What are you basing this on?Quote:
Originally Posted by ToomuchStuff
Europe has a Homicide rate of 3 per 100,000 inhabitants. The America’s are over 16. The US is almost 5.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List..._homicide_rate
Printable View
What are you basing this on?Quote:
Originally Posted by ToomuchStuff
Europe has a Homicide rate of 3 per 100,000 inhabitants. The America’s are over 16. The US is almost 5.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List..._homicide_rate
I'm happy to discuss just about any subject at any time although I'd have to first correct your initial presumption that I want to arm teachers. The fact is I'd like to de-criminalize the possession of legal weapons at schools, thus allowing responsible teachers to be armed if they so desired. (As an aside, my wife works in the Autism unit for the local elementary school, would you believe that every teacher in that unit possesses a concealed carry permit. Weird huh?)Quote:
Originally Posted by Williamsmith
Of course there are always fears of liability and fear of doing the wrong thing, but in your example I'd have to weigh the risks of being played by some suicidal kid with the possibility that the kid intended to take out the class. There is no good choice there, but one is better than the other. Liability be damned.
Alan you either have a higher level of tolerance for unintended consequences than I do or more confidence in the average concealed carry permitee. Given that obtaining a concealed carry permit is easier than obtaining a drivers license....in my county....do you have a pulse? And you’re not a felon are you? Bam , go forth and carry!Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
You don’t have to demonstrate any knowledge of the firearm, any safety IQ, no competency in placing rounds in their intended location, no demonstration of knowledge of basic justification and legal issues. Just Bam...go forth and carry.
I see #studentslivesmatter in our future.
Now if you are going to conduct training for teachers....who trains,how much training who pays for the training? And finally I’ll say this. My academy trained police officers for 21 weeks. Accidental and negligent discharges were not uncommon. In one training academy, an instructor took out a handgun he thought was unloaded and discharged it with the round killing a student Trooper. One such incident in school would prove the folly of that strategy......and we have 15 million school student k-12 at any one time.
Williamsmith, I can see that you're heavily invested in the belief that only law enforcement personnel should be trusted with the burden of protection. I was too years ago but am no longer sure of that.
The fact is that we have developed a violent culture and every single person deserves the right and opportunity to protect themselves and those under their charge, as well as those who would rather relinquish that responsibility to others. I can't in good conscience stand in their way.
Maybe it’s a staged conspiracy by Trump haters
https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2...political/amp/
https://www.thedailybeast.com/donald...ors-ex-fbi-dad
And don't Forget, Twitter is out to silence the right
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-43144717
watch out. House to house gun confiscation is next.
Actually, the rate of violent crime in this country has been dropping steadily for years. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank...me-in-the-u-s/Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
That's true, but it doesn't mean violence doesn't exist. The residents of St. Louis and Baltimore and Chicago and Detroit and Houston and Philadelphia and New York City still deserve the ability to protect themselves, even if some of their local governments disagree. And, everybody else in every other part of the world deserves the same right to protect themselves from those rare individuals who are determined to immortalize themselves by killing or injuring as many people as possible in one planned event. At least I think so, YMMV.Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneV2.0
I agree with the "well-regulated militia" part of the second amendment. I believe in training and licensing for owners of handguns and rifles. I see no reason people not actively part of the police or military should own military-style weapons. I don't recall a time when I felt it was necessary to arm myself--even when I had a stalker. The thought never crossed my mind.
Im quite comfortable arguing that the “well regulated militia” actually refers to the citizenship and not the police (modern day policing did not exist until the turn of the 20th century) nor the military....we have had a separate military force since day one. The farmers and artisans of revolutionary America were required to maintain and have ready a rifle , a specific amount of ammunition and based on your ability possibly more for the defense of the state. Participation was even mandatory based on age.Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneV2.0
THe problem is with our professional military ...the founding fathers disagreed about the necessity for a standing army...and our paid law enforcement, training our militia has fallen by the wayside and in fact much Of the citizenry is afraid of firearms, many are untrained and a few are down right dangerous with them.
I dont know where the compromise is but I know that restricting it to military and the police is not the answer. Not in this country.
Yes, it infringes and limits my pursuit of happiness.Quote:
Originally Posted by Williamsmith
Not being silly, having the ability to defend oneself.Quote:
Originally Posted by CathyA
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ted_death_rateQuote:
Originally Posted by flowerseverywhere
Basing on gun violence goes up with access to guns. Without access to guns, crazy people will find other means to attack others. Without those same guns to defend and deter those actions, more people look like sheep.
