Broward Deputy Scot Peterson seen standing outside during Florida school shooting in new video

[Teh One Who Knocks]

By Katherine Lam | Fox News


https://i.imgur.com/xBnnAeY.jpg
Former Deputy Scot Peterson, right, is seen on newly released video taken during the Feb. 14 Florida school shooting.

Broward Deputy Scot Peterson stands safely behind a concrete wall taking no action as high school students lay dead and wounded just feet away, newly released video of the Florida school shooting shows.

The Broward Sheriff’s Office released the 27-minute video Thursday of the former longtime resource officer responding to initial reports of a shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School on Feb. 14. Peterson, who was assigned to the school and on site when the shooting began, is seen with a civilian security monitor at the start of the video, but spends most of the video standing outside the school with his gun drawn.

“The video speaks for itself,” the Broward Sheriff’s Office said in a statement. “His actions were enough to warrant an internal affairs investigation, as requested by Sheriff Scott Israel on Feb. 21. After being suspended without pay, Peterson chose to resign and immediately retired rather than face possible termination.”

Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel previously said Peterson, who was armed when gunman Nikolas Cruz opened fire at the Parkland high school, “never went in[to]” the building that was under attack. The sheriff added that Peterson instead took up a position viewing the western entrance of the building — as the video released Thursday shows. Peterson remains in the area for the next 20 minutes. Responding officers arrive at the scene, taking a total of 11 minutes to enter the building from the time shots were first reported.

Cruz, who's not seen in the video released Thursday, killed 17 people and injured 17 others that day with Peterson outside the entire time. Israel said Peterson should have charged in and tried to kill the gunman.

Peterson fired back at the sheriff’s words in late February. In a statement released through his lawyer, the ex-deputy said he initially didn’t enter the building because he believed the shooter was outside. He added that he wished he could have prevented the horrific tragedy, but denied being a “coward.”

https://i.imgur.com/jHvKtNG.jpg
Former Deputy Scot Peterson is seen standing outside the building as gunman Nikolas Cruz opened fire inside.

Internal radio dispatches released by Broward County Sheriff’s Department, however, revealed the former school resource officer said gunfire was coming from “inside,” according to the Miami Herald.

“Do not approach the 12 or 1300 building, stay at least 500 feet away,” Peterson was heard saying over the radio.

Investigators revealed Peterson’s focus was on getting nearby streets and the high school shut down and keeping deputies away from the building.

The surveillance videos were made public after several media outlets sued for the release. A Broward circuit judge authorized the release on Thursday. Broward County Schools Superintendent Robert Runcie backed Thursday's release of the video, saying it brings "transparency" to the investigation.

"I believe in transparency with the public and I believe they should see it," Runcie had told the Sun Sentinel. "The public has a right to know what happened, and we should be able to learn from that and figure out what we need to change in our institutions to get better as we go forward."

“The attorneys agreed it wouldn’t give any of our secrets away with regard to security” at Douglas High School, School Board Chairwoman Nora Rupert told the Sun Sentinel about the decision not to appeal the video’s release.

It’s unclear if other camera angles surrounding the school were available.

President Trump last month slammed Peterson’s actions, calling him a “coward.”

"When it came time to get in there and do something, he didn't have the courage, or something happened," Trump said. "He certainly did a poor job. That's the case where somebody was outside, they are trained, they didn't react properly under pressure or they were a coward."

Cruz appeared in court on Wednesday for his arraignment on 17 counts of premeditated murder and 17 counts of attempted murder. The judge entered a not guilty plea on the gunman’s behalf. Prosecutors on Tuesday filed a notice of intent to seek the death penalty for Cruz.

[Hal-9000]

Let's talk about the time frame and weapons here. According to police calls they've established Cruz took only SIX minutes to kill 17 people and injure 17 more. He went into varying classrooms four times.

He used the semi automatic AR-15, which fires at a faster rate than a regular hand gun.

Do we expect this resource officer to go into the school, run to where the people are being shot and hit the gunman within that six minute window using an inferior weapon? Getting shamed by the president on local news for not taking action. Was that necessary?

I think shooters are cowards and would love to bring one down, but just reading the story frightened me. I'm not sure I could get close enough during the initial confusion and keep my head clear.

