***OFFICIAL GUN CONTROL DEBATE*** (1 Viewer)

[IC FBGCav]

Alan Dershowitz disagrees with me on gun control and offers a different alternative:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/12/19/dershowitz_our_schools_should_be_as_safe_as_our_congress.html

“There are better ways of addressing school safety,” Dershowitz said. “Look, I recently was in Congress and in the White House. And to get into any of those buildings, you have to go through one door first, and it locks behind you. Then you have to go through another door, and you get tested for metal and everything else. Our schools should be as safe as our Congress.”

“Look at buildings — you go to visit a law firm today, you can’t just walk up to see the partner,” Dershowitz said. “You have to go and present ID. It’s the reality of life. It’s far less restrictive of freedom if we have that than if we start locking people up based on suspicion, start controlling video games, start tinkering with the Second Amendment in its broadest sense. I think there are things we can do to make our schools safer, and they will require compromises with convenience. But we have to make our schools safer.”

Ah yes so lets turn schools into prisons with metal detectors and double locking doors with security checkpoints. That's a much less intimidating environment than a couple welll trained teachers with a pistol hidden on their person.

You put a lot more faith in teachers than I do. There are many that are not even good at their first profession teaching.

You lump bad teachers and good teachers together and think he wants to put a gun into each one's hands?

There will always be bad decisions by school/county/state/federal management. They don't intend to hire bad teachers but they do. They won't intend to arm irresponsible teachers but they will.

 

[ATC1]

at the "could care less" in the opening argument.

Sorry. "Don't follow" suit you better?

 

[timschochet]

Alan Dershowitz disagrees with me on gun control and offers a different alternative:

http://www.realclear...r_congress.html

"There are better ways of addressing school safety," Dershowitz said. "Look, I recently was in Congress and in the White House. And to get into any of those buildings, you have to go through one door first, and it locks behind you. Then you have to go through another door, and you get tested for metal and everything else. Our schools should be as safe as our Congress."

"Look at buildings — you go to visit a law firm today, you can't just walk up to see the partner," Dershowitz said. "You have to go and present ID. It's the reality of life. It's far less restrictive of freedom if we have that than if we start locking people up based on suspicion, start controlling video games, start tinkering with the Second Amendment in its broadest sense. I think there are things we can do to make our schools safer, and they will require compromises with convenience. But we have to make our schools safer."

It's tough for things like schools unless you're going to make kids stay inside the entire time. Also there's a cost involved in installing these kinds of things everywhere - you ready to have taxes go to something like this?

Well first off I'm not sure I agree with it. It's a new proposal and I found it interesting, but haven't really had time to ponder it. Also, it's being offered as an alternative to some common sense gun control measures I happen to support.But if I thought it would work, would I want taxes to go up? I think so, yeah. Or put it this way: if my daughters' elementary school came to all of us parents and said, we want to do this and we need each of you to contribute $500, I'd find a way to come up with it.

 

[TobiasFunke]

My main takeaway from this thread so far is that our government should require courses in logical reasoning in our schools. Holy Christ are there some awful arguments in here. icon's "Ban A would not have stopped Incident B, therefore Ban A would not be effective in stopping any incidents" might take the cake.

I got the point he was getting at but I am rather curious as to where you stand on this whole issue that is being thrown around(very loosely I might add)?To be honest here,I have no clue.

More extensive gun control? I really don't care that much. I've never seen anything that leads me to believe it would be all that effective- for every study or anecdote showing that it helped in a certain place or a certain population to reduce access to or the # of guns, there's another one showing that maybe it helps to have an armed population as a deterrent. In that sense I kind of agree with the point I think icon was trying to make, I just think he did a really bad job of making it.But at the same time I think the notion that the "right" to own a gun is incredibly important and something people need in their lives for protection is kind of silly, and I don't understand why we perpetuate it. The idea of effective self-defense is ridiculous. The chances that a gun owner or someone in their family will be at the other end of your "self-defense" weapon when it goes off are higher than the chances that it'll stop a home intruder or a school shooter or whatever fantasy they've got in their head. And the idea that we need private gun ownership to protect against the tyranny of government is even more foolish.

What I really want is to see a really good, well-funded, non-partisan study into the effects of various gun restrictions and the details of mass killings and related topics, so we can start to put together some reliable analysis. I've seen all kinds of studies, but they all seem biased and flawed. My guess is that the conclusion would be "#### happens and there's not much we can do about it," but it would be nice to at least have some reliable information to work with.

