Stoneman survivor speaks out

Jag · Post by **Jag** » Sat Feb 17, 2018 6:16 pm

Watch this video from a survivor and tell me gun control is fine as is. I have friends going to multiple children's funerals because blood money from the NRA has bought politicians and brainwashed the public into thinking gun control won't save lives. My kids are terrified to go back to school right down the street from Stoneman. They don't feel safe. The older generation has totally failed them.

Watch this video. If you aren't moved by this, then honestly you have no soul and no heart and frankly you have blood on your hands too.

Students who survived school shooting call for tougher gun laws

Moliere · Post by **Moliere** » Sat Feb 17, 2018 8:23 pm

Besides "tougher gun laws" is there anything specific that would have prevented this shooting? And also realistic. Saying "get rid of all the guns" is not really an option. I know the FBI is certainly on the hook for not following their own procedures when this guy was previously flagged. I would like to see all the major media outlets pledge that the perpetrator's name and face will never be advertised and promoted. Let's take away the fame angle.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Sat Feb 17, 2018 9:00 pm

Gun control doesn't have to prevent the most recent killing and all future killings. It just has to prevent some future killings.

Absence of gun control leaves you responsible for the next killings--all of them--that could have been prevented.

Feel OK with that?

Daehawk · Post by **Daehawk** » Sat Feb 17, 2018 9:58 pm

What gun law would you want other than removal of all guns that would change this? Even then this would happen. He used a AR 15. Its the same as a 22 only a bigger bullet. Its not a full auto. Theres no test that will say someone will kill someone sometime in the future. Theres no test that will determine if someone is batshit insane.

I was given my first gun at the age of 10 I think it was. I still have it. Ive never even hit someone with it never mind shot anyone and never will unless they break into my home. I saw a news story about what age a kid should be to have their own smartphone. I was thinking 14. But a gun I would give at 10. Parents can teach their child right from wrong .But even then if a kid grows up to be crazy or an asshole they will do what they want .

So what can be done that isn't? Granted I dont know full Federal and state laws on guns but what I do read they seem to be good laws and enough of them already. As I said even if all guns were banned then someone will kill someone with guns. Even if guns didn't exist this guy could have killed a lot with other things..bats swords knives explosives cars and hell even big rocks.

I dont like it but I think in this day the only way to make a school safe is with armed security that checks everyone that enters then when the day starts the school is locked down with those same security manning exits for emergencies that require exit or entrance to the school. But even then..ya you guessed it...deaths can occur. That teacher may go nuts and shove a pen into someones eye, that kid could break some others neck, or some piece of equipment may fail and multiple deaths happen.

This repeated harping on guns doesn't do anything but in the end possibly endanger the everyday citizen who would no longer be able to defend their home. Criminals and nuts will always have the advantage because you cant predict their actions.

Guns are tools. Guns dont kill people..people do...and as much as anti gun folk hate it its the truth. Set a gun down on the table with some bullets near it or in it and cuss it all ya want it wont hurt you. People kill others. You cant ban spoons because a fat person claims it made them fat. No they made themselves fat. Heck ban cars..they kill more every year.

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:00 pm

Let's ask someone who was there.

Colton Haab, a 17-year-old student at Stoneman Douglas High School, was a hero in his own right during Wednesday’s shooting. Haab, a junior ROTC member, told Fox News that he shielded his classmates with bulletproof kevlar mats as the shooter swept the halls.

“We lined [the students] up into the wall and along the back of the wall…and from there I was standing with my first sergeant and I said, ‘these are kevlar, these are bulletproof material,'” Haab recalled. “We started moving the kevlar sheets forward.”

Haab also revealed that he believes Coach Aaron Feis, who died while shielding students with his body, could’ve stopped the shooter if he had his firearm with him in school.

“Unfortunately, gun control, it’s definitely needed a little bit more,” he explained. “I believe if we did bring firearms on campus to teachers that are willing to carry…and they got their correct training for it, I think that would be a big beneficial factor for school safety.”