That's what people forget or don't realize. In those initial minutes of panic during firefights, even veterans with experience say understanding threat assessment is difficult.

[Teh One Who Knocks]

Let's talk about the time frame and weapons here. According to police calls they've established Cruz took only SIX minutes to kill 17 people and injure 17 more. He went into varying classrooms four times.

He used the semi automatic AR-15, which fires at a faster rate than a regular hand gun.

Do we expect this resource officer to go into the school, run to where the people are being shot and hit the gunman within that six minute window using an inferior weapon? Getting shamed by the president on local news for not taking action. Was that necessary?

I think shooters are cowards and would love to bring one down, but just reading the story frightened me. I'm not sure I could get close enough during the initial confusion and keep my head clear.

That's what people forget or don't realize. In those initial minutes of panic during firefights, even veterans with experience say understanding threat assessment is difficult.

Yes, that's his job. He's a police officer, he knows he may need to put his life on the line. He deserves all the shame and ridicule he gets IMHO. He was and is a coward.

[Hal-9000]

Yes, that's his job. He's a police officer, he knows he may need to put his life on the line. He deserves all the shame and ridicule he gets IMHO. He was and is a coward.

So the Charlton Heston in me has to ask...what is he armed with? Revolver, nine mill, something along those lines? Is he being outgunned from the outset? If an 18 year old can buy and use a semi-auto, why not give the resource officers a compatible weapon?

[Teh One Who Knocks]

So the Charlton Heston in me has to ask...what is he armed with? Revolver, nine mill, something along those lines? Is he being outgunned from the outset? If an 18 year old can buy and use a semi-auto, why not give the resource officers a compatible weapon?

No police officer carries a revolver anymore. He (most likely) carried a pistol in either 9mm or .40 caliber that had a 15 round clip. But, that doesn't matter, his job is to protect, and he didn't.

Side note, at least in Broward County where this happened, the police officers assigned to the schools will now be carrying rifles.

[Hal-9000]

No police officer carries a revolver anymore. He (most likely) carried a pistol in either 9mm or .40 caliber that had a 15 round clip. But, that doesn't matter, his job is to protect, and he didn't.

Side note, at least in Broward County where this happened, the police officers assigned to the schools will now be carrying rifles.

So do their weapons now or in future, fire as fast as an AR-15, or any other semi-automatic rifle?

[Teh One Who Knocks]

Every semi-auto fires exactly the same speed. It fires as fast as you can pull the trigger.

[Hal-9000]

Every semi-auto fires exactly the same speed. It fires as fast as you can pull the trigger.

I understand that.

I'm asking about the difference in the weapons the resource officers are using now compared to an AR-15...and the comparison of an AR-15 to whatever rifles the resource officers will be assigned.

[Hal-9000]

My question is - Are the resource officers being outgunned from the outset in these school shooting situations?

Stock AR-15 can fire 45 rounds per minute and can have clips containing 60 or 100 rounds.

9mm or .40 cal handguns aren't comparable in clip sizes or speed.

Questioned answered, thanks anyways.

[Pony]

Assuming the training of the officer is superior he would be just fine with a 9mm or .40 cal handgun. Hit center mass and dead is dead regardless of the weapon.

[Hal-9000]

Assuming the training of the officer is superior he would be just fine with a 9mm or .40 cal handgun. Hit center mass and dead is dead regardless of the weapon.

Is it easier to hit someone with a rifle compared to a handgun? As in AR-15 vs 9mm?

[Teh One Who Knocks]

My question is - Are the resource officers being outgunned from the outset in these school shooting situations?

Stock AR-15 can fire 45 rounds per minute and can have clips containing 60 or 100 rounds.

9mm or .40 cal handguns aren't comparable in clip sizes or speed.

Questioned answered, thanks anyways.

:facepalm: The speed is exactly the same...if you can fire a semi-auto rifle at 45 rounds per minute, then you can fire a pistol at the same speed. There is no difference in speed of fire. And the largest standard magazine you are going to get for an AR style weapon will be 30 rounds, those are by far the most common. If you weigh one down with a rare 100 round magazine, the rifle will be unbearably heavy and unweildly.

