Texas School Shooting

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by Metal god

You can't compare one countries gun laws to another and think you're comparing apples to apples . The laws start with the/a constitution . Unless country A has the same constitution as country B . Comparing any of each others laws is moot . There are to many other neonist parts of the laws that give right to other parts that you can't compare one country to another . In the US we don't need a permit or permission to own a gun because we have the RKBA . We don't have to show why we should be able to own a gun . The burden is on the government to show why we can't . I don't but am guessing in Germany the people have to ask to own a gun first then is granted permission to do so ????

Of course we can compare one country's gun laws against others. Why not? Regardless of what constitution the laws exist under, they are the laws in that country, and it's instructive to look at how different countries approach the issue. In fact, for a couple or three years the on-line magazine of The M1911 Pistols Organization (M1911.org) has been running a series of articles laying out the gun laws of as many countries as they can get accurate information on. You can find it here:

https://ezine.m1911.org//forum.php

Disclaimer: I know the owner of M1911.org.

Secondly: as always, we cannot generalize.

In the US we don't need a permit or permission to own a gun because we have the RKBA . We don't have to show why we should be able to own a gun . The burden is on the government to show why we can't .

You're overlooking the fact that a number of states have a requirement for a firearms owners identification card (FOID) before you can buy a gun. Also, the RKBA includes the 'B' -- "bear." Yet a majority of the 50 states still require a license or permit to carry, many of those states are "may issue" rather than "shall issue," and in a few the permits exist primarily on paper and not in the wild (New Jersey, Hawaii). Good for you if you're fortunate enough to live in a free state, but don't fall into the trap of thinking it's the same everywhere.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by MTT TL

Where did we get off on a tangent of colleges and other places? I am just curious about this "program" that under reports crimes committed by students at Parkland; If such a program does in fact exist. That would imply some culpability.

The existence of the program is not in question. It has been documented and widely reported. Even Superintendent Runcie has acknowledged it, although he does his best to downplay the effects. I already gave you a link to one article discussing it -- see post #142. You can use Google to find numerous other articles.

[Edit to add] Found another one for you: http://www.independentsentinel.com/p...as-cruzs-case/

Also I did notice that two of the security monitors from the Florida school were suspended yesterday including the one that called the SRO to let him know the shooter was in campus. That is a curious turn of events.

Link to reports on this development?

[thallub]

Link to reports on this development?

Andrew Medina failed to stop shooter Nikolas Cruz, question him or lock down the school. He instead radioed ahead to warn fellow monitor David Taylor that a suspicious kid was headed his way.


When Taylor heard the gunfire erupt in the 1200 building where he was, he hid in a janitor’s closet.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/br...606-story.html

[Aguila Blanca]

Hmmm ...

It was unfathomable, Pollack said, that Medina, 39, failed to call a “Code Red,” which would have signaled a threat inside the building and kept students behind locked doors.

“All he had to say was ‘Code Red.’ Two words … those two words and he didn’t call it and 17 people are dead because of it,” Pollack said.

Medina told detectives on the day of the shooting that he didn’t call a Code Red because he had been trained not to do so unless he saw a gun or witnessed the shooting for himself.

That actually doesn't sound particularly wrong. Calling a Code Red if there's no gun would be like yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater when there's no fire. Why generate a panic over a potentially false alarm?

After listening to the interview, I'm less satisfied with the actions of the second "security monitor." Granted, apparently they were "monitors" (meaning "eyes"), not security guards as was initially reported, but their training (probably provided by the Broward County Sheriff's office, and likely by Scot Peterson, the discredited SRO) was seemingly suspect. We haven't heard Coach Taylor's version, but Medina told the detectives that when Taylor heard the gunfire he locked himself in a janitor's closet "as we were trained to do."

Somehow, I don't think the intent of the training was for the security monitor to save his own hide by locking himself into a place where nobody knew where he was, and that would hold only himself. I suspect the intent of "lock down" training was to get the students into the classrooms and to lock the classroom doors.

