School Shooting in Connecticut - Multiple Fatalities

[AntiSwagLand]

I feel like while we do need to have some sort of conversation about regulation of firearm access, that's maybe the second or the third one down the list and our primary focus should be on taking a much closer look at our mental health services and the degree of support that we provide to families with seriously mentally ill children.

Two problems I see there:
1-How do we make sure that the people who actually need help go?
2-America is one of those places where if there is no profit to be made, it's not happening.

[Northern Dominus]

Except not really. See, "sticks and rocks" to use your terminology, can be used as weapons, but they not only require some degree of strength and skill to be used as such they also require uninhibited movement and time to land a deadly blow. Adam Lamza might have been focused and in the grip of some terrible madness that few could really understand, but he wasn't that big and burly and most likely could have been wrestled to the ground before killing 27 people with "sticks and rocks".

A firearm is a device designed to make the act of killing virtually effortless in the face of most other methods available to non-military people who don't want to risk blowing themselves up with some kind of homeade bomb or burn themselves alive by starting a fire. It does not matter what the use for that firearm is intended to be, every firearm is a device that uses explosive propellant to fire a metal projectile at high speeds out of a barrel that is designed not only to impart force to that projectile but in many firearms improve accuracy.

The fact that Adam Lamza had access to multiple firearms at his home courtesy of his mother, described as a gun "enthusiast" and a survivalist, is the reason why he was able to murder 20 young children and 7 adults, including his mother. Once a person has a firearm of any kind, their ability to kill is significantly multiplied. The fact that he wouldn't have been able to have access to firearms on his own but still was able to speaks to a severe defecit of firearms ownership responsibility in this country. Perhaps if Nancy Lamza had kept trigger locks on every single firearm and never revealed the location of the keys, perhaps if she had stored the ammunition in a safe and never released the code, if she had done ANYTHING to slow down or impede Adam Lamza's acquisition of firearms, this tragedy might have been averted.

This was not the case, and now we're left with an uncomfortable and ugly but harsh truth; that the firearm has been elevated to such a lofty position because of a Cult of Guns around it that we're now being killed by the very object that this Cult worships so dearly. Using petty excuses of "it could have happened anyway" or "only criminals will have guns" and other petulant one-liners is doing nothing but paving the way for the death toll to continue.

I for one am tired for paying for our nations immaturity with blood. This has to stop.

Once more, how can you prevent 100% of the people from owning guns?

With 300 million firearms in the US, it is unreasonable to assume that every tragic incidence of gun violence can be stopped. Plus I never advocated for that.

However, steps can be taken to ensure that people with psychological disorders and/or extensive criminal backgrounds, which is something that, quite obviously, has to be done.

First and probably most critical is the closing of the gun show loophole. Private sellers should be beholden to the same regulations as liscensed firearms dealers and be required to perform background checks for every single sale they make.

Background checks themselves should be more in-depth and as probing as the law allows.

The process to acquire a license to carry a firearm could be vastly expanded, becoming as involved as the one needed to operate a motor vehicle on public roads.

All firearms sales could be required to be accompanied with trigger locks.

An individual tax on every bullet in a box could be levied, making purchases of large quantities of ammunition that much more cost-prohibitive.

These and hundreds of other actions could be implemented, realistically, and not really have any functional effect on 2nd Amendment rights, meaning the base right would still exist, only with added recognition that the country has changed since its writing and technology has advanced as well.

It could be done, but first the Cult of the Gun has to be addressed and recognized for what it really is; a mutation of that 2nd Amendment that is doing more harm to the nation than any sort of firearms regulation ever has.

[Koraka]

I've noticed you're arguements are you repeating "If we have people gaurding, they're just going to cause more chaos."
You wouldn't be giving weapons to inexperienced people, you'd give them to trained professionals (or cops, whatever the school could afford). Since this is an elementary school that we're talking about, it wouldn't be difficult to tell who the shooter was.

I'm not sure if you understand exactly what's going on with American finances, but I can assure you that hiring a minimum of two guards per school (one is just going to be immediately targeted and killed) is not going to be cheap.

P.s. Banning something, never gets rid of it.

Except that in most of the first world, where we've banned guns, guns have pretty much disappeared from general circulation. So you're not quite right.

