Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Armed guard stopped the Atlanta school shooter


  • Please log in to reply
44 replies to this topic

#1 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,687 posts

Posted 01 February 2013 - 10:09 AM

http://www.sltrib.co...e-says.html.csp

A student opened fire at his middle school Thursday afternoon, wounding a 14-year-old in the neck before an armed officer working at the school was able to get the gun away, police said.
Multiple shots were fired in the courtyard of Price Middle School just south of downtown around 1:50 p.m. and the one boy was hit, Atlanta Police Chief George Turner said. In the aftermath, a teacher received minor cuts, he said.
Posted ImagePosted Image


The wounded boy was aken "alert, conscious and breathing" to Grady Memorial Hospital, said police spokesman Carlos Campos. He was expected to be released Thursday night.
Police swarmed the school of about 400 students after reports of the shooting while a crowd of anxious parents gathered in the streets, awaiting word on their children. Students were kept at the locked-down school for more than two hours before being dismissed.
Investigators believe the shooting was not random and that something occurred between the two students that may have led to it.
Schools Superintendent Erroll Davis said the school does have metal detectors.
"The obvious question is how did this get past a metal detector?" Davis asked about the gun. "That’s something we do not know yet."
The armed resource officer who took the gun away was off-duty and at the school, but police didn’t release details on him or whether he is regularly at Price. Since 20 children and six adults were shot to death at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut in December, calls for armed officers in every school have resonated across the country.


Great idea NRA!

#2 stirs

stirs

    I Reckon So

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,320 posts

Posted 01 February 2013 - 10:22 AM

This does not further the AGENDA.



#3 Panthro

Panthro

    aka Pablo

  • Moderators
  • 24,168 posts

Posted 01 February 2013 - 10:53 AM

So did he shoot the armed kid?

#4 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,687 posts

Posted 01 February 2013 - 10:55 AM

No...but it sounds like he could have.

#5 Panthro

Panthro

    aka Pablo

  • Moderators
  • 24,168 posts

Posted 01 February 2013 - 11:25 AM

So an unarmed guard would have been just as effective

#6 stirs

stirs

    I Reckon So

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,320 posts

Posted 01 February 2013 - 11:29 AM

Not if he had drawn down on the kid who just dropped the gun rather than getting blown away.

#7 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,137 posts

Posted 01 February 2013 - 11:33 AM

False flag by the NRA to push their agenda. Big deal.

#8 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,687 posts

Posted 01 February 2013 - 11:49 AM

So an unarmed guard would have been just as effective


Unarmed guard...metal detectors...

http://abcnews.go.co...report-18368058

#9 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,687 posts

Posted 01 February 2013 - 11:50 AM

False flag=does not enhance my liberal narrative

#10 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,556 posts
  • LocationMontford

Posted 01 February 2013 - 11:50 AM

so giving kids condoms at school is for "protection" because abstinence is unrealistic. yet, having armed guards for "protection" is unrealistic?

and somehow background checks and smaller magazines is the answer?

no armed guards at schools but if we have more strict gun laws etc, it will weed out the people that randomly want to go to school AND, if they do go, they will smaller magazines or less bullets or not quite as a high powered of a weapon.
so while they are starting to shoot at the school, while they are loading again, it will give the school time to tell the police who are somewhere else to go to the school in time to stop the already screened shooter from hurting anyone?

yes, im making an extreme point but i don't think this scenario is too far off.

in short. abstinence is only good for gun owners, protection is not. but abstinence is bad for kids, but protection is good. LOL

#11 thatlookseasy

thatlookseasy

    Death to pennies

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,950 posts

Posted 01 February 2013 - 11:52 AM

There were armed officers at every public school I went to, are we going to pretend this is a new idea?

#12 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,687 posts

Posted 01 February 2013 - 11:54 AM

There were armed officers at every public school I went to, are we going to pretend this is a new idea?


No, you are to pretend it's an awful idea because the NRA suggested it.

#13 Anybodyhome

Anybodyhome

    USN Retired

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,941 posts
  • LocationWherever I May Roam

Posted 01 February 2013 - 12:56 PM

"The armed resource officer who took the gun away was off-duty and at the school..."

Had he shot the kid, the lawsuits would already be filed...
1. He was off duty- why was he carrying a weapon?
2. He was off duty- why was he at the school?
3. Do off-duty, armed cops ride around in their cruisers looking for crime?

Sorry, the thought of an armed, yet off-duty cop at the school gives me just as much cause for concern as the kid...

#14 I Mean He Was Found Guilty

I Mean He Was Found Guilty

    We dominated time of possession though!

  • ALL-PRO
  • 10,688 posts
  • LocationChapel Hill

Posted 01 February 2013 - 01:08 PM

so giving kids condoms at school is for "protection" because abstinence is unrealistic. yet, having armed guards for "protection" is unrealistic?

....

in short. abstinence is only good for gun owners, protection is not. but abstinence is bad for kids, but protection is good. LOL


i wouldn't call it an "extreme point" so much as a terrible comparison. what are you thinking here?

let's think about this: on one hand, you have elective sexual activity between high school aged kids-something so common and normal that it's just a generally accepted part of our culture on all levels to the extent that i doubt anybody reading this thread abstained from sex until marriage.

such a thing can have unintended consequences, however, so some people promote a religion-derived abstinence-only approach that has been proven by a multitude of studies to be ineffective. others prefer a prevention-based approach-they're gonna fug, so it's better for them to have fact-based education and easily accessible contraception, more or less.

on the other hand, you have the concept of armed gunmen entering schools with the intent of injuring/killing students and faculty. the activity is not elective for all parties, it's not imbued with any kind of commonality in terms of experiencing it first hand, it's unlikely anybody in this thread has ever perpetrated a school shooting, it's not something that can be easily prevented by education and access to cheap materials (unless you're one of those 'everybody should be armed all the time no matter where you are' fruitcakes).

just, what?

#15 I Mean He Was Found Guilty

I Mean He Was Found Guilty

    We dominated time of possession though!

  • ALL-PRO
  • 10,688 posts
  • LocationChapel Hill

Posted 01 February 2013 - 01:10 PM

let's take a quick straw poll re: the "abstinence is unrealistic" point:

anybody here who saved it for marriage?


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com