https://theconversation.com/amp/news-media-heeding-call-to-limit-naming-perpetrators-in-mass-shootings-175604

Manny Sanguine said:

---

Werewolf said:

---

Good retort. This guy is an interesting dude.....probably 23-24........still at State.....groomed and indoctrinated like many of the rest. I think he'll have some reasons to disappear in a few months.

Just a little funnin'.

---

HA! I wish I was 23-24. My kids are older than that. Also not still at NC State. Graduated almost 40 years ago. Been posting on these boards all the way back to WolfChat, and just about everything since, but changed user names a few months ago.

Maybe don't quit your job to be an FBI profiler.

---

LOL, good one

Probably a Liberal Arts PhD there....one of the crowd?

Crushed it....

A "sit behind the desk" PhD....

Thanks for the article on notoriety of the shooter. I will say that in the case of the Uvalde shooter, I saw his name in almost every article I read and I saw his picture several times. I read interviews with his grandmother, friends, mother, etc. For some reason, this story didn't match the pattern mentioned in the article.

There are other aspects of the Uvalde shooting that I would like to learn more about. Where did this kid get the money to buy 2 rifles and at least one hand gun? What the heck was the chief doing calling off his men and ignoring pleas for help from within the classroom? Why did the chief come to the school without his radio? There are other questions I won't place here because this whole story just seems off to me.

Manny Sanguine said:

---

Werewolf said:

---

Good retort. This guy is an interesting dude.....probably 23-24........still at State.....groomed and indoctrinated like many of the rest. I think he'll have some reasons to disappear in a few months.

Just a little funnin'.

---

HA! I wish I was 23-24. My kids are older than that. Also not still at NC State. Graduated almost 40 years ago. Been posting on these boards all the way back to WolfChat, and just about everything since, but changed user names a few months ago.

Maybe don't quit your job to be an FBI profiler.

---

Oh man, I remember wolf chat

Civilized said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

why no other developed countries had the volume of school shootings as us?

---

I think we might be making the murders of school children more appealing to the unstable population by the way we react. There is an immediate understandable emotional reaction followed quickly by polarized political reactions to the event before anyone understands much about what happened. The shooter's name and photo is prominently featured in national news coverage for several days. Everyone who is related to the shooter is interviewed. Friends are interviewed. They may see the event as a way of making themselves notoriously famous. For example, the would be shooter of Judge Kavanaugh told police he viewed the assassination as a way to give his life purpose.

In one of the articles I read about the last few school shootings, the shooter was known to be a student of the Columbine shooting with a fascination about those shooters and their methods. Perhaps we ironically increase the frequency of these types of events when politicians try to use them to pass or block legislation for political gain. Copy cats have several examples to follow now and a well established impact on society to pursue.

---

Kinda disgusting, if true. Seems so unlikely to the rational mind, but then, you're referring to people who are detached and rationalizing like most people.
Or who are filled with hatred.

But I'm also not sure our reactions to any kind of major event are any different from most countries with a free press?

---

If your assertion that guns are uniquely an American issue is true, then the politicization of guns must also be uniquely prevalent here as well. We are also presently experiencing the most polarizing narrative driven press of my lifetime. Truly ugly times that are about to get even worse.

---

'Politicization' has basically lost its meaning at this point.

Politicians are our representatives in the legislative process and we hold them accountable electorally for their stances and decisions on important issues.

Issues that both lack consensus and are important are going to garner more attention electorally for obvious reasons.

Can we think of issues that are both important and lack consensus and that aren't described as politicized?

---

Civ, I agree with you 100%

BBW12OG said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

BBW12OG said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

why no other developed countries had the volume of school shootings as us?

---

I think we might be making the murders of school children more appealing to the unstable population by the way we react. There is an immediate understandable emotional reaction followed quickly by polarized political reactions to the event before anyone understands much about what happened. The shooter's name and photo is prominently featured in national news coverage for several days. Everyone who is related to the shooter is interviewed. Friends are interviewed. They may see the event as a way of making themselves notoriously famous. For example, the would be shooter of Judge Kavanaugh told police he viewed the assassination as a way to give his life purpose.

In one of the articles I read about the last few school shootings, the shooter was known to be a student of the Columbine shooting with a fascination about those shooters and their methods. Perhaps we ironically increase the frequency of these types of events when politicians try to use them to pass or block legislation for political gain. Copy cats have several examples to follow now and a well established impact on society to pursue.

