Anonymous email threat closes all Los Angeles schools

Oh boy. This is getting ridiculous.

A whole school district is something new. Random schools from time to time is decades old.

I'm no alarmist BUT, if I had to make the decision of a pending threat at the moment, it's difficult. What if? In retrospect all the idle threats acted on look silly but someday they will be credible and actual. I do hope they are thwarted.

With an obama approval rating of 43% people do not feel safe. After San Bernardino and Paris, who knows what the jihadis are planning. It is the LAUSD's responsibility to analyze the the "threat."

Because in America, "You just don't know." Even teenage boys and "wives" from ME have the potential to carry out attacks.

Because in America, "You just don't know." Even teenage boys and "wives" from ME have the potential to carry out attacks.

The lesson from Sandy Hook - 26 killed, 20 of them children - is that Americans care more about the 2nd Amendment than they do about their children's lives. The lesson from San Bernardino is that Americans are willing to throw overboard their basic values if the threat comes from a Muslim gun. Sure, the two lessons are completely at odds, but welcome to 'Merica.

Wc, you're going to feel quite silly when it turns out the threat came from some right-wing yahoo.

Laguna, the sandy hook incident was terrible. I do not remember all the details, in fact I don't remember anything except many children were shot to death.

Doesn't matter where the threat cones from? These jihadis want to put fear into our everyday lives. They want to commit terror attacks in western cities like in Paris- which killed over 100 people within a couple hours.

When was the last time a bunch of angry white guys shot over 100 people in a sigle attack? They don't even have fully-automatic weapons like the jihadi johns did in Paris.

I don't think I have ever read of any threat to a venue or plane or anywhere where a bomb was actually found. People who want to blow up something do so without warning.

Wc626 Don't forget the many more unecessary deaths that are caused by handguns and assault weapons. Weapons whose sole purpose is to kill human beings. As you say, doesn't matter where the threat comes from. It's there everyday with your claim to 2nd amendment rights. But you know, it is an amendment. And and amendment by definition can be changed.

Wc626DEC. 16, 2015 - 11:24AM JST Because in America, "You just don't know." Even teenage boys and "wives" from ME have the potential to carry out attacks.

One wonders why you felt the need to specify that teenage boys and "wives" from the Middle East have the potential to carry out attacks. Anyone has the potential to carry out attacks. If you actually check the record, you'll not find a single attack by people of Middle Eastern origin on an American school, but you'll find plenty of attacks by other Americans, especially by white Americans.

The fact that anyone can attack a school is a result of America's lax gun laws, which is why it's so pathetic that certain people keep trying to direct fear at a certain group of people rather than at the real problem. If we stopped letting Republicans take money from the gun lobby to obstruct sensible regulations, we could secure the US tomorrow. But they don't want to stop taking gun money, so their only hope is to deflect the conversation to be about how scary certain people who look different from you are.

@WC

angry white guys shot over 100 people in a sigle attack? They don't even have fully-automatic weapons like the jihadi johns did in Paris.

But you know full well assault weapons can be readily - illegally but still possible - converted to fully automatic. I have no doubt that members of the numerous angry white guy posses and militias (found in almost every state) in the US have fully automatic weapons, as do many angry white guy loose cannons.

You're a gun owner: how many rounds per second can a legally purchased semi-automatic assault rifle fire? How easy is it to get magazines that hold more than the 'legal' number of rounds?

And my favourite question: why in the world does a civilian need a 50 calibre semi-automatic weapon?

Once more: I think angry white guys with powerful guns are the scariest people in the US. How many bikers were killed in the Waco shootout?

When was the last time a bunch of angry white guys shot over 100 people in a sigle attack?

Wc, in the three years since the Sandy Hook massacre, over 550 children have been killed by guns. That works out to about one every other day. You'd think that if some foreign entity such as ISIS were killing American children at that rate, the government would do something. So far: Crickets.

Los Angeles County officials, though, are considering a requirement for gun owners to buy insurance. Think about it: if the straw buyer who supplied the two .223-caliber semi-automatic rifles to the perpetrators had been required to buy insurance beforehand, he likely would have backed out. I am sure that, opposed as you are to guns getting into the wrong hands, you support this bill. It would be a game-changer in America.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-county-gun-control-20151214-story.html

FEEEEEEEEL the paranoia. Live the fear.

France ran coverage non-stop for several hours.

This means the terrorists are getting what they want.

When prank phone calls and tweets can close public schools or ground airliners, the terrorists really have won.

There is such a thing as a "validated threat." When you allow UNVALIDATED threats to control policy, there is a problem.

So basically New York has bigger stones.

Just found this out: "Under California law, transferring the ownership of a firearm from one person to another must be conducted by a registered gun dealer. The dealer keeps possession of the weapon while the person wanting it undergoes a background check by state officials. Giving or selling a firearm to another without going through such a process is a misdemeanor offense."

Ah, so kind of like illegal parking. Does anyone here object to upgrading this to a felony? After all, if you're honest, what would be the worry?

You're a gun owner: how many rounds per second can a legally purchased semi-automatic assault rifle fire?