Link?

Here's a study showing a huge risk increase of suicide or homicide victim in homes with guns, with linksin the footnotes to similar studies.I've never seen any broad analysis (i.e. not some random town in Georgia) showing the presence of guns reducing the likelihood that you'll be a victim of violent crime to a degree remotely approaching that, but if you've got something for me I'm happy to read it.

 

[ATC1]

Alan Dershowitz disagrees with me on gun control and offers a different alternative:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/12/19/dershowitz_our_schools_should_be_as_safe_as_our_congress.html

“There are better ways of addressing school safety,” Dershowitz said. “Look, I recently was in Congress and in the White House. And to get into any of those buildings, you have to go through one door first, and it locks behind you. Then you have to go through another door, and you get tested for metal and everything else. Our schools should be as safe as our Congress.”

“Look at buildings — you go to visit a law firm today, you can’t just walk up to see the partner,” Dershowitz said. “You have to go and present ID. It’s the reality of life. It’s far less restrictive of freedom if we have that than if we start locking people up based on suspicion, start controlling video games, start tinkering with the Second Amendment in its broadest sense. I think there are things we can do to make our schools safer, and they will require compromises with convenience. But we have to make our schools safer.”

Ah yes so lets turn schools into prisons with metal detectors and double locking doors with security checkpoints. That's a much less intimidating environment than a couple welll trained teachers with a pistol hidden on their person.

Don't forget iron bars on all the windows. Or better yet, bullet proof glass.

 

[moleculo]

There are teachers out there that used to be in the military. There are teachers out there that used to be police officers. There are trained individuals that are more than capable of handling this, currently working in the teaching profession. Beyond that, picking up these skills is certainly attainable within the three months off that most teachers have every year. Why prevent them from being able to assist in a Sandy Hook type event?

 

[ATC1]

Alan Dershowitz disagrees with me on gun control and offers a different alternative:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/12/19/dershowitz_our_schools_should_be_as_safe_as_our_congress.html

“There are better ways of addressing school safety,” Dershowitz said. “Look, I recently was in Congress and in the White House. And to get into any of those buildings, you have to go through one door first, and it locks behind you. Then you have to go through another door, and you get tested for metal and everything else. Our schools should be as safe as our Congress.”

“Look at buildings — you go to visit a law firm today, you can’t just walk up to see the partner,” Dershowitz said. “You have to go and present ID. It’s the reality of life. It’s far less restrictive of freedom if we have that than if we start locking people up based on suspicion, start controlling video games, start tinkering with the Second Amendment in its broadest sense. I think there are things we can do to make our schools safer, and they will require compromises with convenience. But we have to make our schools safer.”

Ah yes so lets turn schools into prisons with metal detectors and double locking doors with security checkpoints. That's a much less intimidating environment than a couple welll trained teachers with a pistol hidden on their person.

You put a lot more faith in teachers than I do. There are many that are not even good at their first profession teaching.

You lump bad teachers and good teachers together and think he wants to put a gun into each one's hands?

There will always be bad decisions by school/county/state/federal management. They don't intend to hire bad teachers but they do. They won't intend to arm irresponsible teachers but they will.

Would you like a cop in schools? There are bad cops as well.

 

[Apple Jack]

at the "could care less" in the opening argument.

Sorry. "Don't follow" suit you better?

Just saying that it's generally a good rule of thumb for a writer trying to make a point on a controversial subject not to tell the reader right off the bat that they are a bad writer. But that's beside the point. I can see past it. Just one of those things I get a cheap kick out of. Like some of you guys with firearms built to kill as many humans as quickly as possible.

 

[Dvorak]

My main takeaway from this thread so far is that our government should require courses in logical reasoning in our schools. Holy Christ are there some awful arguments in here. icon's "Ban A would not have stopped Incident B, therefore Ban A would not be effective in stopping any incidents" might take the cake.

I got the point he was getting at but I am rather curious as to where you stand on this whole issue that is being thrown around(very loosely I might add)?To be honest here,I have no clue.