---

This JAMA article: "Presence of Armed School Officials and Fatal and Nonfatal Gunshot Injuries During Mass School Shootings, United States, 1980-2019" presents some interesting data about 133 school shootings in the US:

• Almost 1/4 had armed security present
• Only 16 shooters were 22 or older
• The mean fatalities when armed security was present was actually higher than overall (2.07 vs. 1.34)
• The number of cases involving an assault-style or semi-automatic rifle was low (14 compared to 92 for handguns) but the mean fatalities was much higher (5.36)

The article also notes: "Prior research suggests that many school shooters are actively suicidal, intending to die in the act, so an armed officer may be an incentive rather than a deterrent." (Citing Peterson J, Densley J. The Violence Project database of mass shootings in the United States. https://www.theviolenceproject.org)

---

Those are interesting stats, Manny. Without reading the link, I wonder how often the armed security presence stood around doing nothing for an hour like that chief in Uvalde. I assume that event counted as armed security present even though they were ineffective.

---

Seems like there are at least two relevant questions:

• To what degree does armed security interrupt or circumvent a shooting incident? (What failed to happen Uvalde.)
• To what degree does armed security act as a deterrent to a shooter. (In 23% of the cases in the JAMA study, it was not a deterrent.)

The first question is hard to answer without a more narrative descriptpion of each case.

---

So to your second point, does that mean it was a deterrent 77% of the time?

---

No. 23% of the time there was armed security present that was not a deterrent. 77% of the time there was no armed security present.

---

So in 77% of the school shootings there was not an armed individual, staff/faculty/SRO, on campus?

23% of the time there was an armed individual. Out of those 23% how many of the shooters died by "suicide by cop?" Show your work.

Do you have the stats on shooters that looked at the states that have armed faculty, staff, SROs and changed their minds on entering and shooting up the school?

By your methodology, which we know is cherry picked and subjective given your penchant for regurgitating MSM/DNC talking points, if the 77% of schools that were victimized there is a better than 23% chance of the shooter never entering in the first place.

But, you do you. You have an agenda and talking points. Good for you.

---

I looked for a study of US school shootings, particularly looking at the presence of armed security. This appears to be comprehensive and comes from a non-political source. (Hint: the "M" in "JAMA" isn't for MARXIST.)

If you believe that the analysis in this study somehow cherrypicks the data then point to data that is more comprehensive. If there is a study that you believe contradicts the conclusions of this study then point to it. If the analysis and conclusions of this study are so obviously wrong then it should be easy to find something to contract it.

This study does not break down the fate of the shooter as to: survived, death by suicide, killed by armed security, or kiiled by others. I would be interested in that breakdown, though.

Obviously there is no data for things that didn't happen.

---

Thank You. I appreciate your response.

Especially the last sentence.

• There's no data to support the hyperbole that if you ban AR-15's the number of school shootings will go down.
• There's no data to support the hyperbole that if you ban guns the number of school shootings will go down.
• There's no data to support the hyperbole that if you arm faculty/staff in schools the number of accidental gun related incidents on campus will increase.

You see where I am going with this?

There are over 300 million LEGALLY owned guns in the United States. There are billions of legally owned rounds of ammunition in the United States. If law abiding citizens who own these guns wanted to do something to overthrow the government, cause chaos, initiate a coup... do you honestly not think it wouldn't have already happened?

We can play these games all night and you won't like the final result.

The left operates on "what ifs," "hyperbole," "fear mongering," in order to scare an uneducated on the subject base. Largely of whom have never seen a firearm in person. i.e. the Coastal Elites, city dwellers, soccer moms and the urban city dwellers.

In the real world, main stream America, we tend to dwell in facts and real life experiences.

And linking a ultra-liberal activist website is par for the course with arguments coming from the left.

Dr. Jillian Peterson and Dr. James Densley.... Really??? Unbiased??? LOL...

https://www.hamline.edu/faculty-staff/jillian-peterson/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Densley

Damn dude.... just damn....

---

• At the very least, the data from the study I linked indicates that even if school shooters were merely diverted to weapons other than assault-style and semi-automatic rifles, the lethality of the assaults would be decreased.
• Assuming you use the phrase "ban guns" to mean what it says (I.e., total ban on private ownership of guns - which isn't something I would favor, by the way), I think it is self-obvious that if there are no privately-owned guns then the number of shootings in all contexts would decrease. (Just as if there was a ban on ice cream then the number of ice cream cone sales would go down.)
• I think even you would agree that the rate of accidental firearm discharges - even among trained/licensed operators - is non-zero. It stands to reason, then, that if the number of firearm possessions in schools increase then there is an increased probability of accidental discharges as well. However, I haven't looked for studies about that and haven't argued that such a result is a fact.

