Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

mcmoustache

Pepefrogok wrote: »

The cop who stood down while kids were being killed is a coward and should feel shame.

How would you fancy your chances if you were armed with a pistol and had to take on someone with an AR15?

Sorry Pepé but you don't seem to know anything about weapons. It sounds like you heard your God emperor say something and just ran with it. It's not the best way to make points because copying a self confessed retard* can come across a bit less than well rounded and articulate.

I'd like to think that you learned some things about firearms from computer games and thought that the same rules applied in real life but you haven't even learned about gaming fire arms.

You have a lot to learn.

*

"When I look at myself in the first grade and I look at myself now, I’m basically the same. The temperament is not that different,”

mcmoustache

Pepefrogok wrote: »

I haven't any experience confronting heavily armed school shooters, and I probably never will because I have not signed up to a job in law enforcement and swore an oath to protect the public, same as not being a fan of entering burning buildings stops we from joining the fire brigade. Are things really so polarised now that people will be offended by people calling a cop who failed to do the job he is paid to do and resulted in a load of kids dead a coward? With his training and weapon his chances of taking out the bad guy were high, sure there was a chance he would get killed but all cops face that threat, put it this way if he said he would react this way at the interview he wouldn't have got the job.

Are you taking the piss? How old are you? Your points are at about a US first grader's level.

Pepefrogok

mcmoustache wrote: »

How would you fancy your chances if you were armed with a pistol and had to take on someone with an AR15?

Sorry Pepé but you don't seem to know anything about weapons. It sounds like you heard your God emperor say something and just ran with it. It's not the best way to make points because copying a self confessed retard* can come across a bit less than well rounded and articulate.

I'd like to think that you learned some things about firearms from computer games and thought that the same rules applied in real life but you haven't even learned about gaming fire arms.

You have a lot to learn.

*

In what situation, an open field? Or in a school? Sure id rather have a shotgun in close combat but even a 9mm has massive stopping power, in certain close combat conditions a person will swap their main rifle to side arm as it suits better, getting shot by a 45 or an AR won't make a difference, but if I had to bet on a trained cop playing cat to a untrained teens mouse, with the teen constantly giving away his position with live fire with an AR my money would be on the cop, anyway I would suspect most cops would agree he was a coward but I'll leave yous to it, this is not really a thread for opinions other than "how terrible is trump!" Is it?

mcmoustache

Overheal wrote: »

And yet in most of these states they've had a school shooting incident in the last 10 years. Texas, in particular, with its don't mess with us gun loving culture, shows up on that list *disproportionately*

That's because having weapons is one thing - shooting first is another. If some kid with 30 rounds in an automatic weapon, hell he could have a Derringer, loaded and ready to fire while a teacher has their glock or whatever in a drawer, who do you think has the best odds? It surprises me that even gun owners could think that an armed teacher could fix this problem.

mcmoustache

Pepefrogok wrote: »

In what situation, an open field? Or in a school? Sure id rather have a shotgun in close combat but even a 9mm has massive stopping power, in certain close combat conditions a person will swap their main rifle to side arm as it suits better, getting shot by a 45 or an AR won't make a difference, but if I had to bet on a trained cop playing cat to a untrained teens mouse, with the teen constantly giving away his position with live fire with an AR my money would be on the cop, anyway I would suspect most cops would agree he was a coward but I'll leave yous to it, this is not really a thread for opinions other than "how terrible is trump!" Is it?

Because unless you have your shotgun pointed at the door the entire time, every day, you aren't going to win against an armed kid coming in the door with a weapon pointed at you. If you think that you could take on a gunman armed with an automatic weapon while you have a pistol, I'd recommend playing Call of Duty or something. At least then you would achieve Call of Duty levels of firearms education - which is a lot better than what you have now.

Overheal

mcmoustache wrote: »

That's because having weapons is one thing - shooting first is another. If some kid with 30 rounds in an automatic weapon, hell he could have a Derringer, loaded and ready to fire while a teacher has their glock or whatever in a drawer, who do you think has the best odds? It surprises me that even gun owners could think that an armed teacher could fix this problem.

Exactly. A shooter with violent intention will always have the advantage of initiative.

everlast75

B0jangles wrote: »

I hope that poor man is getting some decent emotional support because I can't imagine how damaging it would be to be so mercilessly shamed in the aftermath of such a terrible event.

