Florida passes Gun Reform bill - Polidicks

[url]https://www.politico.com/states/florida/story/2018/03/07/florida-house-passes-gun-reform-school-safety-bill-after-lengthy-debate-301839[/url] [QUOTE] The Republican-led Florida House passed a school safety package that includes an unprecedented tightening of gun control regulations on Wednesday. The close vote placed reluctant GOP legislators in a vice between browbeating chamber leadership and the powerful National Rifle Association. The 67-50 vote was also tough for House Democrats, who earlier in the day decided to take a caucus position against the bill because it would allow for armed educational personnel in schools. Of 76 House Republicans, 57 voted in favor of the bill, with 19 against it. Of the 41 House Democrats, 10 voted yes and 31 voted no. The provision played a major role in the legislation’s near defeat Monday night when the Florida Senate barely passed the bill. Called “The Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Act,” the bill now goes to Gov. Rick Scott for his signature. Legislators say Scott, who expressed reservations about armed teachers before the provision was watered down, is expected to sign it into law.[/QUOTE] the basic bill stuff: [url]https://www.flsenate.gov/Media/PressRelease/Show/2877[/url] [QUOTE]Mental Health In the area of mental health the legislation makes significant changes to keep firearms out of the hands of those suffering from mental illness: Authorizes a law enforcement officer who is taking a person into custody for an involuntary examination under the Baker Act to seize and hold a firearm or ammunition from the person for 24 hours after the person is released and does not have a risk protection order against them or is the subject of a firearm disability. Prohibits a person who has been adjudicated mentally defective or who has been committed to a mental institution from owning or possessing a firearm until a court orders otherwise. Creates a process for a law enforcement officer or law enforcement agency to petition a court for a risk protection order to temporarily prevent persons who are at high risk of harming themselves or others from accessing firearms when a person poses a significant danger to himself or herself or others, including significant danger as a result of a mental health crisis or violent behavior. The bill also: Allows a court to issue a risk protection order for up to 12 months. Requires the surrender of all firearms and ammunition if a risk protection order is issued. Provides a process for a risk protection order to be vacated or extended. Firearm Safety The legislation also provides new provisions to ensure full and complete background checks when a firearm is purchased: Requires a three-day waiting period for all firearms, not just handguns or until the background check is completed, whichever is later. Provides exceptions for: Concealed weapons permit holders, and For the purchase of firearms other than handguns, an exception for: Individuals who have completed a 16 hour hunter safety course; Individuals holding a valid Florida hunting license; or Law enforcement officers, correctional officers and service members (military and national guard) The bill addresses two of the most frequent requests Senators heard from the families of victims simply to raise the age for purchasing a firearm and ban devices that turn a legal firearm into an illegal weapon. Prohibits a person under 21 years of age from purchasing a firearm, and prohibits licensed firearm dealers, importers, and manufacturers, from selling a firearm, except in the case of a member of the military, or a law enforcement or correctional officer when purchasing a rifle or shotgun. (Persons under 21 years of age are already prohibited from purchasing a handgun under federal law.) Prohibits a bump-fire stock from being imported, transferred, distributed, sold, keeping for sale, offering for sale, possessing, or giving away within the state. School Safety The bill improves school safety through the following provisions: Establishes the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Commission to investigate system failures in the Parkland school shooting and prior mass violence incidents, and develop recommendations for system improvements. Codifies the Office of Safe Schools within the Florida Department of Education (DOE) and which will service as a central repository for the best practices, training standards, and compliance regarding school safety and security. Permits a sheriff to establish a Coach Aaron Feis Guardian Program. The legislation allows school districts to decide whether to participate in the guardian program if it is available in their county. A guardian must complete 132 hours of comprehensive firearm safety and proficiency training, pass psychological evaluation, submit to and pass drug tests; and complete certified diversity training. The guardian program is named after Coach Aaron Feis, who lost his life protecting students during the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. The guardian program is completely voluntary for a sheriff to establish, for a school district to participate, and for an individual to volunteer. Individuals who exclusively perform classroom duties as classroom teachers are excluded from participating in a Coach Aaron Feis Guardian Program. However, this limitation does not apply to classroom teachers of a Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps program; a current service member; and a current or former law enforcement officer. Requires each district school board and school district superintendent to cooperate with law enforcement agencies to assign one or more safe-school officers at each school facility. The safe-school officer requirement can be satisfied by appointing any combination of a school resource officer, a school safety officer, or a school guardian. Requires each district school board to designate a district school safety specialist to serve as the district’s primary point of public contact for public school safety functions. Requires each school district to designate school safety specialists and a threat assessment team at each school, and requires the team to operate under the district school safety specialist’s direction. Requires the DOE to contract for the development of a Florida Safe Schools Assessment Tool which will assist school districts in conducting security assessments to identify threats and vulnerabilities. Creates the mental health assistance allocation to assist school districts in establishing or expanding school-based mental health care. The legislation also: Prohibits a person from making, posting, or transmitting a threat to conduct a mass shooting or an act of terrorism. Requires DCF to contract for community action treatment teams to provider behavioral health and support services. Requires FDLE to procure a mobile app that would allow students and the community to relay information anonymously concerning unsafe, dangerous threats. The students of Marjory Stoneman Douglass recommended that the program be named “FortifyFL” [/QUOTE] for those curious what florida's baker act is in the mental health section: [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_Mental_Health_Act[/url]

