CYCLINGFORUM.COM - Where Cyclists Talk Tech --- Return To Home

 

    Register FAQ'sSearchProfileLog In / Log Out

 

****

cyclingforum.com ****

HOMECLUBS | SPONSORS | FEATURESPHOTO GALLERYTTF DONORS | SHOP FOR GEAR

Return to CyclingForum Home Page CYCLING TECH TALK FORUM
          View posts since last visit

Vista Outdoor; CamelBak,Giro,Bell,Blackburn and more.
 Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Author Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
Brian Nystrom
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 4005
Location: Nashua, NH

3/14/18 7:21 AM

Not everyone...

...just most of the people who choose to participate in the discussion. There are several people who are noticeably absent, but perhaps that's because they're just smarter than me and recognize that this discussion ends up accomplishing nothing, every time we have it.

I tried to turn us in what could have been a productive direction, but apparently none of you are interested.

I'm pretty sick of the other political discussions too, so perhaps we should just banish all non-cycling - or at least non-exercise - topics from the forum. Maybe we'd actually end up with some useful content and new people who stumble upon the forum might choose to participate rather than running for the hills.

 Reply to topic    

Sparky
Joined: 08 Dec 2003
Posts: 16335
Location: Portland, OR

3/14/18 8:43 AM

"this discussion ends up accomplishing nothing, every time we have it. "

Actually, seems to have accomplished a reasonably and quantifiable higher tolerance of opposing opinions, and subsequent respect and decorum. Only good IMO.

"perhaps we should just banish all non-cycling"

Except we have never done that here, hope we don't start either personally. Optionally, not participating might be good. ;) Thread go down the list fast when folks run outta points, this one has exhibited some staying power it seems.

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

Anthony Smith
Joined: 12 Jan 2004
Posts: 840
Location: Ohio

3/15/18 9:16 AM

Reply to Brian

1. You misconstrue my position. With high liability, manufacturers should decide not to provide guns to the civilian sector. They will have no liability concerns with the military and in fact not having to cater to the civilian market should make them better producers of military guns.

2. With respect to fingerprints, three lines of analysis:
A. anticipated failure rates are an advantage as people (civilians) who do have guns will be less likely to rely on them, eventuially destroying gun culture
B. less problems as tech improves
C. just because some people can hack, doesn;t mean it is a bad solution, illegitimate guns will be only usable to a small percentage of the criminals who now have total use/access.

3. Ammunition, again you misconstrue my position. It is ok to have different calibers, they just should not fit old guns.

4. With regard to the Second Amendment, the Supreme Court has reversed itself before (look at some of the slavery decisions) and just because it has set precedent in one direction does not make it correct, or even immutable, and I believe my analysis to be spot on.

BTW the "militia" was the "army", but now we have a large professional standing army and recruits are no longer expected to provide their own weapons.

 Reply to topic    

Steve B.
Joined: 19 Jan 2004
Posts: 688
Location: Long Island, NY

3/15/18 10:23 AM

If a decision was made at the national level to ban the sale to civilians of any handgun or rifle that uses removable magazines, most manufacturers would stay in business. There might be many fewer but I've no issue with that.

There would remain more than sufficient manufacturers for military production. Certainly the very strict restrictions in most European companies is not affecting either FN or H&K, who seemingly do quite well selling military weapons. Indeed, a quickie WiKi search yielded hundreds of manufacturers, many selling in countries that have significant restrictions, thus it's a specious argument to state that a ban of an AR15 or similar weapon is going to stop production of these weapons.

 Reply to topic    

Matthew Currie
Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 758
Location: Vermont

3/15/18 12:05 PM

While I agree with statements above that it's about time to abandon this whole issue here, I would add that banning removable magazines, or even removable magazines over a certain size, would seem like a pretty useful compromise. One could still have repeating arms with enough shots to be useful to a hunter and the like. My pump action rifle takes 9 shots. One might consider that if you can't hit what you're aiming at in 9 shots, perhaps you shouldn't be pulling the trigger anyway.

On a completely different note, continuing the indoor cycling thread derail, my latest movie was the great Italian classic General Della Rovere. I saw it the first time when I was about 12, and it remains a great favorite, not only for its cinematic virtues, but because it investigates a real issue of morality and identity - who we are, and what we become, and how we decide. Highly recommended.