I mean, he's almost certainly already eaten up by guilt; being publically called a coward by the President of the United States (even if that president is Trump), is extremely cruel and dangerous.

I've an awful feeling he will top himself. I truly hope I'm wrong

Water John

One would be worried for him.

Trump says, if a teacher had a gun, he'd have shot the hell out of the shooter. FFS.

oscarBravo

Pepefrogok wrote: »

Sure id rather have a shotgun in close combat but even a 9mm has massive stopping power, in certain close combat conditions a person will swap their main rifle to side arm as it suits better, getting shot by a 45 or an AR won't make a difference, but if I had to bet on a trained cop playing cat to a untrained teens mouse, with the teen constantly giving away his position with live fire with an AR my money would be on the cop...

Based on your extensive experience with using an assortment of firearms in various live-fire situations?

...anyway I would suspect most cops would agree he was a coward...

Based on your extensive conversations with law enforcement officers?

Because I have family members and friends in law enforcement, and I can count on the fingers of zero hands the number of them who are mindlessly parroting talking points from the f*cking-moron-in-chief.

...but I'll leave yous to it, this is not really a thread for opinions other than "how terrible is trump!" Is it?

Well, Trump is objectively terrible. I guess it's hard to tell how terrible he is when you have a strange compulsion to mindlessly parrot even the stupidest things he says, but he is a truly terrible person by almost any useful metric.

Water John wrote: »

Trump says, if a teacher had a gun, he'd have shot the hell out of the shooter. FFS.

In the immortal words of my late father-in-law, what do you expect from a pig but a grunt? Any sentence that starts "Trump says..." can almost axiomatically be finished "...something ball-achingly stupid."

Ash.J.Williams

Calling that gaurd a coward is a dispicable thing for a president to say...

However the guy reviewing the 20min old camera footage directing cops to where the shooter was 20mins ago needs a more suitable job

CelticRambler

Pepefrogok wrote: »

but if I had to bet on a trained cop playing cat to a untrained teens mouse, with the teen constantly giving away his position with live fire with an AR my money would be on the cop

Grand, bet away. Just remember, though, that the cops are still 6 minutes away, so you're not betting on a trained cop versus an untrained teens mouse. You're betting on a trained teen who thinks he's invincible versus a surprised and untrained teacher who may or may not have her gun to hand and has to decide whether taking one shot at the shooter is likely to hit or miss, and if it misses (the most likely outcome, based on the hit-to-miss ratio of law-enforcement officers under real-life conditions) whether that'll draw attention not only to herself but also all the children in her class. :mad:

This whole "arm the teachers" proposal is full of holes on every level ... not least the fact that there have been more mass shootings in the US on military bases than there have been in schools. Maybe it's time to arm the military? Oh, hang on a sec ... :rolleyes:

I may have misheard a CNN report earlier today, but I think they said that when the police arrived, they found four deputies waiting outside.

However, I definitely didn't mishear Trump saying that teachers will be better able to kill because they love their students more than some retired soldier/police officer who's just putting in the hours. WTF???

oscarBravo

Trevor Noah showed a clip in last night's show in which it was mentioned that, during a simulation designed to train teachers to shoot back in response to a school shooting, a teacher shot a "student".

Asked if that made him change his mind about the idea, the interviewee said it didn't - that the teacher killing one innocent student might save 30 more.

Like I keep saying: you can't have a rational conversation with that.

edit:

From 2:30. "Good lord - America just went from 'no child left behind' to 'sometimes little Timmy gotta get got!'"

PropJoe10

Even by his own non-existent standards, Trump has said some truly remarkable things today. Hard to imagine how someone that stupid can hold the office of POTUS.

aloyisious

Pepefrogok wrote: »

In what situation, an open field? Or in a school? Sure id rather have a shotgun in close combat but even a 9mm has massive stopping power, in certain close combat conditions a person will swap their main rifle to side arm as it suits better, getting shot by a 45 or an AR won't make a difference, but if I had to bet on a trained cop playing cat to a untrained teens mouse, with the teen constantly giving away his position with live fire with an AR my money would be on the cop, anyway I would suspect most cops would agree he was a coward but I'll leave yous to it, this is not really a thread for opinions other than "how terrible is trump!" Is it?

