If you're not pissed and emotional about this and demanding we take action, I have to wonder about you.Originally Posted by Sancho
|
|
If you're not pissed and emotional about this and demanding we take action, I have to wonder about you.
Short of making schools like prisons you can't. Even eliminating every gun wouldn't help because someone like this would still find one - or another way to kill.
i demand we take action....
I am pissed and emotional about this and I am going to wait until I am able to think about it rationally and analytically before I start spewing out nonsensical actions that we MUST take.
That was not the point, imo.
Nobody wants to make schools feel like prisons, but I really don't see any other option that is viable. Having a single officer doesn't seem "prison like" and would perhaps be enough of a deterrent.
In this country we always respond with technology and laws, to moral and social issues. It never works.
The following users like this post: Julz
I don't believe having officers in schools in nonsensical. And I don't believe taxing gun related purchases to pay for it is non-sensical. It's a practical approach, whereas trying to "outlaw" weapons or even certain types of weapons will mean a long, drawn out battle with uncertain results. You need to do something now to protect children in public spaces like schools and libraries.
that is beyond nonsensical....
Then what about daycares, swimming pools, playgrounds? Had this mental defective shot up a playground would you want armed guards there? Are you going to put them on the bus to and from school? I understand your feelings but you just can't guard people everywhere.
And good luck thinking that the extra tax money from gun sales would go anywhere except into a black hole.
If you want guns so badly, you'll pay for it. Nothing gets people's attention in America like getting into their wallet.
No, but I believe there should be an expectation/responsibility in a public school or library. Private institutions can hire their own and fund their own security.
typical dumbazz thinking......you want something....but you want someone else to pay for it...
A systemic societal problem................ Please elaborate and tell us why it ends up expressing itself in episodes of gun violence...
You ask for a quick answer so you can ridicule it, when in reality this is a complicated issue.
How long has it been since someone got on an airplane with a firearm? Even before 9/11 and the TSA it was practically impossible to get a gun on a plane. It is really possible to prevent someone from walking into a school with a gun, or with other weapons, to commit m**** murder of our kids. So, they knew him because his mother worked there. He still could have been checked at the entry by a security guard with a metal detecting wand like the ones I get checked with before every Thunder game. It's not that hard, it's not that complicated, and it's not that expensive. It also isn't part of an agenda.
Once again, where does the security stop? And once again, what keeps him from shooting the person at the door? The guard would have been the first one killed. So we lock up our schools, librairies...what about museums as well as anything else that is public? When they go on field trips does an armed guard go along with them?
3 users like KCRuf/Nek's post: Julz, Nazgul, URNotserious
We've decided that airplanes are a priority, perhaps our schools and children are, also.
Perhaps an armed and trained security guard would be better with his firearm than a mentally challenged 20 year old who stole his mother's guns?
You can argue anything to absurdity. I'm not saying that we can eliminate danger. Nonetheless, schools and children in them are particularly vulnerable, so perhaps it isn't ludicrous that we do a better job of protecting them.
As can anyone. Well that mentally challenged 20 year managed to fire off 100 rounds. He wasn't splitting the atom. Schools and children are venerable. As are churches and nursing homes. Once again I ask where do we draw the line on who needs security and protection? When we were attacked on 9/11 it was as much to change our way of living and to make us afraid as it was anything. I don't want to live my life peeking out from behind my drawn blinds in my locked house. Do you? I feel your frustration 150%. Sometimes things happen, for better or for worse.
Acting on emotion is always the best plan.
Airplanes, by nature, have choke points (airport, terminal, gate, door) making it easier to "defend". Schoolsl, by nature, don't have choke points. Are we going to build those choke points in all 130k plus schools?
Not sure if there is any data or enough data (thank goodness!) to determine if guards currently act as a deterrent where they are in place. That would give us an indication if additional security measures would be successful. I thought I had read a study awhile back that having guards and metal dectectors in schools actually increased fighting and other forms of violence (will have to look for that again).
Frustrated?
I'm frustrated that I keep seeing people using this tragedy to promote agendas. Antigun agendas, God in schools agendas, healthcare agendas, etc. I'm checked by security every time I walk into the Chesapeake. I don't feel imprisoned while I'm there. Having a security guard at schools is simple, not prohibitively expensive, and protects children who cannot protect themselves. It is not draconian, nor impractical, and it does not infringe upon liberty.
Also, he fired off 100 rounds while he was not being opposed by an armed individual. It's dramatically easier to kill people who are not shooting back at you.
Airplanes have choke points, by nature. Airports, did not, until they were made that way. Again, if airplanes are a priority, if large sporting arenas are a priority, why is it such a stretch that we make schools full of vulnerable children, also a priority?
"I'm so done with these people. If I had a gun I would kill them all. Alas I have no guns just all these knives, chainsaws, hammers, axes, rat poison, bows&arrows, and swords so I guess they all will live."
People want to address the weapon used instead of the cause that led up to the violence.
I don't think that happened. He was too busy wiping away his fake tears.
This is how some of the idiots on this board would react.