 Reply to topic    

walter
Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 4309
Location: metro-motown-area

3/15/18 8:31 PM

"You have a military with no source of domestically manufactured weapons."

the sky is falling, theyre going to take all our guns nonsense -- absolutely ludicrous!


Last edited by walter on 3/16/18 8:22 AM; edited 1 time in total

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

PLee
Joined: 08 Dec 2003
Posts: 3571
Location: Brooklyn, NY

3/16/18 6:59 AM

The demise of Remington, by the way, has nothing to do with this debate, and everything to do with how private equity takes over companies, leverage them to the hilt, suck out all the cash to pay themselves, and hope the businesses do well enough to recover so they can sell them and get even more cash. Toys R Us is another example.

 Reply to topic    

daddy-o
Joined: 12 Apr 2004
Posts: 3053
Location: Springfield

3/16/18 9:34 AM

There's a Wells Fargo Bank shareholder meeting coming up. WFB is a major financier of NRA and related entities.

Bloomberg Article, March 7, 2018: Wells Fargo Is the Go-To Bank for Gunmakers and the NRA

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

walter
Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 4309
Location: metro-motown-area

3/16/18 9:42 AM

glad i'm shortly to relieve myself of any financial ties to WF

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

PLee
Joined: 08 Dec 2003
Posts: 3571
Location: Brooklyn, NY

3/18/18 4:49 AM

I'm in the market for a new ski helmet and goggles. It's easy enough to avoid Giro, Bell and Bolle. We all have choices, and choices have consequences and effects, some big and some small.

 Reply to topic    

Matthew Currie
Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 758
Location: Vermont

3/18/18 9:54 AM

True, though I must say I am sorry about Giro, as a Giro helmet is a fairly major contributor toward my ability to walk and talk and type (although coherent thought is of course a matter of opinion).

 Reply to topic    

daddy-o
Joined: 12 Apr 2004
Posts: 3053
Location: Springfield

3/18/18 12:40 PM

Your writing and originality are at least as clear as anyone's, Matthew. You're your own harshest critic. Any second-guessing will recede.

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

dan emery
Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 5911
Location: Maine

3/24/18 3:40 PM

Hey hey NRA

This is purely despicable:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=h72Z_b8X5IA

Just for starters, is anyone saying there shouldn't be school resource officers?

Brought to you by Mossberg.

 Reply to topic    

Brian Nystrom
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 4005
Location: Nashua, NH

3/25/18 9:09 AM

Despicable? Hardly.

The video simply pointed out that a hero's actions that probably saved lives have been largely ignored by the media, simply because it refutes the narrative that they're pushing. No one said or implied that anyone was opposed to Resource Officers in schools. In fact, the NRA has not only vigorously supported them, they've been providing grants to schools to improve security.

If a metal detector had been installed at the door, this incident probably wouldn't have happened at all, but all the focus is on anti-gun rhetoric rather than an obvious, effective preventative measure. It's mind-boggling that technology that has worked for decades at airports, courthouses and other venues is almost completely ignored or even worse, dismissed out of hand for use at schools. Why?

I can only speak for myself, but I certainly feel safer in airports knowing that metal detectors are there. You're an attorney, so how do you feel going through metal detectors in courts?

Kids understandably want to feel safer in schools, so why aren't they protesting for more Resource Officers and basic equipment that will definitely increase safety at their schools, rather than more gun laws that won't make any difference? Heck, there are apparently lots of schools that don't even lock their doors once classes are in session! How fundamental to safety is that? Better yet, the fix is free!

Smart schools have been doing this for a long time. A decade ago, I had to go to local schools here in NH to service computers. The inner school doors were locked and I wasn't allowed in until my tool case and parts boxes I brought had been checked and their IT person came to get me. I didn't find that to be a problem and apparently the kids attending the school didn't either.

BTW, exactly what is wrong with a gun manufacturer sponsoring this video? Who do you expect to sponsor it?


Last edited by Brian Nystrom on 3/25/18 1:14 PM; edited 1 time in total

 Reply to topic    

Craig
Joined: 12 Jan 2004
Posts: 534

3/25/18 11:50 AM

I like numbers. Anecdotal evidence isn't proof. But the sample sizes are still relatively small so...

Ways to stop shootings at schools?

There was an armed SRO (School Resource Officer) and an unarmed SRO at Columbine. Shots were even exchanged between the SRO and one of the killers.

There were five armed police officers and the chief of police on the Virginia Tech campus on the day of the shooting there. The killer was aware of the police presence. The killer shot 32 people before killing himself. Six armed police on campus had no effect, so should there be 12? 24? One per student? Maybe we should arm students. To stop a bad student with a gun you need a good student with a gun.