More extensive gun control? I really don't care that much. I've never seen anything that leads me to believe it would be all that effective- for every study or anecdote showing that it helped in a certain place or a certain population to reduce access to or the # of guns, there's another one showing that maybe it helps to have an armed population as a deterrent. In that sense I kind of agree with the point I think icon was trying to make, I just think he did a really bad job of making it.But at the same time I think the notion that the "right" to own a gun is incredibly important and something people need in their lives for protection is kind of silly, and I don't understand why we perpetuate it. The idea of effective self-defense is ridiculous. The chances that a gun owner or someone in their family will be at the other end of your "self-defense" weapon when it goes off are higher than the chances that it'll stop a home intruder or a school shooter or whatever fantasy they've got in their head. And the idea that we need private gun ownership to protect against the tyranny of government is even more foolish.



What I really want is to see a really good, well-funded, non-partisan study into the effects of various gun restrictions and the details of mass killings and related topics, so we can start to put together some reliable analysis. I've seen all kinds of studies, but they all seem biased and flawed. My guess is that the conclusion would be "#### happens and there's not much we can do about it," but it would be nice to at least have some reliable information to work with.

The CDC did a look at Firearm Law effectiveness back in 2002, I would not exactly call them non-partisan, but the certainly are not what I would call friends of the NRA: My link

 

[timschochet]

There are teachers out there that used to be in the military. There are teachers out there that used to be police officers. There are trained individuals that are more than capable of handling this, currently working in the teaching profession. Beyond that, picking up these skills is certainly attainable within the three months off that most teachers have every year. Why prevent them from being able to assist in a Sandy Hook type event?

It's a fair question. My answer is that I don't believe what your talking about is representative of most school teachers, and I don't think it's a good idea to be encouraging this sort of thing on a nationwide basis.Perhaps in certain specific cases what you're talking about could be allowed: if a teacher had police or military experience, and wanted to carry a firearm, then the school district in question would have to approve of it. I imagine that also every parent who had a child in that classroom would also have to sign off. I don't think I personally would do so unless I had total confidence in that teacher.

 

[Brony]

A couple of days ago I was in the camp that guns themselves were a bigger problem than the owners. The pro gun people in this thread have convinced me that the mental state of gun owners is a far bigger problem for our country.

 

[Apple Jack]

A couple of days ago I was in the camp that guns themselves were a bigger problem than the owners. The pro gun people in this thread have convinced me that the mental state of gun owners is a far bigger problem for our country.

Damn .

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

There are teachers out there that used to be in the military. There are teachers out there that used to be police officers.

What percentage of elementary school teachers do you think fall into these two categories? I don't think I've ever met one. I'd be surprised if there were a lot of these.

 

[IC FBGCav]

Alan Dershowitz disagrees with me on gun control and offers a different alternative:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/12/19/dershowitz_our_schools_should_be_as_safe_as_our_congress.html

“There are better ways of addressing school safety,” Dershowitz said. “Look, I recently was in Congress and in the White House. And to get into any of those buildings, you have to go through one door first, and it locks behind you. Then you have to go through another door, and you get tested for metal and everything else. Our schools should be as safe as our Congress.”

“Look at buildings — you go to visit a law firm today, you can’t just walk up to see the partner,” Dershowitz said. “You have to go and present ID. It’s the reality of life. It’s far less restrictive of freedom if we have that than if we start locking people up based on suspicion, start controlling video games, start tinkering with the Second Amendment in its broadest sense. I think there are things we can do to make our schools safer, and they will require compromises with convenience. But we have to make our schools safer.”

Ah yes so lets turn schools into prisons with metal detectors and double locking doors with security checkpoints. That's a much less intimidating environment than a couple welll trained teachers with a pistol hidden on their person.

You put a lot more faith in teachers than I do. There are many that are not even good at their first profession teaching.

You lump bad teachers and good teachers together and think he wants to put a gun into each one's hands?

There will always be bad decisions by school/county/state/federal management. They don't intend to hire bad teachers but they do. They won't intend to arm irresponsible teachers but they will.

Would you like a cop in schools? There are bad cops as well.

That question has nothing to do with this discussion, if you have no response just don't answer. No need try divert things to fit your view.Your reply should be, yes they would arm irresponsible teachers. Is there a difference between irresponsible teachers and cops?

 

[ATC1]

at the "could care less" in the opening argument.

Sorry. "Don't follow" suit you better?

Just saying that it's generally a good rule of thumb for a writer trying to make a point on a controversial subject not to tell the reader right off the bat that they are a bad writer. But that's beside the point. I can see past it. Just one of those things I get a cheap kick out of. Like some of you guys with firearms built to kill as many humans as quickly as possible.