Never said it was cheap, simply countering his arguement. "Pretty much disappeared" It means that they're still there. While it will lower crimerates, it's impossible to prevent.

[AntiSwagLand]

Once more, how can you prevent 100% of the people from owning guns?

With 300 million firearms in the US, it is unreasonable to assume that every tragic incidence of gun violence can be stopped. Plus I never advocated for that.

However, steps can be taken to ensure that people with psychological disorders and/or extensive criminal backgrounds, which is something that, quite obviously, has to be done.

First and probably most critical is the closing of the gun show loophole. Private sellers should be beholden to the same regulations as liscensed firearms dealers and be required to perform background checks for every single sale they make.

Background checks themselves should be more in-depth and as probing as the law allows.

The process to acquire a license to carry a firearm could be vastly expanded, becoming as involved as the one needed to operate a motor vehicle on public roads.

All firearms sales could be required to be accompanied with trigger locks.

An individual tax on every bullet in a box could be levied, making purchases of large quantities of ammunition that much more cost-prohibitive.

These and hundreds of other actions could be implemented, realistically, and not really have any functional effect on 2nd Amendment rights, meaning the base right would still exist, only with added recognition that the country has changed since its writing and technology has advanced as well.

It could be done, but first the Cult of the Gun has to be addressed and recognized for what it really is; a mutation of that 2nd Amendment that is doing more harm to the nation than any sort of firearms regulation ever has.

That can be done, yes. But there is still the problem of black markets and smugglers.

[Romanum Tellus]

whats this "cult of guns"
I own a gun passed down by my father, its one of the few things I have left of him and ill be damned if anyone's going to take it away from me. besides guns can be used for recreation too.(EX: trap shooting)

[Chronic Hypersomnia]

I feel like while we do need to have some sort of conversation about regulation of firearm access, that's maybe the second or the third one down the list and our primary focus should be on taking a much closer look at our mental health services and the degree of support that we provide to families with seriously mentally ill children.

Two problems I see there:
1-How do we make sure that the people who actually need help go?
2-America is one of those places where if there is no profit to be made, it's not happening.

You can't be that ignorant, man.

[Tubbsalot]

You can't be that ignorant, man.

Given that America routinely fails to implement anything approaching a decent national medical system, what makes you think they'll be looking at effective mental health treatment within two decades of now?

Bear in mind that your answer to this question is going to have to justify you saying "it's impossible for a person to be this ignorant."

[Gun Manufacturers]

whats this "cult of guns"
I own a gun passed down by my father, its one of the few things I have left of him and ill be damned if anyone's going to take it away from me. besides guns can be used for recreation too.(EX: trap shooting)

Heirloom firearms are the best firearms.

Pics?

[Northern Dominus]

With 300 million firearms in the US, it is unreasonable to assume that every tragic incidence of gun violence can be stopped. Plus I never advocated for that.

However, steps can be taken to ensure that people with psychological disorders and/or extensive criminal backgrounds, which is something that, quite obviously, has to be done.

First and probably most critical is the closing of the gun show loophole. Private sellers should be beholden to the same regulations as liscensed firearms dealers and be required to perform background checks for every single sale they make.

Background checks themselves should be more in-depth and as probing as the law allows.

The process to acquire a license to carry a firearm could be vastly expanded, becoming as involved as the one needed to operate a motor vehicle on public roads.

All firearms sales could be required to be accompanied with trigger locks.

An individual tax on every bullet in a box could be levied, making purchases of large quantities of ammunition that much more cost-prohibitive.

These and hundreds of other actions could be implemented, realistically, and not really have any functional effect on 2nd Amendment rights, meaning the base right would still exist, only with added recognition that the country has changed since its writing and technology has advanced as well.

It could be done, but first the Cult of the Gun has to be addressed and recognized for what it really is; a mutation of that 2nd Amendment that is doing more harm to the nation than any sort of firearms regulation ever has.

That can be done, yes. But there is still the problem of black markets and smugglers.

The United States IS the black market of firearms.

