DaveTN

You don’t need one; you have some quality rifles already. Your M1A’s will do anything an AR will do; only much better. Unless you perceive getting into a situation where you need multiple 30 round magazines of underpowered rifle ammo. You aren’t missing anything. I’ve owned several over the years and own four right now, a .22 LR, a 5.56/.223, a 7.62/308, and a .223 pistol. With the exception of the .308 (My go to SHTF rifle) and the pistol (trunk gun) they are just range toys. I won’t say I have never had a malfunction with an AR; but I can’t remember one right now. I have them simply because I can. I have a lot of guns that I don’t use or carry very often but just wanted them to play with. I know it’s not popular to call guns “Toys” but that’s exactly what they are to me. If you are just looking for something to buy, do you have a quality bolt action rifle with a quality scope than can make a 1000 yard shot? Do I think AR’s will be outlawed? Possibly by some of the states, but I doubt the Feds do it. When the Dems get back in power if they get it done we don’t know that they will be Grandfathered or transferable to family members. But if that happens I doubt your Garand or M1A’s will be safe either.

My choices were between Arlo and Nest. I had outlets available and didn’t want rechargeable; so I went with Nest. The yearly subscription fees are high, but other than that I’ve been happy with them. They have a lot of control in the settings and everything can be adjusted with your phone. I bought a set with an indoor and an outdoor on sale at Kohls. https://nest.com/cameras/

If you do a search you will see that most of the mainstream news reported it two days ago, shortly after it happened.

I think we will be okay. He’s kicking around ideas out loud instead of sitting on his hands and saying there isn’t anything we can do; as some are suggesting.

Judge Napolitano seems to think Federal law doesn’t cover it, but some state laws may.

I would guess you are about to see everything go to 21.

I saw them interviewed a couple of times on FOX. A man armed with a shotgun entered their store and robbed them. They shot him and caused him to drop the shotgun. The continued to shoot him. The mother fired until she knew her weapon was empty. The only injure either of them suffered was a cut to the Moms hand when the dirt bag ripped her empty gun from her hand. Other than the perp still being alive; this ended well. Good for them; this was a win. Train all you like; that's a good thing. But you still have no idea how you will perform in a confrontation with an armed criminal.

All of this will end up in the SCOTUS. I wonder how they will keep from having to make all the decisions on what should/should not stop a gun sale.

when did cops start carrying "scatterguns"?

To do the very best they can do.

For those of you that are as old as I am, I will remind you of May 4th 1970 when a bunch of untrained kids faced a situation they weren’t trained to handle. "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Israel has strict gun control. You can’t point to fewer school shooting and say their gun control has nothing to do with it; it has everything to do with it. We do not want to copy Israel.

Sure the hearing.... but I'm saying you (depending on where you live) won't get a hearing before you are served. When you are served with a restraining order or an order of protection your guns will be seized. The hearing will come later.

Do you get a hearing on retraining orders now? Nope. Many time restraining orders are used in Divorces so one party can get the other party off the property while they clear out the house. The same liberal Judges that are allowing cities and states to violate our immigration laws will keep every gun they can get seized. They aren't going to want to return anything.

Unless you want gun control I don’t think we want to use Israel as an example.

Some folks are a little slower than others it seems.

Yes, cash can be repurposed better than anything I can think of.

Cash. It can fix most any problem.

The only ones that know what they did and why are the Deputies/Officers that were there. The Sheriff and the Chiefs involved need to let these responders speak out. I can understand one Deputy freezing; but not four. They need to answer the question as to why they didn’t enter the school and engage the shooter.

Well I think most everyone has stated their opinions in the other threads. However…. This problem will be fixed. We will find out that having trained Police Officers and the technology required to keep our schools safe is not cost prohibitive. We won’t need to use HCP holders, security companies, or military veterans. It will happen when parents and school boards quit playing the odds. Odds are that 99.9% (I just made that number up on the spot) of us will never have to use deadly force; but that doesn’t stop us from carrying. What is more important than protecting our children? The answer is nothing; if we need money we will take it from somewhere else that is less important. People are having discussions everywhere right now that will impact us all. We need to be involved.

Since shortly after Columbine (18 years ago) the response for a school shooting has been for the arriving Officers to enter and engage the shooter. It probably won’t last long enough for SWAT to get involved. This one lasted six minutes. I hate to Judge this Deputy because we don’t know what happened. We don’t know because he has refused to make a statement. This Deputy apparently had enough time at BSO to retire. I would assume he wasn’t trained to wait based on the statements from his boss; the Sheriff. I have such mixed emotions. It's sad. I feel for this guy. He froze and the haters and the MSM is going to drive him into the ground. But maybe some lives would have been saved had he acted.

Thank you for your service. I never would have thought a patrol Officer would fail to engage a shooter while kids were being killed any more than I would have thought an HCP holder would stand over an Officer and execute him. Unfortunately both have happened; fortunately neither is the norm.

I saw a story that said the Mayor and her husband were trying to work things out. The wife of the Officer is referring questions to her attorney.

No one knows how they will handle being involved in a shooting until it happens. If the reports are correct this Officer failed to engage. I would assume he got scared since he has offered no explanation and resigned. (Retired is more accurate if what I am seeing is correct) He has to live with what he did. This is another reason we have to be able to have guns to engage violent criminals. There have been SCOTUS rulings that the Police are not required to or responsible for our protection. We must be able to protect ourselves in seconds, not minutes.