https://i.imgur.com/eUlWe2N.jpg
Printable View
sucks to be french...
Why can't teachers carry guns if properly trained? For instance my cousin is a reserve deputy for the police department and a history teacher, but he has to leave his firearm at home due to a gun free zone. Seems silly really because everyone knows only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.
Among the long list of very obvious issues of arming teachers, I'd say my favorite point to illustrate is that the police are properly trained and they tend to shoot innocent people on a pretty consistant basis. I don't think news stories going along the lines of "A girl was shot dead at Jefferson High school today. Witnesses say the teacher was unprovoked. The school is investigating the incident" makes schools a better, safer place.
This is also untrue.Quote:
Seems silly really because everyone knows only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.
Tread lightly there pamela...I have a feeling this LONG LIST is not as long as you portray it to be. There is a school district in Colorado that their teachers are allowed to carry guns. But in doing so they must attend a 3 day tactical course on proper use of the weapons and how to defuse the situation. This is a subject that will most definitely piss off the libs and democrats. #TrumpMakesAmericaGreatAgain
One cops do not shoot innocent people on the regular. That's just completely false narrative put out by the media. Second teachers would be armed to stop mass shootings, not enforce laws like police are charged to do. Police do a extremely hard job with little to no pay, then we ask them to police war zones like Chicago, Baltimore and Oakland. Honestly anyone brave enough just to put on the badge in cities like that have my respect. Sure there are a few bad apple cops that commit crimes but most police shootings come down to was it justified or not. Basically the individuals broke a law or laws then the police officer shot them for whatever reason and it's investigated. Teachers wouldn't be charged with enforcing laws and instructed to only use a gun in life or death situations. Just the knowledge of guns being in schools will stop most of these mass shootings. Because the people doing these shootings are cowards, hence why they always pick gun free zones. Also media is showing their extreme biased by the way, shootings happen all the time in Chicago but no one ever reports it. :(
Off the top of my head:
-teachers shooting students will be a problem
-who is paying for these guns and training? Teachers make practically nothing and most school districts are already cutting basic stuff to get by
-a teacher's responsibility is to protect their students. That means either locking their classroom down or getting their students evacuated. You can't do either of these things running down the hallway trying be Mr cowboy and trying to shoot a shooter.
-A lot of schools already have armed security. Clearly the threat of other armed people do not stop school shootings.
-Along with this, afaik, most school shooters go into the shooting prepared to either die or kill themselves. So again, having more armed people does nothing to deter these people.
-School shootings tend to last a matter of minutes. 17 people were killed in 6 minutes in Florida. At best having armed teachers would have cut down the shooting time and saved a few more lives. It wouldn't have stopped the actual attack.
-teachers are now forced to be primary targets for shooters. They can't risk having a teacher shoot them and as a bonus, if they kill a teacher that had a gun, they get another gun to shoot even more people with
-A lot of people say that "gun free zones" are easy targets, but I'll remind people that places like capital hill and the white house are gun free zones and I can't remember any instance of innocent people getting gunned down there. It's amazing what happens when you actually have security.
-In order for the teacher's gun to be of any use at all in a school shooting, it will need to be easily accessible, which means it is easily accessible to students as well, which is potentially creating even more school shootings as the access to firearms now becomes a given.
-You're teaching kids that guns=power and authority, and this is supposed to help curb school shootings how exactly?
-There are plenty of examples of unarmed people stopping armed threats.
I can start actually looking up more/better arguments if this list isn't long enough, but my most important point is that arming teachers isn't an answer to the question "How do we stop school shootings?" It is an answer to the question "How do we kill a school shooters faster?"
Pretty much, Korp.
Some teachers may be capable, and worthy of such a task. In my experience, though, teachers can be overtaken by individual students, despite age and sometimes size disparity. What happens in a scenario where a teacher loses their gun? If someone's already been denied a weapon, now you could be providing them with one, I guess. The idea feels good in some aspects, but I think it also has a lot of pitfalls.