[Pony]

My question is - Are the resource officers being outgunned from the outset in these school shooting situations?

Stock AR-15 can fire 45 rounds per minute and can have clips containing 60 or 100 rounds.

9mm or .40 cal handguns aren't comparable in clip sizes or speed.

Questioned answered, thanks anyways.

60 and 100 round magazines are rarely used. Typical mags for that weapon in .223 caliber are 10-30 rds. A Glock 40 is 15 rounds I think.

The rounds per minute stuff isn't relevant in the real world because different people can pull the trigger faster than others. Also relies on how fast you can be effective with those shots. I can probably fire off 100 rds/min with my 22 rifle or my handgun given enough magazines. Doesn't mean I'm gonna hit a damn thing firing like that.

If you are an effective enough shooter you can hit more "targets" effectively with fewer rounds. Especially with a more maneuverable handgun.

BTW a typical "AR15" is calibered in .223. A Glock 40 is .40 caliber, a much larger round and had plenty of power to put someone down. The rifle round travels much faster though.

[Pony]

Is it easier to hit someone with a rifle compared to a handgun? As in AR-15 vs 9mm?

Typically? I'd probably say yes. More so the greater the distance. In close quarters a handgun would be more effective to hit multiple targets quickly as you can, the rifle would do more damage because of the speed of the round.

[Hal-9000]

:facepalm: The speed is exactly the same...if you can fire a semi-auto rifle at 45 rounds per minute, then you can fire a pistol at the same speed. There is no difference in speed of fire. And the largest standard magazine you are going to get for an AR style weapon will be 30 rounds, those are by far the most common. If you weigh one down with a rare 100 round magazine, the rifle will be unbearably heavy and unweildly.

Please don't facepalm me when I ask a question. This is why Americans enjoy a certain reputation when anyone attempts to have a civil discussion with you on the subject.

So a semi-automatic rifle fires bullets at the same speed as a handgun. In 60 seconds an AR-15 fires 45 bullets and a person with a handgun can fire bullets at the same speed (until their clip runs out).

Thanks.

[Hal-9000]

Typically? I'd probably say yes. More so the greater the distance. In close quarters a handgun would be more effective to hit multiple targets quickly as you can, the rifle would do more damage because of the speed of the round.

So the rifles do have a faster round. Adding to what Lance just told me and to clarify, semi autos and handguns can "be fired at the same speed", but the round coming out travels at a faster velocity.

Is that correct?

eg handgun bullet - 279 mph
semi auto bullet - 401 mph

[Hal-9000]

60 and 100 round magazines are rarely used. Typical mags for that weapon in .223 caliber are 10-30 rds. A Glock 40 is 15 rounds I think.

The rounds per minute stuff isn't relevant in the real world because different people can pull the trigger faster than others. Also relies on how fast you can be effective with those shots. I can probably fire off 100 rds/min with my 22 rifle or my handgun given enough magazines. Doesn't mean I'm gonna hit a damn thing firing like that.

If you are an effective enough shooter you can hit more "targets" effectively with fewer rounds. Especially with a more maneuverable handgun.

BTW a typical "AR15" is calibered in .223. A Glock 40 is .40 caliber, a much larger round and had plenty of power to put someone down. The rifle round travels much faster though.

That was my next question about calibers. A .40 round is pretty large.

Thanks for the info.

[Pony]

Please don't facepalm me when I ask a question. This is why Americans enjoy a certain reputation when anyone attempts to have a civil discussion with you on the subject.

So a semi-automatic rifle fires bullets at the same speed as a handgun. In 60 seconds an AR-15 fires 45 bullets and a person with a handgun can fire bullets at the same speed (until their clip runs out).

Thanks.

More or less. Firing 45 rds/min out of an AR would take 2 magazines. (assuming a 30 rd mag) Firing 45 rds/min out of a handgun would take at least 3 mags.

Rate of fire really isn't relevant though. Rifles have more "stopping power" due to the speed the bullet is traveling. Faster bullet = more damage.

The AR style of rifle is more maneuverable than a standard rifle and is more easily adapted to personal preferences, Being able to modify it is one of the reasons it's so popular with gun enthusiasts. The reason it's popular with stupid kids who go on school shootings? Because it looks cool and is like the guns they use in their favorite video games.

