Texas school where teachers carry guns prepared to protect students

reply to post by hequick


You are correct Europe as a whole has higher violent crime. Where as the US has a higher murder rate. Why that is I do not know.. Gun related crime in the UK may have gone up 68% but how high was it to start with. Most people in the UK have never seen, touched or heard a gun. Your point being what exactly.

As for gun prohibition increasing gun crime i do not know what planet you live on.. here are the top 5 massacres caused my an individual..

www.top5ofanything.com...

Thanks, purplemer for the link.

Below the list (ALL of which except ONE took place OUTSIDE the U.S. - and it is a list of the mass-murdered in a single incident)

The Top 5 Worst Gun Massacres by an Individual
Perpetrator Location Date Victims
1
Anders Behring Breivik
(aged 32, captured) Utøya Island, Norway 22 Jul 2011 77 killed,
(151 wounded)
2
Woo Bum-Kon
(aged 27, suicide at scene) Sang-Namdo, South Korea 26 Apr 1982 57 killed,
(35 wounded)
3
Martin Bryant
(aged 29, captured) Port Arthur, Australia 28 Apr 1996 35 killed,
(21 wounded)
4
Seung-Hui Cho
(aged 23, suicide at scene) Blacksburg, Virginia USA 16 Apr 2007 32 killed,
(25 wounded)
5
Campo Elí­as Delgado
(aged 52, killed at scene) Bogota, Colombia 4 Dec 1986 30 killed,
(15 wounded)

And here's a sort-of explanation of "why" these things occur:

According to forensic psychiatrists most mass murderers who commit their atrocious acts in high numbers do so because of generalized paranoia and rage against the world rather than a specific grudge. This theory is called "representative victimization" and is the second most common kind of mass murderer (after targeted victims such as at a workplace). This type of murderer is one who targets people who represent what they consider to be the source of their woes.

In such cases, "the perpetrator has a grudge against the world and feels that if it were not for the system, things would have gone better for him," says criminologist James Alan Fox of Northeastern University, who with colleague Jack Levin has studied every mass murder in the United States since the early 1980s. "He doesn't care who he kills as long as he kills a lot of people."

About 16 percent of mass killings target complete strangers, said Levin, professor of sociology and criminology at Northeastern. They are not necessarily more or less severely mentally ill than murderers who target acquaintances or people who belong to a group they resent, but their pathology takes a distinct form. Wide-ranging suspicion that the world has treated you unfairly can be a sign of paranoid personality disorder.

The American Psychiatric Association defines that condition as "a pervasive distrust and auspiciousness of others such that their motives are interpreted as malevolent, beginning by early adulthood." (a.)

The rate of killings in the U.S. involving five or more victims — one generally accepted definition of a mass killing — represents less than 1% of all homicides. Mass killing, says Diane Follingstad, a professor of clinical and forensic psychology at the University of South Carolina, "is a low baserate thing. It just does not happen very often." (b.)

Woo Bum-Kon was a Korean police officer in the mountainous region of Gyeongsangnam-do, South Korea. Bum-Kon carried out the worst recorded killing spree in known history killing 56 people and then himself after having an argument with his girlfriend. After drinking large amounts of whisky he then raided the police armoury of its weapons and built a personal arsenal. Bum-Kon then stole a single high-powered rifle and some grenades and left the armoury. Around dinner time he then started walking from house to house, and abused his position as a police officer to make people feel safe and gain entry to their homes.

Then he shot the victims, or killed the entire family with a grenade. He continued this pattern for the next eight hours and into the early morning hours of April 27th traversing 5 villages on his killing spree. Finally, Woo took his final two grenades and strapped them to his body, he then held three people captive and then exploded the grenades, killing both himself and his final victims.

(from the same source given by purplemer)
So, you see, guys, it isn't "having guns" that cause this type of hideous and tragic behavior. It's mental illness, and societal failing that we must address.

The fact is that a would-be perpetrator is LESS LIKELY to victimize any place or person who is KNOWN TO BE ARMED or otherwise have protection. For burglars, a big dog and lots of noise might work. For my ex-con neighbor and suspected drug-dealer, he'll leave my husband and me alone, AND our dogs, because he knows what my husband is capable of - and ready - to do, under pressure or threat.

