Gun sales today...pretty amazing...

[Tank-Ace]

Think about that.  You would think that with dozens of wars over generations of time, with millions of combat veterans, armies would have had this nailed.  Nope.  They didn't have a clue.  Training has been radically changed in the last decade or so in response, and it has gotten MUCH more intense.  As a soldier, I've lived through that change.  I've been fortunate enough to meet LCol Grossman, and to be trained by and beside some of the people who've been central to this change.  Before that, I thought I was good.  After all I was a twenty-year infantry soldier, qualified to marksman level every year for that whole time, had a shelf full of trophies besides.  Nope.  I wasn't good, not even close, because range shoots, and blank fire exercises, and even live-fire exercises do not actually produce skills which work well in real close combat.  The drills I learned were likely to fail under lethal stress, because they weren't built around the way people function when someone is trying to kill them.  And >I< was likely to fail under lethal stress, because my training didn't expose me to it in a meaningful way.

Thinking about going military. Out of curiosity, how has training changed? Also, I always thought the point of the training was largely to condition an automatic response, not so? Or is the response not enough to overcome the reaction to being shot at, and so something new was needed?

[Tank-Ace]

To all the people worried about arming teachers.... arms locker. Just saying.

Put two padlocks on it that only six people know the combination to, with no one knowing the combination to both locks. Keep a couple pistols, maybe a shotgun loaded with bird shot (keep collateral damage down) and you largely take care of both problems.

[VonMessa]

To all the people worried about arming teachers.... arms locker. Just saying.

Put two padlocks on it that only six people know the combination to, with no one knowing the combination to both locks. Keep a couple pistols, maybe a shotgun loaded with bird shot (keep collateral damage down) and you largely take care of both problems.

I am not taking a stance either way on having teachers armed but if you would, please:

1) Please detail, as verbosely as possible, what the protocols, and details of gaining access to this locker would be.

 2) In addition, please describe, in best and worst of conditions, what the projected elapsed time it would take to present these to target.

A weapon locked in a closet is more useless than a paperweight.  An unloaded one is a metal club...

[Tank-Ace]

I am not taking a stance either way on having teachers armed but if you would, please:

1) Please detail, as verbosely as possible, what the protocols, and details of gaining access to this locker would be.

 2) In addition, please describe, in best and worst of conditions, what the projected elapsed time it would take to present these to target.

A weapon locked in a closet is more useless than a paperweight.  An unloaded one is a metal club...

The arms locker would be kept in the office of the school, and would in actuality be a small gun safe, to prevent one person with a gun from gaining access to even more guns. Preferably, it would be hidden from sight, but not kept in a locked room, as it is a locked safe.

There would be two locks, either opened by keys or combination. Combination would likely be more secure, as you can't take a combination from a dead man. A total of 6 people (or more in a larger school) would be involved in the opening of the arms locker, with 3 of the people knowing the combination/having the key to one lock, but not the other, and the other 3 knowing the combination/having the key to the other lock, but not the first one. Nobody is to know the combiation/possess the keys to both locks at any point in time, to ensure at least two people must know about and authorize access to the firearms stored within the safe.

The purpose of multiple people being able to open each lock is to allow for people being sick, or incapacitated in an emergency. Idealy, the 6 individuals would be seperated from eachother, to help ensure there is at least one person that can open each lock who is present and uninjured.

In larger schools, multiple arms lockers could be dispersed througout the school, to allow for quicker response. Locks would be standardized between arms lockers, to simplify the system.


Those in possession of the keys/combinations would be required to carry radios at all times when on school grounds. If an incident is reported that warrants the use of firearms, the people involved with the opening of the arms locker are to procede to the location of the arms locker as quickly and directly as is safe to do so. Predetermined routes are to be identified based on general location in the school. If possible, nobody will proceede by the same route as another person, to the extent that any detours nessecetated by alternate routes do not constitute a delay of more than 2 minutes, if not possible, and multiple people are in close proximity, they are to put a 30 second interval between their departure times, so that if the first is fired on, the other(s) may backtrack and detour.


Elapsed time will vary greatly with the situation.

Best case scenario
school is relatively small, and the office is not the first target. Warning is given by the office as soon a shots are heard, and the shooter is not obstructing the path to the arms locker. I would estimate time to be between 1 and 3 minute to opening the locker, and up to another 3 to engagment of the hostile gunman, again depending on size of the school, and location of the shooter.