“If Coach Feis had had his firearm in school that day, I believe that he most likely could’ve stopped the threat,” Haab asserted.

Daehawk · Post by **Daehawk** » Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:06 pm

Nobody will hear that ROTC student. If someone says what they dont want to hear they will be dismissed. "Oh he is 17 years old what does he know"..But if its a 17 year old saying stuff they like its all "Listen to this guy he knows what he is saying"

milo · Post by **milo** » Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:21 pm

Daehawk wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 9:58 pm What gun law would you want other than removal of all guns that would change this?

Yes, once you remove all of the options that are known to work, there are no good options.

Every other country that has gathered up the vast majority of guns from its citizens--and required those who wish to own a firearm to prove that they have a legitimate need for one--has seen a dramatic reduction in violent deaths. Humans have been violent for millions of years. No amount of education or mental health screening will change that. What we *can* change is the level of lethality that violent people can easily bring to bear.

But we won't do that. Because we value having the ability to kill our neighbors more than the freedom to not worry about being killed by them.

YellowKing · Post by **YellowKing** » Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:27 pm

We can't prevent all car accident deaths either, but we still put in as many measures as possible to prevent them.

Hell, we had stores pulling Tide detergent pods off the shelves because a few teenagers were eating them. But 17 kids get murdered? "Nothing we can do."

Skinypupy · Post by **Skinypupy** » Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:31 pm

Rip wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:00 pm “Unfortunately, gun control, it’s definitely needed a little bit more,” he explained. “I believe if we did bring firearms on campus to teachers that are willing to carry…and they got their correct training for it, I think that would be a big beneficial factor for school safety.”

"If Coach Feis had had his firearm in school that day, I believe that he most likely could’ve stopped the threat,” Haab asserted.

Half the teachers in this country have to buy school supplies out of their own goddamn pockets. We slap them with lawsuits if they dare discipline a student. But now we think a viable solution for school shootings is to ensure they're armed at all times and have proper combat training?

Jesus christ...we're so fucked.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:34 pm

Yeah. We're going to buy all the teachers Uzis when we won't even buy them chalk and printer paper.

Daehawk · Post by **Daehawk** » Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:34 pm

more than the freedom to not worry about being killed by them.

Never once feared that or thought of that before. even when pulled over by police it never enters my mind.

Chaz · Post by **Chaz** » Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:49 pm

Daehawk wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:34 pm
more than the freedom to not worry about being killed by them.
Never once feared that or thought of that before. even when pulled over by police it never enters my mind.

Good for you. That's far from a universal experience in this country. I assume that you're not a black person. Also worth noting that those kids probably weren't thinking that they'd be shot when they walked into class that day either.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sat Feb 17, 2018 11:04 pm

Daehawk wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 9:58 pm Guns are tools. Guns dont kill people..people do...and as much as anti gun folk hate it its the truth.

And as gets pointed out every time someone wastes breath with this comment - the issue is that guns are tools with a single purpose - to kill things. Yes, the tool requires a person in order to use the tool to kill things, but that is still the only purpose of the tool (the gun's purpose is not to shoot paper targets). Killing living beings is literally the only thing it is designed to do. It isn't a tool like a hammer that I can use to cave in your skull, or hang dry-wall.

And some of these tools are designed to kill lots of living things, quickly. And yes, these tools require human beings to pick them up, aim them at other human beings and to pull the trigger.

So my first question is "How do we keep guns out of the hands of the sort of person that is capable of picking one up and walking into a crowd and spraying people in the face with bullets?"

Or maybe "How do we have less people that are capable of picking one up and walking into a crowd and spraying people in the face with bullets?" Those are questions I'd really like to talk about an exhaust all possibilities we can think of before getting more drastic.

