Discussion: The Second Amendment III

[SentinelMind]

How is the NRA planning on paying for all these armed guards? I suppose you could fire the teachers. That should about cover it.

Protecting and educating kids should be top priority....I'm sure we can cut some bureacrat's pension here and let go some adminstrator of feel-goodiness there...

 

[Paradoxium]

In some schools in Israel, some of the teachers are trained and are armed themselves. No shooting massacres in those particular schools. It might have something to do with not being a soft target.

 

[Paradoxium]

To be fair, the officers would be at the entrances/in the hallways. So its not like they're breathing down the kids' necks. Baramos, I feel there should be a physical fitness standard for these hypothetical guards. You're right that an obese officer is an easy target.

I propose a tax to pay for the security team.

We should tax California for that. I see all these union signs that says "please tax us" t:

 

[Thundercrack85]

I'm not arguing whether or not the gunman would get past security, my point is that it's ridiculous to hire thousands of people to patrol elementary schools just in case some insane person shows up with a weapon.

Assuming that would even stop them... which most people say it wouldn't.

 

[Matt Mortem]

To be fair, the officers would be at the entrances/in the hallways. So its not like they're breathing down the kids' necks. Baramos, I feel there should be a physical fitness standard for these hypothetical guards. You're right that an obese officer is an easy target.

I propose a tax to pay for the security team.

And I say **** that. Why make the people shoulder another tax burden when you could just get rid of the guns. Not only would you have to pay salary for every guard in every school, but there'd have to be more than guard per school to take shifts AND you'd be paying for their weapons and ammunition. It's an outrageous proposal and anyone seriously considering it is a blinder wearing fool.

That garbage the NRA said about the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun is just asinine. If neither man had a gun, problem solved.

 

[Victarion]

Thundercrack85, would you agree that this shooting is, in fact, an anomaly? An exception rather than a rule?

Edit: Matt, what about the mesh/bullet proof windows with doors that lock from the inside? (Rather than my security proposal)

 

[Thundercrack85]

The best part if the people who want to implement this ridiculous plan would refuse to pay for the new taxes to implement it.

 

[Matt Mortem]

Protecting and educating kids should be top priority....I'm sure we can cut some bureacrat's pension here and let go some adminstrator of feel-goodiness there...

Cutting pensions would pay for multiple guards in every school in the nation? I don't want to say you're delusional but.........

 

[Thundercrack85]

Thundercrack85, would you agree that this shooting is, in fact, an anomaly? An exception rather than a rule?

No, there have been a handful of instances where insane people have attacked elementary schools. But they are incredibly rare, and the ones I know of, no one could see coming.

In 1927, a lunatic blew up an elementary school in Michigan. It killed more than 30 people. But no one suggested that every elementary school in the country should have a bomb squad on standby.

How far do people want to take this logic? Because insane people strike everywhere.

 

[Matt Mortem]

The armed guard solution is slapping a band-aid on a heart attack. Sure, it looks like you're trying to fix it, but it's not going to do a damn thing. It's an impotent gesture.

 

[Victarion]

Fair. What system should we implement to confiscate assault weapons? Should we reimburse the owners for the weapons that we confiscate?

I'm simply playing the role of Lance Sackless' advocate. I'm not a shooter nor a gun owner; I have co-workers and colleagues who are into it though.

 

[dnno1]

Yep Meli prevented it with his conceal and carry. There are other cases like this where the majority of the time, the CCW manage to prevent without firing a shot. Of course no one really reports cases of massacre prevention.

That's because it's unreliable. Sure, Mr. Meli was fortunate enough to be in the right place at the right time, but that wasn't the case at Fort Hood, a military base for crying out loud. Nor was it the case at the Empire State Building where, although the shot and killed the perp, police actually wounded innocent bystanders near the scene. It's dangerous business and you can't expect the average Joe CCW to be as professional as an LEO (and even then they can be sloppy).

 

[dnno1]

Fair. What system should we implement to confiscate assault weapons? Should we reimburse the owners for the weapons that we confiscate?

I'm simply playing the role of Lance Sackless' advocate. I'm not a shooter nor a gun owner; I have co-workers and colleagues who are into it though.

Buy back programs have been successful in the past.

 

[SentinelMind]

Cutting pensions would pay for multiple guards in every school in the nation? I don't want to say you're delusional but.........

You say my idea of strict budgeting is delusional but then suggest banning all guns?

 

[SentinelMind]

No, there have been a handful of instances where insane people have attacked elementary schools. But they are incredibly rare, and the ones I know of, no one could see coming.

In 1927, a lunatic blew up an elementary school in Michigan. It killed more than 30 people. But no one suggested that every elementary school in the country should have a bomb squad on standby.

How far do people want to take this logic? Because insane people strike everywhere.

That logic doesn't stop suggestion of banning guns of millions of responsible gun owners.
When people quote statistics showing how rare incidents are or how bans don't work, it makes the analysts look shallow, tone deaf, and unconcerned about the current tragedy at hand. I think steel, lock reinforcement and checkpoints at schools is a more serious idea than efforts to handicap lawful gun owners.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Fair. What system should we implement to confiscate assault weapons? Should we reimburse the owners for the weapons that we confiscate?

I'm simply playing the role of Lance Sackless' advocate. I'm not a shooter nor a gun owner; I have co-workers and colleagues who are into it though.

To tell you the truth, I don't think an "assault weapons" ban will do anything to curtal this. Look at Luby's massacre. 20+ dead. The weapons used? Rather unremarkable semiautomatic handguns. One of the most famous shooting incidents (the man in the University tower) was using a simple bolt-action rifle. Those are legal in many countries with very restrictive gun laws.

I don't really have an answer. The sad truth is that this going to happen from time to time in any society with weapons widely available.