Again, if you have studies or data sources showing that the analysis in the study I linked is incorrect or incomplete, then please post. I would be sincerely interested in learning more.

Side note: Not sure when or how the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) came to be viewed by some as an "ultra-liberal activist website."

Werewolf said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

Werewolf said:

---

Good retort. This guy is an interesting dude.....probably 23-24........still at State.....groomed and indoctrinated like many of the rest. I think he'll have some reasons to disappear in a few months.

Just a little funnin'.

---

HA! I wish I was 23-24. My kids are older than that. Also not still at NC State. Graduated almost 40 years ago. Been posting on these boards all the way back to WolfChat, and just about everything since, but changed user names a few months ago.

Maybe don't quit your job to be an FBI profiler.

---

LOL, good one

Probably a Liberal Arts PhD there....one of the crowd?

---

Nope. Not close.

Seriously, you're not good at this.

Why don't you make murder a crime? When you solve that one get back to me.

And... the cities that have mass shootings on a weekly basis have the strictest gun laws in America. How is that working out for them?

Please tell law abiding citizens that don't "shoot up the place" on a weekly basis they should surrender their 2nd Amendment Rights so the criminals, hooligans and thugs can continue to victimize communities.

In your "utopia" who is allowed to own firearms? Do you know what a semi-automatic firearm is? Serious question.

Manny Sanguine said:

---

Werewolf said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

Werewolf said:

---

Good retort. This guy is an interesting dude.....probably 23-24........still at State.....groomed and indoctrinated like many of the rest. I think he'll have some reasons to disappear in a few months.

Just a little funnin'.

---

HA! I wish I was 23-24. My kids are older than that. Also not still at NC State. Graduated almost 40 years ago. Been posting on these boards all the way back to WolfChat, and just about everything since, but changed user names a few months ago.

Maybe don't quit your job to be an FBI profiler.

---

LOL, good one

Probably a Liberal Arts PhD there....one of the crowd?

---

Nope. Not close.

Seriously, you're not good at this.

---

That was pretty clear to me a long time ago. Listen... if you want some real entertainment, just keep doing what you're doing.

You've got the right one picked out now.

WHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Come on Manny.... step right in. You can't be first...but you can be next.

BBW12OG said:

---

WHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Come on Manny.... step right in. You can't be first...but you can be next.

---

Damn it, BBW... I didn't mean you!

*Glass, you can cue up the Chester and Spike video again if it makes you feel better...

He's busy justifying Sleepy Joe and the loony left's agenda. You know as a "independent" Ol' Glass has so many stories to keep up with he often forgets what he said 3 minutes ago!!!

LOL...

Just don't change screen names........and don't go anywhere. ;-)

Werewolf said:

---

Just don't change screen names........and don't go anywhere. ;-)

---

Not changing and not going anywhere. Unless I'm "excused" again...... LOL...

NY Times propagandist admits the real agenda of the Left is to drastically curtail firearm rights:

https://archive.ph/c1yhL

Quote:

---

I understand that Republicans are the opposition, that they have come to accept staggering levels of death as the price they must pay to advance their political agenda on everything from Covid to guns.

But I am on the same page as they are on one point. They see the passage of gun safety laws as a slippery slope that could lead to more sweeping laws and even, one day, national gun registries, insurance requirements and bans. I see the same and I actively hope for it.

---

Lie #1...that there are "staggering" levels of death. Completely false. The truth is that the U.S. has a relatively low homicide rate compared to the rest of the world.

He is reacting emotionally, to 24/7 wall-to-wall coverage by the communist Lamestream media of these staged shootings and psyops. When the communist TV media is talking about it 24/7, you are tricked into thinking it is a "crisis", when in fact it is NOT. Not at all.

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Lie #1...that there are "staggering" levels of death. Completely false. The truth is that the U.S. has a relatively low homicide rate compared to the rest of the world.

He is reacting emotionally, to 24/7 wall-to-wall coverage by the communist Lamestream media of these staged shootings and psyops. When the communist TV media is talking about it 24/7, you are tricked into thinking it is a "crisis", when in fact it is NOT. Not at all.

---

Compared to under developed / 3rd world countries, totally.

Compared to peer developed countries, we outpace most by 2x the homicide rate at a minimum. I just looked at the data on here and amongst peer countries we actually average 6x the homicide rate.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/murder-rate-by-country