I assume they would have to strap, because eventually, if kept in a safe somewhere, a teacher or student will get shot while punching in the code or whatever, and that won't be acceptable either.
https://www.gannett-cdn.com/media/20...-homicides.png
If those arent warzones then what are they?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...er_2013%29.png
You're right though, totally the same thing
Edit: sorry that's so small lol
Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casu...rian_Civil_War
Gun control in the USA doesn't work, I think places like Chicago and all of California prove this. We have the 2nd admenment which isn't going any place. So you have to be realistic on what steps can be taken. I think everyone can get behind the 21 years of age limit. Same token if your not adult enough to own a gun, you shouldn't be adult enough to vote, to borrow money or buy cigarettes or weed or be tried as a adult. List goes on and on but I think starting with a age limit is a good step.
There are plenty of 40 year olds that aren't mature enough to vote. Liberal Tears and Fighting the Patriarchy are not legitimate voting points. Legal adults have every right and should be encouraged to vote.
I don't think anything will get done because no one is interested in actually talking about the problem and more kids are gonna get slaughtered at the one place they're legal required to go to, in the only country where this is a major problem (and no, this isn't me demanding everyone turn their guns in)
It will definitely be a interesting legal fight, can you take away a adults 2nd admenment rights without cause? My guess they will have to declare a new adult legal age to be 21. But again one side wants to take all guns and the other side knows it so they won't budge a inch. So hence nothing will ever get done, so you might as well give properly trained teachers guns.
No one is trying to take away anyone's second amendment. There are already limitations in place regarding what citizens can and can't purchase. It's not like people can just go to their local gun vendor and buy a surface to air missle, tank, rpg, machine gun, etc
Sadly, just because you have armed people nearby is no guarantee they'll intervene
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/02/22/u...ing/index.html
As a future teacher (but mostly as a decent, rational human being), teachers do not need to and SHOULD NOT be permitted to carry weapons in the classroom. Palem's list pretty much sums up why, but let me tack on a few things:
- Taking a human life takes a SIGNIFICANT psychological toll on a person; ask any veteran. Why do you think soldiers are sent to camps to become desensitized and removed from the very act of killing someone?
- Take the above point, except with children. You're asking for teachers, who are meant to educate and nurture our youth, to prepare themselves to potentially end the life of child that they've been charged to protect.
- Police shoot unarmed civilians all the time, specifically black civilians; this is NOT a media narrative. See Stephon Clark. See Philando Castile. Look at the scandal involving the Gun Trace Task Force in Baltimore where they were literally robbing dealers and planting guns/evidence to cover up after themselves.
- Police kill innocent civilians with relative impunity; will it be the same with teachers? Forget the costs associated with liability insurance and the inevitable psych evaluations; will we hold teachers accountable for killing an innocent student?
In all seriousness, f*** this sensationalist rhetoric spouted by gun-obsessed cowboys and the NRA. We can't even pay teachers a livable wage or pay for their classroom supplies, yet we're ok with paying to arm them. Miss me with that BS.
Got to arm the childrens! They're the only ones with the specific knowledge of their classmates to be able to make these life and death decisions. Teachers are just too far removed. We need more armed people to defend against the domestic terrorist police forces anyway.
The problem is the easy access of guns, the moment you force potential would be school shotters to go to a gang member/ drug dealer type to get a gun not only does they risk getting caugth, you also give them time to rethink what they are doing, since I doubt it would be easy and fast for a kid to do this, they might get scared or have the time to calm down and think rationally.
In a fit of rage people might grab for the nearest weapon, and they are more dangerous if it is a gun than say if it is a knife or a broken bottle of booze.
