Thanks for the rambling stream of consciousness 
.
I didnโt ask that question to be contentious, I really would like to have an intelligent and respectful conversation on the subject. You seemed like a good bet.
Stop it Entylend! You're embarrassing me and making me feel all warm and fuzzy inside... blush, blush
Sorry about your relative /roommate. That must have been very difficult for you and your family.
Thanks.
I donโt have time to address everything you mentioned right now, but hereโs a short summary of what I heard in your reply. Feel free to clarify or correct if I missed something in the rambling:
Lol... I really need to work on my communication skills because it appears your take away isn't what I was trying to convey.
We canโt prevent it, itโs pointless to try.
Even if we could, the risk is too low to be worth the effort.
Not quite. I'm saying that I'm a realist and accept as fact that bad things are going to happen in life no matter what we do because there are and always will be bad people in the world intent on doing bad things to others. To think otherwise is fantasy. That's the way it has been since the beginning of man and will continue to be no matter how much more "civilized" we become.
The chances of bad things happening can be mitigated to varying degrees but it will always be based on a risk/reward or cost/benefit calculation whether done by us, the government, or the people that operate the places we go every day.
Again, if any of us civilians actually believed being shot was within the realm of realistic probability on any given day, why would we leave our house?!?!?
Weโd all be safer if more people carried weapons and had concealed carry permits.
Generally I believe this to be true, but not because I think it will result in the bad guy being shot before they can do too much harm. I believe it acts as a strong deterrent. Will it stop every bad guy? No. But I believe most of bad guys and at least the mildly crazy do have an inherent sense of self preservation. Now those that are suicidal, maybe not so much...
Again, how many of the sensationalized mass shootings have taken place at locations where everyday citizens had the right to carry as they wished?
Some anger and defensiveness (no need to justify, just saying what I heard in your post.)
And off-topic, if we want to save lives we should focus our efforts on:
Keeping people from killing themselves (and occasionally others?) with tobacco and alcohol.
Requiring safer vehicles or a special permit to drive one not fitting the requirements
(I donโt totally disagree with either point, but donโt certain vehicles already have much higher insurance rates for that very reason? )
I don't think I'm angry about anything. Cynical yes, angry no.
I was trying to point out the hypocrisy of anti-gun people claiming it is all about saving lives when there are even greater causes of death that could be removed or changed.
Unfortunately these things -- despite their death tolls - won't be removed or changed because people (and the industries that make those products) feel their right to self-medicate or express their freedom and individuality is of greater importance than saving as many lives as possible.
Letโs play a little RPG
Youโre in a windowless conference room. Boss is pissed. If you want to keep your job (letโs assume you do) the group needs to produce one or more sets of recommendations for allocating budget to address school shootings / mass shootings or youโre all staying in that room for the foreseeable future. Ordering in Burger King or McD.? Hah - you wish! More like 6 day old cold cuts from the 7/11 next door.
The wall art is hideous, the chairs arenโt comfy. Your phone has been confiscated. Thereโs no way out.
You want to leave and have a life, and not die of listeria from convenience store bologna. What recommendations do you come up with?
Let me start by saying I absolutely LOVE the scenario you've presented/painted here. I can actually visualize the entire room and participants. Crap! Seems we're having problems with the ventilation in the room as well. It's going to be a long stay in this room...
I have no answer to your question because there is NO WAY to prevent ABSOLUTELY EVERY possible permutation of a bad guy with a weapon intent on destruction.
To even begin to approach that level of security, not only would it be cost prohibitive, but it would put a major strain on everyone involved along with the entire school's infrastructure.
The best you can do - and is what most schools seem to have done - is figure out the most likely scenarios and attempt to protect against those as best they can within the budget they were given, without creating too many points of possible conflict and without infringing on too many rights. (Pretty much what I was saying further up.)
Unfortunately the biggest weakness in any and every plan will likely be one or more of the humans that must execute it effectively in order for it to work. People get complacent. They put their own well being above others. They...
Marjorie Stone Douglas High School likely thought they had a pretty good plan in place. Unfortunately there wasn't just one weak link, they were many.
A gunman with an AR-15 fired the bullets, but a series of blunders, bad policies, sketchy training and poor leadership helped him succeed. "
http://projects.sun-sentinel.com/2018/sfl-parkland-school-shooting-critical-moments/#nt=oft09a-2gp1
(Ps. If I even thought I had a solution to school shootings I'd be screaming it at the top of my lungs! That's assuming it didn't trample on any of our Constitutional Rights.)