Airports have always had chokepoints. How many 747s could you walk up to or ride your bicycle up to before 9/11. They simply limited who could get past some already natural checkpoints. Even before 9/11 you had to go through security; it just wasn't as stringent and anyone could go through. There are @350 airports that have airline service in the US; under a 1,000 sporting arenas (counting pro and college). There are over 130,000 schools... Not saying it shouldn't be a priority, just not sure if it's feasible.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/14/world/...ack/index.html
22 school aged kids were injured in a knife attack... as opposed to 20 kids dead in a gun attack. I wouldn't want any child to go through anything like this and it doesn't address the mental illness of the person committing either act, but it appears that the odds of surviving were greater in one attack over the other.
I went out and pulled some data from the 2011 CDC National Vital Statistics Report. Its long but pleas take the time to read it.
Deaths in the U.S . 2011
~Source - Data for 2011. National Vital Statistics DHHS, CDC
Total deaths 2,512,873 - 99.99995% not caused by firearms!
Top 15 causes of deaths
All 15 except number 5 are from diseases. 23,900,096 deaths are from health related causes, Heart disease, cancer, etc… Thats 95.1% of all deaths.
The 5th leading cause of death is accidents which account for 122,777 deaths
Top 5 accidents
Motor vehicle accidents - 34,677 deaths - 28.2% of accidental deaths are caused by motor vehicles. Why is there no outcry to ban motor vehicles? Motor vehicles accidentally killed 33,826 more people than firearms did in 2011
Accidental poisoning - 33,554 deaths - 27.3% of accidental deaths are caused by accidental poisoning. Why is there no outcry to ban poisons and household chemicals?? Accidental poisoning accidentally killed 32,703 more people than firearms did in 2011
Falls - 26,631 deaths - 21.69% of accidental deaths are caused by falls. Why is there no outcry to ban high places and gravity?? Falls accidentally killed 25,780 more people than firearms did in 2011
Other Unspecified Non-transportation - 18,289 14.9%
Drowning - 3, 555 deaths - 2.9% of accidental deaths are caused by drowning. Why is there no outcry to ban people from pools, lakes, and oceans ?? Drowning accidentally killed 2,704 more people than firearms did in 2011
Coming in at number 10 - Accidental discharge of firearms - 851 - 0.69% of accidental deaths.
Non Accidental Deaths - Non Disease
Unlike Accidents the following deaths are senseless deaths caused by the irresponsible, sick, troubled or murderous felons.
Drug induced deaths - 40, 239 preventable deaths by just not abusing drugs. While there is not much outcry about drugs anymore, state governments are making it easier for people to use drugs by passing laws making them legal.
Suicide - 38,258 deaths
Alcohol induced deaths - 26,256, preventable deaths by just not abusing alcohol. Where is the outcry to ban alcohol? Alcohol kills twice as many people each year in the U.S. than firearms do!
Homicide - 15, 953 deaths. Which is 0.63% of the total deaths in the us each year. Theses deaths are caused by sick murderous people with the intent to kill others. That intent will manifest itself in many forms and be carried out in numerous ways with numerous weapons. If someone is intent to kill they are going to find a way to do it. If they want to to kill a group of people and don't have access to a gun there are many ways to get the job done. Cars, bombs, car bombs, etc... just ask Timothy McVeigh.
Before the high jacking craze in the 70's, lots of them. Airports have not always had choke points.
What if he had walked in with a couple cans of gasoline and a lighter?
^^^^As always, stop bringing facts into this discussion^^^^
So drugs kill almost three times as many as homicides. We can't legalize those fast enough, can we?
then one of the teachers would have a chance to pull out a gun and blow his **** away....
To JDShellnut's point; how many of those vehicle deaths happened because of one person/incident? Or poisonings? No one tries to go out in a blaze of glory by drowning countless kids. Until we can find away to identify the crazies before they can do harm, we have to look at how we can limit Joe Blow from collateral damage.
Guns should be made illegal and taken away from everyone.
What about gasoline and lighters?
hahahahah.
As an avid gun-lover, I am willing to subscribe to stricter gun laws if I am guaranteed, or shown that the said gun laws will prevent and stop these kind of tragedies. However, I sense the "ban guns" crowd is fueled by a desire to punish someone. Human logic works in this manner: something bad is done, so someone has to pay. When the shooter kills himself, the anger turn to the tools like guns, and to those millions of Americans who own guns and are law-abiding citizens.
Why stricter, or banning guns would not work:
1.The US constitution would be violated.
2. Evil is present with or without guns.
3. There are too many guns out there.
4. Criminals would still have guns, while law-abiding citizen would not.
5. The black-market would be flooded with guns from Mexico.
PS: Must suck living in those ME countries where kids die regularly.
what about them?
The government should get the military to get all guns.
Evil is present with or without guns but its not as effective or efficient without them. Could still kill, but would have to give lots more effort.
Are you a troll or are you stupid? It cannot be neither.
I'm pretty sure I'd disobey a direct order to collect firearms. It would be unlawful and I would like to keep living.
Bruthaman is a special case
So you're saying it could be both?
The following users like this post: Julz
Id obey it and lead the way and would live.
I can't imagine a scenario where someone would want you in charge of anything of substantial importance.
The following users like this post: OUEverest
Stupid constitution.
The following users like this post: jdmt37
Thats cool, Im still in charge.
I'm not sure how successful they'd be in doing so.
He's going to do it all by himself. He's in charge of the whole military.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