Worst case probable scenario
school is large, but old and poory laid out. Shots are not recognized as such, warning is not given immediately. The office or location of the arms locker is targeted first, any any school personelle present are incapacitated or killed. Layout of the school prevents people involved in opening of the arms locker from taking alternate route, and shooter has incapacitated or killed one of their group in his initial assult. Shooter is blocking another member from proceding directly to the arms locker, nessecetating his/her exiting of the school building, and entering another door. 4 other members must take the same route in order to avoide excessive delay by detours. Due to the 30 second delay between departures, response time from first shots fired to opening of the arms locker is up to 15 minutes, with another 5 to 7 to engagment of the shooter, depending on exact layout of the school, and location of the shooter.


Completely irrational/inept shooter scenario
Shooter assults the office or location of the arms locker first, incapacitating or killing all staff members present. Shooter is aware of the existance of the arms locker, and holds possition to kill those attempting to open the arms locker. Response time from firing of first shots to engagment of the shooter is incalculable, and entirely dependent on response time of local law enforcment.




Having a gun that can't be used for 15 minutes might not be as good as having a gun that can be used imediately, but its also more secure, and is still better than having no gun at all, which is my point.

[CAP1]

The arms locker would be kept in the office of the school, and would in actuality be a small gun safe, to prevent one person with a gun from gaining access to even more guns. Preferably, it would be hidden from sight, but not kept in a locked room, as it is a locked safe.this was my thoughts

There would be two locks, either opened by keys or combination. Combination would likely be more secure, as you can't take a combination from a dead man. A total of 6 people (or more in a larger school) would be involved in the opening of the arms locker, with 3 of the people knowing the combination/having the key to one lock, but not the other, and the other 3 knowing the combination/having the key to the other lock, but not the first one. Nobody is to know the combiation/possess the keys to both locks at any point in time, to ensure at least two people must know about and authorize access to the firearms stored within the safe.combination lock would be bad in high stress situation. key lock would do well.

The purpose of multiple people being able to open each lock is to allow for people being sick, or incapacitated in an emergency. Idealy, the 6 individuals would be seperated from eachother, to help ensure there is at least one person that can open each lock who is present and uninjured.

In larger schools, multiple arms lockers could be dispersed througout the school, to allow for quicker response. Locks would be standardized between arms lockers, to simplify the system.


Those in possession of the keys/combinations would be required to carry radios at all times when on school grounds. If an incident is reported that warrants the use of firearms, the people involved with the opening of the arms locker are to procede to the location of the arms locker as quickly and directly as is safe to do so. Predetermined routes are to be identified based on general location in the school. If possible, nobody will proceede by the same route as another person, to the extent that any detours nessecetated by alternate routes do not constitute a delay of more than 2 minutes, if not possible, and multiple people are in close proximity, they are to put a 30 second interval between their departure times, so that if the first is fired on, the other(s) may backtrack and detour.


Elapsed time will vary greatly with the situation.

Best case scenario
school is relatively small, and the office is not the first target. Warning is given by the office as soon a shots are heard, and the shooter is not obstructing the path to the arms locker. I would estimate time to be between 1 and 3 minute to opening the locker, and up to another 3 to engagment of the hostile gunman, again depending on size of the school, and location of the shooter.

Worst case probable scenario
school is large, but old and poory laid out. Shots are not recognized as such, warning is not given immediately. The office or location of the arms locker is targeted first, any any school personelle present are incapacitated or killed. Layout of the school prevents people involved in opening of the arms locker from taking alternate route, and shooter has incapacitated or killed one of their group in his initial assult. Shooter is blocking another member from proceding directly to the arms locker, nessecetating his/her exiting of the school building, and entering another door. 4 other members must take the same route in order to avoide excessive delay by detours. Due to the 30 second delay between departures, response time from first shots fired to opening of the arms locker is up to 15 minutes, with another 5 to 7 to engagment of the shooter, depending on exact layout of the school, and location of the shooter.


Completely irrational/inept shooter scenario
Shooter assults the office or location of the arms locker first, incapacitating or killing all staff members present. Shooter is aware of the existance of the arms locker, and holds possition to kill those attempting to open the arms locker. Response time from firing of first shots to engagment of the shooter is incalculable, and entirely dependent on response time of local law enforcment.




Having a gun that can't be used for 15 minutes might not be as good as having a gun that can be used imediately, but its also more secure, and is still better than having no gun at all, which is my point.

[bustr]

From Tank-Ace:

Having a gun that can't be used for 15 minutes might not be as good as having a gun that can be used imediately, but its also more secure, and is still better than having no gun at all, which is my point.