This shooter Lanza was a madman, and a coward. No responsible gun owner wakes up one morning and says,..."I'm bored, I have all these guns of my mom's.....I think I'll just go slaughter a bunch of little kids."

Originally posted by GAOTU789
Although I agree that this could work, I would want mental evaluations done at least quarterly, real training done at least once a month and have to be re certified at least twice a year.

Popping off rounds on a range is NOTHING like the high stress, life or death situation that these shootings are and I don't want someone that wrote a test and hit a few targets adding more rounds into an already messed up situation.

Not saying this isn't a good idea in certain schools but it would have to be strictly controlled and if my kids teacher is carrying a concealed weapon, I want them to have military grade training before they start firing rounds off. I would think the chance for collateral damage would be way to high otherwise to make it worth while.

Interesting...
If this is the case, should our police not recieve the same training???
Police train quarterly on the range, standard paper shooting.
"SIX ROUNDS TEN SECONDS"!!
Hmmm, hardly stressful in my accurate opinion.
What about pshych evals for police? they do have them as an intro to policing but only to looksee if the individual is capable of taking orders.
I believe teachers would be much more qualified to carry concealed than a police officer.
They have background checks and degrees, yes they are smarter and much better educated than your average cop.
I am not worried about collateral damage from teachers, they have a real job that they actually had to work to get there.
Plus, teachers do not sign on just to carry a gun, they sign on to teach and care for our youth.
I doubt teachers will be doing tuck and rolls through the halls with rifle in hand wearing all of their expensive 511 gear.

when there is the remote possibility that the person will be equally engaged when walking into a school, they will not do so ,not every teacher has to carry but the variable of 1 of those teachers or RO officers having lethal force,
not 1 so called mentally ill person would attempt it, even they know gun free zones AKA victim zones
are the the areas to mow down without threat of reprisal

Originally posted by Logos23
I can't even begin to imagine a world, where the question of whether teachers should be armed with guns to be able to keep children safe in school as to even be a consideration......very very sad

There is the other option...
We could all disarm and then we will be much like many areas of Africa where there are no schools and the people are at the mercy of men with guns.Plus the rampant rape and genital mutilation...
I'll take Mama bear at the door with a shotgun over the alternative.
There are children out in this big world that have their own personal security detail, why not mine??

reply to post by g146541

There are children out in this big world that have their own personal security detail, why not mine??

Yes, I was thinking that, too.
Hire body-guards for our kids..... just as the POTUS and other "dignitaries" have...
if that's not what we trust teachers to be...why do we send them to school?

I actually registered as a Home-School a few years ago when my son was having troubles with the "public school system".

It's very simple to do.
It never went into effect, but it could.

I'm on the fence about home-schooling, but I wouldn't be surprised if more parents start pulling their kids out of public school (of course, limited to those who can afford to have a parent at home full-time)...

At least I'd know where my kid is, and how to protect them.

Originally posted by Logos23

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by Logos23

 

I can't even begin to imagine a world, where the question of whether teachers should be armed with guns to be able to keep children safe in school as to even be a consideration...

I appreciate your sentiments, but.....
it is the world.
It's here, right now.

It's not something that affects me in the UK....it's not a part of my little corner of the world.....but don't misunderstand that as an attempt to gloat ( as a lot of people on here seem to think the British do...) I am genuinely saddened that families in the US have to face this....our children's safety while in school should be something we all should be able to take for granted

I believe your royal families are guarded by men with guns over there, why so in a land free of gun violence?
It seems it does effect you after all.

Originally posted by Maxatoria
Not a bad idea actually as any nutter wanting to cause trouble will go somewhere else so if it was implemented at most public places where you could guarantee that there was several people who were armed it would put off people trying to do anything bad as they'd never stand a chance,

this is the reason why lone gunmen never target a police station.

all the occupants inside are armed.

Originally posted by g146541

Police train quarterly on the range, standard paper shooting.
"SIX ROUNDS TEN SECONDS"!!
Hmmm, hardly stressful in my accurate opinion.
What about pshych evals for police? they do have them as an intro to policing but only to looksee if the individual is capable of taking orders.

