Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What Happens at a Firearms Training for Teachers

bostonreview.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 57 posts

Re: What Happens at a Firearms Training for Teachers

#31

Post by luigibosco »

maxxxxx wrote: post #28

Unless they train frequently I can't imagine this working well. When I was at military we did shooting exercises at targets. This was easy but as soon as there was an exercise where the situation is messy or you are under pressure things fall apart quickly. There were situations where our group would have killed each other instead of the attackers. You need a lot of training to do that right. I don't know how things…

Great feedback, except for the part about the organizers, who obviously have not.

More guns is not the solution to problems with guns.

Improving access to medicine, economic stability and programs that help empower educators and students to build safer spaces may be though.

In my school all the kids knew who was having a hard time and who was isolated, it would be better to reach out to these students rather than shoot at them. Students are going to school to learn and we're teaching and modeling militarism and violence.

The reason, my guess - doesn't make headlines, isn't good for bottom line.

Re: What Happens at a Firearms Training for Teachers

#32

Post by benjohnson »

maxxxxx wrote: post #24
mijowi wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh, no it’s not. You think they happen less often in Russia? Syria? Venezuela?

They happen less in countries with similar political and economical environment like Europe.

Depends on the time frame - if we go back 100 years and include governmental killings the US seems much more peaceful.

Re: What Happens at a Firearms Training for Teachers

#33

Post by SolaceQuantum »

Casseres wrote: post #23
SolaceQuantum wrote: post #19

"But now it was no longer a theoretical question of protecting kids at any cost. The faceless target at the shooting range, so absurd in its proportions, had a face: Jason, whom I wanted so badly to help." Yeah, I don't know. I feel that we shouldn't be training civilians in the psychological dehumanization necessary to kill someone. Especially students they know. We know this kind of mindset is damaging to the psych…

> has there ever been a case where a teacher successfully shot a school shooter before any innocents could be harmed? I don't think there ever will be. I would probably not shoot a kid that I only suspect would shoot someone. I doubt a teacher would either. (Also, is the kid a "school shooter" if he/she did not harm anyone?) There has been a case where a principal got a gun from his car and stopped a school shooter t…

Could you link me the case? I'm pretty curious about it. The cases I've seen have been when the school shooter was already largely finished killing people.

Re: What Happens at a Firearms Training for Teachers

#34

Post by lwhalen »

The hand-wringing by the author in this piece is off the charts. If they're this conflicted about carrying, they shouldn't do it. Carrying is a strictly voluntary practice, and I'm glad to see Ohio is enacting (IMHO sensible) legislation allowing it for teachers _who want to participate_.

Re: What Happens at a Firearms Training for Teachers

#35

Post by maxxxxx »

benjohnson wrote: post #32
maxxxxx wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They happen less in countries with similar political and economical environment like Europe.

Depends on the time frame - if we go back 100 years and include governmental killings the US seems much more peaceful.

I don't think that's relevant in a discussion about school shootings.

Re: What Happens at a Firearms Training for Teachers

#36

Post by potta_coffee »

Casseres wrote: post #3

"hollow points, rounds designed to swell upon impact to ensure maximum harm." My understanding is that hollow points were designed to prevent over-penetration rather than to harm more. How does the author know it was designed to "ensure maximum harm"? I can't help but think it was intentional. Edit: Of course now that I read the rest of the article after initially writing this comment, I see that quote is also highli…

Hollow points are intended to do maximum damage. It makes sense - you shouldn't be employing your weapon unless your life is in danger. If your life is in danger, you want to neutralize the threat as quickly and effectively as possible. If you don't need to do that, then you don't need your weapon at all. Shooting with the intent of wounding someone is a Hollywood-ism.

Re: What Happens at a Firearms Training for Teachers

#37

Post by potta_coffee »

gotocake wrote: post #14
MrMember wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are absolutely designed to prevent over-penetration. That's how the FBI tests ammunition. They fire it into a block of ballistic gelatin and ammunition that penetrates far enough to have a high chance of incapacitating the target but not so far as to carry through completely gets the highest marks. The only real way to accomplish this is with hollow points. There's a reason every law enforcement agency in the co…

Actually federal law enforcement has had a long preference for 10mm auto, and its shortened successor the .40 S&W. In particular the FBI HRT and SWAT still use it despite a history of over penetration.

I don't have a link, but I read a long article about the development process for the 10mm. Apparently, penetration was the reason they switched to 10 (and later 40). They were having difficulties with 9mm not penetrating windshields and other barriers.

Re: What Happens at a Firearms Training for Teachers

#38

Post by potta_coffee »

detaro wrote: post #7
Casseres wrote: post #3

"hollow points, rounds designed to swell upon impact to ensure maximum harm." My understanding is that hollow points were designed to prevent over-penetration rather than to harm more. How does the author know it was designed to "ensure maximum harm"? I can't help but think it was intentional. Edit: Of course now that I read the rest of the article after initially writing this comment, I see that quote is also highli…

How do you increase stopping power? By having a bullet do greater damage to the target. That's what they are designed for. You can argue that there's a legitimate interest for doing so, but it doesn't change that it is about damage. They're banned by the hague conventions for warfare, seen as unnecessarily harmful, so they only see civilian use (although some military designs follow similar ideas, as far as I know no…

Also, the objective when shooting someone in self-defense vs shooting someone in war is often different. A wounded enemy is a huge burden - now they need medivac, and their fellows are concerned for their welfare. A dead enemy produces none of that overhead.

Re: What Happens at a Firearms Training for Teachers

#39

Post by potta_coffee »

jvergeldedios wrote: post #4
Casseres wrote: post #3

"hollow points, rounds designed to swell upon impact to ensure maximum harm." My understanding is that hollow points were designed to prevent over-penetration rather than to harm more. How does the author know it was designed to "ensure maximum harm"? I can't help but think it was intentional. Edit: Of course now that I read the rest of the article after initially writing this comment, I see that quote is also highli…

They're designed to prevent going straight through by expanding inside of soft tissues. One of the effects of that is increased tissue damage. So they maybe they weren't "designed to cause maximum harm" but that's certainly one of the effects over a full metal jacket round.

Yes but ammunition manufacturers often advertise the enhanced lethality of their hollowpoints. It's pretty clear that it's seen as a benefit.

Re: What Happens at a Firearms Training for Teachers

#40

Post by dragonwriter »

Casseres wrote: post #3

"hollow points, rounds designed to swell upon impact to ensure maximum harm." My understanding is that hollow points were designed to prevent over-penetration rather than to harm more. How does the author know it was designed to "ensure maximum harm"? I can't help but think it was intentional. Edit: Of course now that I read the rest of the article after initially writing this comment, I see that quote is also highli…

> My understanding is that hollow points were designed to prevent over-penetration rather than to harm more

The reasons they were designed to prevent overpenetration is because:

(1) overpenetration means energy which could go into damaging the target is instead wasted doing something else, and,

(2) that “something else” is sometimes harming things that one doesn't mean to harm.

Post reply on HN