Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sir Finkus]

He tried to get past the office staff. They tried to stop him, but they were shot. Imagine if one of them had a gun? Imagine if, after rigorous background and mental health checks, every member of the staff that passed was required to have a gun?

You want guns in schools? Seriously? Fire arms to be kept within grabbing range of emotionally immature kids who don't yet understand the seriousness of shooting each other.

I agree that it's a dumb idea to have people required to carry guns, but I don't think having an armed police officer or 2 in every school would really be all that bad.  As far as the guns being in "grabbing range", I'd love to see some teenager make a grab for a cop's gun. 

We had an officer on campus at our school.  It's a good idea I think.  He even went around to our civics classes and had Q&As with students.

But they wouldn't be cops. I  agree it sounds like a sensible idea, but the practicals will fail. Notably, the human element. I personally know teachers I wouldn't feel safe being in the same room as if they had a gun. People go, mad. Especially poorly paid teachers. Do you REALLY want a school to be armed to the teeth?
 
And what pisses me off the most is the assumption that having a gn makes you competent. Accuracy, ESPECIALLY OF CIVILIANS is terrible. Remember the police shooting at the empire state building? That accuracy is fairly common. and they're trained professionals. Do you honestly think the government can afford to train teachers? There's ALOT of teachers. And if it actually happens, more people are going to eventually end up being shot by the TEACHERS then the mass gunman.

Please re-read my post before jumping down my throat.

[Max White]

One or two trained police officers is a big, big leap from every staff member.
The police response time over here is very good, and school shootings are almost unheard of, so my opinion on the matter is that it might not be suited to where I live, but from what I can gather in the US response time is a lot longer, and there is a higher rate of shootings, so maybe an armed school liaison officer would work well.

[misko27]

He tried to get past the office staff. They tried to stop him, but they were shot. Imagine if one of them had a gun? Imagine if, after rigorous background and mental health checks, every member of the staff that passed was required to have a gun?

You want guns in schools? Seriously? Fire arms to be kept within grabbing range of emotionally immature kids who don't yet understand the seriousness of shooting each other.

I agree that it's a dumb idea to have people required to carry guns, but I don't think having an armed police officer or 2 in every school would really be all that bad.  As far as the guns being in "grabbing range", I'd love to see some teenager make a grab for a cop's gun. 

We had an officer on campus at our school.  It's a good idea I think.  He even went around to our civics classes and had Q&As with students.

But they wouldn't be cops. I  agree it sounds like a sensible idea, but the practicals will fail. Notably, the human element. I personally know teachers I wouldn't feel safe being in the same room as if they had a gun. People go, mad. Especially poorly paid teachers. Do you REALLY want a school to be armed to the teeth?
 
And what pisses me off the most is the assumption that having a gn makes you competent. Accuracy, ESPECIALLY OF CIVILIANS is terrible. Remember the police shooting at the empire state building? That accuracy is fairly common. and they're trained professionals. Do you honestly think the government can afford to train teachers? There's ALOT of teachers. And if it actually happens, more people are going to eventually end up being shot by the TEACHERS then the mass gunman.

Please re-read my post before jumping down my throat.

It wasn't so much aimed at you as it was that you were the most recent comment and therefore easiest to respond to.

[fqllve]

One or two trained police officers is a big, big leap from every staff member.
The police response time over here is very good, and school shootings are almost unheard of, so my opinion on the matter is that it might not be suited to where I live, but from what I can gather in the US response time is a lot longer, and there is a higher rate of shootings, so maybe an armed school liaison officer would work well.

Having one or two people armed would not be bad, especially if they were police officers.

However, I believe this shooter was wearing body armor. So... that may not have been enough to stop him, sadly.

[Max White]

No, but it does give people a better chance in future incidents where the shooter may not be armored, as well as make sure that authorities are already on scene who can try and take control of the situation in a calm manner and get people to safety. And like Finkus said, they also offer an educational benefit. They can give lessons on safety in an emergency and would be able to run school drills.

[Urist_McDrowner]

School bombings aren't terribly uncommon. If we ban guns, it will just go back to things like this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

[misko27]

It being in 1927 somewhat undermines your point. There was still the Weimar republic damn it. Stuff was different.
 
A more recent example would help you. I can certainly name a number of recent GUN related massacres.

[Urist_McDrowner]

Yeah, that argument is basically like saying "to sterilize our waters, add more bacteriophages"!

You know bacteriophages are actually harmless, right?

[Urist_McDrowner]

It being in 1927 somewhat undermines your point. There was still the Weimar republic damn it. Stuff was different.
 
A more recent example would help you. I can certainly name a number of recent GUN related massacres.

Guns that could shoot fast enough were hard to come by. People used bombs. Make guns illegal, they'll use illegal guns or use bombs.

[Darvi]

Just, please, learn to edit your posts first.

Urgh.

[USEC_OFFICER]

No, but it does give people a better chance in future incidents where the shooter may not be armored, as well as make sure that authorities are already on scene who can try and take control of the situation in a calm manner and get people to safety. And like Finkus said, they also offer an educational benefit. They can give lessons on safety in an emergency and would be able to run school drills.

Having a police officer at a school would be helpful, but I'm not sure if it'd be worthwhile. The number of people who die in a school shooting each year in the US is... something along the lines of 15~30 people. That's out of 100,000 public schools. Having the officers visit the highschools to talk about the shooting would be a better use of time and money, especially since they could also touch upon other matters while they're there.

[Leafsnail]

Bombs are also controlled

Bombs are also controlled

Bombs are also controlled

[fqllve]

School bombings aren't terribly uncommon. If we ban guns, it will just go back to things like this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

I'm pretty sure you're the only person here who has said anything about banning guns. Regulation is a spectrum and there are a lot of options.

And yes, there are plenty of ways to cause serious damage, did you know you can build your own automatic weapon in your garage? With the right tools and knowledge. The point is to discourage spree killings by making them as hard to pull off as reasonably possible. Defining the argument in terms of "Free guns or ban guns" does absolutely nothing to help anything.

[Urist_McDrowner]

I don't want to end up on a terrorist watch list, but there are a lot of ways to make a bomb. How well DID laws prevent the IRA from their bombings?
 

[Sonlirain]

Hitler and nazis would ban guns.

Did i win the thread?