It doesn't seem like much, but I guess it's better than nothing. I'm not too concerned about the arming-teachers bit, that looks like they've got enough restrictions that it'll never amount to anything in practice. Still dumb but at least harmlessly dumb. But waiving the three-day waiting period if you've got a hunting license? Either Florida has some really strict hunting licenses or the whole waiting period is a farce.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;53185049]Probably has something to do with the fact that if you've got a hunting license, then you've got a gun. If you've got a gun.. then what's the point of a waiting period?[/QUOTE] Relying on the usual explanation doesn't do anything to help stop the rare and dangerous case. The problem here is that if a person snaps and decides to commit an act of mass violence, a 3-day waiting period might increase the chance of *someone* or *something* being able to notice the signs and intervene before it's too late, but in my town, the Bass Pro Shop is right around the corner from the elementary school I work at. If some lunatic wants to hurt us, he can buy his hunting license and a [U]suitable[/U] weapon on the same day in the same location, and then proceed directly to the school. This law has a major loophole.

They need sheriff's office reform. He was reported 39 times to the police. Two times to the FBI. Yet this is the answer. More trust in the sheriff's office. More trust in the government. And when the shooting actually went down they actually just stood outside. Its coming out that the three extra deputies who stood outside while the shooting was happening did so due to orders from command staff. [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bCMGHVIXWs[/media] [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHdkKvZ6AH8[/media] Reform the BCSO. The gun free school zone crap just enables these attacks in the US. How many times do these mass shootings happen in gun free zones vs the general public?

[QUOTE=gman003-main;53185039]It doesn't seem like much, but I guess it's better than nothing. I'm not too concerned about the arming-teachers bit, that looks like they've got enough restrictions that it'll never amount to anything in practice. Still dumb but at least harmlessly dumb. But waiving the three-day waiting period if you've got a hunting license? Either Florida has some really strict hunting licenses or the whole waiting period is a farce.[/QUOTE] Typically before getting a hunting license you need to go through a hunters safety course, which is usually more comprehensive than even a carry permit.

[QUOTE=Sega Saturn;53185086]Relying on the usual explanation doesn't do anything to help stop the rare and dangerous case. The problem here is that if a person snaps and decides to commit an act of mass violence, a 3-day waiting period might increase the chance of *someone* or *something* being able to notice the signs and intervene before it's too late, but in my town, the Bass Pro Shop is right around the corner from the elementary school I work at. If some lunatic wants to hurt us, he can buy his hunting license and a [U]suitable[/U] weapon on the same day in the same location, and then proceed directly to the school. This law has a major loophole.[/QUOTE] Pretty sure hunting licenses aren't handed out to just anyone who asks. The law also makes an exception for those who have taken a 16 hour hunting safety course, which by my guess is most likely a requirement to get a license. If true, then the exception for the license itself is just for those who already have a license when the law goes into effect.

Not too bad, certainly way better than a flat ban. I'm ok with this. Color me surprised they managed to pass a sensible bill rather than a knee jerk 'ban them' bill. Pleasantly surprised at that.

Not sure how I feel about the age bump or the waiting periods (research is mixed on if it impacts suicides, and research has shown no effects on homicides), but this could have been a far worse piece of legislation.