Breaking my word on commentating, the only way for the 9mm to win for certain is to have the drop on the O/P or be behind him and shoot him there and then. Even then, a slight hesitation can be fatal for the 9MM. Nothing is certain in combat or live-fire. As for the cop, I don't know what his standing orders or ground rules are so won't pass comment on his moves. I'd prefer my BAP over a shotgun indoors any day as it's target specific.

Professor Moriarty

aloyisious wrote: »

Breaking my word on commentating, the only way for the 9mm to win for certain is to have the drop on the O/P or be behind him and shoot him there and then. Even then, a slight hesitation can be fatal for the 9MM. Nothing is certain in combat or live-fire. As for the cop, I don't know what his standing orders or ground rules are so won't pass comment on his moves. I'd prefer my BAP over a shotgun indoors any day as it's target specific.

Don't lower yourself to that level. Don't give malice any oxygen.

aloyisious

There's more reported revelations on the circumstances of the school shooting on CNN. Along with the Broward County Sheriffs Dept school security officer allegedly remaining for four [4] minutes outside while the killer went on with his six [6] minute shooting spree, there were now reportedly three [3] other Broward County Sheriffs Dept officers present who remained by their cars outside the building around the same time. It seem's from the drip-drip flow of info that officers from another police dept were actually the first to enter the building in pursuit of the shooter.

A possible broo-haha may follow in any Police Response Op PM as it's also being reported on CNN that [sic:allegedly] when officers looked at security camera feed to see where the shooter was [real-time] in the building, they didn't know that they were actually looking at rewound video footage showing movement in the building taken twenty [20] earlier.

I know of security footage from earlier scenes being played by one person leading to others watching CCTV screens believing they were watching live feed of an ongoing situation and getting wrong info on which to understand what they thought were live situations. **** happens.

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

Currently, there are at least 18 states which allow armed adults on school property with relatively minor conditions.

A 2013 NBC News investigation found:

Alabama (which bans possessing a weapon on school grounds only if the carrier has "intent to do bodily harm")

Ah Alabama, where it's legal to own a deadly weapon but illegal to own sex toys, explains the mentality of some folks I know from there.

Really Interested

DubInMeath wrote: »

Ah Alabama, where it's legal to own a deadly weapon but illegal to own sex toys, explains the mentality of some folks I know from there.

Well how many deaths by sex toy happen?

demfad

Another superseding indictment against Manafort.
BREAKING: Federal grand jury returns superseding indictment against Paul Manafort, alleging he "secretly retained a group of former senior European politicians to take positions favorable to Ukraine, including by lobbying in the United States,” per court documents. - @Tom_Winter

'Senior European politicians'..Hard to know if this should be better suited to Brexit thread...investigation is now multinational.

(EDIT: Actually no. The former senior European politicians were the 'Hapsburg group) that included former Austrian Chancellor Haussenbauer and former Italian PM Prodi. Both paid to give 'independent' public testimony about Ukraine while being secretly controlled and paid by Manafort. The Farage connections to Rohrabacher stand)

Gates guilty of conspiring against the United States. Also guilty of lying to FBI about a meeting between Manafort, Congressman Rohrabacher and two other congressmen.
Again Rohrababher met with Farage when Farage was involved in Calexit (known Russian influence operation). Rohrabacher was another who 'visited' Assange (like Farage).
That's actually beside the point and minor.
Manafort is facing two cases: Virginia Eastern Dustrict and DC. He can't beat both now Gates has flipped and he is facing the most serious charges.
Gates was with Trump a full year, was in charge of leasing with RNC, changed the Trump position re Ukraine at RNC even wrote the main speeches after Manafort resigned. Only person more influential on entire campaign was Manafort himself.

If Manafort flips (he should) only one person higher up now...

This whole year is surreal.. a fact is now that the life of Gates and anyone associated with him is in serious danger. This is the point we are at I believe.

Christy42

demfad wrote: »

Another superseding indictment against Manafort.
BREAKING: Federal grand jury returns superseding indictment against Paul Manafort, alleging he "secretly retained a group of former senior European politicians to take positions favorable to Ukraine, including by lobbying in the United States,” per court documents. - @Tom_Winter

'Senior European politicians'..Hard to know if this should be better suited to Brexit thread...investigation is now multinational.

