On the Sandy Hook Report…

If you have not read the full Sandy Hook Report report that has been released yet, you can do that here.

Couple things I have to say are this…

1. It didn’t matter in the least what gun that psycho used, he shot all those kids while they were trapped in their two classrooms. (fish in a barrel) Actually, having a long gun in a close quarters situation like that technically made it more difficult.

2. Like I have said before… Secure the damn schools! A locked glass door is not security, its security theater.

Connecticut State Police Release Sandy Hook Report

And sadly, nothing has changed. Our schools are still soft targets and the only thing keeping this from happening again is pure dumb luck.

3. We must ban ‘Dance Dance Revolution’. Yep, you are gonna hear a bunch of stuff about violent video games, and while he did indeed play those DDR was by far his favorite and it is what he spent the most time doing. We need to get our heads out of our asses.

4. Back to the guns… like I have said before, you could have taken every gun on planet earth and thrown it into the ocean and this still would have happened. A gun ban wont fix the problem because it doesn’t effectively address the problem. Gun, knife, baseball bat, farm implement… it doesn’t matter. When you have an armed adult going up against 1st graders confined in a classroom, the body count is always going to be staggering. This once again goes back to securing the schools and actually doing the things necessary to keep murders from ever gaining access to our children in the first place.

5. The report also said that he was obsessed with Columbine and other incidents like these. What does that mean? The ratings driven media is 100% responsible for this incident and every incident like it since Columbine. This crap has got to stop. I know it is a major news story, and it should be reported. BUT no one should know that lunatics name, and all the ratings driven exploitation that we see for weeks and weeks after the fact has to end. Someone needs to sue these people into extinction for all the lives they have cost this country since Columbine.

6. “Motive still unknown” – thats what everyone is obsessing about with this report. Well, stop the presses because I’ve got a headline for ya… He was evil. And guess what… all the writing was on the wall. Once again, here is a case where this lunatic was in every way, shape, and form the poster child of all the promises that our BIG .GOV gives us about being able to protect us from evil, but nope. So now we are gonna get more of the cry of Bureaucracy failed. We need MORE bureaucracy!

*Rant off

 

  1. I don’t buy 4 and 6.
    4–with a baseball bat or a knife two or three even wounded adults could have subdued his skinny, wimpy a$$.
    6–calling him evil is just an easy and convenient out. He was mentally ill with some huge issues, but there are plenty meaner (more evil) people doing plenty of bad things–child raping bishops, etc.–who aren’t doing mass shootings. Only a nut does these.

  2. Joe I have to disagree with you on your debunk of 4: It definitely didn’t stopped a few nut jobs with box cutters from taking over airplanes on 9/11. When you have someone, trained or not, evil, psycho, or military, on a mission, with the element of surprise if they have a weapon that can kill multiple times without having to stop they can drop quite a few people, even if they’re scrawny. It takes the police 3-10 minutes to respond at all, and in Britain where “there are no guns,” they then have to stop the homicidal maniac without getting hurt themselves… in the meantime in those first three minutes someone on the chemical high require to kill is going to saw through people as fast as natural barriers let him… Now you train and arm teachers or even half the teachers… two to the chest one to the head with hollow-points, it takes a lot of crazy narcotics to keep going after that. Yes, the children will be traumatized… but not nearly as much as watching their friends and teachers shot, stabbed, or bashed.