[quote]Permits a sheriff to establish a Coach Aaron Feis Guardian Program. The legislation allows school districts to decide whether to participate in the guardian program if it is available in their county. A guardian must complete 132 hours of comprehensive firearm safety and proficiency training, pass psychological evaluation, submit to and pass drug tests; and complete certified diversity training. The guardian program is named after Coach Aaron Feis, who lost his life protecting students during the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. The guardian program is completely voluntary for a sheriff to establish, for a school district to participate, and for an individual to volunteer. Individuals who exclusively perform classroom duties as classroom teachers are excluded from participating in a Coach Aaron Feis Guardian Program. However, this limitation does not apply to classroom teachers of a Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps program; a current service member; and a current or former law enforcement officer.[/quote] Wow, they actually did the thing. Glad to see the the entire thing is voluntary all the way down to the person volunteering. And it excludes actual teachers, so, possibly, the risk of a student getting their hands on a weapon is reduced. Still uncomfortable having weapons as a potential part of the school process.

Don't really see how this will do much. The Guardian program prohibits regular teachers from participating. So that leaves coaches, JROTC instructors, and What, counselors maybe? The principal? It's an odd way to go about it. Also not sure what the age raise will do, not to mention a waiting period. Firearms restraining orders are pretty scary, and have the potential to be abused. Another concerning thing is the bump stock wording. You can't even possess one. So when this is signed, law-abiding citizens will become criminals overnight. Private property being banned and taken from citizens when said object is not harming anyone is never a good thing. I guess it is a form of compromise, but it seems like one side gets more than the other. By the way, 132 hours of comprehensive firearms instruction is more than I get in an entire year in the Army. That's actually more than I have gotten in 3 years, and I'm trained to operate everything from pistols to grenade machine guns. Those will be some seriously trained freakin staff.

[QUOTE=SKEEA;53185272]By the way, 132 hours of comprehensive firearms instruction is more than I get in an entire year in the Army. That's actually more than I have gotten in 3 years, and I'm trained to operate everything from pistols to grenade machine guns. Those will be some seriously trained freakin staff.[/QUOTE] I see two possibilities on that note: they overcompensated and didn't know what they were doing or wanted to set the bar so high as to be almost unobtainable.

[QUOTE=Alxnotorious;53185284]I see two possibilities on that note: they overcompensated and didn't know what they were doing or wanted to set the bar so high as to be almost unobtainable.[/QUOTE] Probably a little of column A, lot of column B. Seriously, I have to practice on my own time to keep sharp.

[QUOTE=Alxnotorious;53185284]I see two possibilities on that note: they overcompensated and didn't know what they were doing or wanted to set the bar so high as to be almost unobtainable.[/QUOTE] Politicians passing legislation on things they don't understand? That seems unlikely.

[QUOTE=TestECull;53185177]Not too bad, certainly way better than a flat ban. I'm ok with this. Color me surprised they managed to pass a sensible bill rather than a knee jerk 'ban them' bill. Pleasantly surprised at that.[/QUOTE] I concur. It's almost completely in line with what I've been discussing here with others (licensing for proof that you at least CAN be responsible, tied into a safety course requirement? Fine by me!), stricter background checks, plenty of means of reasonable appeal if a law-abiding citizen falls through the cracks... If more states adopted similar measures while we try to fix whatever's motivating these gun crimes, we might just start to see an improvement.

[QUOTE=Zero-Point;53185654]I concur. It's almost completely in line with what I've been discussing here with others (licensing for proof that you at least CAN be responsible, tied into a safety course requirement? Fine by me!), stricter background checks, plenty of means of reasonable appeal if a law-abiding citizen falls through the cracks... If more states adopted similar measures while we try to fix whatever's motivating these gun crimes, we might just start to see an improvement.[/QUOTE] I don't see where there is a licensing system for regular people. There just seems to be a way for people to get around the 3 day mandatory wait on purchase by having some sort of license or certification.

Thank goodness, because if anything is going to stop a person from shooting up a school, I'm sure the extra 72 hours to wait will definitely win out over the years of bullying and untreated mental illness that has developed alongside it. Once again, the children are saved by well thought out and informed legislation.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;53185944]I don't see where there is a licensing system for regular people. There just seems to be a way for people to get around the 3 day mandatory wait on purchase by having some sort of license or certification.[/QUOTE] -DERP Massive mis-read- It says a hunting license, which I assume at least teaches you the basics of fire-arm safety, I would hope (trigger discipline, how to properly aim(not sure as I've never gotten a hunting license?), storage, safe handling, not sure what else they mandate for those). If it doesn't teach any of those at all, then at least it presumes that since you're hunting and all, that you've studied what you need to do in order to be safe with your "tools". Not quite as thorough as I might like in that case but as long as they're willing to TRY I'll accept baby-steps, I just hope it helps as much as I'd like to think it would, at least for "accidental" discharges.