Gates guilty of conspiring against the United States. Also guilty of lying to FBI about a meeting between Manafort, Congressman Rohrabacher and two other congressmen.
Again Rohrababher met with Farage when Farage was involved in Calexit (known Russian influence operation). Rohrabacher was another who 'visited' Assange (like Farage).
That's actually beside the point and minor.
Manafort is facing two cases: Virginia Eastern Dustrict and DC. He can't beat both now Gates has flipped and he is facing the most serious charges.
Gates was with Trump a full year, was in charge of leasing with RNC, changed the Trump position re Ukraine at RNC even wrote the main speeches after Manafort resigned. Only person more influential on entire campaign was Manafort himself.

If Manafort flips (he should) only one person higher up now...

This whole year is surreal.. a fact is now that the life of Gates and anyone associated with him is in serious danger. This is the point we are at I believe.

I could well see the arm the teacher stuff being a screen for this. Arm the teachers will be forgotten in a few weeks. I don't think the states is that far nuts just yet. I mean it should be opposed as the past year should have thought people not to take any sort of common sense for granted but I can't see that being a suggestion anyone thinks will happen.

Manic Moran

oscarBravo wrote: »

The idea of armed teachers is objectively insane.

It's not objectively insane.

I will agree with a number of adjectives. Distressing. Unpleasant. Unfortunate. Awful. Horrifying, even. Not a preferred situation.

That does not make it insane.

Here's what is objective.
This is the official advice for active shooter incidents.
https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/active_shooter_pocket_card_508.pdf

Run, Hide, Fight, in that order of preference. If running isn't an option, and your hiding place has been located, fight. It states "Act with physical aggression and throw items at the active shooter" (The long form version of the training also recommends that in the event that the shooter is throwing grenades, curl up with your legs close to the grenade to protect the torso. I'm sorry, but if Plan A is to take fragmentation to the legs, I want a Plan .

The nearby city of North Miami Beach states the following:
http://www.citynmb.com/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC=%7B8412620D-8BAE-45BF-AE6D-80F5D4B76E0B%7D
"Act with physical aggression and throw items at the active shooter, this will throw his aim off. Use any stabbing weapons you may have, pens, pencils, scissors, or use blunt force weapons."

So fighting is grand, if necessary, but to do it, you're going to have to stab the guy holding the firearm with a pen. I know they say the pen is mightier than the sword, but I am not sure that this is quite what they meant.

If it comes to a fight, would you like a pair of scissors, or would you like a sidearm?

This is why it's not insane. It reflects the reality that school shootings happen, and are likely to continue happening for a few years yet. It is sufficiently not insane that a number school boards have approved the policy, police have taught the policy, and teachers and administrative staff have chosen to carry firearms.

So, no, it's not a nice idea. It's a necessary idea, because as long as school shootings are happening, and even if there are major gun control changes coming in the near future (which are unlikely to the extent necessary to stop them), one needs a plan to deal with 'it is happening here'.

robinph

Cops and firefighters are not paid to commit suicide on our behalf.

Calina

Manic, it is a mitigation to the wrong problem. What the US needs to do is bring about cultural change such that shooting incidents like this do not happen. Arming teachers is predicated on the basis that mass shootings in schools will happen on a monumental scale. It means you avoid thinking about one of the tools by which mass shootings are facilitated. Most other countries dealing with shooting tragedies of this nature take gun control measures. They are not a feature of life in any other rich country the way they are in the US. This is because when they happen, the US does not really take gun control measures. The actions of the US are predicated on the idea that gun control is impossible. It only is because as a society, the US cares more about having guns and less about preventing shooting tragedies. Arming more people escalates rather than de-escalates the issue.

It is not sane to arm teachers. A country that has to do this or thinks it has to do this is a failing country. Regardless of how rich, or how big its army is. Arming teachers is a sign of a sick society.

jooksavage

Could someone explain why the line has been drawn at high powered semi-automatic rifles?

My understanding is you can own a fully automatic weapon but need to register it with the ATF. What are the objections to doing the same with semi-automatic assault weapons? Surely this is no more an infringement on second amendment rights than the provisions already in place for fully automatic weapons?

Igotadose

jooksavage wrote: »

Could someone explain why the line has been drawn at high powered semi-automatic rifles?

My understanding is you can own a fully automatic weapon but need to register it with the ATF. What are the objections to doing the same with semi-automatic assault weapons? Surely this is no more an infringement on second amendment rights than the provisions already in place for fully automatic weapons?