All in all, every bit of additional information that comes out about Parkland points to a monumental institutional failure. It was a classic demonstration of Murphy's Law at work: "Whatever can go wrong, will go wrong."

[Metal god]

Sorry should have been more clear . You are correct we can compare . My point was that as countries laws differ so does the ability to regulate . To point out Australia's gun laws and how they work or don't work is pointless if you live in the US . Those types of laws "can't" ( choke cough ) happen here . So pointing out how well a law works in one country that in theory can't happen in another is a waist of time because the approach as you say is completely different , the US constitution does not allow for the same restrictions . It's not like the US has a choice to have free speech , RKBA etc , it's built in to the foundation . You have to look at the laws all the way to there foundation to then truly compare . If they didn't start from the same place and can never get to the same place they're really not all that comparable .

There's probably not a lot of mass shootings in North Korea . Do we really want to compare one country to another ? It matters what the foundation is that allows any country to control there firearms .

[MTT TL]

The existence of the program is not in question. It has been documented and widely reported. Even Superintendent Runcie has acknowledged it, although he does his best to downplay the effects. I already gave you a link to one article discussing it -- see post #142. You can use Google to find numerous other articles.

[Edit to add] Found another one for you: http://www.independentsentinel.com/p...as-cruzs-case/

That is a whole lot of speculation and "not been disclosed" and "might have" and not much else.

I am not saying you are wrong, just saying that we don't positively know enough about it. I imagine discovery during a civil trial will be a wonder.

When Taylor heard the gunfire erupt in the 1200 building where he was, he hid in a janitor’s closet.

So my question here is obvious. If the DOJ recommended way of dealing with an active shooter is "Run, hide, fight" why is he in trouble? Looks like he was following his training.

Somehow, I don't think the intent of the training was for the security monitor to save his own hide by locking himself into a place where nobody knew where he was, and that would hold only himself. I suspect the intent of "lock down" training was to get the students into the classrooms and to lock the classroom doors.

I don't know how they expected him to do that seeing how he was unarmed and dude was running around shooting as many as he could with a center fire semi-auto rifle. The expectation that an unarmed hall monitor with practically no training should step up is a bad one.

But for the SRO? Failure.

Complete and total abysmal failure.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by MTT TL

That is a whole lot of speculation and "not been disclosed" and "might have" and not much else.

I am not saying you are wrong, just saying that we don't positively know enough about it. I imagine discovery during a civil trial will be a wonder.

How many articles did you read? Just what I provided links to? Beginning just a couple of days after the shooting, there was a LOT of coverage of this program. I read numerous articles, but I didn't save them or bookmark them. You can Google them up yourself if you care to remove your doubts.

[thallub]

Anyone who gives a hoot about this school shooting should read the collaborative agreement that school superintendent Runcie and sheriff Israel entered into.

Broward county and officials of the state of Florida entered into an agreement to forgive infractions committed by certain students. Look at the signatories to the Broward County collaborative agreement.

Non-Violent Misdemeanors include, but are not limited to:

Disrupting or Interfering with a School Function;
Affray;
Theft of less than $300;
Vandalism of less than $1,000;
Disorderly Conduct;
Trespassing;
Criminal Mischief;
Gambling;
Loitering or Prowling;
Harassment;
Incidents relating to Alcohol;
Possession of Cannabis (misdemeanor amount only);
Possession of Drug Paraphernalia;
Threats;6 and
Obstructing Justice without Violence.

http://www.ncjfcj.org/sites/default/...%20-%20MOU.pdf

i have numerous friends who are school teachers. Politically motivated hacks who enter into these types of agreements could care less that disruptive students interfere with the learning experience of other students.

[MTT TL]

That actually doesn't sound particularly wrong. Calling a Code Red if there's no gun would be like yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater when there's no fire. Why generate a panic over a potentially false alarm?