But if we can't come up with a solution that has a lot less random people being riddled with bullets while in AP Chemistry, at some point we are going to have to talk about getting rid of some of the more egregious tools that make it so goddamn easy to kill so many people in such a short period of time.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sat Feb 17, 2018 11:08 pm

Skinypupy wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:31 pm we think a viable solution for school shootings is to ensure they're armed at all times and have proper combat training?

That is literally the dumbest goddamn thing I've ever heard. Do people really not understand the amount, depth and frequency of training that is required to maintain the chance that you can function properly in a shooting event? The idea that Mrs. Naples the Geometry teacher is going to be armed, and capable of dealing with the stress of a firefight without becoming a *significantly* greater threat to the innocent staff and students around her is fucking ludicrous.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Sat Feb 17, 2018 11:25 pm

RunningMn9 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 11:08 pmThe idea that Mrs. Naples the Geometry teacher is going to be armed, and capable of dealing with the stress of a firefight without becoming a *significantly* greater threat to the innocent staff and students around her is fucking ludicrous.

Maybe she should join an NRA grant-funded rifle team at the school.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Sat Feb 17, 2018 11:27 pm

On topic: I applaud anyone willing to share their story and think we as Americans need to hear them speak about these horrific events.

However, we collectively did nothing after Sandy Hook which (in my mind) is one of the most horrific events of the last 20 years. As terrible as this current shooting is, the needle barely moved after Sandy Hook. I don't expect much to change after this one...and that's even more terrible.

Carpet_pissr · Post by **Carpet_pissr** » Sat Feb 17, 2018 11:37 pm

Holman wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:34 pm Yeah. We're going to buy all the teachers Uzis when we won't even buy them chalk and printer paper.

In modern America, I can totally see that happening. Are guns not more important than education? We're fucking obsessed with guns.

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:20 am

RunningMn9 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 11:04 pm
Daehawk wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 9:58 pm Guns are tools. Guns dont kill people..people do...and as much as anti gun folk hate it its the truth.
And as gets pointed out every time someone wastes breath with this comment - the issue is that guns are tools with a single purpose - to kill things. Yes, the tool requires a person in order to use the tool to kill things, but that is still the only purpose of the tool (the gun's purpose is not to shoot paper targets). Killing living beings is literally the only thing it is designed to do. It isn't a tool like a hammer that I can use to cave in your skull, or hang dry-wall.

And some of these tools are designed to kill lots of living things, quickly. And yes, these tools require human beings to pick them up, aim them at other human beings and to pull the trigger.

So my first question is "How do we keep guns out of the hands of the sort of person that is capable of picking one up and walking into a crowd and spraying people in the face with bullets?"

Or maybe "How do we have less people that are capable of picking one up and walking into a crowd and spraying people in the face with bullets?" Those are questions I'd really like to talk about an exhaust all possibilities we can think of before getting more drastic.

But if we can't come up with a solution that has a lot less random people being riddled with bullets while in AP Chemistry, at some point we are going to have to talk about getting rid of some of the more egregious tools that make it so goddamn easy to kill so many people in such a short period of time.

Well we could start with being able to protect people from someone that actually goes onto social media and proclaims they are going to do it.

If we can't even who has publicly made the threats and been reported to federal authorities we probably can't stop anyone with the current approach.

I mean this guy was a walking poster child for someone who should have been on the list.

I hate to bring up SSRIs again but yea, he was on those as well.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:40 am

Rip wrote: ↑Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:20 am
Well we could start with being able to protect people from someone that actually goes onto social media and proclaims they are going to do it.

Says the guy who screams bloody murder and starts threads if he even thinks the NSA might be monitoring American citizens. The same guy who loves to claim personal liberty gives him a boner and police are being too intrusive is now suddenly a champion for locking up anyone who verbally threatens someone.

Zarathud · Post by **Zarathud** » Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:58 am

If Rip and the NRA will let government act against citizens who make threats or have violence indicators, let's do that -- NOW.