The armed guard stayed outside during the Parkland shooting. I don't blame him. Even with all that training etc, the guns people can buy etc, he probably feared going after an attack dog with a pen knife for defense.

As for metal detectors/access control; there hasn't been a study specifically addressing the effectiveness of this, but anecdotally (cited in a study anecdotally, which is a bit of an oxymoron, but the study looked at the effectiveness of security measures in preventing school shootings and they wished for more data, but what little they had suggested metal detectors wouldn't make a difference) there's no proof that it would work. Sandy Hook was a school on lock down and the shooter gained access by shooting out a window next to a locked door and reached in and opened the door from the inside. And at Westside school, an 11 and 13 year old pulled the fire alarm and ran to the forest next to the school and shot classmates and teachers as they exited the building. Do we tell our students to not leave the building when the fire alarm goes off? 4 students and one teacher killed, 10 wounded.

And in Red Lake Senior High School, a 15 year old student killed the security guard operating the metal detector and then walked through the metal detector and shot a teacher and five students before killing himself.

I also find that video offensive for a number of reasons. Colion Noir is discounting the experience of the kids at Parkland. Every single one of those kids would prefer to not have a voice, they would all trade their time in the spotlight for having their classmates back. And Colion oversimplifies it by talking about the situation where Blaine Gaskill, the SRO, shot the student at Maryland's Highschool. First, the SRO didn't prevent the shooting, the shooter shot his ex-girlfriend and a male bystander. Second, it's unclear that Gaskill even shot the student shooter. Reports are that the shooter killed himself after shooting his ex-girlfriend, which may have been his plan all along. Did Gaskill prevent it from being much worse? Maybe. I'd even optimistically say, "sure." But it's possible he didn't, and his presence (which the student must have known about) certainly didn't prevent the shooting. And Colion does what a lot of us do, cites a single event as proof of something. Gaskill may have done a great thing, but he didn't prevent it from happening in the first place, so there's still an issue of how to prevent vs. minimize the severity of school shootings.

The whole "good guy with a gun" argument is flawed because it doesn't address the root issue. And it doesn't prevent the shootings, it at best minimizes them, if we're lucky. We've seen shooters walk into schools with armed guards and metal detectors present, it doesn't work as a deterrent. It's like bike helmets, wearing them may or may not prevent head injuries amongst cyclists, but it would sure be great if we could figure out how to stop cars from running into cyclists so we didn't need helmets either.

And, no, I don't know what the answer is.


edit:

"I can only speak for myself, but I certainly feel safer in airports knowing that metal detectors are there."

I don't:

http://fortune.com/2015/06/03/airport-security-tsa/

 Reply to topic    

Sparky
Joined: 08 Dec 2003
Posts: 16335
Location: Portland, OR

3/25/18 12:15 PM

"Colion Noir"

There is only one possible choir that guy bothers preaching to.

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

dan emery
Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 5911
Location: Maine

3/25/18 12:55 PM

Not ignored; doesn't refute

The story of the resource officer wasn't ignored, I saw it. He was identified, interviewed, and praised. And that episode doesn't refute anything. Having a trained professional on scene may or may not help; did it help at Parkland? And I don't think the kids are arguing there shouldn't be trained professionals. Nor are they arguing to take away his gun. This is just another straw man put up by the NRA.

The NRA apparently thinks that this episode proves that assault weapons should be freely available to disgruntled 19 year olds.

It is despicable to attack these kids who have been through an incredibly traumatic experience, and ridicule them while grossly mischaracterizing their position.

You figure someone heading into a school with an AR-15 is going to hand it over to go through the metal detector? I go through them and really don't think about it one way or another.

The kids, I, and most people here think that having guns, and particularly assault weapons, less freely available will reduce gun violence. You and the NRA don't. No, it won't eliminate it. And advocating gun control is not arguing against other measures. I fully suport enhanced mental health treatment, which will be facilitated greatly by expanded Medicaid and National Health Insurance. Is the NRA advocating that?

 Reply to topic    

Brian Nystrom
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 4005
Location: Nashua, NH

3/25/18 1:34 PM

The NRA has advocated for improvements to the mental health system, but realistically that's going to take a lot more resources than any entity other than the combination of state and federal governments can muster.

