Gun and weapon detection is still useful to stop shootings and stabbings that arise out of fights, where one member may suddenly present and use a previously concealed weapon.
Agreed that the usefulness against a crazed gunman is less clear, although crazies do not always have a rational plan. If the weapon was concealed in a backpack or something the security may be able to tackle them before they access it. If they’re carrying it in an easily accessible, concealed holster, that’s less effective and they might be able to draw and use it after being detected.
> Gun and weapon detection is still useful to stop shootings and stabbings that arise out of fights, where one member may suddenly present and use a previously concealed weapon.
Which might be a reasonable thing to aim for? It was mentioned up thread there's >100 school shootings/yr. The vast, vast majority (>>90%) of those are not the "crazy person randomly shoots up school" type, but rather the "two people in a fight / two groups in a fight / targeted revenge on single person".
Of course the downside with the latter is that simply weapons checking at the school won't stop it from happening right before / after school, or otherwise outside of school.
I'm still sad about having so many scanners preventing things like pocketknives in public spaces though. I generally carry a pocketknife with me everywhere I go, and there have been a number of times where I just haven't even thought about the fact it's on me when I end up going to a sporting event. They're pretty useful things; I probably use mine a few times a day.
Luckily some venues are nice about checking it with security, but still a pain to have to remember to go back and pick it up when leaving.
Wouldn't it be nice of people would just quit shooting and stabbing each other at things like sporting events :(
You can make the scanner a condition of entry. Disclose that it’s happening and it’s a deterrent. Better for crazy people to do crazy at the front door.
(C) crazed gunman neutralized by good guy with gun. In this case it was 3 minutes after the fact (Median Police Response Time to Active Shooter Attacks) rather than immediately as there were no available Good Guys with Guns due to gun policies.
I would never ever choose to be involved in an active shooter situation but if I were I’d surely want to be armed rather than not.
Well the "good guy with a gun" argument presumes the good guy is willing to use his gun and probably risk his own life doing it. This would happen more easily if he's already inside and under direct threat by the bad guy(s).
A cop outside is not obligated or expected to put his own life at risk. He's expected to show up for work tomorrow.
I do not agree with the second at all. Law Enforcement are both obligated and expected to put their own life at risk protecting the public. That said they are also expected to show up for work tomorrow! It’s a sad day when they don’t.