That gun show loophole, that allows straw purchases of military-spec weapons. Not fully automatic weapons but ones that could potentially be converted, without so much as a background check, at least not with much of a penalty for the seller anyway. These firearms then make their way across state and even national borders into the hands of criminals. It happens all the time here in Chicago, with weapons flowing from places like Kentucky and Indiana. Better still, wanna know where the drug cartels in northern Mexico get most of their firearms? Through straw purchases via private sellers in Texas and Arizona. Those weapons then get smuggled south and end up in the hands of cartel assassins and psychos.
http://www.theworld.org/2012/12/guns-an ... gents-see/

That's why that gun show loophole has to be closed. To close the black market, to track firearms more effectively and to more readily identify illegal weapons sales and usage.

Again, it's foolish to think that all illegal weapons sales will be stopped forever, but a helluva lot more gun violence will be stopped and the flow of weapons into the hands of criminals and dangerously deranged maniacs can be reduced from a gush down to a drip, which is a helluva lot better than how things work today.

But since you seem to be hung up on that particular talking point, let's hear an idea or two from your camp. How would you tamp down on gun violence and illegal firearms trade?

whats this "cult of guns"
I own a gun passed down by my father, its one of the few things I have left of him and ill be damned if anyone's going to take it away from me. besides guns can be used for recreation too.(EX: trap shooting)

Hmm...well I'll explain it by asking you a question.

To you, what is a firearm? Not the one passed down from your father, but just any firearm in general. What is it?

[Chronic Hypersomnia]

Given that America routinely fails to implement anything approaching a decent national medical system, what makes you think they'll be looking at effective mental health treatment within two decades of now?

Bear in mind that your answer to this question is going to have to justify you saying "it's impossible for a person to be this ignorant."

Bear in mind that your answer to this question is going to have to justify why you think changing gun rights will help change things for the better, when you just admitted that it wont. :]

[Romanum Tellus]

whats this "cult of guns"
I own a gun passed down by my father, its one of the few things I have left of him and ill be damned if anyone's going to take it away from me. besides guns can be used for recreation too.(EX: trap shooting)

Heirloom firearms are the best firearms.

Pics?

might be able to find one

[Vanum Norendum]

>Implying a 20-year-old nerdy psycho boy knows how to smuggle in guns to shoot a school up.

Guns as deadly as assault rifles come in sizes suitable to hide in lunchboxes, coats and backpacks. They're easier to hide than excitement in public. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.

How big is your lunchbox, coat and backpack? Rifles aren't exactly compact ya know.

There were other stabbings that killed people too. The fact that this kind of stuff even happens at all is what we should actually focus on though, not the particular weapon that was used. The mental health of the person is in question seems to be a common factor in many of these kinds of incidents. Focusing and blaming the weapon is just an emotional knee jerk reaction to something awful that happens, and I understand that, but I think it's just the wrong way to go. Talking about the weapon used is easy, which is why everyone's doing it, but I think there's a much deeper issue here that needs to be addressed.

OK then, what are you proposing to do about mental health?

Mental illness is pretty expensive to treat. Are you suggesting free consultations for every US citizen? Just for the young men who typically act out their mental illness? Compulsory treatment? What?

Or ... as is more likely ... you're just saying "blame the person not the gun" and don't intend to do a damn thing about the problems.

Well, the person is the one at fault, since the person was the one that performed the crime. The gun didn't just decide to go and murder over 20 children on its own. I'm not sure what we should do about mental health, perhaps we should start with an increase in funding for mental health facility and psychiatric care, and make it more readily available?

There were other stabbings that killed people too. The fact that this kind of stuff even happens at all is what we should actually focus on though, not the particular weapon that was used.

No, not if you're for gun rights.

You can't make that argument if you're for gun rights. It is illogical. It does not matter if stabbing people leads to death. The fact that you're comparing the shooting to the stabbing means that you have to accept that the stabbing incident produced less severity than the shooting one. I don't care if your family have to die in a fire for you to accept it. I don't care if the world ends tomorrow. Pound this into your head: stabbing is not shooting. Stabby is less lethal than shooty.

If you can't accept that shooty is less hurty than stabby, then you're arguing against gun rights in that guns don't protect people. Since we already have knives in our homes anyway, we don't need guns. I personally do not want to give gun-control activists more reasons to place restrictions. Because guns kill. Because guns are effective. Because of this guns are NEEDED MORE than knives or other sharp weapons. If you argue that the weapons doesn't matter, then it wouldn't matter to ban guns and to allow knives to exist.