How fast can you squeeze the trigger?

Why in the world does a civilian need a 50 calibre semi-automatic weapon?

Well first off it isn't a fair question, needs are not a requirement in order for people to own or use products or purchase services or engage in an activity for non-malicious reasons. Lets say something isn't a need, what is your point? That if something is not a need that it shouldn't be allowed?

I think the empirical evidence would support the position that allowing civilians to purchase or use semi-automatic 50 caliber firearms generates more tax revenue than it costs society.

How easy is it to get magazines that hold more than the 'legal' number of rounds?

It is not difficult in any country, magazines are really for the most part nothing more than a box with a spring in it. Your basic 3d printer you can get at BestBuy or Sam's club could make the box for example.

Wc, in the three years since the Sandy Hook massacre, over 550 children have been killed by guns. That works out to about one every other day. You'd think that if some foreign entity such as ISIS were killing American children at that rate, the government would do something. So far: Crickets.

It just shows you that populations tend to overreact to outside forces. Lots of things kill over 180 children each year in the USA, fires, drowning, accidental poisonings, etc.

In fact unintentional injuries/accidental that are not from firearms result in over 6,000 deaths of children between the ages of 0-14 in the USA each year.

Wc626: These jihadis want to put fear into our everyday lives.

They should give each other high 5s when they read your comments.

The Sandy Hook incident was terrible. I do not remember all of the details.

But you seem to be an expert on San Bernadino and Paris. And very, very afraid.

Noliving,

Where else in the world have 550 children been murdered by firearms in three years?

I'm betting without a glance that other than some African and/or Islamic hell-hole the US is the only first world country in the list.

Comparing accidental deaths to those purposely cut down by your precious guns is intellectually dishonest. At best.

You don't strike me as an idiot, yet surely only an idiot would argue that the US doesn't have a serious problem with guns.

@noliving I’ve long heard US gun rights extremists make a zombie’s argument (i.e. an argument that is dismissive of the needs of the living - the noliving) claiming their right to own guns trumps those of people who’d prefer not to have to worry about being threatened, shot or killed by a gun and its owner.

US gun rights extremists dismiss the problems of frequent mass murders, unless of course the murders are committed by someone from a culture they fear and abhor. If the mass murderer was from their own culture, they shrug their shoulders and blame the problem on the country’s poor mental health care systems.

Re my question, why would any civilian need a 50 calibre weapon: you know full well why I asked it. I know a gun is a gun and they all fire bullets which can maim and kill, but a bullet that is 12.95mm (.51 inch) wide should be used only by military forces to defend their country from military invasions.

“That if something is not a need that it shouldn't be allowed?”

I’d put 50 calibre weapons in the same category as hand grenades: not needed, should not be allowed. I’d also add assault weapons. Do US Americans fear runaway bison herds and is that their justification for needing these military grade weapons? Is it because so many gun owners are such bad shots that they need a weapon that can fire 3 rounds a second, as quickly as they can pull the trigger.

Thank you for making the point about how easy it is for gun owners to circumvent the various weak and not always enforced gun laws and make their legally purchased weapons even more powerful, thereby hastening dystopia in the US. As you know, those same gun laws that allow you to purchase military grade weapons allow those you fear to do the same. Dystopia NOW!

Not sure how this devolved into a rant about US gun laws and the 2nd Amendment. It states in the article that the prankster also mentioned explosives, which that alone could have done just as much damage as guns. So don't just go Gerry-picking and focus on one part of the threat while ignoring the other. The real elephant in the room is what is the US going to do about screening or vetting these so called "peaceful Muslims" who want to enter into the country. That is where the debate should be focused on. We have already seen that the so called "robust vetting process" that we have heard so much about is a joke. DHS was found to be ordered not to look at social media posts of potential immigrants because as they said "the optics of it" would not sit well with immigrant tights groups. Hate to be the one to burst their bubble, but foreigners who reside in other nations don't have constitutional (US Constitution) rights, and if they want to come in, then a look should be done at their social media, especially if they come from areas of high anti-USA sentiment and where many of the jihadist come from. But we spend our time bickering over gun laws rather than focusing on the real issue, people who would rather blow themselves up and kill other innocents to achieve their means at spreading their beliefs.

That is the debate we should be having on this.

@Al But we spend our time bickering over gun laws rather than focusing on the real issue, people who would rather blow themselves up and kill other innocents to achieve their means at spreading their beliefs. That is the debate we should be having on this

Beg to differ: the US should be debating both of these real issues.

Where else in the world have 550 children been murdered by firearms in three years? I'm betting without a glance that other than some African and/or Islamic hell-hole the US is the only first world country in the list.

OK.

Comparing accidental deaths to those purposely cut down by your precious guns is intellectually dishonest. At best.

