The problem is lunatics legally purchasing a weapon design to easily kill a lot of people in a short amount of time. Enough with all the goddamn obfuscating.I bet there are number of teachers from Sandy Hook Elementary and Douglas Stoneman High School that second guessed that belief.
I don't believe that arming teachers is the answer, but it makes more sense than banning the AR-15 and assuming doing so will end or reduce the number of school shootings. Especially when said firearm is used is less than .5% of all firearm related homicides and the deadliest school shooting in U.S history didn't even involve one.
The idea that this is a desirable situation for the U.S., emulating an uber-militarized quasi-outlaw religious state that taxes citizens at some of the highest rates in the world, is pretty sad.Israel does it right. An armed guard with military training guards the entrance to their schools. They are required to complete refresher training every 4 months. CBC ran a segment on it on last night's news but I couldn't locate it. Of course this requires an investment - maybe tax firearms sales or get the NRA to pay for it.
I guess Israel is a good idea of where this country is headed. High political polarization, political corruption at the highest level of government, and major doubts on issues of public safety.Israel does it right. An armed guard with military training guards the entrance to their schools. They are required to complete refresher training every 4 months. CBC ran a segment on it on last night's news but I couldn't locate it. Of course this requires an investment - maybe tax firearms sales or get the NRA to pay for it.
It's extremely sad but since disarming the crackpots is clearly out of the question, and since society seems to be creating them at a record pace for all kinds of sociological reasons, copying one aspect of Israel seems necessary.
Just out of curiosity, if we did arm teachers, who would assume the legal liability if a teacher misuses that weapon or is negligent with it? The school district? The teachers themselves? Or do we just chalk it up to "oops, accidents happen!" as is so often the case with firearm "accidents?"
Here's two actual, real-world incidents for reference:
-A teacher in Utah drops her pistol while using a school bathroom, the pistol fires, shattering the toilet and wounding the teacher in the leg.
-A teacher in Pennsylvania accidentally leaves her pistol sitting on top of the toilet after using the restroom. It is later found by some elementary school students.
And of course, let's not forget the more local example of the Bay City deputy and the science teacher that sent a bullet flying through the wall while using a device to test the trigger pull of the deputy's weapon in a science classroom. A teacher in an adjacent classroom was wounded in that little kerfuffle.
The more guns we put into schools, the more likely we are to see incidents like this. They WILL happen. They have already happened. Who will be responsible?
Collateral damage, much?
I can hear Fieger licking his chops from here.
Trauma from every brandishing event at a student in school, high 6 figures.
Trauma and perment ear damage from every accidental discharge in a school per student in the room, mid 7 figures.
Injury or death of a student not armed in a public school from teachers weapons, 8 to 9 figures especially if they were "trained properly".
He probably is already shopping for another Caribbean Island to buy himself off the tax payers of Michigan. Only bigger, much bigger this time around.
Last edited by ABetterDetroit; February-28-18 at 06:14 PM.
I'll put here and expand upon what I posted on the other thread.
My mom is a teacher.
An excellent teacher.
She's taught rich kids.
She's taught poor kids.
She's taught immigrants.
She still does.
They're incredibly lucky to have had her as a teacher.
Tell her she should carry a gun to work and they wouldn't have been so lucky.
Put guns in schools — whether in the hands of teachers or security guards at the doors — and she'd look for a school where she could teach without them.
If she were choosing a profession, and schools were militarized as some are now proposing, she'd almost certainly pick some other.
Not because teaching isn't her calling,
But because she believes weapons have no place in a school setting.
I know a lot of teachers.
And most of them think the way she does.
Does it make sense to make the professioneven moreso unattractive?
Putting guns in schools would deprive students of many good teachers.
We have a hard enough time recruiting good teachers as it is.
And before someone says she must not be tough enough,
She's always beeninfamously among the toughest of the faculty.
I've seen her rush into a brawl to break it up without a thought whether she had backup.
She had only me, visiting her at school that day, running behind her.
But she's never laid a hand on a child except to pull him out of a fight.
She wouldn't.
She enforces discipline with her example, her tone of voice when necessary, her unyielding adherence to high standards, and her generous faith in her students that they too can rise to those standards.
And it works.
She's pragmatic about guns.
She recognizes their obvious military and law enforcement purposes.
She respects the right of hunters:
She grew up eating venison;
I loved the bear skin rug her brother had in front of his fireplace.
But she thinks guns in schools are for cowards.
And they are.
Last edited by bust; March-01-18 at 04:28 AM.
Besides, whether we should have guns in schools is just deflecting our attention from the real question:
How do we keep weapons from individuals who cannot be trusted with them?
Or from a legal standpoint:
What weapons does the 2nd Amendment provide the right to bear, and under what conditions?
Our current patchwork of laws allow weapons that are too powerful in the hands of too many and without sufficient precautions.