I have no idea what straw man you're referring to, as I haven't seen any statements from any organization intimating that proposed gun restrictions would affect any form of law enforcement.

Nobody wants to see disturbed people armed with firearms. To argue that anyone is promoting that is ridiculous. Taking firearms away from law-abiding citizens is not the answer to that problem.

What you see as ridicule, I see as an attempt to provide a broader context to the issue and to redirect their energy toward something that may be more productive without infringing on the constitutional rights of others.

"There is only one possible choir that guy bothers preaching to."
Sure, as if the anti-gun spokespeople are speaking to more than one "choir". Give me a break.

 Reply to topic    

PLee
Joined: 08 Dec 2003
Posts: 3571
Location: Brooklyn, NY

3/26/18 11:10 AM

The NRA's vision of safe schools are bullet proof windows, secure walled-in compounds accessible only through metal detectors, with armed security guards, perhaps housed in watchtowers around the perimeter and in each hallway.

 Reply to topic    

Brian Nystrom
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 4005
Location: Nashua, NH

3/26/18 1:00 PM

Hyperbole doesn't help

Metal detectors? Yes. Bulletproof glass? In some locations it may be necessary to prevent someone from easily entering by shooting out a glass door or window. At least one resource officer on-premises? That just makes sense. Locked doors? Of course,even if you didn't mention it.

There is no way to make schools completely safe from every type of attack, but that would be enough to eliminate them as easy targets. Right now, most school kids are essentially sitting ducks.

When I was in school, we didn't have any of that and guns were at least as easy to get as they are now. The difference is that the idea of attacking a school was so outrageous that nobody did it, at least not that I can recall. Why that's changed is hard to pin down to any single, but perhaps terrorists who've gotten huge headlines and nonstop TV coverage by doing it have "shown the way" for the current crop of psychos.

 Reply to topic    

Craig
Joined: 12 Jan 2004
Posts: 534

3/26/18 3:04 PM

But, all those safety measures, the cost associated with them, the effects on the mental health of the people subjected to them daily, for a limited, mostly ineffective treatment of a situation. These are all things that treat the symptoms, not the disease. Shootings have occurred in places where doors are locked, SROs are on site, and metal detectors are in use. Unfortunately there's no way to prove a non-event, as in, how many shootings have been averted at schools where metal detectors and SROs are on site, because it's impossible to know what didn't happen.

The emphasis has to be put on figuring out what the fuck is wrong and not putting a bandaid on something that is broken. Metal detectors might stop some guns, but the truly deranged and bent on doing damage will walk up to the metal detector with a gun in hand and shoot the operator and then carry on through the school. Or, in some of the cases where it's been a team effort, one student will go through clean and pop open a fire door where student two will be waiting with a duffel bag full of guns and ammo. Christ, student one could just drop the bag there, go through security himself, and go to the second door and grab the bag without help. Nobody is going to notice a crumpled up garbage bag filled with guns by a door for the five minutes it takes a student to get through the school.

Or just pull the fire alarm and pick the students off one by one as they exit. It's happened.

In my last post in this thread I linked to a report that showed the highly trained professionals in a heavily controlled environment failed 95% of the time to catch a threat. But what metal detectors and SROs do is shift the problem, not solve it or (probably) not deter it.

I mean, from a cost benefit point of view, and not really that absurd considering metal detectors, and a parallel to bike helmets, maybe students should all be given kevlar vests and helmets. It's probably cheaper than metal detectors and the staff to run them. It's just personal protection equipment, like steel toed boots and a hard hat on the job site, or a bike helmet and reflectors when riding a bicycle. And statistically, would probably save as many lives as metal detectors and SROs, probably even more.

But that seems kind of nuts, right?

Plus, if we're going to blame mental health issues, and isolationism, or societal dysfunctionality etc etc, then consider the damage being done to the students' sense of community and well being by putting them through a lock down situation daily.

From this study:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15564886.2017.1307293

The following: (sorry about all the citations making the text nearly illegible, but I guess citations are what makes it a legitimate concern...)