[QUOTE=Zero-Point;53186191]-DERP Massive mis-read- It says a hunting license, which I assume at least teaches you the basics of fire-arm safety, I would hope (trigger discipline, how to properly aim(not sure as I've never gotten a hunting license?), storage, safe handling, not sure what else they mandate for those). If it doesn't teach any of those at all, then at least it presumes that since you're hunting and all, that you've studied what you need to do in order to be safe with your "tools". Not quite as thorough as I might like in that case but as long as they're willing to TRY I'll accept baby-steps, I just hope it helps as much as I'd like to think it would, at least for "accidental" discharges.[/QUOTE] I know that in Louisiana, you have to take a Hunter's Education course to get a hunting license (if you weren't born by a certain date to grandfather in old people), which teaches you all of that. But I'm not sure if it's done that way in Florida.

My favorite part of this is the part where they throw the constitution and due process out of the window and just seize your firearms for any vague reason. Plus, how are they gonna seize firearms that they don't know you have? All of my teachers in school were borderline sociopaths and shouldn't have been in charge of houseplants, let alone growing people's minds. Why not just fund more school resource officers and make sure they know what their job is. This bill is purely unconstitutional and doesn't even accomplish anything positive for it's efforts. What are they gonna do for the thousands of 18-20 year old people who already own firearms? None of these things will be answered. This bill is just building blocks for future legislation.

Floridian hunter here: The process for a Florida hunting license is to go through the hunter safety course, which can be done at pretty much any age (I did mine at 10). There are two portions to the test, a timed, multi-section test on how guns work (chokes, actions, rifling, safety, etc) as well as general safety when you are out and away from civilization, and ethical game taking. That takes a couple of hours and is done in a similar format to the test you would do online when you get a traffic ticket. Second part of the certification is to do an in-person field day. There is additional testing and in-class lecture time with a game warden or FWC rep, and after the first few hours of class time, you will be taken to a range where you will do target practice with archery, rifles (usually a .22LR), pistols, and shotguns (black powder was a thing when I did it, not anymore). This is usually an all-day affair on a weekend. I had to sit through about 4 of these things besides my own with friends that I got interested in hunting, so I'm pretty familiar with it. It really drills the idea of safety first into your head, especially as a first time person.

[QUOTE=Revenge282;53187298]Floridian hunter here: The process for a Florida hunting license is to go through the hunter safety course, which can be done at pretty much any age (I did mine at 10). There are two portions to the test, a timed, multi-section test on how guns work (chokes, actions, rifling, safety, etc) as well as general safety when you are out and away from civilization, and ethical game taking. That takes a couple of hours and is done in a similar format to the test you would do online when you get a traffic ticket. Second part of the certification is to do an in-person field day. There is additional testing and in-class lecture time with a game warden or FWC rep, and after the first few hours of class time, you will be taken to a range where you will do target practice with archery, rifles (usually a .22LR), pistols, and shotguns (black powder was a thing when I did it, not anymore). This is usually an all-day affair on a weekend. I had to sit through about 4 of these things besides my own with friends that I got interested in hunting, so I'm pretty familiar with it. It really drills the idea of safety first into your head, especially as a first time person.[/QUOTE] So basically asking you to exercise the [I]slightest[/I] modicum of responsibility before saying "Okay, you can safely own a gun. Here you go." Good, that's exactly what I wanted to see at the absolute bare-minimum.

[QUOTE=Zero-Point;53188328]So basically asking you to exercise the [I]slightest[/I] modicum of responsibility before saying "Okay, you can safely own a gun. Here you go." Good, that's exactly what I wanted to see at the absolute bare-minimum.[/QUOTE] That's devaluing the process by calling it the "slightest modicum of responsibility", but yes. Basically anyone who comes out of one of those courses is going to be eons ahead of someone who just owns a gun because of home defense or whatever reason your one-off gun buyers use. As a side note, when applying for a concealed carry license in Florida, the state requires you to take a class for the license, which can be waived if you have the hunter safety certification. While they are different in purpose, both stress safety in equal levels from what I can experience, and that's what it all really boils down to. [editline]8th March 2018[/editline] To add to this, I kind of like the idea that you can show a hunting license as proof that you aren't an idiot to buy a gun, while at the same time staying out of the blackhole that is "gun licenses" and registries. At least with a hunting license it is completely detached from the necessity of owning a gun, as if for some odd reason in the future they did come around looking for weapons, you can just easily deny owning one. Whereas with a specific license towards firearms, you can't really afford that same plausible deniability.

