Armed Individual at Colorado School May Have Prevented Mass Shooting

That depends almost exclusively on the study and the people paying for it. I've seen 'findings' starting with the same official sources arrive at completely opposite conclusions. So it can be argued either way depending on whose set of statistics and conclusions you want to push.

 

post 27.
"I never knew doltish was a word. And yeah, they are on the decline. Is it because gun ownership is up? Probably not. "

"there is a correlation, you just don't to admit it."

Post 29.
"there is a correlation, you just don't to admit it."
"Prove to me there is one."

Then you kept dodging.

- - - Updated - - -

Okay, thank you. If you could find some of these sources, or at least give me something to go off on, that would be nice.

 

gun ownership is up, crime is falling.......
http://www.examiner.com/article/two...ontrol-s-worst-nightmare-more-guns-less-crime
and the sun still comes up. now go bury your head someplace so that it doesn't get sunburned....perhaps in the sand, maybe

 

All you've done is say something I already know. What I'm asking you to do is prove that there is a link. In order to prove that link, you need to establish that increased gun ownership has lead to decreasing crime rates. Right now, there are too many issues at play here that can be another possible explanation. What about social unrest? Think about it, the 60's-80's weren't the best time in American history due to the Vietnam War, Civil Right's Movement, economic issues (Stagflation). Since then things have quieted down a lot.

 

Yes but where was he? My whole point is not to arm a single person in a large school, my belief is the more the better. Hence the Hail of gunfire.
The officer in the OP was close and yelled to let the shooter know he was there. I can see the same happening with multiple teachers being close and yelling.

 

Colorado Governor forced to admit.....
http://gunssavelives.net/news/anti-...-nothing-to-stop-recent-high-school-shooting/

Amen

 

then create your own study. Since you already know that, all you are doing is trolling and flamebatiing....wot a typical lib now declaring the truth to be the truth when it was already known to be the truth......like they discovered the truth before anyone else...
In 'Nam, we used to call that a spin-dizzy..........the truth hidden in a lie and magically appears to be the truth like a rabbit out of a cub scout's hat.
Take yer double speakin' butt elsewhere.

 

IMO it is smart to look at possible "what-if" scenarios. So I take it you are against examining potential scenarios? I think if we had spent more time looking at the "what-ifs" long ago that perhaps we would not be in the pickle we are in now.

 

well, bless your opinion. What ifs are destroying the BoR. What if we see a communist at the wheel? maybe we should have done something back when?
What if you had no rights?

 

They were not in the building or on the grounds. They were across the street eating lunch in a car. When the shooting began they did not enter the building.

 

T.H. Harris. We made a muzzle loader in a school I attended later, cap and ball. In the early late 40s and early 50s people were not paranoid about guns. It was not unusual for us to take a shot gun to school to have for hunting after last bell.

 

I am okay with armed resource officers at all schools. I do not believe, however, that this would have ended any differently. This kid had a specific target in mind and could not reach that target. There is no indication he was a run up the body count shooter so far as I have heard, just a very disturbed and possibly obsessive individual seeking vengeance against someone who he perceived had either wronged him or somehow ruined his life. If anything, I suspect that this is an illustration of what happens when we increasingly have an over-dramatic society about every possible thing that ever enters the public discourse.

 

Statistically even with correlation there is no proof of causation. As you said, you could hit him over the head with a gun and he wouldn't admit it was a gun if it disturbed his train of mouth.

 

The fact is that that increased gun ownership has happened at the same time that crime has decreased. It certainly is possible that that gun ownership is not the primary cause, but disingenuous to deny that it may have some responsibility.

Your preconceived stand on gun ownership blinds you examining the reality.

 

So what does that tell you?

 

That they should have been in the building and done their duty. The man at Arapaho ran toward the sound of shots, these guys did not.

 

I really can't believe that we as teen agers in the late 40s and early 50s were better people than the kids today. What is the problem? Are schools the problem? Have the kids grown up with insufficient discipline? Have we spoiled the kids by sparing the rod? Is it the fear that drives the people?

 

Yep. . . maybe.
But you forgot one thing: "Armed individual at Colorado school has caused the death of one beautiful, innocent young woman and has traumatized many youths, prior to provoking his own death."

THAT is the true story!

 

I think the observation could be, the attack may have been planned around their absence from the school. One of the myths of these events is the seeming spontaneous nature of the attacks. In the vast majority of cases a fair bit of planning an fore thought is evident. So it is reasonable to consider the potential attacker will plan around the sorts of changes being suggested in this thread

 

And these are definitely questions we have to consider. I'd suggest if there was an identifiable trend or commonality, people such as the FBI would be aware of it. With Columbine there is strong evidence bullying was an underlying cause. Many school districts in the US and around the world have understood this message and worked extremely hard to control such anti social behavior. My daughter's school receives a visit and lecture annually from one of the survivors of that terrible day. It touches my daughter deeply enough we often spend the night talking through her feelings and what the message is.

 

moving the foal posts...we were talking about correlation ONLY ..........causation is three large bags of varieties. and it would take 5 years to sort all of that out.

 

I would agree that that may well have been part of their plan. But it would be difficult to pursue such a plan with an unknown number of armed adults in the school.

The Arapaho shooter had such a plan to do a great deal of violence, but he was foiled by one man with a gun.

It is too bad there was not someone armed in the hallway when he first entered, before he got to the one victim.

 

Well I believe it would have ended differently. While he may have had a specific target, he had lots of ammo and shot 2 people who supposedly were not his specific target, there are no indications he wasn't a run up the body count kinda guy either...matter of fact the indices reflect the opposite. All active shooters are very disturbed...that is exactly the point, They are not being identified early enough and there is no law on the books that would stop them from acquiring weapons.
I suspect it's an illustration of what happens when we rely on a law to protect our most precious assets and not a physical means, and therein lies the true discussion,

 

You forget the one truly important fact that it was an armed disturbed individual who did not follow a law or multiple laws who took a beautiful innocent young woman's life that maybe could have been prevented by having many armed individuals close by to stop him from ever entering the school with a weapon in the first place.

That is the truth!!!

 

Thanks for making my point, when disturbed individuals know who is armed and their routine it's simple to make plans....not so easy when you don't know who is carrying and how many yes?