Though if I had to come up with something, I would restrict magazines.

 

[SentinelMind]

That's because it's unreliable. Sure, Mr. Meli was fortunate enough to be in the right place at the right time, but that wasn't the case at Fort Hood, a military base for crying out loud. Nor was it the case at the Empire State Building where, although the shot and killed the perp, police actually wounded innocent bystanders near the scene. It's dangerous business and you can't expect the average Joe CCW to be as professional as an LEO (and even then they can be sloppy).

The Fort Hood military base was a gun-free zone..
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/11/10/john-lott-ft-hood-end-gun-free-zone/

 

[dnno1]

Good luck getting a gun in Mexico. If you're not in a cartel, I mean.

I Mexico the private citizen has the constitutional right to keep a firearm in his home for security of his/dwelling. They are limited to a revolver or a semi-automatic of caliber less than .38, a .22 caliber semi-automatic riffle, or a triple barrel shot gun.

 

[Thundercrack85]

I Mexico the private citizen has the constitutional right to keep a firearm in his home for security of his/dwelling. They are limited to a revolver or a semi-automatic of caliber less than .38, a .22 caliber semi-automatic riffle, or a triple barrel shot gun.

I've been told it's rather difficult. You have to be approved (obviously), and you have to buy them directly from the state (which can take them away at any time). You can only have so much ammo. They have extremely strict laws on transportation (it cannot leave your home).

Most Mexican families who have firearms (the number may surprise you), acquired them (at least by the standards of their own country) illegally.

 

[Zar25]

Columbine was a gun-free zone. http://articles.cnn.com/2007-04-19/...n-free-brady-campaign-zero-tolerance?_s=PM:US

I remember a shootout taking place.


"In 1999, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold killed 15 people and wounded 23 more at Columbine High School. The destruction occurred despite the fact that there was an armed security officer at the school and another one nearby -- exactly what LaPierre argued on Friday was the answer to stopping "a bad guy with a gun."

Deputy Neil Gardner was a 15-year veteran of the Jefferson County, Colo., Sheriff’s Office assigned as the uniformed officer at Columbine. According to an account compiled by the police department, Gardner fired on Harris but was unsuccessful in stopping him.

‘Gardner, seeing Harris working with his gun, leaned over the top of the car and fired four shots. He was 60 yards from the gunman. Harris spun hard to the right and Gardner momentarily thought he had hit him. Seconds later, Harris began shooting again at the deputy.’

After the exchange of gunfire, Harris ran back into the building. Gardner was able to get on the police radio and called for assistance from other Sheriff’s units. "Shots in the building. I need someone in the south lot with me."
The second officer was Deputy Paul Smoker, a motorcycle patrolman who was near the school writing a speeding ticket. When he heard a dispatch of a woman injured at the high school, he responded. He, too, fired at Harris but didn't stop him."

 

[Zar25]

Firefights are rarely straightforward affairs. When shots are fired things can get pretty hectic and distinguishing friend from foe isn't easy when **** hits the fan

 

[Hotwire]

With this whole armed guard debate, I am not a fan. As it's been pointed out, Columbine had an armed guard and he failed to stop the shooting. With the shooting at the Empire State Building, the police wounded 9 innocent bystanders. The MPs on Ft. Hood could respond fast enough to stop the shooter. These were all highly trained professionals! I'm not saying every officer guarding a school would respond this way but, it makes you wonder if it's really the effective way to go. Also, wouldn't that be moving us just that much closer to a police state? I mean, let's say the went through with it and there was another school shooting that killed over a dozen kids. Would the NRA then say, "Two armed police officers at every school in the country!" "Now we need three!, Four!" Where would it stop? With one in every classroom? I'm not saying that it could not be effective, it just might but, I'm saying, is that really the way we want our kids to go to school every day?

Another thing. I remember reading, not sure where, that people were suggesting arming teachers. Are they nuts?!?! Police and soldiers train their entire careers to deal with a possible firefight or shoot out and, they still sometimes can't do it. They freeze, forget their training, miss their targets entirely, etc.. I'm not saying all but, there are instances. And knowing that, someone would suggest arming a teacher? Would they also suggest that we put our teachers through combat training? Not only that but, I had teachers who couldn't stand up to a 13 year old with an attitude but, some people want them to stand up to an armed killer? I don't even want to imagine the liability should a student get a hold of the teacher's gun.

 

[Hotwire]

Firefights are rarely straightforward affairs. When shots are fired things can get pretty hectic and distinguishing friend from foe isn't easy when **** hits the fan

Exactly. Watch this one.



Not only did NO ONE GOT SHOT, the suspects GOT AWAY!

 

[Hawkingbird]

I don't understand the argument that guns are needed for defense. Gun crime would go down if they were taken away, surely that's the fix?

 

[jmc]

Fair. What system should we implement to confiscate assault weapons? Should we reimburse the owners for the weapons that we confiscate?

I'm simply playing the role of Lance Sackless' advocate. I'm not a shooter nor a gun owner; I have co-workers and colleagues who are into it though.

That's what we did down here in 1996, a gun buy back scheme, and it worked. One mass shooting is all it took for our conservative PM to make changes, he had objection from within his own party and our own gun lobbyist (who admittedly aren't nearly as big as the US ones), but morally he knew what the right thing was to do and in many ways defined his first term as Prime Minister. The results? We haven't had a mass shooting since because the ability to obtain firearms is a long process with lots of restrictions. Are we free of guns? Nope, and we never will, but we don't live in fear of our schools being shot up, we don't have security guards or metal detectors at schools, a parent can drop their child off and feel comfortable they're in a place of safety for the next 7 hours. The great irony is that the US tries to present itself as this great moral leader to the rest of the world yet seems to lack the morals to change their attitude toward shootings and guns in general.