So President Trump has apparently endorsed arming teachers as a major component to solving the mass shooting incidents. While I won’t condemn it as the worst response to the problem, I’ll hold to my opinion that it’s a bad idea. It’s like allowing the fox to enter the hen house before you kill it. In this case, there is no necessity to first allow the shooter into the school and then respond.
So why do we have armed security outside fenced in facilities? Why not just arm all employees? Why does the military bother to have outside perimeters? Why not just require all enlisted members be armed at all times? The cook can wear a shoulder holster while he mashes potatoes.
Now why should the same people who argue against the federal government involvement in schools in the first place now endorse a federal effort to arm teachers. Just based on probabilities on the increased encounters between armed teachers and students - it’s possible that more students will be injured or killed than mass shooters account for now.
If we are going to arm teachers then let’s make the unintended, accidental and negligent discharge of their weapon an immediate termination of employment and an entry on a lifetime ban from teaching. Sort of a teachers no fly list.
And should they go to the bathroom and leave their firearm on the tank where a child could find it.....same result. That has happened here in Pennsylvania.
I worked with many fine police officers, who were very diligent in their training and trustworthy who had unintended discharges unloading, loading and handling their firearm. Right in the police station and out in public. It’s an expected occurrence strictly due to probabilities in handling firearms. So we are going to put students in direct proximity to firearms on a daily basis because......we want to protect them from firearms.
As a teacher armed ....how much liability insurance is enough to have if god forbid you are involved in a fatal or life threatening shooting of an innocent bystander or student?
Arming teachers attempts to solve one problem but causes many others. I’m surprised our President doesn’t have better counsel than that.
I'm so proud of these young people taking a stand. Finally. I wasn't sure the next generation cared about much, but I'm very encouraged!
I haven’t read all of this.
and coming back to this thread reaffirmed for me that I should stay out of it.
but I need to put this out there in case hearing it makes any difference at all.
i told dh last night that the day they arm teachers, I quit. Dh - who owns three fire arms and has taught all three of our children to use them safely btw - said “they aren’t going to require you to have a gun. They are just going to LET you have a gun.” So, amended my statement. The day they let one of my coworkers bring a gun into my building. I quit. That does not make me feel safer. It makes me feel less safe. The odds of one of my students being harmed by a gun belonging to a teacher seem astronomically higher than the odds of a shooter entering our school. I have enough to worry about with fish and peanuts and tree nuts. (I know where to get an epipen and I know how to use it!)
i understand the “guns don’t kill people” argument. In fact, I agree with it. Mostly, Boys kill people. With guns. So could we maybe take the guns away from boys? (I use “boys” deliberately, although in a legal sense I mean “young men and also as collateral damage women under oh, 25 or 30” because I would like to see a little impulse control and mature reasoning ability in people with deadly weapons!) Dh asked me about military - exempt them. I’m fine with that. As long as they are not under any disciplinary action or dishonorable discharge or mental disability discharge. I think we could compromise on some hunting related regulations too.
TooMuchStuff’s unfettered pursuit of happiness appears to be interfering with mine. Also with the rights of others to life. You know “LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?” It would make me happy to go barefoot all summer, but the health department makes me wear shoes in restaurants for reasons I don’t really understand.
What the father proposed in the meeting between 45 and the Florida students and parents was to have a few select teachers trained in firearm safety and use as well as how to react in a crisis situation. And the guns would be kept under lock and key. It doesn't make it a good idea, but is different from the perception of random teachers with guns inn shoulder harnesses or without training.
Our society has a gun culture woven into our it's fabric and is based more on paranoia than logic. I don't see much hope for any significant gun control legislation. The violence on TV and computer games has romanticized our villain and hero roles based on guns and shootings. That would be the starting point for change if I were in charge.
How about if we put fire extinguishers in classrooms? I could definitely spray an assailant with a fire extinguisher. I could also grab it during an actual fire in case we get trapped. I have two fire cadets in one of my classes.
CL, sure, I would be happy if “they” take away guns from the boyz in my ‘hood. Would make for more peace and safety around here.
oh wait, these are already illegal. Our local courts are clogged with gun cases of
1) guns illegally obtained and possessed
2) crimes made more serious by possessing a gun
3) felons possessing guns
DH sat on grand jury for three months and by far the majority were guns and drug cases. Those are illegal yet common in a certain demographic.