----------------------------------------

15 minutes is about the average response time of the police in many of our "massacer by whiteboy" events in the last 30 years. On average 14 people die before the police get on sight. What dosen't get into the news are the attempted "massacer by whiteboy" that are addressed by a person(s) on sight with CCW. On average 2.5 people are killed\injured before the police get on sight to address the dead shooter or haul him away to jail. The "massacer by whiteboy" types are not specialy trained in any manner so are not prepaired for an armed confrontation. Thats why they go hunting in gun free zones. Armed confrontation is a mental state radical game changer the "massacer by whiteboy" types are not counting on.

If it takes 15 minutes to gain access to the locked up firearm. You might as well not allow firearms in the school. And the "massacer by whiteboy" will know your firearms are locked up becasue our press and politicians will publicly pound their chests over protecting the children from evil guns leaping out of the storage lockers and going on a child slaying rampage. So in effect your school is still a gun free zone to hunt children in by the "massacer by whiteboy" nuts.

In Utah the teachers who carry are volinteers who subject themselves to invasive personal scrutiny by the Utah governemnt. Not employees forced into being something they are incapable of. As with CCW persons across the US. For the most part they are the kind of personaly responsible people you want as policmen, combat soldiers or sitting next to the red launch switch in a silo. We are not at war so they don't need to become world class special ops trained to deal with "massacer by whiteboy" types. That argument is a red herring to cover a personal fear. Being a CCW carrier they are eminently better trained than the "massacer by whiteboy" types unless we see an evolutionairy response by these monsters to seek out world class combat training. I would suspect CCW and personal combat trainers wherever teachers volinteer will gladly and generously volinteer their professional time to make the process a success like one did in Utah.

[Tank-Ace]

I know it wouldn't nessicarily do a whole lot of good, but still the attempt must be made.

If you have a better suggestion, then by all means share.

[ToeTag]

ok numb skull.....say your opponent spawns into a gv fight while you have it camped and you cant use your gun for 15 minutes.....nuff said

[Tank-Ace]

ok numb skull.....say your opponent spawns into a gv fight while you have it camped and you cant use your gun for 15 minutes.....nuff said

Lol! If you seriously think thats an apt comparison, I'm not sure you should be calling me a numb skull.

[Dago]

This thread has now morphed into blatant stupidity.

[bustr]

Tank-Ace,

How can I give you an answer to your real dilemma in the face of a voting block in the USA deciding suicide is better than taking responsibility for their own lives and choosing to kill the demons slaughtering them becasue they are playing the odds which are in their favor for the most part. Just not the parents in CT. You want no possibility of casulties along with another poster arguing we can never be trained well enough to satisfy his professional opinion. Then your only answer is suicide. But, probably in someone elses town and not yours. No one is even arguing from the most famous of all emotional positions.

It's worth it if it saves even one life to have gun free suicide zones. Except this argument is why our children are being slaughtered and our teachers have no way to kill the demons. Works good don't it if slaughtered children and teachers is your goal to the gun free zone laws.

The only answers are very simple. Do nothing and commite suicide because you cannot account for all of the unknowns and unitendad consiquences to keep everyone but the perp from getting hurt. Or reverse the famous logic of:  Gun Free Zones are worth it if they save even one life to: it's worth it to be armed and kill the demons if it saves only one life.

As I was trained and survived by. Action has consiquences you accept along with killing your enemy and you surviving. Some casulties happen and have always happened. Inaction is suicide and will result in more deaths 99.9999% of the time. And you and those you are trying to protect "will die anyway". Thats called suicide from the trained professional's perspective under any situation.

Your chances of survival go up slightly by taking action. Slightly has been all it ever was to tip the balance in human survival through out history when it was not a man made by force of law one sided slaughter zone. In that case you have mandated by force of law everyone in that zone is potentialy dead the whole time they are there. It worked as constructed in CT didn't it? But, not in your kids school yet.....maybe never. And you want to keep accidents out of their teachers hands just for good measure because you are playing the odds. Life is playing the odds on what we cannot control or forsee. We just lie to ourselves it isn't because the odds are with you much of the time. Untill they aren't. Thats how gun free zones happened. And look at the unintendad consiquences in CT.

Children were slaughtered and teachers forced to commit suicide in the hopes of achiving the possibility of slightly tipping the balance in a suicide zone. In their specific case training in unarmed interdiction of an armed attacker might have tipped the balance, maybe. That is a very specialised skillset and takes many more years to be combat effective than a CCW. Too much psycology and micro body queues to watch for in the perp along with constant rigorous martial and psyco\strategic training. Who wants that kind of a lethal dangerous mind teaching and protecting their children? A CCW is simpler and more effective for this form of domestic trained individual if we are playing the odds.

As long as you vote for suicide zones you will continue to feed this kind of mass murderer and for children and teachers in someones town to commit suicide. No one will say the truth: "Not around my child you don't!! You might shoot him\her even if you save the whole school from the child mass murderer." And so you are happy playing the odds. And there is a strange and guilty solace in being one of a group of parents with dead children versus the one who accidentaly died while the rest were saved. We are human afterall.