That's the root of the problem, and that's what we should be discussing.
There are common sense measures we can take to make gun ownership safer.
Last edited by bust; March-01-18 at 10:36 AM.
I'm trying to picture the 6'8" 350 linebacker getting pissed off and eyeing the gun carried by the Wally Cox type teacher.
Yeah. That'll go well.
And does anyone remember one of these events in a big city school? All I can remember are in rural, suburban or sub-urban [[under 50,000 population) cities.
I'm not aware of any in a Chicago, Atlanta, Miami, Seattle, Phoenix, Boston type town.
I guess the blue bus and squad car parades are over. DPD continues to make wonderful crossing guards @ the coliseums, and the rest of us outside the Green Zone continue to fend for ourselves. Armament seems to be his mantra. This isn't the first time Craig's encouraged this sort of thing.
Last edited by Honky Tonk; March-01-18 at 07:57 AM.
We should just construct the schools out of guns, problem solved. Anyone who needs or wants a gun, just reach into the wall or floor and pull one out. They'll be the safest places on earth.
Perhaps we should just outlaw all guns, regardless of the Constitution. After all, that's how we got rid of illegal drugs.
I was referring to the mass raids he used to do when he first became Police Chief. There would be long lines of various Law Enforcement vehicles, with the DPD blue bus in the center of it, sirens going, lights a-flashing heading toward their destination. They raided a complex near my residence once. Quite a spectacle, and circus, rolled into one.
Australia provides a model of how the United States could reduce gun violence and mass shootings. They managed to eliminate mass shootings through the prohibition of semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, buy-back programs and amnesty for those who turn their illegal weapons in. They also have 28 day waiting periods, increased background checks and the requirement of having a reasonable reason to own a gun [[i.e. hunting).
If the United States as a nation believes so strongly in the "right to bear arms" [[an outdated philosophical and legal concept, and never one of the inalienable rights), than it will have to accept that mass shootings are just a fact of life. The sad thing is that the NRA already has accepted this, and doesn't care. What this says about a nation is that the right to have weapons designed only for the purpose of killing takes precedent over the right to life.
Ah, the Russian bot red herring arrives.
No one wants to "outlaw all guns", obviously. No one wants to rewrite the Constitution.
Reasonable people want some safety rules re. war weaponry. No one cares about hunting weaponry, handguns, weekend target practice, etc.
And your analogy is absurd and nonsensical, and contradicts your premise.
Maybe we look even closer to home? After all, an island nation that is a thousand of miles from anywhere with some of the world's strictest customs and border controls isn't exactly a mirror image of the U.S . Our neighbor to the South has gun control laws that are far more stringent than those in Australia. How's it working out for Mexico?Australia provides a model of how the United States could reduce gun violence and mass shootings. They managed to eliminate mass shootings through the prohibition of semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, buy-back programs and amnesty for those who turn their illegal weapons in. They also have 28 day waiting periods, increased background checks and the requirement of having a reasonable reason to own a gun [[i.e. hunting).
.
Last edited by Johnnny5; March-01-18 at 12:34 PM.
I think its pretty well established that there is not much correlation between gun control laws and crime rates.Maybe we look even closer to home? After all, an island nation that is a thousand of miles from anywhere with some of the world's strictest customs and border controls isn't exactly a mirror image of the U.S . Our neighbor to the South has gun control laws that are far more stringent than those in Australia. How's it working out for Mexico?
There is correlation, to be sure, in a great many cases. Canada and Western Europe do have low crime rates and gun control. But correlation is not causation. There are many factors. Gun control is only one.
As to Chief Craig and arming teachers...
I'm doubtful as to the success of this approach -- especially when the rather liberal teachers of America would have to support it to make a difference.
But I applaud Craig for his progressive thinking. Even though violence against school children is way down, it is still unacceptable that sick people see schools as easy targets with a guarantee of notoriety for the perp.
Craig may not be right. But its also certain that gun control is not the answer too. Look at Canada. Gun violence is common in drug wars in Surrey, BC, for example. Gun Control is part of the solution, but its not the only answer. We have to be open to different ideas. Craig seems to be open to innovation and progress -- whereas the teacher community its stuck in the mud.
You honestly think comparing America to a developing country is a fair comparison?
By that logic, Somalia is a free for all where there are effectively no guns laws because there is effectively no government. It's also awash in firearms. How's that working out for them? Also do you think that's a fair comparison to make?
Putting aside the fact that Mexico is a third world country with regions basically at war, almost all the guns in Mexico are from the U.S.
In short, Mexico has a gun problem, because the U.S. has a gun problem. Guns are super cheap and plentiful in Mexico because of us.
No first world country on the planet has remotely similar gun laws as the U.S. No first world country has remotely similar violence as the U.S. If you think these points aren't related, then I don't know what to say.
|
Bookmarks