Of course if you still think gun ownership is everyones right then you should probably start to rethink the way you make them avalible, as well as how you portray gun usage in fiction and elsewhere, I can hardly watch an American action movie without worrying about the numbers of "Bad guys" shot down in cold blood by so called "Good guys" such vigilante behavior makes it more acceptable to kids to use guns if they think themself the "Good guys" and all their teachers and co-students as the "Bad guys"
America is a shining light that keeps peace in the world. We saved Europe twice, keep evil nations in check and keep ourselves free thanks to the 2nd admenment. With out us gun touting Americans you would be speaking German, Russian or Japanese. Freedom isn't free and takes sacrifice sadly. I owned a rifle when I was a kid then served in the military it is no big deal. Society is the problem now, guns haven't changed but people have. Let's dig into mental health, family structure, medications. Ect. The real issues that cause these terrible acts. It's every Americans job is to defend themselves and their communities. Teachers being armed would be voluntary and they would receive the proper training.
Lol wut?
That's some next level thoughtless nationalism right there
There is definitely nothing wrong with loving your country. There's a little something wrong referring to America as a "shining light that keeps peace in the world" and suggesting that the 2nd amendment has ever helped "keep us free". There's nothing wrong for admiring a thing for what it is, but there's a dangerous threshold where you begin to inflate that admiration beyond reality.
For example, I love me some Taylor Swift and there's nothing wrong with that. There's nothing wrong with boasting about how she's an accomplished musician or her charitable endeavors or her fan outreach. However it's not ok to boast about how she's literally the perfect human being, or that she's never done anything wrong, or that anyone who is critical of her is an evil bastard that the world would be better without.
Tldr: Admiration is a good thing. Fanaticism is not.
I find it hard to make a connection there between the discussion about wether or not arming teachers is a good thing and your point of view about your home country.
Facts is that no other nation has as many guns owned by civilians, and no other country has this massive problems with school shootings, even countries with relatively many gun owners have not seen more than maybe one or two such shootings so it got to have something to do with both the fact there is such an easy access to guns, and the way the school system works in USA. The US have several shootings a year and probably more than the rest of the world combined.
If you want to discuss world wars or the war against terror that is a total diffrent discussion and I do not buy that it has anything to do with school shootings or arming teachers.
I am a teacher, and have been for 6 years. The usual arguments never work during this topic, so I'll offer anecdotal 'argument' or whatever you want to call it.
I will never carry a gun in any school I teach in and I will never work in a school that brings guns into it. I will quit before I do that:
- An aggressive student would eventually grab it, or try to wrestle it away. Many students even at good schools are very aggressive with teachers.
- It would make everyone scared. Students would focus on it constantly; it would freak them out. It would be this elephant in the room. They already can't concentrate on anything; they don't need a gun in the room with them.
- It would freak me out #1: a gun is kill people. Why in God's name should I carry a death-machine round with me at work? And spare me the 'guns don't kill people, people do' or 'you could kill someone with a spoon if you really tried!' nonsense because the sole purpose of a gun is to cause death.
- It would freak me out #2: I would be forever panicked about the safety of everyone. Is the safety on? Is it correctly holstered? What if I bump it? What if I drop it? What if someone grabs it? Oh crap what if I accidentally leave it on my desk? It would be a constant fear, and would add a load of mental stress.
- It would freak me out #3: because I am often utterly incompetent. There are times when I am a babbling mess at work, when nothing gets done and I **** up thing after thing after thing, students just **** with me all day etc - some days you just have shockers. I can't focus on a gun all the time. It would get lost or stolen eventually. All it takes is one 'whoops, forgot it!' and it's gone.
- It would freak me out #4: because tons of teachers are absolutely incompetent at life. Tons of teachers scream insults at kids when they rage - statistically, SOME of them would pull their gun out and shoot dead a cheeky students. Statistically it just would happen, and tbh I bet it would happen a decent amount. Students are really, really good at making you want to smash your head against a wall without over and over. At my school there are about 150 teachers. So now my school has 150 weapons. Half of them are incompetent. Half of them will forget sometimes. Some will accidentally fire their weapon. Some will be playing with it, thinking they're a badass, and it'll go off. Many will be too terrified to confront a shooter.
I do not understand how people can be so passionate about guns when there is so much evidence for almost every metric measurable to show that guns make things more dangerous, not less.