It's generally a good rule of thumb that before you make an argument to ban something, you should know exactly what it is you are banning. GM, Otis, our government.

 

[[icon]]

1. You're forcing the teacher to choose what options he/she must take and I don't think it is reasonable to expect a teacher who may be facing an armed gunman to control both aspects.2. Explain to me how a teacher can walk over to a safe, load a gun and shoot a man who walks into a classroom with a shotgun. Does he ask the gunman to wait? I believe the discussion we were having was centered around the gunman being in the school and not necessarily standing at the door ready to open it.I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this.

I agree a unloaded gun in a biometric safe is useless for a teacher who has had someone walk into the room with a gun (but so is the "herd them to safety" approach), which is why I endorse a few teachers concealed carry on their person. As a secondary option a biometric safe is decent because any teacher who's classroom is NOT the first one to be walked into can get the weapon, then escort children to "safety" (as safe as can be found) while maintaining the ability to protect those children if the shooter DOES move on to his/her room. Also once children in that room are secured, the armed teacher could come to the aid of a (perhaps) unarmed teacher that is faced with an active shooter in a different room. In many shootings the gunman tends to move from room to room... limiting casualties to one room (even limiting casualties within that first room) should be the goal here. Again, I am referring to well trained teachers who go through tactical courses not unlike law enforcement. In the wake of sandy hook I am sure there would be no shortage of qualified teachers willing to volunteer for the role. Select the best candidates and issue additional background checks then certify them.

 

[jafo]

Damn, Moleculo and Sinn Fein's ideas are much more complicated than simply having a national database, (which we would need to execute them anyhow.) I like the idea of gun registration and insurance, but it would be such a fight to try to get those that I figured one little step at a time...

People who break the law could care less about registration and insurance, so all your doing in essence is adding a tax to someone who does not break the law and is within their right to own a weapon.

Where do you think the illegal weapons come from?

Operation Fast and Furious.

 

[IC FBGCav]

1. You're forcing the teacher to choose what options he/she must take and I don't think it is reasonable to expect a teacher who may be facing an armed gunman to control both aspects.2. Explain to me how a teacher can walk over to a safe, load a gun and shoot a man who walks into a classroom with a shotgun. Does he ask the gunman to wait? I believe the discussion we were having was centered around the gunman being in the school and not necessarily standing at the door ready to open it.I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this.

I agree a unloaded gun in a biometric safe is useless for a teacher who has had someone walk into the room with a gun (but so is the "herd them to safety" approach), which is why I endorse a few teachers concealed carry on their person. As a secondary option a biometric safe is decent because any teacher who's classroom is NOT the first one to be walked into can get the weapon, then escort children to "safety" (as safe as can be found) while maintaining the ability to protect those children if the shooter DOES move on to his/her room. Also once children in that room are secured, the armed teacher could come to the aid of a (perhaps) unarmed teacher that is faced with an active shooter in a different room. In many shootings the gunman tends to move from room to room... limiting casualties to one room (even limiting casualties within that first room) should be the goal here. Again, I am referring to well trained teachers who go through tactical courses not unlike law enforcement. In the wake of sandy hook I am sure there would be no shortage of qualified teachers willing to volunteer for the role. Select the best candidates and issue additional background checks then certify them.

What if the "well trained" teacher's all get the flu and call in sick? Oh my.

 

[ATC1]

Alan Dershowitz disagrees with me on gun control and offers a different alternative:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/12/19/dershowitz_our_schools_should_be_as_safe_as_our_congress.html

“There are better ways of addressing school safety,” Dershowitz said. “Look, I recently was in Congress and in the White House. And to get into any of those buildings, you have to go through one door first, and it locks behind you. Then you have to go through another door, and you get tested for metal and everything else. Our schools should be as safe as our Congress.”

“Look at buildings — you go to visit a law firm today, you can’t just walk up to see the partner,” Dershowitz said. “You have to go and present ID. It’s the reality of life. It’s far less restrictive of freedom if we have that than if we start locking people up based on suspicion, start controlling video games, start tinkering with the Second Amendment in its broadest sense. I think there are things we can do to make our schools safer, and they will require compromises with convenience. But we have to make our schools safer.”

Ah yes so lets turn schools into prisons with metal detectors and double locking doors with security checkpoints. That's a much less intimidating environment than a couple welll trained teachers with a pistol hidden on their person.