So don't do that if you're for gun rights. Now, if you're for gun-control, then you're free to ignore my argument.

The mental health of the person is in question seems to be a common factor in many of these kinds of incidents. Focusing and blaming the weapon is just an emotional knee jerk reaction to something awful that happens, and I understand that, but I think it's just the wrong way to go. Talking about the weapon used is easy, which is why everyone's doing it, but I think there's a much deeper issue here that needs to be addressed.

Yes, but that's moving goalposts. Like Ailiailia said, mental illness treatments are expensive. And there's no telling if the person was already being treated or not.

Another reason why you have to make the distinction between guns and other types of weapons is that guns require different kind of care. You can't just leave guns lying around the place. If the weapon doesn't matter, then why not just leave guns lying like knives? It's stupid.

I was talking about in context of incidents like this where people go off the deep end, and attack multiple people. People put way too much emphasis on what was used in incidents like these. There's nothing wrong when moving the goalpost when you think that the goalpost is improperly set in the first place.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Guns as deadly as assault rifles come in sizes suitable to hide in lunchboxes, coats and backpacks. They're easier to hide than excitement in public. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.

How big is your lunchbox, coat and backpack? Rifles aren't exactly compact ya know.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IskfFKiuh3Y

Watch this video. Just watch it.

You're wrong.

[Occupied Deutschland]

How big is your lunchbox, coat and backpack? Rifles aren't exactly compact ya know.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IskfFKiuh3Y

Watch this video. Just watch it.

You're wrong.

Really?

That kid is only going to be 'concealing' all that as long as he's standing still. He has to get to where he's going right? You know how obvious that shit is going to be?

Very obvious.

[The Emerald Dawn]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IskfFKiuh3Y

Watch this video. Just watch it.

You're wrong.

Really?

That kid is only going to be 'concealing' all that as long as he's standing still. He has to get to where he's going right? You know how obvious that shit is going to be?

Very obvious.

Very obvious. In a crowd full of people, with the people all used to "That Weird Kid" walking funny or being odd. Where nobody pays attention to him anymore because he's so ostracized as to be utterly invisible.

Until, of course, he opens up with his first salvo.

He doesn't have to get very far, just into the building, where students are gathered to talk right before class.

[Gauthier]

The media obcession with video games as a factor in the shooting is just asstacular.

[Vanum Norendum]

How big is your lunchbox, coat and backpack? Rifles aren't exactly compact ya know.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IskfFKiuh3Y

Watch this video. Just watch it.

You're wrong.

The only rifle length weapon there was the shotgun that was "hidden" in his pant leg. I use that term really loosely too, since walking would surely give you away. "Is that a rifle in your pants, or are you just really happy to see me?" Also notice how cumbersome it took for him to pull that out in a calm setting. Coat pockets aren't nearly as big, nor are average lunchboxes, nor are average backpacks.

[The Zeonic States]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IskfFKiuh3Y

Watch this video. Just watch it.

You're wrong.

The only rifle length weapon there was the shotgun that was "hidden" in his pant leg. I use that term really loosely too, since walking would surely give you away. "Is that a rifle in your pants, or are you just really happy to see me?" Also notice how cumbersome it took for him to pull that out in a calm setting. Coat pockets aren't nearly as big, nor are average lunchboxes, nor are average backpacks.

You could fit a Glock 23 comfortbly within an average sized lunch pail but why would you? I don't see many Glocks involved in these types of shootings; Concealable Handguns are generally never used in this type of thing.

These people walk in and start shooting; they don't go in the front door and sit in the lobby sipping tea trying to conceal an assault rifle in their underwear.

[The Emerald Dawn]

The media obcession with video games as a factor in the shooting is just asstacular.

They have to blame something, why not blame the easy target?

[The UEG-Space Command]

A friend of mine at the school is starting a thing were they are asking for people to send teddy bears to the victims families.

[Alien Space Bats]

Also, I don't know if someone else has addressed this, but why don't we give a capable person on school campuses a gun so that they can shoot back if something like this happens?

I feel like people that I talk to about this are trying to be so politically correct when it comes to this.
Stop the guns! blah blah blah.

But what is that going to do? What'll happen then is that the criminals will get their hands on the guns, and where will we be left? Without guns to defend ourselves. It's not the guns that kill people, it's the person pulling the trigger.