Commentators worry that metal detectors, armed SROs, and access control measures have transformed the school from a warm nurturing environment into a prisonlike setting focused on harsh discipline and increased security (Dohrn, 2002 Dohrn, B. (2002). The school, the child, and the court. In M. K. Rosenheim, F. E. Zimring, D. S. Tanenhaus, & B. Dohrn (Eds.), A century of juvenile justice (pp. 267–309). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
[Google Scholar]
). In these types of environments, students’ perceptions of trust and caring often decline, while perceptions that the school is unsafe increase substantially (Hankin et al., 2011 Hankin, A., Hertz, M., & Simon, T. (2011). Impacts of metal detector use in schools: Insights from 15 years of research. Journal of School Health, 81, 100–106. doi:10.1111/josh.2011.81.issue-2
[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
; Hirschfield, 2008 Hirschfield, P. J. (2008). Preparing for prison?: The criminalization of school discipline in the USA. Theoretical Criminology, 12, 79–101. doi:10.1177/1362480607085795
[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
; Kupchik, 2010 Kupchik, A. (2010). Homeroom security: School discipline in an age of fear. New York, NY: New York University Press.
[Crossref], [Google Scholar]
).[/i]


Last edited by Craig on 3/26/18 3:43 PM; edited 1 time in total

 Reply to topic    

Matthew Currie
Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 758
Location: Vermont

3/26/18 3:26 PM

Rick Santorum has, I see, weighed in and suggested that instead of "phony gun laws" the students should be learning CPR and drilling to be better prepared for the next school shooting. Maybe he should introduce a bill to provide big brown bags for the kids to hide in.

 Reply to topic    

Brian Nystrom
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 4005
Location: Nashua, NH

3/26/18 3:51 PM

Come on Craig

"the affects on the mental health of the people subjected to them daily"

Seriously? I've heard this ridiculous argument from teachers and others and it makes no sense. Walking through a metal detector is hardly a traumatic experience and would just become routine in a hurry. Bullet-proof glass is literally invisible. Having a Resource Officer on premises is no more traumatic than a Mall Cop. This is like arguing that making kids where seatbelts is going to traumatize them. It seems to me that knowing that reasonable measures have been taken to protect them should make them feel safer and more relaxed, and allow them to focus on their school work and being kids.

I've already detailed my own experience with a relatively secure local school and after going there on several occasions, I can tell you that the kids there seemed perfectly fine. They weren't alarmed to see a stranger (me) in the hallway and were just going about their normal routines.

There is no way to make schools completely safe, but some of these basic measures will likely divert people away from them, unfortunately perhaps to other "softer" targets.

Matthew, I think everyone should learn CPR, simply because it's a valuable skill to have for normal living. It's actually simpler and safer than it used to be. More rapid chest compressions (100/min) without assisted breathing is considered acceptable now and is much safer for the rescuer, particularly in overdose cases.

As for the rationale in this case, it just goes to show that some people just can't help sticking their feet in their mouths.

 Reply to topic    

Craig
Joined: 12 Jan 2004
Posts: 534

3/26/18 4:19 PM

Though it might not be how you or I feel when walking through a metal detector, it's not conjecture, and the number of different studies cited behind that statement suggests consensus behind it. Remember, it's not adult minds that are processing this, it's often 9 to 14 year olds who have a very different world perspective than we do. And it's real. Kids start to believe schools are dangerous places.

As far as metal detectors and hardening of buildings, there are just too many ways around these deterrents for them to ever be effective. I go to a bar on occasion where there's a doorman with a metal detector wand checking people for weapons on the way in. I almost always have a locking blade folding knife on me and when I go to this bar I palm the knife in my hand and hold my keys between my thumb and forefinger on the same hand. The wand buzzes on my keys, doorman waves me through every time, and I put the knife back in my pocket. Security systems like this are about the facade of safety and very rarely effective. I don't want my kid to think she's safe at school. I want her to be safe at school.

 Reply to topic    

greglepore
Joined: 10 Jan 2004
Posts: 1617
Location: SE Pa, USA

3/26/18 4:58 PM

Rick Santorum is a scumbag no matter which side of the gun issue you're on.

On a related note, Remington filed Chap 11, likely to shed debt in advance of a takeover.

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail


Return to CyclingForum Home Page CYCLING TECH TALK FORUM
           View New Threads Since My Last Visit VIEW THREADS SINCE MY LAST VISIT
           Start a New Thread

 Display posts from previous:   


Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next  
Last Thread | Next Thread  >  

  
  

 


If you enjoy this site, please consider pledging your support

cyclingforum.com - where cyclists talk tech
Cycling TTF Rides Throughout The World

Cyclingforum is powered by SYNCRONICITY.NET in Denver, Colorado -

Powered by phpBB: Copyright 2006 phpBB Group | Custom phpCF Template by Syncronicity