Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Ohio School Janitors To Carry Handguns


  • Please log in to reply
188 replies to this topic

#166    sslama

sslama

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 98 posts
  • Joined:15 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • Say what you mean and mean what you say....that way I know who you are and what you stand for!

Posted 15 January 2013 - 07:49 PM

Most US citizens want gun control.  A majority do.  

"Lastly, just try and take our rights from Americans and see just what happens".

When I read comments like this and hear Alex Jones freak out and say the same thing, I think to myself. "Thank God I'm not living in the US"....comments like that are not democratic but dictorial and threatening.  These are the very  people that need gun controls put on them.

It's a sensitive subject...that and health care.  Both issues which are changing whether some of you like it or not.

"Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit, but Wisdom is knowing not to put it in a fruit salad."

#167    rashore

rashore

    Telekinetic

  • 6,720 posts
  • Joined:26 Feb 2010
  • Gender:Female

Posted 15 January 2013 - 08:02 PM

The two day course is for the CCH license. They also have to pass a background check, mental evaluation, and submit their fingerprints to the database. Same as everyone else in Ohio that holds CCH licenses, and that's roughly a quarter of the state.


#168    aztek

aztek

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,463 posts
  • Joined:12 Nov 2006

Posted 15 January 2013 - 08:04 PM

View Postsslama, on 15 January 2013 - 07:49 PM, said:

Thank God I'm not living in the US&
youi right, thanks god you don't live in usa, we have enough of ours here.

RESIDENT TROLL.

#169    freetoroam

freetoroam

    Honourary member of the UM asylum

  • Member
  • 6,677 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:rivers and canals of England and Wales.

  • If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 15 January 2013 - 08:07 PM

View Postrashore, on 15 January 2013 - 08:02 PM, said:

The two day course is for the CCH license. They also have to pass a background check, mental evaluation, and submit their fingerprints to the database. Same as everyone else in Ohio that holds CCH licenses, and that's roughly a quarter of the state.
Apart from the 2 day gun training, do they not have this system for all those employed at schools anyway, be it teacher, janitor? they are working with children!

In an ideal World a law would be passed were NO guns were allowed and all those out there destroyed, trouble is the law makers are not going to take a risk of trying to pass that without making sure they are armed first.

#170    green_dude777

green_dude777

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,039 posts
  • Joined:24 May 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

  • When you look back in life, you don't regret what you did, you regret what you never attempted.

Posted 15 January 2013 - 08:12 PM

View Postfreetoroam, on 15 January 2013 - 07:49 PM, said:

And during that 5 minutes we have the school janitor who has had 2 days training taking control of the situation??

Not take control, but deter the shooters from having free reign.

At this time, if we have any, will someone who has been in a shootout situation explain how much more difficult it is to hit a target when you know bullets can/are coming your way.

Here's a little something to read http://dailyanarchis...age-statistics/, not exhaustive, and probably did cherry pick some of his instances to demonstrate his point, but I did notice that it didn't list one civilian hit by another defending against a shooter.


#171    freetoroam

freetoroam

    Honourary member of the UM asylum

  • Member
  • 6,677 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:rivers and canals of England and Wales.

  • If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 15 January 2013 - 08:25 PM

View Postgreen_dude777, on 15 January 2013 - 08:12 PM, said:

Not take control, but deter the shooters from having free reign.

At this time, if we have any, will someone who has been in a shootout situation explain how much more difficult it is to hit a target when you know bullets can/are coming your way.

Here's a little something to read http://dailyanarchis...age-statistics/, not exhaustive, and probably did cherry pick some of his instances to demonstrate his point, but I did notice that it didn't list one civilian hit by another defending against a shooter.
Deter the shooter....how? I would imagine you mean by shooting him first, because I very much doubt the shooter is going to wait for the cleaner to put down his mop, get out his gun and start trying to reason with him.

In an ideal World a law would be passed were NO guns were allowed and all those out there destroyed, trouble is the law makers are not going to take a risk of trying to pass that without making sure they are armed first.

#172    rashore

rashore

    Telekinetic

  • 6,720 posts
  • Joined:26 Feb 2010
  • Gender:Female

Posted 15 January 2013 - 08:32 PM

View Postfreetoroam, on 15 January 2013 - 08:07 PM, said:

Apart from the 2 day gun training, do they not have this system for all those employed at schools anyway, be it teacher, janitor? they are working with children!