[Pony]

So the rifles do have a faster round. Adding to what Lance just told me and to clarify, semi autos and handguns can "be fired at the same speed", but the round coming out travels at a faster velocity.

Is that correct?

eg handgun bullet - 279 mph
Rifle bullet - 401 mph

Correct. But handgun = 900=1400 feet per second. Rifle round 3000 feet per second.

(corrected semi auto to rifle in your post as both the handguns and rifles are semi auto)

[Hal-9000]

More or less. Firing 45 rds/min out of an AR would take 2 magazines. (assuming a 30 rd mag) Firing 45 rds/min out of a handgun would take at least 3 mags.

Rate of fire really isn't relevant though. Rifles have more "stopping power" due to the speed the bullet is traveling. Faster bullet = more damage.

The AR style of rifle is more maneuverable than a standard rifle and is more easily adapted to personal preferences, Being able to modify it is one of the reasons it's so popular with gun enthusiasts. The reason it's popular with stupid kids who go on school shootings? Because it looks cool and is like the guns they use in their favorite video games.

This is what I'm trying to learn. Are the school resource guys outgunned when shooters show up by virtue of the weapons used?

My mind and logic tells me a semi-automatic weapon fires at a faster rate than a handgun = advantage shooter. According to you this isn't accurate.

You guys are explaining the rate of fire is comparable, but the velocity and stopping power is greater with the semi-auto rifle.

You've further explained that other than using limited clips and reloading time, a person using a handgun should be able to have the same chance of hitting the shooter in terms of timing.

Interesting stuff.

[Hal-9000]

Correct. But handgun = 900=1400 feet per second. Rifle round 3000 feet per second.

(corrected semi auto to rifle in your post as both the handguns and rifles are semi auto)

It's about twice the velocity in both cases but more importantly, handguns are semi automatic?

And by you changing my terminology does that mean all rifles are semi-auto? I didn't know that.

[Pony]

Now you're getting it! :tup:

A lot of it comes down to basic science. A handgun has a much shorter barrel therefore the bullet has less time to gain velocity, Also since it's shorter and lighter it "kicks" a lot more and, this makes it more difficult to hit targets at distance. At close distances (lets say under 25 feet/ 6.2 meters) it's relatively easy to be accurate.
A rifle, with a longer barrel gains velocity, is also heavier which greatly reduces the kick back. This keeps the barrel more manageable. Also the length helps with accuracy, especially at greater distances. You lose maneuverability due to the greater length and weight but gain stopping power.

[Pony]

It's about twice the velocity in both cases but more importantly, handguns are semi automatic?

And by you changing my terminology does that mean all rifles are semi-auto? I didn't know that.

Most (80%?) handguns and rifles sold today are semi auto. Pretty much shotguns, revolvers and bolt action rifles are not.

[Pony]

Spit a popcorn kernel at someone, then spit another one through a straw. There's your difference between handguns and rifles. :cheerlead:

[Hal-9000]

Most (80%?) handguns and rifles sold today are semi auto. Pretty much shotguns, revolvers and bolt action rifles are not.

Yes, this reasoning is creating the disparity between traditional ideas of weapons and what I've experienced.

Any handguns I've seen are single shot (not semi-auto) and most rifles (never semi-auto) have been owned by cousins and uncles on farms. I live in what amounts to a farming/cattle province. We get called Little Texas or Texas North often, so I'm not completely unaware of gun environments. Every visit to the various farms in my childhood consisted of motorbikes, snowmobiles, and/or guns.

[Hal-9000]

Now you're getting it! :tup:

A lot of it comes down to basic science. A handgun has a much shorter barrel therefore the bullet has less time to gain velocity, Also since it's shorter and lighter it "kicks" a lot more and, this makes it more difficult to hit targets at distance. At close distances (lets say under 25 feet/ 6.2 meters) it's relatively easy to be accurate.
A rifle, with a longer barrel gains velocity, is also heavier which greatly reduces the kick back. This keeps the barrel more manageable. Also the length helps with accuracy, especially at greater distances. You lose maneuverability due to the greater length and weight but gain stopping power.

