Gun Control Debate #3

[flourish]

I’d rather a teacher have a chance of protecting himself and the students rather than cowering in a corner just waiting to die. One shot is all it would take to end it.

However, I’ll say I don’t think just this idea of allowing teachers to be armed is the entire answer to the problem. Not even close. It’s really just a distraction from real solutions, in my opinion.

What is the real solution in your opinion? ☺[emoji111]

 

[BayouBelle_LA]

I hear you, I do and I hear very many say the opposite.
I'm with not arming or permitting teachers to be armed.
The job is hard enough, classroom sizes overstretched and a lot of them are running on empty because they simply do not have the resources to do the job they love in the way it is meant to be done.
To take on even ONE more task is the straw that can break many backs.
Seriously, they would need Uzi's, ak's and a few ied's to be effective..

Can I ask you whether you could ever imagine a world without guns?
How do you cope if you travel to or holiday in gun free zones or countries?
It's a serious question because I really do want to understand the attachment?

I'll answer the rbbm.

No.

I've traveled to places that most people wouldn't consider a vacation destination like Turkey and Colombia, with strict gun laws but still high crime areas. It's the bad people that have the guns. I can say I'm always happy when my feet hit American soil.

I don't CC but I'm around many people that do in south Louisiana and there is a certain comfort level about that. imo

 

[bobcat]

So hire guards to guard. Leave teachers to teach.

At the risk of repeating myself, I'm sure my scenario of a teenager overpowering an armed teacher and then having a weapon right at their disposal is not something that can just be eliminated. It is a very real possibility. I'd rather too, especially in an elementary school, the teacher is there with the frightened children, hiding them and keeping them calm and quiet than leaving them to go hunting an unknown number of armed shooters. Imagine a bunch of 6 or 7 year olds left alone in that kind of terrifying situation!

The teacher with a gun wouldn’t necessarily have to do anything different. They could stay with the class, following the normal procedures. Just would have the ability to defend herself if it came to that.

 

[Blef]

I’d rather a teacher have a chance of protecting himself and the students rather than cowering in a corner just waiting to die. One shot is all it would take to end it.

However, I’ll say I don’t think just this idea of allowing teachers to be armed is the entire answer to the problem. Not even close. It’s really just a distraction from real solutions, in my opinion.

RBBM. Many teachers have saved children by hiding them. One shot is no guarantee to take out the shooter. In a chaotic situation, you need to be able to get a clear sight of the shooter, who doesn't have a clear sight of you, hoping they don't have a bump stock, or a high capacity magazine, so they don't just spray the area and take out yourself, and anyone else around, and then be able to hit them. Meanwhile the teacher IS going to be worried about the children they have left alone. How does that teacher know they haven't left a classroom full of 7 year olds, for the shooter's accomplice to find and massacre?

 

[bobcat]

What is the real solution in your opinion? ☺[emoji111]

I’ll have to answer this later. Don’t have time now, but the solution is more than just one thing. And it doesn’t include repeal of the 2nd Amendment.

 

[fiver]

how does one "gun show loop hole"?

 

[bobcat]

RBBM. Many teachers have saved children by hiding them. One shot is no guarantee to take out the shooter. In a chaotic situation, you need to be able to get a clear sight of the shooter, who doesn't have a clear sight of you, hoping they don't have a bump stock, or a high capacity magazine, so they don't just spray the area and take out yourself, and anyone else around, and then be able to hit them. Meanwhile the teacher IS going to be worried about the children they have left alone. How does that teacher know they haven't left a classroom full of 7 year olds, for the shooter's accomplice to find and massacre?

I would expect the teacher would stay with the students and protect them from the gunman if necessary.

 

[Blef]

The teacher with a gun wouldn’t necessarily have to do anything different. They could stay with the class, following the normal procedures. Just would have the ability to defend herself if if came to that.

Would they not be criticised by the likes of Trump for not running towards the gunshots? ?sarcasm

 

[musicaljoke]

And the fact remains that doing so impacts the entire school and all its employees, not just those. Just because some want to doesn't mean it should just be so.