I'll take any break in the "gun rights at any cost" and "we can't stop anyone" approach. Do something, and tweak it until it works.

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Sun Feb 18, 2018 1:37 am

Zarathud wrote: ↑Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:58 am If Rip and the NRA will let government act against citizens who make threats or have violence indicators, let's do that -- NOW.

I'll take any break in the "gun rights at any cost" and "we can't stop anyone" approach. Do something, and tweak it until it works.

I'd be happy to. I support far harsher penalties for using a gun in a crime or possessing one illegally as well.

Perhaps make it a little easier to apply trafficking charges too.

https://www.propublica.org/article/gun- ... s-illinois

gilraen · Post by **gilraen** » Sun Feb 18, 2018 2:03 am

Rip wrote: ↑Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:20 am Well we could start with being able to protect people from someone that actually goes onto social media and proclaims they are going to do it.

If we can't even who has publicly made the threats and been reported to federal authorities we probably can't stop anyone with the current approach.

I mean this guy was a walking poster child for someone who should have been on the list.

I hate to bring up SSRIs again but yea, he was on those as well.

Well, seeing as Trump signed legislation a year ago that allows people who have been adjudicated mentally ill to buy guns - funny you should mention that the guy was on SSRIs.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Sun Feb 18, 2018 2:31 am

RunningMn9 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 11:04 pm
And as gets pointed out every time someone wastes breath with this comment - the issue is that guns are tools with a single purpose - to kill things.

Hilariously I once had a discussion where Noxiousdog refuted that notion. I believe we were specifically talking about handguns at the time.

When you can't get people to admit that weapons are weapons, gun control is a very short conversation.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Sun Feb 18, 2018 2:55 am

I’m sure those Olympic competitors in the biathlon and those competing in the Summer Games in rifle, pistol, skeet and trap will be glad to know that their weapons’ only purpose is to kill things.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Sun Feb 18, 2018 3:49 am

Yawn.

You have totally refuted me.

A bow and arrow is suddenly not a weapon because you only use it at the range.

I wonder why those events exist. What are their origins. Probably the same as curling.

YellowKing · Post by **YellowKing** » Sun Feb 18, 2018 9:47 am

Well let's just let people start carrying around hand grenades.

Hand grenades can be used to blow up targets, so they're not a weapon.

Hand grenades don't just detonate themselves. Someone has to pull the pin.

We need to be able to own hand grenades, because the military has them. And we need the same weapons that the military has in order to fight tyranny.

I know hand grenades can kill dozens of people quickly, but so can a very fast person with a knife.

If somebody wants to walk in a school and start throwing hand grenades, then we need to give other people hand grenades to blow up that person before they do any damage.

That's how stupid the "no gun control" arguments sound to me.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Sun Feb 18, 2018 10:20 am

It's similar to the 3D-printing argument: "pretty soon people will be able to make their own guns whenever they want, so all gun control is useless."

If that's so, then people aren't going to stop at making handguns and assault rifles. They're going to make grenade launchers, autocannons, SAMs, and everything else. Should those weapons now be unregulated just because they'll be easier to produce?

Obviously not. The Brave New World of DIY carnage requires more regulation, not less.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sun Feb 18, 2018 11:32 am

Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Sun Feb 18, 2018 2:55 am I’m sure those Olympic competitors in the biathlon and those competing in the Summer Games in rifle, pistol, skeet and trap will be glad to know that their weapons’ only purpose is to kill things.

Assuming for the moment that they are using a weapon that fires bullets, and not lollipops(*), yes. What they are doing amounts to practice. And as I've explained dozens of times, it is certainly reasonable to believe that a human owning and operating a firearm will only ever practice with it and never use it to fire it to kill another living thing - but that doesn't change the purpose of the design of the weapon, which is to cause catastrophic damage to squishy creatures for the purpose of making them dead.