I'm not entirely sure. I know there is a background check for both. I'm pretty sure a teacher submits fingerprints for the teaching license, but I don't think janitors have to. Or at least I couldn't find anything about it being a requirement. I couldn't find any firm proof of a mental evaluation requirement for either position. I don't know if that's because it does not exist, or if it's in places I didn't look.


#173    green_dude777

green_dude777

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,039 posts
  • Joined:24 May 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

  • When you look back in life, you don't regret what you did, you regret what you never attempted.

Posted 15 January 2013 - 08:38 PM

View Postfreetoroam, on 15 January 2013 - 08:25 PM, said:

Deter the shooter....how? I would imagine you mean by shooting him first, because I very much doubt the shooter is going to wait for the cleaner to put down his mop, get out his gun and start trying to reason with him.

I want to start with a question: Did you even read any of the link provided?

There are several deterents to having an armed person at a location.  To start, knowing there is someone with the means to shoot back at a location, an intruder has to take that into account.  They'll need to know where all 4 janitors are if they are going to be successful in their objective.  Funny thing, because of this, the guys with the guns are at the highest risk of being shot. Which is the second deterent; the shooters primary target is no longer unarmed people, but the armed people.  There's 2 deterents without any shots being fired.

Once it starts, the third deterent is actual shots being fired, and not necessarily in any direction.  The sound of a gun going off inside a building is awfully unnerving to most people, not to mention the smoke and smell of gunpowder in the air. An added deterent is shots being fired in the direction of the shooter, making his accuracy and confidence drop.  The final deterent is actual shots hitting the shooter, with a hopeful added bonus of a fatality to save the taxpayers in the area money from a costly court proceeding and keeping the shooter locked up for x years.


#174    freetoroam

freetoroam

    Honourary member of the UM asylum

  • Member
  • 6,677 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:rivers and canals of England and Wales.

  • If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 15 January 2013 - 08:54 PM

View Postgreen_dude777, on 15 January 2013 - 08:38 PM, said:

I want to start with a question: Did you even read any of the link provided?

There are several deterents to having an armed person at a location.  To start, knowing there is someone with the means to shoot back at a location, an intruder has to take that into account.  They'll need to know where all 4 janitors are if they are going to be successful in their objective.  Funny thing, because of this, the guys with the guns are at the highest risk of being shot. Which is the second deterent; the shooters primary target is no longer unarmed people, but the armed people.  There's 2 deterents without any shots being fired.

Once it starts, the third deterent is actual shots being fired, and not necessarily in any direction.  The sound of a gun going off inside a building is awfully unnerving to most people, not to mention the smoke and smell of gunpowder in the air. An added deterent is shots being fired in the direction of the shooter, making his accuracy and confidence drop.  The final deterent is actual shots hitting the shooter, with a hopeful added bonus of a fatality to save the taxpayers in the area money from a costly court proceeding and keeping the shooter locked up for x years.
Do you not read any of the previous posts?

Deterrent 1: do you honestly think an armed nutter on a mission is going to give a s****? he is more likely to thrive on a shootout situation!

As for the shots being fired by the 2 day trained janitor actually hitting the target as a deterrent.....hope is most definitely the right word there.

"Once it starts, the third deterent is actual shots being fired, and not necessarily in any direction.  The sound of a gun going off inside a building is awfully unnerving to most people, not to mention the smoke and smell of gunpowder in the air."  
I assume this is after the janitor has spotted the shooter, got all the children to safety and then taken up position?

if your list of deterrents are the key to keeping people safe, then God help us all....and i am not even religious!!!



one more question: "They'll need to know where all 4 janitors are if they are going to be successful in their objective" .....does this mean that the school has 4 janitors working daily together? just asking, because it sounds like a lot of cleaners.

In an ideal World a law would be passed were NO guns were allowed and all those out there destroyed, trouble is the law makers are not going to take a risk of trying to pass that without making sure they are armed first.

#175    green_dude777

green_dude777

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,039 posts
  • Joined:24 May 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

  • When you look back in life, you don't regret what you did, you regret what you never attempted.

Posted 15 January 2013 - 09:07 PM

View Postfreetoroam, on 15 January 2013 - 08:54 PM, said:

Do you not read any of the previous posts?

Deterrent 1: do you honestly think an armed nutter on a mission is going to give a s****? he is more likely to thrive on a shootout situation!

As for the shots being fired by the 2 day trained janitor actually hitting the target as a deterrent.....hope is most definitely the right word there.

