Thoughts and Prayers

[JAZZGASM]

Have you thought about the possible ramification that such a circumstance would basically start a 2nd cold war between young people and grown ups in parenting roles?..

Probably a bit of an over-exaggeration, but I get your point, and I have considered it. Without expounding too much, I don't really see that as a huge risk. The idea isn't to police our student body, it is to protect them. Putting myself into the shoes of a student, I wouldn't want a teacher carrying around a weapon all day. And tbh, a teacher may not make any difference is a true shooting situation. That is the main reason I suggested non-lethal, incapacitating solutions, and those being locked up in strategic, and in inconspicuous locations so the kids don't feel they are pervasive, and a shooter won't know where these locations are. A silent alarm hooked to the box would also be a good idea. Maybe even pass a law that if a teacher opens a box in an event not to be perceived as a shooting situation they will get fired, etc. Also letting the faculty/staff pick who has access to the box makes sense. I can think of a few of my teachers I wouldn't want to have had access to a gun.

Trying to ban all guns (which is probably the only solution to stop these random shootings, and even that will take a long time before the guns are weaned away) may start an actual civil war or lots of standoffs. I think even trying to ban semi-auto rifles would cause a lot of unrest. There are always consequences. Doesn't mean you don't do something. And there are a lot of nuts in this country. I am on-board with banning guns. I grew up with guns, and I own them, but I also see the societal problem with them. It doesn't mean, as a society that there won't be consequences we will have to deal with if/when a ban occurs. That said, I don't think banning guns, in a manner that would be allowed to happen in this country, will every make a difference.

In the current environment, I would prefer my child's teachers having access to non-lethal options to protect his or her students vs having nothing.
Logically, I do see a correlation with an area being more dangerous if it is a "gun-free zone" in our current gun environment. Currently, there are a lot of incapacitating, non-lethal options that I would be fine with limited access in schools:

-Bean Bag Rounds
-Taser Rounds (shotgun based)
-Chili Pepper Grenades
-Incapacitating foam (essentially a gun covers you in foam and you can't move)

But on the whole, while school shootings give me concern, the odds are much less likely than my child getting killed by a drunk driver (over 1,000 children between ages 0-14 per year), yet society seems to be accepting of this. Not to mention the cost related to alcohol related deaths @ $44B per year. According to MADD, (take it for what it's worth), over 300,000 people drive impaired every day and only 3,200 are arrested. Same argument for texting. One out of every four car accidents is caused by texting. Eleven teenagers die every day while texting and driving. When I lived in a large city, I would often take the bus. I would see texting everywhere. Probably 1 or 2 of every 4 drivers had their phone in their hand. Being on the road is scary. Part of the reason I drive a 7,500 lb. Land Cruiser.

 

[BTP]

Probably a bit of an over-exaggeration, but I get your point, and I have considered it. Without expounding too much, I don't really see that as a huge risk. The idea isn't to police our student body, it is to protect them. Putting myself into the shoes of a student, I wouldn't want a teacher carrying around a weapon all day. And tbh, a teacher may not make any difference is a true shooting situation. That is the main reason I suggested non-lethal, incapacitating solutions, and those being locked up in strategic, and in inconspicuous locations so the kids don't feel they are pervasive, and a shooter won't know where these locations are. A silent alarm hooked to the box would also be a good idea. Maybe even pass a law that if a teacher opens a box in an event not to be perceived as a shooting situation they will get fired, etc. Also letting the faculty/staff pick who has access to the box makes sense. I can think of a few of my teachers I wouldn't want to have had access to a gun.

Trying to ban all guns (which is probably the only solution to stop these random shootings, and even that will take a long time before the guns are weaned away) may start an actual civil war or lots of standoffs. I think even trying to ban semi-auto rifles would cause a lot of unrest. There are always consequences. Doesn't mean you don't do something. And there are a lot of nuts in this country. I am on-board with banning guns. I grew up with guns, and I own them, but I also see the societal problem with them. It doesn't mean, as a society that there won't be consequences we will have to deal with if/when a ban occurs. That said, I don't think banning guns, in a manner that would be allowed to happen in this country, will every make a difference.