One of the reasons why it is so difficult to get the problem under control is that one of the driving forces toward gun ownership is the fear that another person is carrying a gun and may be the perpetrator of a crime. This sense of danger gets magnified as more guns are brought on the scene, leading to more gun ownership, which creates more fear ...

It's a self-fueling fear that has spiraled out of control American society. One result that is bound to come from restricting certain types of weapons, is that the fear levels can be corrected. It's very difficult to achieve because so many people truly connect their personal safety with unlimited gun ownership. Any move toward restriction guns causes panic.

https://www.upi.com/Study-Fear-of-crime-general-sense-of-danger-drives-gun-ownership/8221496926002/

 

[flourish]

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...fact-sheet-3-things-know-about-gun-show-loop/


Words and phrasing is important, yes.

There's a loophole, maybe it just needs to be referred to as something different, although most people know what is being referred to, I'd guess, unless they are maybe choosing not to.

Bumping this post as the link discusses the loophole commonly referred to as a "gun show loophole," even though perhaps a more accurate term would be "private seller loophole."

 

[Blef]

I’ll have to answer this later. Don’t have time now, but the solution is more than just one thing. And it doesn’t include repeal of the 2nd Amendment.

Gun control does not mean the repeal of the 2nd Amendment, it's about amending that amendment from the 18th Century to modern times. Control isn't prohibition.

 

[flourish]

Gun control does not mean the repeal of the 2nd Amendment, it's about amending that amendment from the 18th Century to modern times. Control isn't prohibition.

The founding fathers sure didn't make it very clear! It's literally one sentence isn't it? Open to interpretation.

 

[flourish]

Would they not be criticised by the likes of Trump for not running towards the gunshots? ?sarcasm

Of course they would.

 

[bobcat]

Again, though, how would that impact the students to witness their teacher shooting someone right in front of them? And if it's a former student, how would that impact the feelings of the other students and the poor teacher who kills them?

There is a whole psychological factor here--teachers signed on to teach students, not kill them.

I’d rather they have their feelings impacted and still be alive. Hurt feelings aren’t permanent, a bullet hole is.

 

[flourish]

One of the reasons why it is so difficult to get the problem under control is that one of the driving forces toward gun ownership is the fear that another person is carrying a gun and may be the perpetrator of a crime. This sense of danger gets magnified as more guns are brought on the scene, leading to more gun ownership, which creates more fear ...

It's a self-fueling fear that has spiraled out of control American society. One result that is bound to come from restricting certain types of weapons, is that the fear levels can be corrected. It's very difficult to achieve because so many people truly connect their personal safety with unlimited gun ownership. Any move toward restriction guns causes panic.

https://www.upi.com/Study-Fear-of-crime-general-sense-of-danger-drives-gun-ownership/8221496926002/

I'm more worried about someone getting a hold of the gun and either purposely or accidentally killing or injuring someone than I am that the armed teachers would misuse it.

 

[fiver]

edit ....

 

[flourish]

I’d rather they have their feelings impacted and still be alive. Hurt feelings aren’t permanent, a bullet hole is.

Trauma isn't "hurt feelings." How dismissive.

 

[fiver]

The founding fathers sure didn't make it very clear! It's literally one sentence isn't it? Open to interpretation.

nope supreme court case heller vs dc defines it well

 

[Blef]

I’d rather they have their feelings impacted and still be alive. Hurt feelings aren’t permanent, a bullet hole is.

And more guns being shot means more chances of a bullet hitting someone, anyone. I would think most responsible gun owners would prefer to see stricter gun controls, meaning less guns out there, so that they can legally use their weapons, and try to keep them out of the hands of someone who isn't a responsible gun user.

 

[bobcat]

Trauma isn't "hurt feelings." How dismissive.

Dismissive? Yes, because if it was one of my kids I’d much rather they come home alive, even if they did have to witness a teacher shooting and killing the person who was about to kill all of them.