Gun Control Debate #3

[Blef]

The fact remains that there are indeed many teachers and administrators that are asking to be allowed to have a firearm at school to defend themselves and their students.

But how are more guns going to reduce gun violence?

 

[bobcat]

But how are more guns going to reduce gun violence?

Easy. These cowardly people who like to kill innocent kids, will be much less likely to do so, knowing someone is there who will be shooting back.

 

[kittythehare]

I’ve not heard anything about these teachers being forced to do so. It’s simply making it an option for those who are comfortable with it. I’d feel better about my kids’ safety at their schools if I knew there was the possibility of having an armed teacher, or other school employee, who could stop a threat, if necessary. The “gun free” signs I see out front don’t give me much confidence in the safety of the schools when I can walk right in the front door and down the hallways with nobody questioning me. Like a person intent on shooting up a school is going to change his mind when he sees the sign and just turn around and go home.

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?

 

[BayouBelle_LA]

Actually that does happen in the US. Cities will occasionally have gun buy backs. I don't know how successful they are however. And anyone that has a firearm that they don't want, can indeed take it to the local LE and surrender it. And lots of times police know a person is a person who is in possession of a firearm but they have to have a reason to stop and frisk them first. And most crimes crimes carry a much stiffer sentence if a firearm is involved.

Buy backs in general are not very successful. The guns that they buy are generally old and from people that don't pose a threat. The criminals are not turning in their guns.

Newtown Prompts Gun Buybacks, But Do They Work?

https://www.npr.org/2013/01/15/169439243/newtown-prompts-gun-buybacks-but-do-they-work

Gun buybacks popular but ineffective, experts say

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/12/gun-buybacks-popular-but-ineffective/1829165/

 

[Blef]

Easy. These cowardly people who like to kill innocent kids, will be much less likely to do so, knowing someone is there who will be shooting back.

That makes zero sense. These people know the likelihood is that they are either going to kill themselves before being captured or that they are going to be shot by LE. I don't think that is any kind of factor in their thinking. I honestly believe most mass shooters really don't care about being killed by someone else/suiciding. Easier access to guns in the building they are shooting up is going to be to their advantage. Down a teacher who is responding to the emergency, with a semi-auto pistol, grab the pistol, mass shooter has another weapon in their arsenal.

 

[Blef]

Buy backs in general are not very successful. The guns that they buy are generally old and from people that don't pose a threat. The criminals are not turning in their guns.

So give them an incentive. These drives do produce results in the UK, when it comes to knives and other weapons.

 

[bobcat]

That makes zero sense. These people know the likelihood is that they are either going to kill themselves before being captured or that they are going to be shot by LE. I don't think that is any kind of factor in their thinking. I honestly believe most mass shooters really don't care about being killed by someone else/suiciding. Easier access to guns in the building they are shooting up is going to be to their advantage. Down a teacher who is responding to the emergency, with a semi-auto pistol, grab the pistol, mass shooter has another weapon in their arsenal.

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.

 

[rosemadderlake]

BBM

What is this socialist takeover (or government tyranny) that must be fought with war weapon? How is it supposed to happen?

--------

OT - Kitty, you're from Ireland? How do you fare with the Beast from the East? Here we call it the Moscow-Paris and it's leaving tonight. Tomorrrow ought to be 10-15 cent. degrees warmer :happydance:

Bbm: England. --1700 something...

Kit- hugs from the hurricane NE.

Lulu- beam me to Paris!!!

 

[bobcat]

So give them an incentive. These drives do produce results in the UK, when it comes to knives and other weapons.

If I have a gun I no longer want, I’ll simply advertise it and sell it. I’ve sold lots of guns. Why would I want to sell good guns to the government for less than they’re worth just to have a perfectly good gun destroyed? Government buy backs are only going to get guns that are not functional and not worth anything.

 

[BayouBelle_LA]

When I looked at the other oft-praised policies, I found out that no gunowner walks into the store to buy an “assault weapon.” It’s an invented classification that includes any semi-automatic that has two or more features, such as a bayonet mount, arocket-propelled grenade-launcher mount, a folding stock or a pistol grip. But guns are modular, and any hobbyist can easily add these features at home, just as if they were snapping together Legos.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...8c702d2d975_story.html?utm_term=.07b2c27480f7

 

[jillycat]

But how are more guns going to reduce gun violence?

I'm not for a policy that mandates that teachers carry in the classroom. I believe that teachers teach and armed guards guard. But I think the states and their districts need to decide how they will protect their schools.