In the current environment, I would prefer my child's teachers having access to non-lethal options to protect his or her students vs having nothing.
Logically, I do see a correlation with an area being more dangerous if it is a "gun-free zone" in our current gun environment. Currently, there are a lot of incapacitating, non-lethal options that I would be fine with limited access in schools:

-Bean Bag Rounds
-Taser Rounds (shotgun based)
-Chili Pepper Grenades
-Incapacitating foam (essentially a gun covers you in foam and you can't move)

But on the whole, while school shootings give me concern, the odds are much less likely than my child getting killed by a drunk driver (over 1,000 children between ages 0-14 per year), yet society seems to be accepting of this. Not to mention the cost related to alcohol related deaths @ $44B per year. According to MADD, (take it for what it's worth), over 300,000 people drive impaired every day and only 3,200 are arrested. Same argument for texting. One out of every four car accidents is caused by texting. Eleven teenagers die every day while texting and driving. When I lived in a large city, I would often take the bus. I would see texting everywhere. Probably 1 or 2 of every 4 drivers had their phone in their hand. Being on the road is scary. Part of the reason I drive a 7,500 lb. Land Cruiser.

I wasn't trying to make a point against guns or gun regulation. I can see your logic behind feeling safe if you know your kid can visit a school and someone tries to protect that kid with weaponry in the case of a shooting. The issue I see with such complicated systems in place to access weapons in emergency scenarios is that they cost a lot of money in training and equipment. I feel like the empathic solution would be to spend that money into parenting classes and training for teachers. Education and social connections are still the best weapons against violence all over the globe.
If physical security is really the first priority in school over psychological well being that I tried to advocate with my previous post, then expanding the fiber network and videostreaming classes with webcams would provide the maximum security at a fraction of the cost and that infrastructure has positive side effects like better opportunities for businesses. Parents and kids would be free to schedule physical contact and protect them with firearms if they feel that that's necessary at their own liberty.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Looking straight logically, a single gun cannot kill a hundred people at a time. Is it possible for one guy, in the right scenario, to kill a hundred people in a shooting spree? Of course. Las Vegas basically proved that.
I’m definitely not on the side of absolutely “no gun reform”. I’m not on the side of “ban guns” either. I personally don’t think AR-15’s should be banned. That might be because I own one and wouldn’t want to give it up. But it might not be for that reason either. I haven’t figured that out yet. I am for raising the age to buy one. I am for stricter, tighter background checks. I am for making all sales go through licensed dealers. I personally wouldn’t sell a firearm to an individual. I am for banning bump stocks and other modifications to speed up rate of fire. I am for a waiting period (maybe two weeks, maybe four) to walk out of the store with a gun. It wouldn’t hard to convince me to be for limiting magazine capacity (don’t really care at this point).
I am for protecting our kids and our schools. To me, that looks differently than it does to others. I personally think every school should have all doors locked and you have to “buzzed” in by security (whether that’s nothing more than an administrator is another point to discuss). At one point I thought arming teachers was a good idea. Now, not so much. But I do think if they want to be armed, they should be allowed to, but the staff should know. I’m personally glad to know teachers can be armed in the state I live in. I’ve personally been armed while walking around a school while in session and no one knew.

Why do you own an AR-15?

 

[Keefe]

I still can’t believe your wife agreed to create one Serp Jr. Now there will be three? Heaven help us all.



But, congrats!

Hell, I can't believe she even had sex with me three times. I'm just assuming at least one of them is someone else's kid.

 

[JazzGal]

As long as the laws are in place, a teacher should be able to get a concealed carry permit if they want to, but at their personal cost and be under no obligation by their job to do so - which is what currently happens in Utah now. So far so good.