Yeah I've been aware of velocity of bullets coming from different weapons for long time now...because I'm a nerd that way.

So final question - You and I are outside on a tennis court. I have an AR-15 and you have a 9mm handgun. We're going to get a signal to start moving and shooting. Do I have the advantage?

*prerequisite is that we both know how to properly fire our respective weapons.

[Pony]

Just remembered, I found this earlier and thought of you. It's a chart showing the percentage of gun ownership per state. I think you will be surprised at the numbers.

https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/gun-ownership-rates-by-state/?ftag=ACQ449302a

[Hal-9000]

Just remembered, I found this earlier and thought of you. It's a chart showing the percentage of gun ownership per state. I think you will be surprised at the numbers.

https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/gun-ownership-rates-by-state/?ftag=ACQ449302a

(final, final question)

I read a stat that said there are 320 million firearms in America. The amount of guns outnumbers the population by a considerable amount. This number was categorized as being 'known', and additional weapons could not be estimated or verified.

Looking at your link, there's some states with low percentages (when compared with another American states), so these numbers indicate that some people have a fuckton of guns, while others are less inclined.

Do you believe the 320 million number?

[Pony]

Yeah I've been aware of velocity of bullets coming from different weapons for long time now...because I'm a nerd that way.

So final question - You and I are outside on a tennis court. I have an AR-15 and you have a 9mm handgun. We're going to get a signal to start moving and shooting. Do I have the advantage?

*prerequisite is that we both know how to properly fire our respective weapons.

Hmm.... Old style western standoff? Assuming that we both have similar reaction times and start with the guns not aimed? Lets say either both pointed down or mine in a holster and yours on a strap around your neck, hands off, go on three? :lol:

I'd have to say we would both hit the ground dead simultaneously. You with three bullets in you and me with one. I would get the first two shots off first and probably hit you with the third as your one shot would be more devastating and immediately put me down.

[Pony]

(final, final question)

I read a stat that said there are 320 million firearms in America. The amount of guns outnumbers the population by a considerable amount. This number was categorized as being 'known', and additional weapons could not be estimated or verified.

Looking at your link, there's some states with low percentages (when compared with another American states), so these numbers indicate that some people have a fuckton of guns, while others are less inclined.

Do you believe the 320 million number?

Yes, that's why I posted that. The assumption is that since there are more guns than people that must mean everyone has a gun. I read another number somewhere that said 3-4% of the population owns something like 60% percent of the guns. So yes I believe the 320mil number and I believe that a comparative few have a very large collection of weapons.
Personally here in Ohio it says it's almost 20%? I feel that is very accurate. I'm in the suburbs near a large city and I know very few people who are armed. Even fewer who carry daily. It's rare to see someone on the street with a suspicious bulge under their coat. Head out toward the more rural areas and those numbers go way up. For instance on the Island where my summer place is, probably the majority of households have at least one weapon. They even have a "turkey shoot" (using targets, not turkeys) in the fall for the locals.

[Hal-9000]

Hmm.... Old style western standoff? Assuming that we both have similar reaction times and start with the guns not aimed? Lets say either both pointed down or mine in a holster and yours on a strap around your neck, hands off, go on three? :lol:

I'd have to say we would both hit the ground dead simultaneously. You with three bullets in you and me with one. I would get the first two shots off first and probably hit you with the third as your one shot would be more devastating and immediately put me down.

Fascinating.

*works on his Rambo spray technique while yelling*


and yes, we both have similar reaction times and yours isn't in a holster etc :lol:

[Hal-9000]

Yes, that's why I posted that. The assumption is that since there are more guns than people that must mean everyone has a gun. I read another number somewhere that said 3-4% of the population owns something like 60% percent of the guns. So yes I believe the 320mil number and I believe that a comparative few have a very large collection of weapons.
Personally here in Ohio it says it's almost 20%? I feel that is very accurate. I'm in the suburbs near a large city and I know very few people who are armed. Even fewer who carry daily. It's rare to see someone on the street with a suspicious bulge under their coat. Head out toward the more rural areas and those numbers go way up. For instance on the Island where my summer place is, probably the majority of households have at least one weapon. They even have a "turkey shoot" (using targets, not turkeys) in the fall for the locals.