However, to answer your question, unless the schools become fortresses that no weapon or bomb can penetrate, and there are guaranteed measures to ensure that violent individuals don't enter them, guns, in the hands of people who train and carry to protect others reduce gun violence of malicious individuals the same way armed guards in federal buildings reduce it, or that a gunner's mate standing watch on a ship as it ports reduces it, or a bank security service reduces it.

 

[CARIIS]

Trump is so predictable !! Here is the game!

Listen for a couple of days.

Pick up some buzz words .

Get cameras

bla bla in front of the cameras using the buzz words.

Knowing full well Rep in congress would do the bump stocks (nothing about machine guns) and then blame congress on it not going through.

Get on Twitter blast congress!

The base thinks he amazing!

Rinse repeat

watch the dance -- we've seen it before .

Taking bets at this time as to how long a cycle this gun control dance will take

 

[Blef]

If I have a gun I no longer want, I’ll simply advertise it and sell it. I’ve sold lots of guns. Why would I want to sell good guns to the government for less than they’re worth just to have a perfectly good gun destroyed? Government buy backs are only going to get guns that are not functional and not worth anything.

Do you do background checks when you sell it? How do you know that you are selling it to someone who has no criminal background/mental health issues? Genuine question btw

Surely getting guns off the street is a concern? It may be a "perfectly good gun" but if it gets into the wrong hands, it's a "perfectly bad gun"

 

[bobcat]

Saw this on Facebook today, a school district here in Washington state trying to entice law enforcement officers to come around, and hang out at their schools:

 

[kittythehare]

When I looked at the other oft-praised policies, I found out that no gunowner walks into the store to buy an “assault weapon.” It’s an invented classification that includes any semi-automatic that has two or more features, such as a bayonet mount, arocket-propelled grenade-launcher mount, a folding stock or a pistol grip. But guns are modular, and any hobbyist can easily add these features at home, just as if they were snapping together Legos.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...8c702d2d975_story.html?utm_term=.07b2c27480f7

Ergo, impossible to classify them for legislation that may never be written.
Therefore ban the lotta them.
It is the only workable solution.
National Guard may well volunteer their services to help collect them.
Trucks and trucks of guns.. all going to the fire..
(I can dream)

 

[flourish]

I’ve not heard anything about these teachers being forced to do so. It’s simply making it an option for those who are comfortable with it. I’d feel better about my kids’ safety at their schools if I knew there was the possibility of having an armed teacher, or other school employee, who could stop a threat, if necessary. The “gun free” signs I see out front don’t give me much confidence in the safety of the schools when I can walk right in the front door and down the hallways with nobody questioning me. Like a person intent on shooting up a school is going to change his mind when he sees the sign and just turn around and go home.

Of course nobody is going to read a gun free sign and leave.

Teachers carrying firearms doesn't only impact those specific teachers, but the entire school. Protocols would still need adjusting to create expectations for the use of the firearm, and for things like who covers for that teacher so their class isn't left alone or out of legal ratios.

As a former classroom teacher, I personally would feel better if the people who were armed at school, if there have to be any, are employees whose job is dedicated only to security and protection. Teachers have enough duties and responsibilities keeping their students calm and quiet during stressful events.

 

[flourish]

The fact remains that there are indeed many teachers and administrators that are asking to be allowed to have a firearm at school to defend themselves and their students.

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.

 

[Blef]

I'm not for a policy that mandates that teachers carry in the classroom. I believe that teachers teach and armed guards guard. But I think the states and their districts need to decide how they will protect their schools.

However, to answer your question, unless the schools become fortresses that no weapon or bomb can penetrate, and there are guaranteed measures to ensure that violent individuals don't enter them, guns, in the hands of people who train and carry to protect others reduce gun violence of malicious individuals the same way armed guards in federal buildings reduce it, or that a gunner's mate standing watch on a ship as it ports reduces it, or a bank security service reduces it.

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!

 

[Blef]

Of course nobody is going to read a gun free sign and leave.

Teachers carrying firearms doesn't only impact those specific teachers, but the entire school. Protocols would still need adjusting to create expectations for the use of the firearm, and for things like who covers for that teacher so their class isn't left alone or out of legal ratios.

As a former classroom teacher, I personally would feel better if the people who were armed at school, if there have to be any, are employees whose job is dedicated only to security and protection. Teachers have enough duties and responsibilities keeping their students calm and quiet during stressful events.

Great minds, you posted this as I was typing something similar.

 

[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.

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.