However, I think people are being overly optimistic if they think a teacher is going to be able to change the outcome of a school shooting. I work for law enforcement and have been part of active shooter simulations. The officers are well-trained, were all armed with fake guns, knew that somewhere there would be a shooter or two in each of the scenarios - and yet the shooter often was able to kill multiple people. So the idea that untrained people who have no idea a shooter is coming can effectively safeguard the students is a bit farfetched.

Do shooters really pick a target based on whether it is a gun free zone or not? They usually shoot at a place where they have some connection, especially the school shootings. Since most of them likely realize they won't survive the event anyway, I'm not sure that is a big factor in how they choose their locations.

Until we can convince our populace that gun ownership should be a privilege (where you have to prove that you should be a gun owner) and not a right (where anybody can be a gun owner), very little will change in the USA. But as pointed out above, students are many times more likely to die on their way to school (car, bus, pedestrian) than by gun.

 

[bigb]

I'm just assuming at least one of them is someone else's kid.

Pretty sure every father thinks that. I once had an old HVAC guy tell me that fatherhood is the definition of faith. The mother knows with surety the kids are hers, but the father has to take it on faith.

 

[bigb]

Why do you own an AR-15?

Everything I'm about to say is my own personal opinion/experience:
It's a multi-use firearm. It can be used to defend my home. Granted, this is not why I bought it. I keep it locked and out of sight in the basement, so I won't be able to get to it if someone is in my home to cause me or my family harm. That's why I have a handgun in a small safe by my bed. Quick access when needed. But, in the event of everything going to hell in a hurry where it suddenly becomes a free for all (however unlikely), I can and will use it to protect myself, my family, and my home/belongings from looters, etc. It can also be used to provide food for my family if that situation becomes necessary (again, not ideal, but it will do the trick). It's shoots a 5.56 (.223 Remington) round, so I know it can do the job. I've put several hundred rounds through it and I know how it works and the little quirks that every gun has. It's very reliable.
The main reason I bought it is that it is fun as hell to shoot. Like I said earlier, I've put several hundred (maybe a couple thousand) rounds through it. It's fun. I personally enjoy going out and shooting with my father, brothers, friends, etc. It's a blast. We plan weekend excursions with a group of guys and we all take our guns. We go out in the desert and shoot clay pigeons, milk jugs, and other crap like that. We take our sons and let them experience it as well. Last time out I took my then 9 year old and then 5 year old. They both shot a 20 gauge shotgun, a .22 rifle, my AR, and my 9mm. These were loaded one round at a time for the younger boy for safety. Most of those were too big for the younger boy, but he had fun with the BB gun, too. First thing we did was a safety course/demonstration for my younger boy as he'd never shot before. My father did that for me and I still remember his lesson to this day. We are not fully trained range officers, but we are safe. No alcohol, etc. We have a firing line that no one walks in front of while anyone is holding a gun.

 

[The Midnight]

A world where EVERYONE has a gun (some may have 100s) VS a world where NOBODY has a gun (except the police).


Which would you prefer?

 

[bigb]

A world where EVERYONE has a gun (some may have 100s) VS a world where NOBODY has a gun (except the police).


Which would you prefer?

Neither will ever exist. Ever. Be realistic.

 

[fishonjazz]