* - in other words, if I design something that looks like a gun, but only fires cotton balls for the purpose of launching cotton balls really far, that's different. We are talking about the purpose behind the design of the weapon.

Max Peck · Post by **Max Peck** » Sun Feb 18, 2018 11:38 am

Daehawk wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:34 pm
more than the freedom to not worry about being killed by them.
Never once feared that or thought of that before. even when pulled over by police it never enters my mind.

If that was true, you wouldn't be talking about needing firearms to defend against people with firearms.

Daehawk wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 9:58 pm I dont like it but I think in this day the only way to make a school safe is with armed security that checks everyone that enters then when the day starts the school is locked down with those same security manning exits for emergencies that require exit or entrance to the school.

Daehawk wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 9:58 pmThis repeated harping on guns doesn't do anything but in the end possibly endanger the everyday citizen who would no longer be able to defend their home.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Sun Feb 18, 2018 11:46 am

I find it amazing what we are seeing from these kids - they are right. Their elders are failing them. *WE ARE FAILING THEM*. The arguments we see right here above are the same old tired defenses of insanity. If you see guns as simple tools and not part of the problem then you're almost certainly wrong. The data is just too strong at this point.

That said realistically confiscation isn't an option but tests of different rules and approaches to reducing deaths are long, long, long overdue. We need to get started on trying to fix this. We've done nothing for too long. Our leaders deserve to be damned for many things but this is the worst. Columbine. Sandy Hook. Stoneman. Either we start attempting to do something about this fundamental wrong or we go down as a broken society that probably deserved a monster like Trump.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:24 pm

GreenGoo wrote: A bow and arrow is suddenly not a weapon because you only use it at the range.

And I totally didn’t call them weapons in my post.

I’m so sorry that a two-way discussion isn’t what you’re interested in.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sun Feb 18, 2018 1:26 pm

Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:24 pmI’m so sorry that a two-way discussion isn’t what you’re interested in.

He's not the only one that responded to you...

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sun Feb 18, 2018 1:32 pm

I guess I think that the main crux of the problem is that we have a fucked up set of priorities. As a nation, we start with the premise of "how can we keep all of our guns, and buy more?" when attempting to address these events. Forget everything else - what can we do to stop dozens of kids being killed at a time while sitting in Geometry?

What *might* work? Can we at least let the CDC resume studying the goddamn problem to make informed suggestions?!

I'm glad these kids are speaking up, with anger. These kids need to speak up. All of them. They are the ones primarily paying the price of Daehawk's freedom (and I only picked his name because he's the most recent advocate, consider Daehawk the everyman that considers his right worth the price of someone else's children being murdered). They shouldn't just take it, because freedom.

Kurth · Post by **Kurth** » Sun Feb 18, 2018 1:36 pm

Smoove_B wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 11:27 pm However, we collectively did nothing after Sandy Hook which (in my mind) is one of the most horrific events of the last 20 years. As terrible as this current shooting is, the needle barely moved after Sandy Hook. I don't expect much to change after this one...and that's even more terrible.

+1

All wasted breath. If nothing changed after Sandy Hook, nothing will change after this. Nothing.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Sun Feb 18, 2018 1:48 pm

Kurth wrote: ↑Sun Feb 18, 2018 1:36 pm
Smoove_B wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 11:27 pm However, we collectively did nothing after Sandy Hook which (in my mind) is one of the most horrific events of the last 20 years. As terrible as this current shooting is, the needle barely moved after Sandy Hook. I don't expect much to change after this one...and that's even more terrible.
+1

All wasted breath. If nothing changed after Sandy Hook, nothing will change after this. Nothing.

True on the federal level. Less true on the state level. Gun control lessons from CT.

Analyses by the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence show that states with the strictest gun-control measures, including California, Connecticut, New Jersey, and New York, have the lowest rates of gun deaths, while those with the most lax laws, like Alabama, Alaska, and Louisiana, have the highest.

