Wow so how did he get in?
It’s quite likely the gunman walked through a classroom door that was unlocked at the time, and then locked it behind him.
Pretty consistent reporting now that a teacher left a back door propped open.
Adam Lanza shot his way through a window next to the locked security door at Sandy Hook.
I think the issue is if the shooter is inside the building as happened in Uvalde.
The school had locked doors as a matter of policy but one was left open and the shooter got in.
Probably not, but I don’t know enough about airplane design and operation. To the extent that at least some portion of the highest profile crashes seem attributable to human error, intentional act, or just the inherent complexity of the systems involved, I can imagine an economic argument being made that at some point planes are “safe enough.” Especially if we desire cheap airfare.
It certainly would apply to airport security theater.
As long as we’ve chosen - as a nation - to allow very ready access to weapons and ammo and to underfund mental health care, we ought to accept that there will be casualties. If we are talking about child health and safety or gun deaths, I’m not sure how much more can be accomplished by “hardening” schools. Especially if the best/most expensive efforts can be undone by some idiot propping a door open, or another idiot not knowing where to find a key.
I’m not expert and haven’t crunched the stats, but school hardening isn’t going to help reduce youth suicides by guns, or accidental shootings, or innocent bystander shootings. Or mass shotings in grocery stores, movie theaters, churches…
And if these freaking cops were unwilling or unable to confront this guy for an hour, I can’t imagine what armed teachers - or a good guy with a gun - would do better. Absent MAJOR overhaul of the interpretation of the 2d amendment, perhaps we ought to just admit that we find a certain level of casualties acceptable. Personally, I would prefer a far different approach. But realistically, I don’t see that happening in today’s political climate.
This sort of analysis can be done with many things. Statistically the chances of dying in a plane crash is about 1 in 29.4 million.
Despite those low odds the government goes to great lengths to constantly assess what went wrong in plane accidents and try to improve safety at every opportunity (mostly).
In the past, when I was a kid, fatal plane crashes were much more common than today but still, the odds of a person dying in a plane crash were very remote. Nevertheless, I think the flying public are happy to have had those odds lengthened (which requires a great deal of time and money to make happen).
Catastrophic failures are caused by unanticipated events. In people centric systems they will be caused by people. Due diligence will be more effective than hardening or carrying.
Increased flying safety = more flying generated $$$$
Increased gun safety = less gun generated $$$$
Decreased gun safety = more cost to society (how much does a hospital stay for a gun shot cost? Bet it is more than the cost of a gun…not to mention court costs and prison costs)
But, but, but … that’s okay.
In America, we love to privatize great profits and socialize the loss.
Exactly, the rise in hospital trauma costs doesn’t affect gun sellers.
Could add hundreds of thousands, even millions to GDP even if the victim dies!
But it does affect taxpayers (you and me). You are paying money so others can have guns.
Freedom isn’t free.
See ? Their side has it easy. Empty, vacuous, specious arguments but they sell like hotcakes.
I need this on a bumper sticker.
This is the answer. Hardening the schools is just theater until we grow bored of the topic. We’re not going to reduce gun deaths if we don’t change how easily we make it to get guns. Nothing is going to change because we don’t care enough to make the change.
Even if we harden the schools to the point they’re not viable targets, they’ll just start shooting people in some other public place (like happens now). In five years, we’ll be talking about hardening Ferris wheels, or wherever else people get shot.
We’ll turn our public places into prisons all to satisfy the bottomless fear of some gun fetishists and the greed of gun industry.
Please define going “hard after guns.” What does that mean?
I saw this happen over and over again when Obama was president. Gun enthusiasts seemed perpetually in fear that tomorrow Obama was going to ban guns. Of course, it never happened. Obama never even came close. Indeed, I think he did practically nothing about guns during his time as president. Neither did congress. And Sandy Hook happened in there.
So, who is going “hard” after guns? And if they have gone “hard” after guns what has been the result in the last 30 years?
Roger that!
Our attitude toward weaponry is insane. Unfettered ownership and use of semi-automatic weapons serves no useful purpose.
One thing school shootings and plane crashes have in common is that in both cases the potwntial victim can do very little to mitigate risks. I can reduce the risk of my son dying to a gun at home by not having one in my house. I can reduce the rosk of him dying in a car crash by insisting he always wear a seatbelt and never rides with someone who has been drinking.
But the risk of school shootings and plane crashes is impossible to mitigate at all. I can’t tell if maintainace has been deferred on a particular plane, or if a kid with a pattern of violence and access to a gun attends a school. I am well aware that a lot of this is illusionary, and I can’t keep my son perfectly safe in any context, but the reality is, news hits different when you search for a way to protect yourself from such a fate and nothing comes to mind.
True but that does not mean the risks cannot be mitigated. Granted if you are sitting in class or a plane seat there is little you can do once things go bad. The trick is stopping the bad thing from happening in the first place and we can certainly affect that.
When we were kids school shootings just were not a thing and plane crashes, while not common, happened with some frequency (a few per year, give or take).
Since then plane crashes have gone way down and school shootings have gone way up. Clearly something has changed on both counts. I submit that we do have control over these events. We may never be able to 100% prevent these from happening but we can certainly mitigate them happening.
How to do that is the hard part but we have been successful with planes.