[QUOTE=Revenge282;53188348]That's devaluing the process by calling it the "slightest modicum of responsibility", but yes. Basically anyone who comes out of one of those courses is going to be eons ahead of someone who just owns a gun because of home defense or whatever reason your one-off gun buyers use. As a side note, when applying for a concealed carry license in Florida, the state requires you to take a class for the license, which can be waived if you have the hunter safety certification. While they are different in purpose, both stress safety in equal levels from what I can experience, and that's what it all really boils down to. [editline]8th March 2018[/editline] To add to this, I kind of like the idea that you can show a hunting license as proof that you aren't an idiot to buy a gun, while at the same time staying out of the blackhole that is "gun licenses" and registries. At least with a hunting license it is completely detached from the necessity of owning a gun, as if for some odd reason in the future they did come around looking for weapons, you can just easily deny owning one. Whereas with a specific license towards firearms, you can't really afford that same plausible deniability.[/QUOTE] My point is it's a HELL of a lot better than doing nothing at all besides screaming for more/no guns like most people have in past shootings. It's also something I remember seeing suggested before, both here and elsewhere, that was contested as either pointless, "feel good", or somehow infringing on their 2nd Amendment right. Both sides must admit that if it's people that are the problem, then people should have to prove they at least have been shown/trained on how to do it right. Will it prevent/reduce gun crime entirely by itself? Of course not. But at least it acknowledges that perhaps not just [I]anybody[/I] should have such easy access to firearms without at the very least having SOME kind of proof that they are aware of the dangers and how to use them safely. It even went so far to include other options besides hunting licenses IIRC, including military, police, and other applicable venues that *should* have taught you the same, so it's not infuriatingly restrictive/infringing while still providing one more potential barrier for potential death or injury, intended or otherwise. I'm... actually PROUD of Florida to do this so quickly as well, and hope to see similar measures adopted, whether local, state, or federal.

[QUOTE=Zero-Point;53188328]So basically asking you to exercise the [I]slightest[/I] modicum of responsibility before saying "Okay, you can safely own a gun. Here you go." Good, that's exactly what I wanted to see at the absolute bare-minimum.[/QUOTE] You can still get a gun without going through any classes. You just have a manditory 3 day waiting period. Taking a class waives the 3 day waiting period, but doesn't restrict you from purchasing a firearm.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;53189086]You can still get a gun without going through any classes. You just have a manditory 3 day waiting period. Taking a class waives the 3 day waiting period, but doesn't restrict you from purchasing a firearm.[/QUOTE] My point is they're [I]trying[/I], which is a sight better than the previous bans wouldn't you agree? While I admittedly [I]would[/I] like to see it be a mandatory thing, using it to incentivize those "inconvenient" mandatory waiting times would at least encourage people who want to buy a gun and use it safely to pursue those venues, yes?

[QUOTE=Kigen;53185098]They need sheriff's office reform. He was reported 39 times to the police. Two times to the FBI. Yet this is the answer. More trust in the sheriff's office. More trust in the government. And when the shooting actually went down they actually just stood outside. Its coming out that the three extra deputies who stood outside while the shooting was happening did so due to orders from command staff. Reform the BCSO. The gun free school zone crap just enables these attacks in the US. How many times do these mass shootings happen in gun free zones vs the general public?[/QUOTE] Unless we have guns in cases ready for people to rapidly arm themselves at any location at any time, declaring a place a gun free zone or not isn't going to make a rats ass of a difference when you have someone running around actively shooting people. People will die in the first few minutes of an active shooting situation like this because we're just not capable of responding with superior force at a moment's notice. Even if the officers with handguns had gone into the building, they'd have been quickly overwhelmed. Even if they had taken the time to unpack their rifles and better body armor, they could have been overwhelmed. They had no intelligence about what was going on inside, and its just stupid to expect police to run into a situation like that. We don't send soldiers in like that, we don't send SWAT in like that, why should we expect the least trained, least armored, least equipped to go in and do that? Additionally, they had the safety of the evacuees to worry about as well. If there was a second shooter, waiting in the parking lot for example, something they couldn't have known in the extremely limited time frame, they could have run into the building leaving the hundred or so people outside defenseless themselves. This could have been a terror attack, there could have been car bombs outside, there could have been shooters making their way to the roof, there could have been any number of things happening. The best, safest course of action was to defend the outside of the school, help evacuees escape, and wait till they had a better understanding of the event, and overwhelming force. You can't just deal with a life and death situation by running in guns blazing like some people advocate for, you can just as easily make mistakes and be overpowered, leaving there to be no defenses whatsoever.