I've actually already addressed this.

Are you going to require teachers to own guns? No? Then not all of them will.

Are you going to require teachers who own guns to get a CCW license so they can carry those weapons on them in public? No? Then not all of them will.

Are you going to require teachers who own guns and have a CCW license to bring them to work? No? Then not all of them will.

And now it's kind of like just relying on "someone" at work to bring donuts to the next staff meeting. If you don't make advance arrangements for someone to go and pick up donuts, then don't be surprised if nobody shows up with any.

It's a numbers game: Less than half of all American adults own a gun (the reason we have so many guns is because those who own them each tend to own multiple firearms); less than 20% (and in most States, something more on the order of 10%) of firearm owners bother to go through the process of getting a license to carry in public (which, in most States, does require quite as much effort and training as getting a license to drive, BTW); and those who have both a gun and a license to carry in public often don't.

So the best we can expect is for 1 adult in 20 to be carrying a gun at any given time; and in most places, the rate is probably closer to 1 in 40 or even 1 in 50.

Which leads me to ask: Is this your "system" for defending our schools? Is this your "system" for stopping random crazies from blowing people away? Just expecting that there will be enough armed citizens on hand should something happen to deal with the problem, and that those citizens will just happen to be in the right mental place to act (should an armed teacher stay with her kindergarten class, or leave them behind unsupervised while she goes to engage a shooter elsewhere in her school)?

That's not a "system". That's a wish.

At best, the "armed citizens will save the day" non-answer is a stupid dodge; more likely, it's a cynical ploy to simply make it legal for gun owners to carry everywhere because they want the right to carry everywhere, whether it's necessary or not (nobody likes being told they can't do something - after all, this is America); at worst, once we've legalized carrying everywhere and issued as many CCW licenses as possible and we still haven't eliminated street crime, it's a prelude to mandating that every adult American own and carry a gun, with felony charges assessed against anyone who doesn't, without even a conscience exception.

I mean, what better way to clap all the liberals in jail and deprive them of the right to vote than to force them to do something they don't want to do on pain of felony conviction and lifetime disenfranchisement?

---

No, here's a better idea: Equip schools with multiple panic buttons (like banks have) and mandate that a police cruiser be within two minutes of every school at all times. Most mass shooting incidents end when law enforcement arrives, either with police taking down the shooter or the shooter committing suicide (as was the case here).

But of course, that solution - which would be a real solution - doesn't satisfy ultra-conservatives, who think it's wrong to "foster dependency" on government, even when it comes to protection (and don't tell me that's bullshit - I've heard NSGers whine about how no one should ever have to depend [or ever even want to depend] on the police for safety). I mean, if we need police, then we likely need government, too - and that would be intolerable, now wouldn't it?

[Chernoslavia]

If the lock down was real I wouldve tried to escape....depending which direction I hear the gunshots. Playing dead makes you an easier target.

There are a number of reasons for a lockdown. Potentially you survive but the gun-man kills all your classmates now he knows where they are... in the implied situation you suggest.

Good point....then I'll just make a run for it if the shooter happens to be far enough from the classroom.

[Chernoslavia]

There are a number of reasons for a lockdown. Potentially you survive but the gun-man kills all your classmates now he knows where they are... in the implied situation you suggest.

Right, and running out in the hall could potentially put a person right in the line of fire. Plus sounds get compressed and bounced all over the place in confined areas, like halls, so it's easier than everyone wants to believe to get the wrong idea or false information and get themselves killed.

And as you mentioned, there was no warning whatsoever, and this shooter seemed to make a beeline for the classroom without pause, meaning there wasn't a long gap between entry and shooting to begin with.

I really wish people would stop acting internet tough, really. First I very much doubt they've ever had a firearm pointed at them and B. It's highly disrespectful to whip it out and swing it that much considering what transpired.

No ones trying to act 'internet tough' point im making is that if I ever hear gunshots ima grab my ass out of there period.

[The UEG-Space Command]

Also, I don't know if someone else has addressed this, but why don't we give a capable person on school campuses a gun so that they can shoot back if something like this happens?

I feel like people that I talk to about this are trying to be so politically correct when it comes to this.
Stop the guns! blah blah blah.