I'll ignore the rest of your cop bashing post to point out that most cops go to work everyday in a high stress job. Also, the cops where I live have mental evaluations once a year or more, depending on what has happened on the job. I know this because I am friends with several, both municipal and federal.

reply to post by GAOTU789

I'll ignore the rest of your cop bashing post to point out that most cops go to work everyday in a high stress job. Also, the cops where I live have mental evaluations once a year or more, depending on what has happened on the job. I know this because I am friends with several, both municipal and federal.

Of course they get evaluations! And, if they've been in a shooting situation, they are often suspended pending "counseling". Until they are cleared by the force to return to duty, they are put on a desk-job or some such....yes??

Originally posted by GAOTU789

Originally posted by g146541

Police train quarterly on the range, standard paper shooting.
"SIX ROUNDS TEN SECONDS"!!
Hmmm, hardly stressful in my accurate opinion.
What about pshych evals for police? they do have them as an intro to policing but only to looksee if the individual is capable of taking orders.

I'll ignore the rest of your cop bashing post to point out that most cops go to work everyday in a high stress job. Also, the cops where I live have mental evaluations once a year or more, depending on what has happened on the job. I know this because I am friends with several, both municipal and federal.

I did not bash cops, I know several cops in fact, some in my own family.
I have simply pointed out some facts here.
Are you actually implying that being a cop is any harder than teaching??
Mental evals are on a case to case basis by the way.

reply to post by g146541


Maybe where you are they are. here they are mandatory once a year or after certain scenarios. A close friend has had three done in the last nine months because of things that have happened on the job and his yearly mandatory. Also, are you saying teaching is more stressful than being a cop? Really?

reply to post by g146541

Are you actually implying that being a cop is any harder than teaching??

Not harder (to answer the question you asked G), but certainly not as "I-might-die-today" stressful.

Originally posted by GAOTU789
reply to post by g146541

 

Maybe where you are they are. here they are mandatory once a year or after certain scenarios. Also, are you saying teaching is more stressful than being a cop? Really?

Like your signature says, "YES I AM"!
The difference between teachers and cops, they are both babysitters at times.
The big difference is teachers almost never beat and kill their charges, the cops often do.
I find that a punching bag is a wonderful stress reliver, cops call those suspects.
Plz do tell, what state you reside in?
I would like to look up the police officer standards board there.
Thanks in advance.

reply to post by wildtimes


I can see that angle as well.
However, it appears teachers are killed in the line of duty, and this happens even without them looking for trouble.

reply to post by g146541


I don't live in a state, I live in a province and you just posted a few minutes earlier that...

I did not bash cops

Yet post this reponse.

Originally posted by GAOTU789
reply to post by g146541

 

I don't live in a state, I live in a province and you just posted a few minutes earlier that...

I did not bash cops

Yet post this reponse.

Ahhhhh, non US, I see now why you claim what you do.
I am referring to US not some foreign country.
At any rate, which province, I'd like to looksee for myself.
About the cops, did I make an inaccurate statement?
Plz enlighten me.

reply to post by g146541


You'll have an easier time finding what you are looking for if you search for RCMP standards in regards to what I am talking about.

And I am not wasting my time with an explanation on how a cops job is more stressful than a teachers. You have obvious preconceived notions about cops so I would be wasting my time, which I am not a fan of.

reply to post by GAOTU789


I guess that is where the bus stops.
Canadian law enforcement is a bit different than US lawmen.
I know current police and retired police, like i said, some in my family.
My wife is a teacher and I do know many teachers other than her.
My "preconcieved notions" may be abit more than that, they are called measured observations.
I think I have given examples to prove my position, I will not waste any more of your time.
hope it helps

Originally posted by g146541

Originally posted by Logos23
I can't even begin to imagine a world, where the question of whether teachers should be armed with guns to be able to keep children safe in school as to even be a consideration......very very sad

There is the other option...
We could all disarm and then we will be much like many areas of Africa where there are no schools and the people are at the mercy of men with guns.Plus the rampant rape and genital mutilation...
I'll take Mama bear at the door with a shotgun over the alternative.
There are children out in this big world that have their own personal security detail, why not mine??

You took my quote out of context.....I wasn't criticising...I am genuinely saddened that parents in America right now are worrying about their children's safety in the one place where they should be able to take their children's safety for granted.
Again...it wasn't a criticism...I was extending a hand of sympathy.