It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by rapier28
Originally posted by sigung86
OK.... Gee, now if I could only get you to sit down and think about an intelligent solution to problems where children are killing children and no one really seems interested in useful solutions that work for everyone.
You want a simple solution? Ban guns.
It's not popular, it might against the amendment, it might infrings on your rights, and heck i might not even support it.
But you did ask for a simple solution.
So what is supposed to happen? As a teacher, should I draw down on a kid whenever he gets within arms reach of me because I can't have him making a play for that gun? As a student, should I go up to the teachers desk every morning and assume the position to show him that he doesn't have to pull his gun on me if I raise my voice over something?
Then let me repeat, teachers are not adequately trained to use deadly force. Everyone has the right to defend themselves, however what happens when you miss and kill somebody else? You're liable. It's not a good idea to put a gun in untrained hands in a room full of children. When you've got 30-40 childen lined up in tight rows and you take a shot at one, you can just about bet on hitting somebody, even if its not the target.
My highschool had two campus resource officers on loan from the police department, and 8 unarmed guards. It was a good sound system. No distruptions of the classroom, no worries about a kid getting teachers guns, and all the guns were in professional hands, yet if there had been a gunshot anywhere in the school, two armed men would have been on scene with 2 or 3 minutes. Not a bad system at all.
So the system of one or two cops on campus is going to reduce the number of people killed on average DRAMATICALLY. Arming teachers on the other hand will double the number of shots fired in the crowded room at the beginning, resulting in more casualties on average.
Suppose you're walking down the street and somebody rattles off a string of the most apalling obcenities and slurs imaginable at your kid- how long has that person got to live, not counting the split second it takes for his lifeless corpse to stop twitching? 5 seconds, maybe 10 if he's a big guy?
Originally posted by sigung86
Licenseable fully automatic weapons are very expensive. The license is 500 bucks a a pop, and you must pass a failry stringent clearance.
It seems to me that you project your violent tendencies on everyone else, thinking that everyone will respond as you would. From your posts it seems as though you have a low threshold for responding with violence. Most people ,that I know anyway, are not like that.
I'm glad you're in Canada.
[edit on 27/3/05 by Skibum]
For those who feel the need to use guns in an illicit fashion.....enforce the laws which we have on the books...and more! I mean, why is anyone who has been convicted of murder using a gun still alive on death row? I know I will be attacked for that statement...but I really wonder why?
Perhaps the Parents of the idiot minors who misuse weapons should serve the same sentence as the their child who misuses a weapon.
Here is another idea....maybe we could send those who feel the need to carry a gun to school....to some sort of Military School, where the instructors and administration would be allowed to carry weapons...and shoot to kill when required! Just an idea! It might even reduce our need for a draft in the future.
It looks like they (and you) are simply trying to find an excuse to press guns into another area of society.
You argue that campus resource officers are two slow because they would need backup, yet one teacher can handle the situation?
You argue that it would cost $100,000 to take one cop off of traffic duty and have them sit at the school instead, and not only that but that flooding a school with guns is better than paying one cent for police protection of the children?
Also let's consider the cost of an administration to monitor and test teachers marksmanship- then the teachers union will want reimbursement for weapons and licensing and all that good stuff, and after the first couple of lawsuits schools are going to be looking at insurance prices too. This will far outstrip the wages and equipment for one extra cop, I don't care how thin you try to slice it.
You believe that in 2 minutes scores of people will be massacred when history shows that school shooters are undisciplined with their shooting and have a hard time finding targets, to the point that incidents lasting HOURS claim around or under a dozen lives only
You can go on all day about wanting training teachers to be responsible shooters, but we can't even train this stinking people to educate our children! Can we at least agree that the primary function of the teacher is to teach, not to "double tap" little Johnny? There is no way to make teachers as safe as professional law enforcement officers, who will also be far more effective than armed teachers. All your plan is going to do is ensure that the teacher is always the first person shot. I'll give you one thing though- it's going to make some people feel like really big men, and that's really the point after all isn't it?
I'm in Canada? Crap, somebody get me a ride back to California ASAP!
Lets see , put cops in schools to defend against an incident that may never even happen, or spend much less money training a few teachers in case it does. Hands down much cheaper my way.
What are the cops gonna do in the meantime, sit around with their thumbs up their backsides doing nothing?What a waste of money.
You don't have a clue what you are talking about.
Columbine - In 7 ½ minutes, 10 people are killed and 12 more wounded.
15 minutes between shooting starting and the last victim is killed.
More than 30 minutes after the shooting starts SWAT is authorized to enter the building.
After 46 minutes of shooting SWAT finally does enter the building.
But even if as you claim that these shootings last hours, wouldn't it be better have the ability to stop them in minutes. Why would they last for hours as you claim? The answer is not difficult. Its because there is no one there that can stop them.
Most school shooting are over quickly. Most of the killing is done long before cops are there to do anything about it.
Yes I agree that teachers primary function is to educate. But in situations like school shootings their responsibility is to defend and protect the students. The stats I've seen are that police are more likely to wrongfully shoot innocents than legally armed citizens when it comes to defensive use.
If you would like to dispute that by all means post some facts.
Its not about feeling like a really big man- thats why criminals carry weapons.
Typical liberal to try to bring up that trite line though. Good for you.
Surprised you have not brought up the thats a big gun you must be compensating for something line yet.
My apologies, I confused you for a different poster. California is even better though. 3000 miles from me.
Originally posted by FredT
A top official for the National Rifle Association has advocated that arming teachers with guns needs to be considered. NRA's first vice president, Sandra S. Froman, made the statement to the Associated Press. Froman is expected to become the NRA's president next month. She cited a 1997 incident where a teacher retrieved a firearm from thier car and held a student at bay.
Here come the vultures. If we start arming our teachers the WE ARE DONE! Let me say it again: WE ARE DONE. Its over period.
There is a word for police who refuse to put themselves in harms way to stop the slaughter of unarmed children- FIRED.
and unwilling to put themselves in harms way as required by their jobs.
You'll have to give me a week though as i will be out of town and offline.
Um... I did. I called it a "big metal substitute phallus" because I thought simply saying that NRA members all have tiny pricks would possibly get me warned. So for future reference, a phallus is that thing you play with in the shower. (just ribbin ya, i hope you don't take that personally).
If you'd tell me where you're from and how common your views are in that area i'll kindly stay the hell away though.