But what is that going to do? What'll happen then is that the criminals will get their hands on the guns, and where will we be left? Without guns to defend ourselves. It's not the guns that kill people, it's the person pulling the trigger.

I've actually already addressed this.

Are you going to require teachers to own guns? No? Then not all of them will.

Are you going to require teachers who own guns to get a CCW license so they can carry those weapons on them in public? No? Then not all of them will.

Are you going to require teachers who own guns and have a CCW license to bring them to work? No? Then not all of them will.

And now it's kind of like just relying on "someone" at work to bring donuts to the next staff meeting. If you don't make advance arrangements for someone to go and pick up donuts, then don't be surprised if nobody shows up with any.

It's a numbers game: Less than half of all American adults own a gun (the reason we have so many guns is because those who own them each tend to own multiple firearms); less than 20% (and in most States, something more on the order of 10%) of firearm owners bother to go through the process of getting a license to carry in public (which, in most States, does require quite as much effort and training as getting a license to drive, BTW); and those who have both a gun and a license to carry in public often don't.

So the best we can expect is for 1 adult in 20 to be carrying a gun at any given time; and in most places, the rate is probably closer to 1 in 40 or even 1 in 50.

Which leads me to ask: Is this your "system" for defending our schools? Is this your "system" for stopping random crazies from blowing people away? Just expecting that there will be enough armed citizens on hand should something happen to deal with the problem, and that those citizens will just happen to be in the right mental place to act (should an armed teacher stay with her kindergarten class, or leave them behind unsupervised while she goes to engage a shooter elsewhere in her school)?

That's not a "system". That's a wish.

At best, the "armed citizens will save the day" non-answer is a stupid dodge; more likely, it's a cynical ploy to simply make it legal for gun owners to carry everywhere because they want the right to carry everywhere, whether it's necessary or not (nobody likes being told they can't do something - after all, this is America); at worst, once we've legalized carrying everywhere and issued as many CCW licenses as possible and we still haven't eliminated street crime, it's a prelude to mandating that every adult American own and carry a gun, with felony charges assessed against anyone who doesn't, without even a conscience exception.

I mean, what better way to clap all the liberals in jail and deprive them of the right to vote than to force them to do something they don't want to do on pain of felony conviction and lifetime disenfranchisement?

---

No, here's a better idea: Equip schools with multiple panic buttons (like banks have) and mandate that a police cruiser be within two minutes of every school at all times. Most mass shooting incidents end when law enforcement arrives, either with police taking down the shooter or the shooter committing suicide (as was the case here).

But of course, that solution - which would be a real solution - doesn't satisfy ultra-conservatives, who think it's wrong to "foster dependency" on government, even when it comes to protection (and don't tell me that's bullshit - I've heard NSGers whine about how no one should ever have to depend [or ever even want to depend] on the police for safety). I mean, if we need police, then we likely need government, too - and that would be intolerable, now wouldn't it?

I think your picking the statement too much, it does hold some ground. Firearms are a potent weapon and is the best answer when someone has a gun pointed at you, mostly when you yourself cannot escape to safety.

Fight or flight, and in this case fighting is possible, but this is only important when there is no alternative, when you can't escape and when you can't hide to save yourself or your friends, families, students, peers. Fighting is your only choice left to combat the danger. if a teacher had a gun, it could be used properly to fight school shooters, but then again they might become shooters themselves, or it might even give shooters a way to do their business.

This idea is very open and really hard to work out, far to many variables to look at here.

[Gun Manufacturers]

No, here's a better idea: Equip schools with multiple panic buttons (like banks have) and mandate that a police cruiser be within two minutes of every school at all times. Most mass shooting incidents end when law enforcement arrives, either with police taking down the shooter or the shooter committing suicide (as was the case here).

But of course, that solution - which would be a real solution - doesn't satisfy ultra-conservatives, who think it's wrong to "foster dependency" on government, even when it comes to protection (and don't tell me that's bullshit - I've heard NSGers whine about how no one should ever have to depend [or ever even want to depend] on the police for safety). I mean, if we need police, then we likely need government, too - and that would be intolerable, now wouldn't it?

I'd be up for that. Maybe as an addition to that, we can add these less lethal devices to classrooms to slow a potential attacker down, if they breach a classroom door (secured in one of these, maybe). Of course, training would be necessary too.