You know I loved Southern Belle and enjoyed posting with her. I respected her. One night at AS we were talking guns and she mentioned she had a handful of guns in her place and didn't really know how many. She did know some were registered. That statement stuck with me for a long time. I won't tell you why because I'd like this discussion to end on a reasonably positive note.

Thanks for the info.

[Pony]

No problem, I enjoyed the convo as always.

I'd be interested to see if someone else here with experience with guns would agree with my results in the "standoff" scenario.

[Hal-9000]

I liked Clint's little advice scene in Unforgiven when the other guy is asking him about the famous shootout where Clint gunned down something like 5 or 6 people.

Clint said take your time and shoot slowly...

[Pony]

That's about right. I'm not experienced enough to be a fast shooter. I take my time and aim every shot. I don't shoot often enough. Maybe this summer I will spend some more time practicing things like draw and fire. Currently I'm more than comfortable target shooting and I'm confident if someone broke into my house that I could defend myself. As far as carrying out of the house? No, not right now. Maybe in the future I will get a conceal carry license but I don't feel the need to right now. The only reason for me to get it now would be the relaxed ruled for transporting firearms in a vehicle with a CCL.

[Hal-9000]

That's about right. I'm not experienced enough to be a fast shooter. I take my time and aim every shot. I don't shoot often enough. Maybe this summer I will spend some more time practicing things like draw and fire. Currently I'm more than comfortable target shooting and I'm confident if someone broke into my house that I could defend myself. As far as carrying out of the house? No, not right now. Maybe in the future I will get a conceal carry license but I don't feel the need to right now. The only reason for me to get it now would be the relaxed ruled for transporting firearms in a vehicle with a CCL.

The thing that bothers me about the conceal carry scenario is the anger element. I'm fucking pissed right now and going to make a decision against another civilian on the spot using a gun. The reason is unimportant, you cut me off driving, you said something derogatory to me....you are out of BBQ sauce for the nuggets in the drive-thru!

It's the on the spot decision making that gun owners are allowed to make that petrifies me. Home invasion - for sure. I'm a convert on that issue. Protection from harm while outside - Yes, same thing.

I can't however agree with the vague tenets of the stand your ground law where one non lethal action somehow equates to a fatal gunshot wound.

[deebakes]

You know I loved Southern Belle and enjoyed posting with her. I respected her. One night at AS we were talking guns and she mentioned she had a handful of guns in her place and didn't really know how many. She did know some were registered. That statement stuck with me for a long time. I won't tell you why because I'd like this discussion to end on a reasonably positive note.

Thanks for the info.

i would say it is pretty unusual for someone to own a single firearm here in the states. the people i know either don't have any or own around 5-10 :shrug:

[Godfather]

I'll be honest, my gut reaction was that I wanted to defend this guy for some reason, at least until I understood his circumstance better. I was thinking that a lot of people who believe they'd be gun slingers have just seen John Wick too many times. I have no doubt we'd all defend our homes and families with our lives, backed into a corner, but on duty in a situation like this that it's confusing and would be different for many people. I also know that police training is often all about not running in by yourself and waiting for back-up (haven't cops been reprimanded for being too Serpico before? )....... but after watching the video and listening to his boss I'm not sure anymore, I'm now feeling he should've done way more. I just don't know..

[Godfather]

i would say it is pretty unusual for someone to own a single firearm here in the states. the people i know either don't have any or own around 5-10 :shrug:

I've had just one for years :shrug: I enjoy owning it, it's fun to shoot, gives me some peace-of-mind.

[deebakes]

i think this guy froze when the exact situation that he was there to deal with arose :2cents:

[deebakes]

I've had just one for years :shrug:

are you in the united states now? :shock:

[Godfather]

are you in the united states now? :shock:

Nope, still Canada :lol: Despite what you might hear, we have plenty of guns. It takes a few hoops to get your license, and the guns & accessories we can own are more restrictive, but you can go buy an AR-15 and handguns if you want.

[deebakes]

:hand: then i still stand by initial statement :lol:

[Godfather]

:hand: then i still stand by initial statement :lol:

:lol: Fair.