I cant understand why those who think making something illegal stops it. Nice fantasy.
That wouldn't be my first choice, but a dry chemical fire extinguisher can make a good non-lethal weapon. It would definitely upset the assailant's OODA Loop and give others time and opportunity to attempt to disarm and detain, but you'd better check with Williamsmith about the liability associated with breaking the seal or the long term effects of the assailant inhaling the chemicals. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicken lady
If we are going to intentionally place guns within the school with a few select trained persons...I want them to be concerned about security, safety, vigilance, and I don’t want their guns kept under lock and key. That would be a useless strategy. An incident like that needs to be attacked immediately. There is no time for retrieving weapons from a locker or safe and loading.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogar
I also want that to be their only priority. I don’t want them teaching and trying to divide their attention between being a mentor and being a first responder to an attack. I want them to be like an Air Marshal on an airplane. I don’t expect Air Marshals to be piloting. I want the pilot to be piloting. So I don’t want teachers carrying period. I want someone who’s job is strictly as an enforcer Of Security.
I am not discouraged about gun legislation. I think it is like a snowball rolling down hill gaining momentum. There is only one thing standing between this country’s fascination with guns, murder, death and bloodshed and serious gun restrictions. That’s is ....the frequency with which children of influential people are mowed down by firearms. What do you think the response would be if another mass shooting at a school would happen this afternoon? The swiftness Of enacting new gun legislation is directly proportional to the frequency of these incidents.
When you have the POTUS sitting listening to grieving parents, siblings and friends about the gun murder of their loved one in school setting.....and he responds by advancing the logic that more guns will make things better. I mean, how can an intelligent person not know that those grieving people don’t want to hear about more guns....,they want to hear about less guns!
Put Marshalls in the school but harden the access. My sons girlfriend is a diabetic with a sensitive pump on her. She has to be patted down, searched, unclothed, questioned and submit to a gunpowder swab of her hands just to board an airplane. But a kid can take a backpack into school with a Ruger 10/22 takedwn and magazines of ammo without anyone even glancing up. This is so we can say our right to carry shall not be infringed? Or is it that we don’t have our priorities in the right place.....meaning our money.
Alan, that’s the kind of snarky attitude that puts people off and deadens any kind of logical debate. I suspect that you have imagined yourself as a teacher, armed and ready to step up to the plate. You might be capable of pulling it off. That doesn’t make it a good idea for a national effort to arm teachers. If you can convince me with logic and a factual presentation rather than shuck and jive....I’m listening.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
Don't take offense Williamsmith, I realize that your concerns for liability are real and will probably be the one element which prevents schools from allowing teachers the same opportunity to defend themselves and their charges in the school environment that they enjoy outside the school. I just happen to believe that after 45 years of experience in the LE/Executive Protection/Security fields, outsourcing that liability won't necessarily create a better outcome. We'll have to agree to disagree on that.
I'm not sure that there is a "national effort to arm teachers" although I am aware of the popular notion that those teachers who are willing and able should not have their right to effectively defend themselves stripped away the moment they enter school property. If we're going to argue, we should frame our positions properly, don't you think?
this may be true, but far before any media people have been very violent. In particular males. A hobby of mine is reading history. Read about the Roman or Mongolian empire or the history of the British archers and the story is the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogar
Men in charge decide they want more wealth and power. Groups of armed men take up the weapons of the time and invade, kill citizens except those that are useful for sex or labor slaves. Peripherally the weapons of the time are used by citizens to intimidate and kill.
This era is no different from any other, except perhaps the ability of people to be able to get their hands on better weapons that can kill more people in a shorter period of time.
The root of the problem in my opinion, is an unfulfillable need for power, attention and money as opposed to valuing life. More power, more money, more fame with no regards of whom has to suffer along the way. But in this case white US born men in particular are mass murdering their peers and innocents using legally obtained weapons.
It is truly insane when you think about it.
Strictly speaking Alan, how is the terms of being a teacher not being armed any different than the terms of a football player not being permitted to protest during the anthem? Both are having their constitutional rights restricted. Both have the option to seek employment elsewhere. There are schools that permit teachers to be armed.
While they're an apples and oranges kind of comparison in the end they both fall under a conditions of employment scenario with the exception that we haven't criminalized anthem protests.Quote:
Originally Posted by Williamsmith
Just out of curiosity, can you tell me if there's ever been a school shooting at one of the schools where teachers are permitted to be armed?