It's a maze of details, but it comes down to, "you can, in some states, as they gig the laws to allow it." For example, you can in Nevada and Montana. Not in NJ or Washington. The pro-gun types obsess about these rules and constantly are wheedling the states to change the regulations. So, in WA, I couldn't own a fully-automatic UZI submachinegun, but I could borrow one at the range for a fee and merrily blast away. And, I think I could've owned one as long as it wasn't 'fully automatic.'

jooksavage

Igotadose wrote: »

It's a maze of details, but it comes down to, "you can, in some states, as they gig the laws to allow it." For example, you can in Nevada and Montana. Not in NJ or Washington. The pro-gun types obsess about these rules and constantly are wheedling the states to change the regulations. So, in WA, I couldn't own a fully-automatic UZI submachinegun, but I could borrow one at the range for a fee and merrily blast away. And, I think I could've owned one as long as it wasn't 'fully automatic.'

Cool thanks. It seems like the second amendment argument is a bit porous. Some restrictions are tolerated, others are not and the line at semi auto assault rifles is a bit arbitrary

pitifulgod

Pepefrogok wrote: »

I haven't any experience confronting heavily armed school shooters, and I probably never will because I have not signed up to a job in law enforcement and swore an oath to protect the public, same as not being a fan of entering burning buildings stops we from joining the fire brigade. Are things really so polarised now that people will be offended by people calling a cop who failed to do the job he is paid to do and resulted in a load of kids dead a coward? With his training and weapon his chances of taking out the bad guy were high, sure there was a chance he would get killed but all cops face that threat, put it this way if he said he would react this way at the interview he wouldn't have got the job.

In that sort of scenario, it's far better to allow a tactical team to arrive to handle the situation. They're trained to deal with such scenarios while anyone else with get their head blown off. Meanwhile Trump's attack on him is going the guy further towards killing himself or tempting some maniac to shoot him. What leadership he displays..

Penn

jooksavage wrote: »

Cool thanks. It seems like the second amendment argument is a bit porous. Some restrictions are tolerated, others are not and the line at semi auto assault rifles is a bit arbitrary

Which goes back to when the second amendment was written, why it was written, and the types of weapons available at that time. The 2nd amendment simply doesn't translate to modern day.

Manic Moran

Manic Moran wrote: »

It's not objectively insane.

I will agree with a number of adjectives. Distressing. Unpleasant. Unfortunate. Awful. Horrifying, even. Not a preferred situation.

That does not make it insane.

Here's what is objective.
This is the official advice for active shooter incidents.
https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/active_shooter_pocket_card_508.pdf

Run, Hide, Fight, in that order of preference. If running isn't an option, and your hiding place has been located, fight. It states "Act with physical aggression and throw items at the active shooter" (The long form version of the training also recommends that in the event that the shooter is throwing grenades, curl up with your legs close to the grenade to protect the torso. I'm sorry, but if Plan A is to take fragmentation to the legs, I want a Plan .

The nearby city of North Miami Beach states the following:
http://www.citynmb.com/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC=%7B8412620D-8BAE-45BF-AE6D-80F5D4B76E0B%7D
"Act with physical aggression and throw items at the active shooter, this will throw his aim off. Use any stabbing weapons you may have, pens, pencils, scissors, or use blunt force weapons."

So fighting is grand, if necessary, but to do it, you're going to have to stab the guy holding the firearm with a pen. I know they say the pen is mightier than the sword, but I am not sure that this is quite what they meant.

If it comes to a fight, would you like a pair of scissors, or would you like a sidearm?

This is why it's not insane. It reflects the reality that school shootings happen, and are likely to continue happening for a few years yet. It is sufficiently not insane that a number school boards have approved the policy, police have taught the policy, and teachers and administrative staff have chosen to carry firearms.

So, no, it's not a nice idea. It's a necessary idea, because as long as school shootings are happening, and even if there are major gun control changes coming in the near future (which are unlikely to the extent necessary to stop them), one needs a plan to deal with 'it is happening here'.

Teachers needing guns in a first world country is insane. It's an insane situation to find yourself in. If I lived somewhere that I needed an ar-15 to feel safe at home or sending my children to school I would move somewhere else as soon as possible and not look back.

Really Interested

Really Interested wrote: »

Well how many deaths by sex toy happen?

Might be a couple of heart attacks, either from use or just the shock of seeing one if your that repressed.

But have yet to hear the phrase, many killed by assailant who despite having social/mental health/race issues was legally allowed to purchase the dildo that caused the carnage.