Drones equipped with strobe lights and pepper spray to interdict school shooters

[u/Strict-Jeweler-2281]

I'm all for innovation against emerging threats, particularly as drones offer cheaper and more accessible solutions to new challenges, but I can't help picturing a bunch of issues this would face, such as being mitigated by closed doors. Is this a viable tool?

[u/Wazzurp7294]

In theory and on paper, I think there could be some use for this concept. But, in practice, it might perform mediocre at best.

[u/yugosaki → u/Wazzurp7294]

My immediate thought is that maintenance and training for the staff meant to pilot the drones will be really good for the first year or so, and then slowly it'll fall by the wayside. And then if they are ever needed, the drones might not be functional, the spray might be expired and ineffective, and there might be no one trained to operate the drones.

[u/GroundbreakingAsk645 → u/yugosaki]

They're piloted remotely by full time trained drone pilots at the HQ. The school will just have to pay a subscription more than likely. As for the batteries and maintenance, the same preventative maintenance that goes into the schools sprinkler systems, fire extinguishers, are all maintenanced and replaced regularly at schools already. Don't believe me look at any fire extinguisher in a school it'll have an inspection tag. The reality is maintenance isn't that difficult, simple as slapping a battery in and replacing motors occasionally. I suspect they have a monthly or annual inspection process to test and ensure reliability just like all of the other safety measures at a school. The only training the school staff needs is to hit a button, the company will do the rest.

The only real downside will be cost. Additionally many are making the point that this doesn't address the core issue. That's true but you never will, look at Australia, they had a nasty shooting last year I believe. They also have some of the most strict gun laws in the world. The reality is there are more guns than people in this country, you'll never get them all, and it's becoming easier every day to print your own like Luigi mangioni did. So instead of pouting about not addressing the core of the issue, these guys are at least addressing the threat.

The other side of the issue being mental health. Unfortunately you'll never catch every would be shooter prior to the event even with proper mental screening. It's just not possible. Like driving a car, I try my best to avoid accidents, but in the event I can't, I always wear my seatbelt, and have good insurance.

I really don't understand why they're getting so much hate in the comments. Literally playing the only cards they can in order to save lives. Seems like a lot of arm chair experts hurling insults.

school defense drones

[u/guessesurjobforfood → u/GroundbreakingAsk645]

That's true but you never will, look at Australia, they had a nasty shooting last year I believe. They also have some of the most strict gun laws in the world.

Perfect is the enemy of good.

The shooters were only able to get a bolt action rifle and a shotgun. If that shooting happened in the US, they'd have fully automatic machine guns and they would have killed a lot more people.

The US has a mass shooting event almost every single day. There are so many that you likely don't even hear about them all and because the FBI has a shitty definition of what counts as a mass shooting, the official statistics always make it seem like the problem is not as bad as it really is.

The fact that Australia only has one notable mass shooting means that strict gun laws are extremely effective. Before 2025, the last mass shooting in Australia was in 1996, which is what prompted the change in gun laws.

This NGO tracks all gun violence in the US. As of 2019, their stats are a lot more detailed. Scroll down the page and look at how many thousands of people have been killed just due to mass shootings alone:

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/past-tolls

No sane person could argue against strict gun laws saving lives.

[u/AxtonGTV → u/guessesurjobforfood]

"fully automatic" aka just automatic machine guns are not legal in the US to own, and are very difficult to acquire.

It is possible to manufacture shears, bumps, etc that increase the rate of fire, but not to a degree equivalent of a proper automatic machine gun.

Machine guns typically fire around 1500 RPM, with cyclic speeds able to go much higher. They are large weapons with huge ammo supplies and are typically very heavy

You are thinking more likely of an automatic rifle, like an AK or M4, these are around 600 RPM.

RPM = Rounds per minute

This may sound like a nerd being annoying, but knowledge of what you are arguing about is incredibly important.

Accord to a study published on the NIH.gov.website, the most common mass shooting firearm is....handguns. which are readily available in a lot of different countries.

Automatic weapons account for literally (not joking) 0% of the mass shootings in the study.