"Once it starts, the third deterent is actual shots being fired, and not necessarily in any direction.  The sound of a gun going off inside a building is awfully unnerving to most people, not to mention the smoke and smell of gunpowder in the air."  
I assume this is after the janitor has spotted the shooter, got all the children to safety and then taken up position?

if your list of deterrents are the key to keeping people safe, then God help us all....and i am not even religious!!!



one more question: "They'll need to know where all 4 janitors are if they are going to be successful in their objective" .....does this mean that the school has 4 janitors working daily together? just asking, because it sounds like a lot of cleaners.

I've read everyone's posts in this topic, what do you think I missed?  Actually, I think I've done a terrific job of responding to everyone's points directed at mine.

Anyone on a mission is going to care, if they are trying to complete an objective.  If they want a high kill count, they need to not go down before then.  If they have a specific target, they need to get to that target. Not to mention, if it's a 'nutter', the flash coming from the end of a gun and the sonic boom it creates sometimes snaps 'nutters' back to reality.  I'm still not sure why you think these guys try to get into a shootout situation, considering a lot of them shoot themselves or surrender once police arrive. (you would have seen this last point in the data my link provided)

And you keep saying 'the 2 day trained janitor.'  Because of the lack of information about the janitors, you can't keep saying that like he's unqualified, as he could be a retired scout sniper, an ex seal, etc.

The janitors will be trained to be a deterrent, the teachers will be trained to gather students and get them to a safe spot.  One thing they learned from Columbine is to not sit and wait, but aggressively pursue the shooter.

As far as the school having 4 janitors working, I don't know, and that helps the point.  If a shooter is planning something, they still need to account for all 4, whether they are in the janitors office, at home, in the parking lot, at your mom's house, etc.

The 'hope' was added as a bonus to a situation of the shooter being hit, but you are correct in that any plan that is designed to prevent death, we always hope it works, even if it's a fool proof plan, we still hope for a good result.


#176    freetoroam

freetoroam

    Honourary member of the UM asylum

  • Member
  • 6,677 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:rivers and canals of England and Wales.

  • If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 15 January 2013 - 09:28 PM

Anyone on a mission is going to care, if they are trying to complete an objective.  If they want a high kill count, they need to not go down before then.  If they have a specific target, they need to get to that target. Not to mention, if it's a 'nutter', the flash coming from the end of a gun and the sonic boom it creates sometimes snaps 'nutters' back to reality.  I'm still not sure why you think these guys try to get into a shootout situation, considering a lot of them shoot themselves or surrender once police arrive.

============================
the only thing they care about is shooting as many people as possible, as for specific target, i would imagine their specific target is anything that moves.
As for the flash snapping him back to reality??? this guy already had killed his mother beforehand, if that did not snap him back into reality then nothing else would.
As for the last sentence, exactly my point....they know the chances are they are going to die in the shoot out with the police, so creating as much carnage as possible will be one of their main objectives first...some of these sad uks would thrive on the fact that once in their lives they are going to become famous...in the worse possible way!
This guy had already had a confrontation with 4 school officials beforehand, but when he went back armed he did not specifically target them alone, hence my first point.

I think you are giving too much credit to the nutters frame of mind at the time....he lost it completely and you "rational" explanations do NOT apply here.

Edited by freetoroam, 15 January 2013 - 09:29 PM.

In an ideal World a law would be passed were NO guns were allowed and all those out there destroyed, trouble is the law makers are not going to take a risk of trying to pass that without making sure they are armed first.

#177    green_dude777

green_dude777

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,039 posts
  • Joined:24 May 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

  • When you look back in life, you don't regret what you did, you regret what you never attempted.

Posted 15 January 2013 - 09:41 PM

View Postfreetoroam, on 15 January 2013 - 09:28 PM, said:

Anyone on a mission is going to care, if they are trying to complete an objective.  If they want a high kill count, they need to not go down before then.  If they have a specific target, they need to get to that target. Not to mention, if it's a 'nutter', the flash coming from the end of a gun and the sonic boom it creates sometimes snaps 'nutters' back to reality.  I'm still not sure why you think these guys try to get into a shootout situation, considering a lot of them shoot themselves or surrender once police arrive.

============================
the only thing they care about is shooting as many people as possible, as for specific target, i would imagine their specific target is anything that moves.
As for the flash snapping him back to reality??? this guy already had killed his mother beforehand, if that did not snap him back into reality then nothing else would.
As for the last sentence, exactly my point....they know the chances are they are going to die in the shoot out with the police, so creating as much carnage as possible will be one of their main objectives first...some of these sad uks would thrive on the fact that once in their lives they are going to become famous...in the worse possible way!
This guy had already had a confrontation with 4 school officials beforehand, but when he went back armed he did not specifically target them alone, hence my first point.