BWAHAHAHAHA Yes, because criminals care about the laws. The 31 states that have “shall issue” laws allowing private citizens to carry concealed weapons have, on average, a 24 percent lower violent crime rate, a 19 percent lower murder rate and a 39 percent lower robbery rate than states that forbid concealed weapons. In fact, the nine states with the lowest violent crime rates are all right-to-carry states. Remarkably, guns are used for self-defense more than 2 million times a year, three to five times the estimated number of violent crimes committed with guns.
Cure nihilism. Teachers don't need guns children need philosophy. Show me the suicide rates in the countries with stricter gun laws; drug-related crime rates, unemployment, etc. Such a narrow scope on an issue of such magnitude is futile.
Guns are bad mkay but the 2nd amendment makes a lot of sense.
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed"
Cuz you know, the security of a free state (ours) is important.
It's not a gun rights issue it's nihilism.
In this individual's poorly informed opinion anyway.
There's a big difference between "A well regulated militia" which aims to protect the people and some lone wolves misquoting the 2nd amendment to own a small arsenal to compensate for ... something.
Also you have to remember that way back, the best guns they had were muskets. Muskets have short range, poor accuracy and long reloading times. Even a semi-automatic rifle with a 'small' 10-round magazine is far superior to a musket in every way and assault rifles more so.
But I agree with you that the US does a poor job of caring for it's citizens which results in higher rates of crime and drug use. Which in turn leads to more violence.
Imagine if all that money spent on war and lobbying was instead spent on education and healthcare....
But that's socialism!
Also, it's not entirely true to say that there was only muskets around when they wrote the 2nd amendment. There was most definitely rapid fire guns and canons and so forth, even if muskets were absolutely the most common firearm around
Socialist Europa has far fewer mass shootings than the US even though many Swiss and Scandinavians have access to modern firearms
Quote:
Also, it's not entirely true to say that there was only muskets around when they wrote the 2nd amendment. There was most definitely rapid fire guns and canons and so forth, even if muskets were absolutely the most common firearm around
Somehow I don't see people bringing cannons to a school shooting.
As for automatic firearms: Oldest ones I could find are https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitrailleuse and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gatling_gun both of which showed up more than half a century after the 2nd amendment and I don't see a school shooter lugging those around either
Do I really have to start using the sarcasm tag? C'mon y'all =/
I didn't say automatic. The Kalthoff repeater existed 100+ years before the 2nd amendment was written.Quote:
Somehow I don't see people bringing cannons to a school shooting.
As for automatic firearms: Oldest ones I could find are https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitrailleuse and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gatling_gun both of which showed up more than half a century after the 2nd amendment and I don't see a school shooter lugging those around either
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalthoff_repeater
More importantly, I'm not sure what point you're trying to get at. Automatic weapons existed long before school shootings became a major problem. It's not someone invented a gun designed for shooting schools up in the 90s.
When murrikans talk bad about socialism, they tend to mean it, but every now and then there's a smart ass who lectures you about sarcasm.
Perhaps they should introduce a new weapons line for school shooters. There seems to be a sizable market for it and the first one to enter that market could make a killing.Quote:
I didn't say automatic. The Kalthoff repeater existed 100+ years before the 2nd amendment was written.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalthoff_repeater
More importantly, I'm not sure what point you're trying to get at. Automatic weapons existed long before school shootings became a major problem. It's not someone invented a gun designed for shooting schools up in the 90s.
Another problem solved by capitalism
/s (just in case)
35 years ago many kids in school had weapons in their trucks and cars at school. There were no shootings or even thought about it. Not long after that tho to many Parents got the idea that their children shouldn't be spanked or discipled not only at home but at school either.Now those children have children themselves and most have no concept of consequences for their actions . When parents start being parents again instead of trying to be their childrens best friends we might go back to how things used to be.
What dream world you live in?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...d_States#1980s
Don't you just love it when people agree with you?
https://assets.amuniversal.com/e37f8...89005056a9545d