[Griffin]

Just remembered, I found this earlier and thought of you. It's a chart showing the percentage of gun ownership per state. I think you will be surprised at the numbers.

https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/gun-ownership-rates-by-state/?ftag=ACQ449302a

Second highest in the country... If Jan Morgan gets Governor we will be #1! OORAH!!!

[deebakes]

#17 :obama:

[lost in melb.]

Just remembered, I found this earlier and thought of you. It's a chart showing the percentage of gun ownership per state. I think you will be surprised at the numbers.

https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/gun-ownership-rates-by-state/?ftag=ACQ449302a

From the article: ( this is why I don't argue about gun laws in the US any more)

We showed that exposure to social gun culture was robustly
associated with gun ownership and to our knowledge, this is
the first study to establish empirical evidence of the relation
between social gun culture and gun ownership. Prior evidence
has shown an association between violent and gun-related
behaviours and broad cultural norms.10 The notion that participation
in a social gun culture and gun ownership co-occurs
and may be mutually reinforcing readily builds on theoretical
models of culture–personality relations. This inter-relationship
suggests that sociocultural environments affect how people
behave and how those people adopt the beliefs, values and
social behaviours that are acceptable in that community
culture.11 The link between social gun culture and gun ownership
also suggest one avenue through which modern conceptions
of the primacy of gun ownership, despite the potential
public health consequences, are reinforced. Although notions
of protection of one’s family and property originally justified
gun ownership,12 gun ownership is today sustained in public
consciousness much more through calls to constitutionally
enshrined social values, reinforced intermittently by outrage
at efforts to limit widespread gun availability. Insofar as social
gun cultures may contribute to these prevailing social values,
their co-occurrence with gun ownership suggests that social
gun culture must be considered by potential public health
intervention in the area.
This analysis rests on a cross-sectional design. Therefore, we
cannot infer whether exposure to social gun culture predisposes
one to gun ownership or whether the latter increases
likelihood of participation in the former. However, this is not
particularly germane to the observations being drawn here,
suggesting simply that prudent gun policies that aim to reduce
gun ownership and gun-related injury might need to actively
consider the prevailing social gun culture in the USA. Future
studies that aim to inform our understanding of gun ownership
may fruitfully explore the determinants of a participation in
social gun culture in the USA.

[RBP]

From the article: ( this is why I don't argue about gun laws in the US any more)

We showed that exposure to social gun culture was robustly associated with gun ownership and to our knowledge, this is the first study to establish empirical evidence of the relation between social gun culture and gun ownership. Prior evidence has shown an association between violent and gun-related behaviours and broad cultural norms. The notion that participation in a social gun culture and gun ownership co-occurs and may be mutually reinforcing readily builds on theoretical models of culture–personality relations. This inter-relationship suggests that sociocultural environments affect how people behave and how those people adopt the beliefs, values and social behaviours that are acceptable in that community culture, The link between social gun culture and gun ownership also suggest one avenue through which modern conceptions of the primacy of gun ownership, despite the potential public health consequences, are reinforced. Although notions of protection of one’s family and property originally justified
gun ownership, gun ownership is today sustained in public consciousness much more through calls to constitutionally enshrined social values, reinforced intermittently by outrage at efforts to limit widespread gun availability. Insofar as social gun cultures may contribute to these prevailing social values, their co-occurrence with gun ownership suggests that social gun culture must be considered by potential public health intervention in the area. This analysis rests on a cross-sectional design. Therefore, we
cannot infer whether exposure to social gun culture predisposes one to gun ownership or whether the latter increases likelihood of participation in the former. However, this is not particularly germane to the observations being drawn here, suggesting simply that prudent gun policies that aim to reduce gun ownership and gun-related injury might need to actively consider the prevailing social gun culture in the USA. Future studies that aim to inform our understanding of gun ownership may fruitfully explore the determinants of a participation in social gun culture in the USA.

Not that hard.

[lost in melb.]

Not that hard.

Understanding the concept - or eliminating paragraph indents? :-s

[RBP]

Understanding the concept - or eliminating paragraph indents? :-s

I was being a dick about the formatting. I'm in a mean funk. My apologies.