He did call the Code when the shooting started. Since baby killer had a shotgun he likely would have been able to make entry to locked doors anyway. Once he set off the fire alarm people were running out in a General Panic either way.

This brings up another good point. What to do when an actual fire breaks out during an active shooting? These murderers often bring explosives and incendiary devices. Tracers can start fires too in common building materials.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by MTT TL

This brings up another good point. What to do when an actual fire breaks out during an active shooting? These murderers often bring explosives and incendiary devices.

This is true, and how to balance security with notification and evacuation requirements of fire codes is a major conundrum facing both school security professionals and the architects and code officials who deal with trying to design schools to be as safe as possible in the face of any eventuality. There are task forces at work right now that are wrestling with that issue.

Tracers can start fires too in common building materials.

Not in schools. Schools have to be constructed of non-combustible materials. Building and fire codes even set limits on how much of the [non-combustible] wall surfaces can be covered by paper (bulletin boards, art work, etc.). Fires in schools almost always involve the building contents, not the building materials.

[Metal god]

Not in schools. Schools have to be constructed of non-combustible materials. Building and fire codes even set limits on how much of the [non-combustible] wall surfaces can be covered by paper (bulletin boards, art work, etc.). Fires in schools almost always involve the building contents, not the building materials.

I had no idea that every school ever built has been remodeled to the new standard of building codes . Are you sure schools are built this way or did you mean all new school construction shall follow these codes ? I don't think the schools I attended in the 70's were built of these materials and they are still active schools today . In fact if I had to guess I'd bet the over whelming majority of schools are not built from these materials .

Fires in schools almost always involve the building contents, not the building materials.

When that content does burn it's often very toxic . My guess is half the deaths it fires are do to smoke and toxins incapacitating the victims first . IMHO it's important to get out of any building on fire regardless of the building codes they followed when building the structure .

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by Metal god

I had no idea that every school ever built has been remodeled to the new standard of building codes . Are you sure schools are built this way or did you mean all new school construction shall follow these codes ? I don't think the schools I attended in the 70's were built of these materials and they are still active schools today . In fact if I had to guess I'd bet the over whelming majority of schools are not built from these materials .

As a licensed architect and a licensed building inspector, I'd guess that your guess is wrong. The grammar school I attended in the 1950s was originally built in the 1930s. The first addition, in which my first grade and third grade classes were held, was built of all non-combustible materials. The second addition was constructed while I was in the fifth and sixth grades, and I watched the masons erecting the concrete block walls through the window next to my desk. That was in 1955-56. This school hasn't been used as a school since the mid-1960s.

Building and fire safety codes have mandated non-combustible construction for schools since the 1960s. Prior to that, I'm sure schools used at least some wood framing -- typically encased in horsehair plaster, which is very resistant to fire. The possibility of a tracer bullet setting the construction materials of even the oldest school building on fire is almost non-existent. And very few of those old school buildings are still used as schools. (My old grammar school is now town offices.) I would say that with about 95 percent certainty any school you attended in the 1970s was constructed of non-combustible materials.

When that content does burn it's often very toxic .

Paper smoke isn't usually toxic. However, that's irrelevant. The statement to which I responded was that a tracer would set the building materials on fire.

[Metal god]

A friend of mine built a private school here in CA and still owns and runs it . I'll pick his brain on this to see what materials were mandated . Well as I was writing this my buddy already got back to me . He said you are correct , his school is mostly all brick , concrete and steel .

Thanks for the info , I had no idea that was the code

[MTT TL]

Fires in schools almost always involve the building contents, not the building materials.

Now that you mention it the last tracer fire I observed (not at a school but at a former military barracks) was caused by igniting contents. The shots went through the cinder block wall, embedded in and ignited contents on the other side. The contents of the room burnt and the building filled with smoke but the building itself did not burn.

[Aguila Blanca]

^^^ Yepp. Fire is fire, the heat doesn't much care what's burning to produce it. I'm not at all trying to downplay the dangers of fires, but if we're going to be tossing out statements about what starts fires I think we should try to be accurate, rather than spreading misinformation.