An excellent question. One which we can both research. But I will hazard to guess that if there hasn’t been....it is only a matter of time. The length or brevity of that period will be directly proportional to the number of armed teachers that are deployed. And I am sure there will be cases where a teacher becomes a hero and stops an attack. My concern is the risk/benefit ratio for the types of incidents that an armed teacher introduces to the school environment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
I am aware of close calls. When an elementary student finds an unattended gun in a school bathroom left behind by a concealed carrying teacher.....theres a problem.
So if certain teachers have guns, who takes care of their students? And when the police rush in, will they think the teacher is the shooter? And if they have some sort of badge.......how long will it take for a person set on killing to fake a badge?
I have some experience with that particular problem, thankfully I didn't get far before realizing my mistake.Quote:
Originally Posted by Williamsmith
There was at least one armed guard at the school in Florida. It is reported he didn't "encounter" the shooter.
I think there is some basic truth to your opinions, perhaps linked all the way back to our genetic propensity for the survival of the fittest and the role of the male to assure safety and protection. I do think there is a significant difference between wars over territory or wealth, and our mass shootings. Mass shootings seem to be more related to insecurity, revenge and mental instability. It is all pretty insane though.Quote:
Originally Posted by flowerseverywhere
I am one that would quit rather than carry a gun, I think that should be left to people trained and who have that as their primary job. Just this morning in before school care I had a child pick up my phone and try to call 911! Of course I would not have a gun on the table, however it is hard to keep things both secure and accessible in a classroom.
I am just super careful about who enters the building after school, there are workers who are not with our district coming in and I asked for them to check in and wear visitor badges. We did not let one in automatically last night, I had another worker come see if they knew him before I opened the door.
Here’s one Alan.....School teacher in Utah negligent discharge of firearm in bathroom. Shot the toilet, got arrested and fired.
http://archive.sltrib.com/article.ph...04&itype=CMSID
Here’s another: a teacher who also was an active police officer and a combat veteran was carrying concealed in his school when somehow he had an “accidental” discharge while “cleaning” his firearm. First ridiculous to be “cleaning” his gun in the school. Second, how can you be more trained than that teacher was?
https://www.ohio.com/akron/news/poli...-gun-accidents
Or....An instructor at Idaho State University unintentionally shot herself in a chemistry classroom.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/idaho-s...self-in-class/
if we confine the discussion to School Shootings, I think there are a number of things that, working together, could make the schools much safer: (really) secure campuses, ban violent video games and movies for children, re-cultivate respect for Life and authority at least in our children, get (real) mental health and counseling services into every school.
It is my firm belief that unless there is a concerted effort to bring many of the issues together, none will work. It is a complex issue and requires a complex solution.
As many have pointed out, Ronald Reagan was surrounded by (one assumes) highly trained Secret Service agents when he was almost assassinated. I did read about a church security guard taking out a shooter once, so I suppose it's possible.
Japan is rife with violent video games; it also has stringent rules for owning guns, and almost no gun deaths.
yes, but it is far more convenient to blame media violence, which incidentally numerous players and watchers do not translate into murdering someone. Anything but the insane access to guns by even the mentally illQuote:
Originally Posted by JaneV2.0
yes, who knows why they get to the point that they actually carry these horrific crimes out. Access to firearms so easily does not help.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogar
children have been witnesses to violence throughout history. Hangings and burnings at the stake were hugely popular entertainments. Children used to routinely be beat and women too. Spare the rod and spoil the child. Some school districts today allow paddling. Hazing is enormously popular in college fraternities. There will always be violence. Banning movies and video games without banning guns seems misguided, but that is just my opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by mschrisgo2
As as long as we have a president who ridicules people, and calls names and bullies those who do not go along with what he says, and grown ups defend his behavior, respect will not return to our society.
Most mentally ill people who harm someone with a gun are depressed and harm themselves.
we connect mass shootings with mental illness because we assume that anyone who could do such a thing must be mentally ill. Not because these people previously met the criteria for a diagnosed mental illness. It is circular reasoning.
The terms “evil” or “socially maladjusted” might serve as well.
+1 and then while we call any random killer "mentally ill" we pretend we aren't stigmatizing mental illness. Oh yes we are. Btw I don't have a mental illness diagnosis, but it's a civil rights movement and those are the arguments.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicken lady