After Connecticut’s General Assembly passed the package of gun laws, and Governor Dannel P. Malloy, a Democrat, signed it into law, gun-related deaths started to drop.

According to the chief medical examiner’s office in Connecticut, the number of deaths resulting from firearms — including homicides, suicides, and accidents — fell to 164 in 2016, from 226 in 2012.

The linked story puts that in more context. Point is, the federal government is failing on many levels, especially since Trump deliberately started tearing it apart. States have some flexibility to make up for that, and FL is ripe for change. The NRA's goons there might tamp it down...but maybe not this time.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Sun Feb 18, 2018 2:05 pm

Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:24 pm
GreenGoo wrote: A bow and arrow is suddenly not a weapon because you only use it at the range.
And I totally didn’t call them weapons in my post.

I’m so sorry that a two-way discussion isn’t what you’re interested in.

Over the inherent purpose of firearms? No I'm not. That would be a pointless distraction, like guns don't kill people, people kill people or the problem is video games.

Zarathud · Post by **Zarathud** » Sun Feb 18, 2018 2:38 pm

Kurth wrote:
Smoove_B wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 11:27 pm However, we collectively did nothing after Sandy Hook which (in my mind) is one of the most horrific events of the last 20 years. As terrible as this current shooting is, the needle barely moved after Sandy Hook. I don't expect much to change after this one...and that's even more terrible.
+1

All wasted breath. If nothing changed after Sandy Hook, nothing will change after this. Nothing.

Only if we accept nothing.

Alefroth · Post by **Alefroth** » Sun Feb 18, 2018 2:58 pm

Kurth wrote: ↑Sun Feb 18, 2018 1:36 pm
Smoove_B wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 11:27 pm However, we collectively did nothing after Sandy Hook which (in my mind) is one of the most horrific events of the last 20 years. As terrible as this current shooting is, the needle barely moved after Sandy Hook. I don't expect much to change after this one...and that's even more terrible.
+1

All wasted breath. If nothing changed after Sandy Hook, nothing will change after this. Nothing.

I'm not so sure about that. Unlike the 1st graders, these survivors have the ability to speak out and take action. They are already planning a march on Washington. I think these kids might start something. I think it's unfortunate the pressure has to be on them to do so, but they might be the best opportunity there is.

milo · Post by **milo** » Sun Feb 18, 2018 3:27 pm

Daehawk wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:34 pm
more than the freedom to not worry about being killed by them.
Never once feared that or thought of that before. even when pulled over by police it never enters my mind.

Your edit of my quote has changed its intended meaning. I said, "But we won't do that. Because we value having the ability to kill our neighbors more than the freedom to not worry about being killed by them." Note that in all cases I used collective pronouns "we" and "our". I'm saying that we, as a nation, have collectively decided to ignore the tens of thousands of us who are killed by gun violence every year.

You say that you are not worried about being killed by a gun; that the thought of being killed by a gun never enters your mind. If you are a gun owner, I would hope that the thought enters your mind every time you touch a weapon. I mean, that's just basic gun safety training. All guns are always loaded. Never let the muzzle cover anything you aren't prepared to destroy.

But that's not the point here.

The question is, does it bother you at all that thousands of your fellow citizens are killed by guns each year? Do you even recognize that this is a price that they—that we all—are paying so that we can have the right to own guns?

Jag · Post by **Jag** » Sun Feb 18, 2018 6:13 pm

Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Sun Feb 18, 2018 2:55 am I’m sure those Olympic competitors in the biathlon and those competing in the Summer Games in rifle, pistol, skeet and trap will be glad to know that their weapons’ only purpose is to kill things.

You bring up an excellent point. Olympic competitors from countries with draconian gun laws and no incidence of children being gunned down in schools clearly have no problem competing at an Olympic level.

Edit: Friends of ours are now reporting in from the services and funerals of murdered children. We know one family that had 3 funerals. No one should ever have to bury their children.