Another factor to consider is that all schools built in the last 20 years or so probably have full sprinkler protection. Parkland looks new enough that I'd guess it's sprinklered. Contrary to the way they show it in movies, other than a few specialty ("deluge") systems, when a fire activates a sprinkler system, not all the heads go off. Each head is independent, activated by a thermal fuse on the head itself. The head or heads nearest and above the fire will go off first, and additional heads get triggered only if the fire continues to spread rather than being extinguished or at least controlled by the initial sprinkler activation.

What this means is that mass fire evacuations in fully sprinklered buildings probably aren't necessary. In the event of a shooter, obviously getting everyone out into the corridors just creates a shooting gallery, so maybe schools (those with sprinklers) should be looking at a shelter in place procedure for fires rather than immediate, mass evacuations.

The widespread use of alarm systems also suggests that maybe having manual pull stations in school buildings isn't a good idea. There are smoke alarms that can detect products of combustion in the air before we can even see or smell them. Why do we need manual pull stations? They're an anachronism.

[Aguila Blanca]

Here's what the 2012 International Building Code says about sprinkler system requirements. The IBC is the basis for all building codes in the United States, as far as I know. It comes out every three years, so there are 2015 and 2018 versions in the wild. I have 2012 because my state is still in the process of adopting a newer version.

Originally Posted by 2012 IBC

903.2 Where required. Approved automatic sprinkler
systems in new buildings and structures shall be provided in
the locations described in Sections 903.2.1 through 903.2.12.

...

903.2.3 Group E. An automatic sprinkler system shall
be provided for Group E occupancies as follows:
1. Throughout all Group E fire areas greater than
12,000 square feet (1115 m2) in area.
2. Throughout every portion of educational buildings
below the lowest level of exit discharge serving that
portion of the building.

Exception: An automatic sprinkler system is not
required in any area below the lowest level of exit
discharge serving that area where every classroom
throughout the building has at least one
exterior exit door at ground level.

Use group E is schools, including kindergarten through grade 12.

[MTT TL]

Why do we need manual pull stations? They're an anachronism.

1. In case the automated system fails
2. Ditch class early on Fridays




My county has zero building codes. IBC or otherwise.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by MTT TL

My county has zero building codes. IBC or otherwise.

Since you don't say where you live, I can't verify that but I doubt it's correct. Other than single family residences, I didn't think there were any jurisdictions anywhere in the U.S. that didn't adopt some version of the IBC at least ten or fifteen years ago.

https://www.buildingsguide.com/blog/...g-codes-state/

Even if you may be in a jurisdiction that doesn't have a code, any architect who designs a school is going to follow the IBC anyway, because that's the standard of care for designing buildings and if he doesn't at least meet minimum code requirements he would be leaving himself wide open to a lawsuit for professional negligence ... and if he didn't adhere to the standard of care, his insurance company would drop him like a hot potato.

From the ICC web site:

The International Building Code (IBC) is in use or adopted in 50 states, the District of Columbia, Guam, Northern Marianas Islands, NYC, the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico.

https://www.iccsafe.org/about-icc/ov...ode-adoptions/

I note that it says "in use or adopted," so there may indeed by isolated jurisdictions where the IBC isn't law. Nonetheless, an architect designing a school would be crazy not to follow it.

[rickyrick]

I lived in a place with no building codes. For a while, I lived on two acres in town. I was poor at the time so I built my house out of 100% used materials. The whole set up cost me $500. A few years later I bought the remainder of the property on my street for $3000. About ten years ago I signed an oil lease and was getting $800-1500 a month in royalties up until I divorced. All in all, I lived there a good while. I built all kinds of things there, never once was the city involved and I never even needed a permit.

[44 AMP]

While a sort of interesting topic, fires in schools is not gunfire in schools, we're way off topic now, and so, this one is done.