    1. In countries where mass-stabbings happen instead of shootings, the most killed in recent school attacks on young kids is ALWAYS VERY SMALL. For example, the most deadly I remember was 8 dead and 5 wounded–another incident killed zero and injured 16 students and a teacher (and the day after that incident, a 47yr old man attacked classes of 4yr olds with a knife and injured 31 people, including 28 students, two teachers and one security guard…BUT ONLY 5 were critically wounded (and I’m not sure any died)). We see lots of knife and sword attacks around the world, but we NEVER see 30-40 dead like in recent shootings.
      BUT my main point (and I’ve taught in schools and colleges), is that I think that arming teachers en masse (even only 5-20%) is a recipe for as many or more acts of accidental injuries and deaths than acts of saving the lives of people in shootings.
      For example, we have a few school shootings every year (like 8-12 with only 40-60% killing anyone; 2013 has been an anomalous year with 16-18 school shootings, only 7 of which resulted in a death); of the 10 kids killed (the average over the last 10 years), lets say in general we could have only saved people in the instances where more than 2-3 people were shot since no armed teacher will be able to react prior to that first shot (and most likely not until at least several shots have been fired–few school shooters reload, and one magazine rarely last more than 4-12 seconds whether it’s a 10/22, revolver or 17rd Glock)–AND IF armed students know a teacher might be armed, future shooters may shoot the teacher first, delaying the response even more.
      Anyway, THIS cuts into the number of shootings in which an armed teacher could have saved anyone. Since 95%of school shootings only kill 1-3 people, we’re looking at only ONE to THREE incidents at the MOST per year where an armed teacher could have saved anyone.
      So let’s say we arm even 500K of the 7 MILLION teachers–the chances that they’ll be around the shooter or able to get to him/her fast is still 1 in 14 assuming ALL students are being monitored by at least one teacher at all times (not a reality), and this only matters in cases where more than 2 or 3 are killed).
      With 500K armed teachers, we’re bound to have instances of accidental discharges (with a few resulting in death/s); we’re bound to have a student overpower a teacher and gain access to a gun he/she would not normally have access to (with a few resulting in death/s), and then there are the innocent kids shot when an armed teacher is trying to kill an assailant–think about the NYC cops who shot like 6-8 people recently when trying to shoot one armed man. ALSO NOTE: many assailants who don’t kill themselves tend to give up after shooting the 1 or 2 kids they were after, but he/she might get killed without that chance to give up if there are armed teachers around–THOUGH I know most people don’t care if a child-shooter lives or dies even if he/she would have lived had he/she not been shot by a teacher, it is still another death (his/her parents, family and friends probably would care, but not many more).
      SO I would think having 2-5 armed people on a school-ground at the most would be best–sure they wouldn’t be able to stop the 1-3 shooters, BUT would be able to stop those that go after 20-40 kids. Of course, we’ve seen that schools with only a few armed police/guards haven’t stopped the small shootings, and to my knowledge, haven’t prevented any huge shootings. If memory serves me, there were armed guards who didn’t get to the shooters at Columbine or VT (two of the big massacres).
      Schools tend to be the safest place for kids, who generally die of suicide, car crashes, neglect/abuse, murder, etc…NOT at school.
      Anyway. Just ranting offhand because I’m stalling–I have papers to grade. ;o)
      NOTE: I currently teach on a college campus WITH armed police on campus; however, I’ve probably had more training than any of the cops–I attend three or four 2-3 day shooting courses a year, plus I practice and compete. I’d LOVE to be able to carry on my campus, but I can’t. That said, if I hear shots–anyone coming through the door will have me and 5-6 of my male students to deal with and I always have a 3.75″ blade on me (even if it pales in comparison to a 9mm).

      1. You mean to tell me that someone with a knife that gets into a classroom of 1st graders wont kill all 20+ kids in that room? Gee, its real hard to slit the throat of a little old lady and then kill all the little kids in the room that have no idea of what is going on.

        I’m also not proposing that we get all these teachers to be a “SWAT” team and start clearing the school and taking down the shooter with flash-bangs and tac-tard ninja moves. All I am saying is that if the protocol is going to be traditional school lockdown procedures -lock the doors and wait for help to arrive – then it certainly would save a bunch of lives if those teachers could have some viable means to defend their children if the psycho breaches the door. Two in the chest as soon as the door opened would go a heck of a lot farther then just being a human shield.

        Look at all of the school shootings that we have had and ask how it could have been different if the teachers barricaded in those rooms would have at least had a fighting chance once that door opened.

Comments are closed.