 

[ToeTag]

Lol! If you seriously think thats an apt comparison, I'm not sure you should be calling me a numb skull.

ok ....say I come into your personal space....where ever it might be and start shooting at you...then you can't shoot back for 15 minutes...nuff said

[Tank-Ace]

Tank-Ace,

How can I give you an answer to your real dilemma in the face of a voting block in the USA deciding suicide is better than taking responsibility for their own lives and choosing to kill the demons slaughtering them becasue they are playing the odds which are in their favor for the most part. Just not the parents in CT. You want no possibility of casulties along with another poster arguing we can never be trained well enough to satisfy his professional opinion. Then your only answer is suicide. But, probably in someone elses town and not yours. No one is even arguing from the most famous of all emotional positions.

It's worth it if it saves even one life to have gun free suicide zones. Except this argument is why our children are being slaughtered and our teachers have no way to kill the demons. Works good don't it if slaughtered children and teachers is your goal to the gun free zone laws.

The only answers are very simple. Do nothing and commite suicide because you cannot account for all of the unknowns and unitendad consiquences to keep everyone but the perp from getting hurt. Or reverse the famous logic of:  Gun Free Zones are worth it if they save even one life to: it's worth it to be armed and kill the demons if it saves only one life.

As I was trained and survived by. Action has consiquences you accept along with killing your enemy and you surviving. Some casulties happen and have always happened. Inaction is suicide and will result in more deaths 99.9999% of the time. And you and those you are trying to protect "will die anyway". Thats called suicide from the trained professional's perspective under any situation.

Your chances of survival go up slightly by taking action. Slightly has been all it ever was to tip the balance in human survival through out history when it was not a man made by force of law one sided slaughter zone. In that case you have mandated by force of law everyone in that zone is potentialy dead the whole time they are there. It worked as constructed in CT didn't it? But, not in your kids school yet.....maybe never. And you want to keep accidents out of their teachers hands just for good measure because you are playing the odds. Life is playing the odds on what we cannot control or forsee. We just lie to ourselves it isn't because the odds are with you much of the time. Untill they aren't. Thats how gun free zones happened. And look at the unintendad consiquences in CT.

Children were slaughtered and teachers forced to commit suicide in the hopes of achiving the possibility of slightly tipping the balance in a suicide zone. In their specific case training in unarmed interdiction of an armed attacker might have tipped the balance, maybe. That is a very specialised skillset and takes many more years to be combat effective than a CCW. Too much psycology and micro body queues to watch for in the perp along with constant rigorous martial and psyco\strategic training. Who wants that kind of a lethal dangerous mind teaching and protecting their children? A CCW is simpler and more effective for this form of domestic trained individual if we are playing the odds.

As long as you vote for suicide zones you will continue to feed this kind of mass murderer and for children and teachers in someones town to commit suicide. No one will say the truth: "Not around my child you don't!! You might shoot him\her even if you save the whole school from the child mass murderer." And so you are happy playing the odds. And there is a strange and guilty solace in being one of a group of parents with dead children versus the one who accidentaly died while the rest were saved. We are human afterall.

What the hell are you talking about  ?

I've always accepted there will be some deaths, no matter what you do. Always, never argued otherwise. I've also argued action, I even suggested putting a Golly-geen arms locker in the school!

I haven't said a word about slaughter, or suicide zones, or even seen anyone else in this thread talking about them (not that I've looked at a good many posts)!


Gun-free suicide zones, children being slaughtered? Playing the odds? The only conclusion I can come to, and I'm being completely serious here, is that you're drunk off your ass.

[Tank-Ace]

ok ....say I come into your personal space....where ever it might be and start shooting at you...then you can't shoot back for 15 minutes...nuff said

World of difference between a lone individual being targeted, and a gunman coming into a school to kill whoever he can.

1) If I'm alone, you'll probably try to come in close, which is more dangerous for me, since I can't flee as well.

2) in the school, you'll be busy shooting everyone you can, and I could be in any number of places, none of them nessicarily near you.

3) you kind of imply that alone, I'll be under fire constantly, which also isn't true in the school.


4) and finally, in the school, you're going to be shooting people regardless of if I have a gun or not, untill the cops come and stop you, or you screw up and do something stupid. But if I have a gun, and save even just one person from being shot, then me being armed is worth it.


..... Nuff said 

[Vulcan]

A weapon locked in a closet is more useless than a paperweight.  An unloaded one is a metal club...

Yet proper storage of weapons may have recently prevented 27 deaths.