Everything I'm about to say is my own personal opinion/experience:
It's a multi-use firearm. It can be used to defend my home. Granted, this is not why I bought it. I keep it locked and out of sight in the basement, so I won't be able to get to it if someone is in my home to cause me or my family harm. That's why I have a handgun in a small safe by my bed. Quick access when needed. But, in the event of everything going to hell in a hurry where it suddenly becomes a free for all (however unlikely), I can and will use it to protect myself, my family, and my home/belongings from looters, etc. It can also be used to provide food for my family if that situation becomes necessary (again, not ideal, but it will do the trick). It's shoots a 5.56 (.223 Remington) round, so I know it can do the job. I've put several hundred rounds through it and I know how it works and the little quirks that every gun has. It's very reliable.
The main reason I bought it is that it is fun as hell to shoot. Like I said earlier, I've put several hundred (maybe a couple thousand) rounds through it. It's fun. I personally enjoy going out and shooting with my father, brothers, friends, etc. It's a blast. We plan weekend excursions with a group of guys and we all take our guns. We go out in the desert and shoot clay pigeons, milk jugs, and other crap like that. We take our sons and let them experience it as well. Last time out I took my then 9 year old and then 5 year old. They both shot a 20 gauge shotgun, a .22 rifle, my AR, and my 9mm. These were loaded one round at a time for the younger boy for safety. Most of those were too big for the younger boy, but he had fun with the BB gun, too. First thing we did was a safety course/demonstration for my younger boy as he'd never shot before. My father did that for me and I still remember his lesson to this day. We are not fully trained range officers, but we are safe. No alcohol, etc. We have a firing line that no one walks in front of while anyone is holding a gun.

Just want to say that its great that you are being safe but want to point out that there are many many you tube videos of professionals shooting themselves and others or having very close calls while they are actually instructing classes on safety and training.

 

[JAZZGASM]

Just want to say that its great that you are being safe but want to point out that there are many many you tube videos of professionals shooting themselves and others or having very close calls while they are actually instructing classes on safety and training.

My #1 safety rule when shooting/hunting is not to go with Dick Cheney, George Zimmerman Gilbert Arenas, Plaxico Burress or this guy:
.

 

[bigb]

Just want to say that its great that you are being safe but want to point out that there are many many you tube videos of professionals shooting themselves and others or having very close calls while they are actually instructing classes on safety and training.

I know. There were hundreds of thousands of deaths last year from drunk driving. Does that stop me or you from driving?

 

[Keefe]

Pretty sure every father thinks that. I once had an old HVAC guy tell me that fatherhood is the definition of faith. The mother knows with surety the kids are hers, but the father has to take it on faith.

I mean, I don’t actually think it. Was just trying to be funny.

 

[The Midnight]

Neither will ever exist. Ever. Be realistic.

Well a country like Japan has a 0.6 gun per 100 residents gun ownership rate. That's pretty close to the 'nobody' scenario IMO give or take.


On the other hand America has 101 guns per 100 residents. (and I assume increasing everyday given the Second Amendment right + the rising level of violence and the need to defend oneself).


So, no, I don't think my scenarios were all that unrealistic.

 

[Gameface]

Well a country like Japan has a 0.6 gun per 100 residents gun ownership rate. That's pretty close to the 'nobody' scenario IMO give or take.


On the other hand America has 101 guns per 100 residents. (and I assume increasing everyday given the Second Amendment right + the rising level of violence and the need to defend oneself).


So, no, I don't think my scenarios were all that unrealistic.

There is NOT a rising level of violence in the U.S..

The U.S. is on a pretty steady 30-40 year decrease in violence.

 

[The Midnight]

There is NOT a rising level of violence in the U.S..

The U.S. is on a pretty steady 30-40 year decrease in violence.

Well I should be more specific and say 'an increase in the level of mass shooting in the US'.

 

[Gameface]

Well

Well I should be more specific and say 'an increase in the level of mass shooting in the US'.

More hyperbole?

 

[The Midnight]

Apparently not, since mass shooting deaths actually increased 300% between 1984 - 2016 according to that graph... LOL!!!

 

[The Midnight]

Wow.

 

[MVP]

So somebody posted a statistics that even trained police officers in critical situations are able to hit intended targets in only 18% of their shots. You all gun lovers tell me is it worth having a gun for self defense when your odds at hitting the target are so pathetically low? And please do not tell me you are better shooters then police officers.
But maybe that is the reason you guys want AR-15's and other high capacity weapons... maybe that 1 bullet from 30 you will spray will hit it lol.