[QUOTE=Sableye;53191806]Unless we have guns in cases ready for people to rapidly arm themselves at any location at any time, declaring a place a gun free zone or not isn't going to make a rats ass of a difference when you have someone running around actively shooting people. People will die in the first few minutes of an active shooting situation like this because we're just not capable of responding with superior force at a moment's notice. [/QUOTE] The mass murder was not superior force. Plus allowing teachers and faculty to be armed does not mean that they need to go hunt down the threat. But there is a reason these cowards choose gun free zones. Its because they know the only armed resistance will be from police. Who take time to respond most of the time and are easy to spot. Seriously, 90%+ of these types of mass murder take place in gun free zones. They are specifically chosen by the mass murderers. Why else would they choose gun free zones over some other public establishment where there are a lot of people? [QUOTE=Sableye;53191806] Even if the officers with handguns had gone into the building, they'd have been quickly overwhelmed. Even if they had taken the time to unpack their rifles and better body armor, they could have been overwhelmed. They had no intelligence about what was going on inside, and its just stupid to expect police to run into a situation like that. We don't send soldiers in like that, we don't send SWAT in like that, why should we expect the least trained, least armored, least equipped to go in and do that?[/QUOTE] No, they wouldn't. A rifle's main advantage is over long range. Inside a school building the only advantage a rifle would provide is penetrating body armor. A pistol is effective in stopping an attacker who most likely going to be 3-20 yards away. Anyway, all the responding officer has to do is pin down the murderer. Responding officers don't have to kill them, they just have to get the murder thinking of their own survival over murdering more innocent people. If you watched the videos I provided both those people are active duty police officers. They both said the same thing. The deputy, by himself, should have went in. Those extra 3 deputies that arrived first, should have went in. That is the training BCSO gives their deputies. Its the training that pretty much every police department and sheriff's office gives their people. Because lives are being lost in a gun free zone while they just wait outside. The turning point in this tactic was Columbine. In Columbine they waited outside like they were taught back then. While mass murders just methodically went through and killed almost everyone they saw. They actually waited for SWAT to arrive. By the time SWAT arrived it was over. Watch the videos I posted. [QUOTE=Sableye;53191806] Additionally, they had the safety of the evacuees to worry about as well. If there was a second shooter, waiting in the parking lot for example, something they couldn't have known in the extremely limited time frame, they could have run into the building leaving the hundred or so people outside defenseless themselves. This could have been a terror attack, there could have been car bombs outside, there could have been shooters making their way to the roof, there could have been any number of things happening. The best, safest course of action was to defend the outside of the school, help evacuees escape, and wait till they had a better understanding of the event, and overwhelming force. [/QUOTE] There can be a million and one things that happened. And no, as I stated above, this is not taught at any law enforcement department anymore in this country that I'm aware of. The first officer goes in. Used to they waited until there was a team, but even that was too long. Plus you are overestimating these mass murders. They are not Rambo, they are cowards. In every instance that I'm aware of with school mass murders they will kill themselves or give up when confronted with armed resistance. They aren't looking for a fight. They are looking for easy, soft, cowering, targets. [QUOTE=Sableye;53191806]You can't just deal with a life and death situation by running in guns blazing like some people advocate for, you can just as easily make mistakes and be overpowered, leaving there to be no defenses whatsoever.[/QUOTE] Read above. Watch the videos I posted. It is what every department trains their officers to do in these situations.

[QUOTE=evilweazel;53186068]Thank goodness, because if anything is going to stop a person from shooting up a school, I'm sure the extra 72 hours to wait will definitely win out over the years of bullying and untreated mental illness that has developed alongside it. Once again, the children are saved by well thought out and informed legislation.[/QUOTE] I mean maybe? there was a study a while ago in Britain that determined that changing the packing for tylenol from 100 tablets to 32 and changing it from a pill bottle to a blister pack resulted in a [url=https://www.nhs.uk/news/medication/smaller-paracetamol-packs-may-have-reduced-deaths/]43% drop[/url] in suicide rates.