Seeing as the quote that I was responding to just stated that 550+ children had been killed by firearms over the past three years, it did not specify if it was due to homicides only, suicides only, accidents only, etc. I'm merely pointing out that children of the ages of 0-14 die from things all the time that kill around 183.33+ and the government and we as people don't do anything or a lift a finger really to further reduce or prevent. We just accept their deaths. In other-words firearms don't disproportionately kill children in the age range of 0-14. Plus with all the hyperbole surrounding firearms you would think that with over 300,000,000 million firearms in circulation and over 40 million children+ between the ages 0-14 you would think if anything that the death toll should be higher than 183.33 on average each year.

There is nothing intellectually dishonest about it.

You don't strike me as an idiot, yet surely only an idiot would argue that the US doesn't have a serious problem with guns.

Subjective.

How do you define a serious problem?

Currently right now there is over 300+ million firearms in circulation, it is estimated that nearly 32-50% of the population adults/households own a firearm, over 10+ billion rounds/bullets are sold to civilians each year. The current death toll from all causes is said to be around 10 per 100,000 or one one hundredth of one percent of the population or in other words it would take 100 hundred years to kill one percent of the population, the non fatal wound rate are said to be around 20-25 per 100,000 per year or in other words it would take around 50-35 years to physically wound one percent of the population.

Are we saying in general that when 32-50% of the population owns a product that results in one hundredth of one percent of the population dying on an annual basis is a series problem?

For those that don't do you blame them for saying that in general when a product is owned by 32-50% of the population and it results in one one hundredth of one percent of the population dying on an annual basis that it is not a serious problem?

Alcohol kills two and half times as many people on a per capita basis than firearms do in the USA, would say Alcohol is a more serious problem than firearms are in the USA?

It is all subjective.

claiming their right to own guns trumps those of people who’d prefer not to have to worry about being threatened, shot or killed by a gun and its owner.

Yeah god forbid anyone claims that their right to own a product or use a service or engage in an activity outweighs someone's worry over a one one tenth of one percent odds of something happening to them. We just can't have that now can we!

my question, why would any civilian need a 50 calibre weapon: you know full well why I asked it.

Yes to act as a euphemism for claiming that because it is not needed that it should be prohibited. The problem is that it is fallacious argument because then that means all things that are not 'needs' should be prohibited. Can you yourself honestly claim that you live your life on the most basic of needs? If you don't can you honestly claim that all the things that you do that are not needs don't or will not result in loss of life? Life is so much more than just needs, if it wasn't then it wouldn't be worth living.

It is not a fair question.

I know a gun is a gun and they all fire bullets which can maim and kill, but a bullet that is 12.95mm (.51 inch) wide should be used only by military forces to defend their country from military invasions.

You do realize that a lot of muzzle and breach loaders, especially from the 1700's and 1800's are around that caliber if not even larger.

I’d put 50 calibre weapons in the same category as hand grenades: not needed, should not be allowed.

Great, for some people that is all they need to be persuaded, for others like myself you are going to have to do a little bit better than just simply saying that because you don't approve of something that it should be prohibited, especially when its human cost is lower than the human cost of recreational activities that you sanction.

Do US Americans fear runaway bison herds and is that their justification for needing these military grade weapons?

Nope they use the justification that it is fun and that the number of people using them for non-malicious reasons out weigh the cost. Kind of like how we say that the benefits of recreational consumption of Alcohol outweigh the 88,000 deaths caused by it. Kind of like how we say that the benefits of recreational sex out weigh the 20,000+ deaths caused by STDs, more than all homicides by all weapon types combined in the USA. You know the same arguments you use for why such activities that you approve of should be allowed even though it results in loss of human life.

Is it because so many gun owners are such bad shots that they need a weapon that can fire 3 rounds a second, as quickly as they can pull the trigger.

Bolt actions can be fired at a rate of 2-3 rounds a second, lever action firearms can be fired at a rate of 2-5 rounds a second, and pump action can be fired at a rate of 4-6 rounds a second. Semi-automatics in general achieve a rate of fire of 5-7 rounds a second. If you bump fire semi-automatics you can achieve rates of fire similar to that of fully automatics.

So the reason why is because speed shooting is a real skill, see the faster you shoot the less time you have to aim and hit the target meaning it takes more skill to be able to hit a target in less time. The challenge is why people use them. Another reason is because they are a versatile firearm, they are a jack of all trades type firearm. They are effective in any and all roles that firearms are used in. They can shoot as slow as you want to and they can shoot as fast you want them to.

As you know, those same gun laws that allow you to purchase military grade weapons allow those you fear to do the same.

All firearms are military grade, other wise they would blow up in your hands. Military style semi-automatic firearms are legal to purchase in the following nations for civilians:

Canada, New Zealand, UK(.22lr caliber), Sweden(They actually still allow civilians to purchase brand new machine guns), France, Italy, Germany, Netherlands, Finland, Belgium, USA, etc.

All readers back on topic please. Posts that do not focus on what is in the story will be removed.

Seems like the prankster has been watching too many episodes of the Showtime series "Homeland" where a similar plot was a story line where in Germany, a radical Muslim sent a similar note out. Probably just some kid who didn't want to take finals and used a VPN to send the email, or just some kids who thought it would be "fun" to prank. Much like the old prank phone callers who used to call news programs (and still do) and prank the hosts on air live.