Gun Control

[Lawdog88]

Originally Posted by Minister_of_Information

What you're missing is that violent arguments, negligent discharges, and general teacher incompetence are potentially much more frequent events than mass shootings.

Not to mention students undisciplined and out of control, which is the single biggest impediment to teachers teaching in the modern classroom.

[GatorAvatar]

Originally Posted by rivergator

John Lott's research has long since shown to be bogus. He includes "studies" that don't exist. Moc, you love to post things that agree with you, but you never seem to have a clue whether they're valid or not.

That's why America is messed up: people cite studies that support their views and trash those that do not support their views. Smart indeed...

[Dreamliner]

Originally Posted by PIMking

I remember when I had my kidney stone that when I went to the ER I had my gun on me and I walked in the door and handed it to the cop and then passed out.

When you came to did you then wrestle the gun away from the cop and shoot him with it ? That's what happens when you let someone have a gun. It almost invariably gets wrestled away from them and used against them. This is how home invasion deaths always occur. The home invaders don't even need to take guns with them.

[Minister_of_Information]

Originally Posted by mdgator05

Okay and I never claimed it was the case, so I am not sure how it is my caricature. It has occurred for sure, but I stated that the causal reasons for the aggregate stats were still be worked out by the researchers. One causal string being somewhat rare however does not mean that this causal string does not exist or prevent other equally bad causal strings from existing.

Well said. Guns may improve a number of scenarios, but they do not improve all scenarios. The question then becomes one of probability when setting policy. And if teachers were armed en masse, the negative aspects of that arming would almost inevitably outweigh the potential from mass shootings -- which could be limited by less risky means, such as armed administrators.

[Dreamliner]

Originally Posted by Minister_of_Information

What you're missing is that violent arguments, negligent discharges, and general teacher incompetence are much more frequent occurrences than mass shootings.

That's one reason that I'm not panicking, on the heels of a thankfully rare mass-shooting, and clamoring to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it (or to keep guns away from people who might have prevented it).

[Dreamliner]

Here's why we need gun control, in a nutshell: if people have guns, they WILL use them to kill others. This is why, in a country with 310,000,000 guns, we have 310,000,000 murders a day.

[Minister_of_Information]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner

That's one reason that I'm not panicking, on the heels of a thankfully rare mass-shooting, and clamoring to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it (or to keep guns away from people who might have prevented it).

I don't think there's any opposition to keeping guns away from nutballs.

[novagator1]

Originally Posted by rivergator

John Lott's research has long since shown to be bogus. He includes "studies" that don't exist. Moc, you love to post things that agree with you, but you never seem to have a clue whether they're valid or not.

Prove it!!!

[GatorAvatar]

Originally Posted by MastaG8r

For those who believe tougher gun laws would've prevented the tragedy in Connecticut, here's food for thought. There was another mass attack on schoolkids in the news today:

Let's say you had a choice: either have your child in a class in Connecticut attacked by gunman with 3 guns (30 killed) or a class in China where gunman attacked children with knife (22 injured), what would you choose?

[Minister_of_Information]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner

Here's why we need gun control, in a nutshell: if people have guns, they WILL use them to kill others. This is why, in a country with 310,000,000 guns, we have 310,000,000 murders a day.

Insert "some" and lower your total homicides. The fact that guns are too dangerous to be passed out to schoolchildren as party favors doesn't mean that a well regulated militia being necessary to the security if a free state, the right if the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

[DSRrg]

Originally Posted by Minister_of_Information

Do I really need to explain what might happen with a roomful of children and a single adult are combined with firearms?

Haha come on now. Do you really believe that a person trained in how to manipulate and fire a pistol would simply just put it in a drawer for anyone to get to? You are smarter than that. I am saying train teachers who want to be trained and have a safe in every room. They make all sorts of safes that are small and concealable. I'm not a freaking idiot here and I'm no stranger to guns.

This guy had two pistols. If ANYONE had a gun on site they could have taken care of him.

[gatordavisl]

Originally Posted by zoltanuf

You're the one naively grasping at straws by vastly inflating the competence and abilities of the people who would be involved in such situations and dismissing the messy realities of how flawed and fallible ordinary people are. We're talking public school teachers here, not Jason Bourne.

True. Another issue is liability insurance. That alone would quash any nutzo guns-in-schools agenda.

[gatordavisl]

Originally Posted by MichaelJoeWilliamson

Mmmmm.....I have been a teacher. I am also competent with firearms.

Another unfounded assertion.

You might be, but if you honestly considered the gun savvy of your colleagues, you would admit that most of them are not competent to the extent necessary to be toting a gun on campus.

[Minister_of_Information]

Originally Posted by DSRrg

Haha come on now. Do you really believe that a person trained in how to manipulate and fire a pistol would simply just put it in a drawer for anyone to get to? You are smarter than that. I am saying train teachers who want to be trained and have a safe in every room. They make all sorts of safes that are small and concealable. I'm not a freaking idiot here and I'm no stranger to guns.

This guy had two pistols. If ANYONE had a gun on site they could have taken care of him.

Even if every teacher was a marine, they would possess variable amounts of competence and emotional stability. You're talking about solving an occasional problem with a massive influx of weapons into an everyday all day environment where security is the last thing on people's mind. Guards are going to be let down. Would you trust your babysitter to carry a .40S&W while watching your kids?

[DSRrg]

Originally Posted by Minister_of_Information

Actually, I happen to own a black rifle, a tactical shotgun, a sniper configured .308 with a collapsing bipod, several automatic handguns with greater than 10 round capacity, PVS7 Gen III+ NVG, and several thousand rounds of ammunition to go along with about 50 5.56 30 round magazines. I also happen to think that a well regulated militia is a necessary element of national security. And I manage to do all that without supposing that armed teachers will lead to fewer firearms deaths in schools. My congratulations on your prodigies of self deception. You see it isn't logically necessary to hold black and white views on guns. They are dangerous, and must be regulated. They are also inimical to tyranny. And while I mourn the innocent loss of life and favor commonsense proposals that might actually make a difference, at the end of the day give me liberty or give me death.

Pvs15 is where you need to direct your attention. Fairly light, not as large as the 7. Although having anything at all is good to go.

[Minister_of_Information]

If I could do it over, I'd go with a select alpha PVS 14.

[Dreamliner]

Originally Posted by Minister_of_Information

I don't think there's any opposition to keeping guns away from nutballs.

Nobody wants nutballs to have guns. Therefore, we should take the guns away from people who aren't nutballs.

[MichaelJoeWilliamson]

Originally Posted by mdgator05

Based on personal anecdotal experience (my mother was a teacher) once or twice a year. It would be nice to have non-anecdotal evidence for this, but unfortunately we only have non-anecdotal evidence that people with guns are more likely to be shot. Why do you want teachers to be more likely to be shot?

So, we deny the chance for teachers to protect themselves based on anecdotal, emotional arguments?

[Minister_of_Information]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner

Nobody wants nutballs to have guns. Therefore, we should take the guns away from people who aren't nutballs.

If that was the only relevant premise that would be logically valid.

[MichaelJoeWilliamson]

Originally Posted by Minister_of_Information

Well said. Guns may improve a number of scenarios, but they do not improve all scenarios.

No one claimed this

The question then becomes one of probability when setting policy. And if teachers were armed en masse, the negative aspects of that arming would almost inevitably outweigh the potential from mass shootings --

You are going to need to prove this. Especially given that NO ONE IS SUGGESTING WE ARM TEACHERS EN MASSE