I think you are giving too much credit to the nutters frame of mind at the time....he lost it completely and you "rational" explanations do NOT apply here.

Your first statement in the retort just isn't true. http://www.bakersfie...html?hpt=ju_bn6 This literally just happened in the past week, gunman not looking for a kill count, but was looking for a target.

Correct, Adam Lanza was not deterred by just shots being fired.  He would've been deterred from a round being put into his chest by that school principal or psychologist.


#178    freetoroam

freetoroam

    Honourary member of the UM asylum

  • Member
  • 6,677 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:rivers and canals of England and Wales.

  • If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 15 January 2013 - 09:55 PM

View Postgreen_dude777, on 15 January 2013 - 09:41 PM, said:

Your first statement in the retort just isn't true. http://www.bakersfie...html?hpt=ju_bn6 This literally just happened in the past week, gunman not looking for a kill count, but was looking for a target.
Correct, Adam Lanza was not deterred by just shots being fired.  He would've been deterred from a round being put into his chest by that school principal or psychologist.

Principle or psychologist? did they have guns?

as for the link, it has absolutely nothing to do with Adam lanza and is not even in comparison to what he did. A link to a random shooter would have been better. Lanza did not target a particular person, he targeted what ever moved.

Edited by freetoroam, 15 January 2013 - 10:01 PM.

In an ideal World a law would be passed were NO guns were allowed and all those out there destroyed, trouble is the law makers are not going to take a risk of trying to pass that without making sure they are armed first.

#179    green_dude777

green_dude777

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,039 posts
  • Joined:24 May 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

  • When you look back in life, you don't regret what you did, you regret what you never attempted.

Posted 15 January 2013 - 11:36 PM

View Postfreetoroam, on 15 January 2013 - 09:55 PM, said:

Principle or psychologist? did they have guns?

as for the link, it has absolutely nothing to do with Adam lanza and is not even in comparison to what he did. A link to a random shooter would have been better. Lanza did not target a particular person, he targeted what ever moved.

Correct, the link has nothing to do with Adam Lanza, the link was to provide a case where someone did choose a target.  You gave the blanket statement of "the only thing they care about is shooting as many people as possible, as for specific target, i would imagine their specific target is anything that moves.", this was just to counter that one point.

In Adam Lanza's case, if the principal or psychologist or both had a gun, I am claiming that only one or no people would've died that day, as the deterrent in that case would've been the round in his chest.


Since no school knows what kind of shooter will potentially show up, you set up as many safeguards as possible. Some will be scared to even do anything if there's armed opposition, some will get scared once the bullets start flying, and some won't be scared and will be gunned down by the armed opposition.

Please, tell me how I am safer in Sandy Hook Elementary with no armed opposition to the gunman.  Or better yet, please explain how I am in more danger if there is armed opposition?


#180    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,412 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 15 January 2013 - 11:49 PM

View Postfreetoroam, on 15 January 2013 - 09:28 PM, said:

Anyone on a mission is going to care, if they are trying to complete an objective.  If they want a high kill count, they need to not go down before then.  If they have a specific target, they need to get to that target. Not to mention, if it's a 'nutter', the flash coming from the end of a gun and the sonic boom it creates sometimes snaps 'nutters' back to reality.  I'm still not sure why you think these guys try to get into a shootout situation, considering a lot of them shoot themselves or surrender once police arrive.

============================
the only thing they care about is shooting as many people as possible, as for specific target, i would imagine their specific target is anything that moves.
As for the flash snapping him back to reality??? this guy already had killed his mother beforehand, if that did not snap him back into reality then nothing else would.
As for the last sentence, exactly my point....they know the chances are they are going to die in the shoot out with the police, so creating as much carnage as possible will be one of their main objectives first...some of these sad uks would thrive on the fact that once in their lives they are going to become famous...in the worse possible way!
This guy had already had a confrontation with 4 school officials beforehand, but when he went back armed he did not specifically target them alone, hence my first point.

I think you are giving too much credit to the nutters frame of mind at the time....he lost it completely and you "rational" explanations do NOT apply here.
Who cares what the nutter thinks, as if you know.  

Blow his head off before he kills even one more child.   That's how you deter mass murder.

It's telling that this story generated so much word-count from people just because it happened to include janitors in one school district in Ohio.   This has been a terrible display of unconscious bias against a job that doesn't get the respect it deserves.   The OP article also mentions that over 1000 teachers in Ohio have applied for an armed training program, but no, that's ignored in favor of this protracted argument about janitors.

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users