You put a lot more faith in teachers than I do. There are many that are not even good at their first profession teaching.

You lump bad teachers and good teachers together and think he wants to put a gun into each one's hands?

There will always be bad decisions by school/county/state/federal management. They don't intend to hire bad teachers but they do. They won't intend to arm irresponsible teachers but they will.

Would you like a cop in schools? There are bad cops as well.

That question has nothing to do with this discussion, if you have no response just don't answer. No need try divert things to fit your view.Your reply should be, yes they would arm irresponsible teachers. Is there a difference between irresponsible teachers and cops?

you are right, there will always be irresponsibility among humanity. My goal to change irresponsibility will be with more mandatory (police like and saftey) training. My point is we trust cops and the military in Gun Free Zones. I don't see why we can not trust a member of the school staff who is trained similarly.

 

[moleculo]

There are teachers out there that used to be in the military. There are teachers out there that used to be police officers.

What percentage of elementary school teachers do you think fall into these two categories? I don't think I've ever met one. I'd be surprised if there were a lot of these.

I can promise you it's a bigger percentage than are allowed to carry.

 

[ATC1]

1. You're forcing the teacher to choose what options he/she must take and I don't think it is reasonable to expect a teacher who may be facing an armed gunman to control both aspects.2. Explain to me how a teacher can walk over to a safe, load a gun and shoot a man who walks into a classroom with a shotgun. Does he ask the gunman to wait? I believe the discussion we were having was centered around the gunman being in the school and not necessarily standing at the door ready to open it.I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this.

I agree a unloaded gun in a biometric safe is useless for a teacher who has had someone walk into the room with a gun (but so is the "herd them to safety" approach), which is why I endorse a few teachers concealed carry on their person. As a secondary option a biometric safe is decent because any teacher who's classroom is NOT the first one to be walked into can get the weapon, then escort children to "safety" (as safe as can be found) while maintaining the ability to protect those children if the shooter DOES move on to his/her room. Also once children in that room are secured, the armed teacher could come to the aid of a (perhaps) unarmed teacher that is faced with an active shooter in a different room. In many shootings the gunman tends to move from room to room... limiting casualties to one room (even limiting casualties within that first room) should be the goal here. Again, I am referring to well trained teachers who go through tactical courses not unlike law enforcement. In the wake of sandy hook I am sure there would be no shortage of qualified teachers willing to volunteer for the role. Select the best candidates and issue additional background checks then certify them.

What if the "well trained" teacher's all get the flu and call in sick? Oh my.

Hope the shooter gets it too.

 

[kentric]

1. You're forcing the teacher to choose what options he/she must take and I don't think it is reasonable to expect a teacher who may be facing an armed gunman to control both aspects.2. Explain to me how a teacher can walk over to a safe, load a gun and shoot a man who walks into a classroom with a shotgun. Does he ask the gunman to wait? I believe the discussion we were having was centered around the gunman being in the school and not necessarily standing at the door ready to open it.I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this.

I agree a unloaded gun in a biometric safe is useless for a teacher who has had someone walk into the room with a gun (but so is the "herd them to safety" approach), which is why I endorse a few teachers concealed carry on their person. As a secondary option a biometric safe is decent because any teacher who's classroom is NOT the first one to be walked into can get the weapon, then escort children to "safety" (as safe as can be found) while maintaining the ability to protect those children if the shooter DOES move on to his/her room. Also once children in that room are secured, the armed teacher could come to the aid of a (perhaps) unarmed teacher that is faced with an active shooter in a different room. In many shootings the gunman tends to move from room to room... limiting casualties to one room (even limiting casualties within that first room) should be the goal here. Again, I am referring to well trained teachers who go through tactical courses not unlike law enforcement. In the wake of sandy hook I am sure there would be no shortage of qualified teachers willing to volunteer for the role. Select the best candidates and issue additional background checks then certify them.

My second point was more a comment on the statement you had made (2) explain to me how a teacher can "guide children out of a dangerous situation" when a man walks into the classroom with a shotgun.) which I interpreted as you saying that the situation starts when the man walks into the classroom with a shotgun. I personally don't want guns around schools at all as I believe that they would cause more harm than good (as explained above). Of course, this is just my view and you clearly have a differing view. Guess that's what makes this country great - the ability to express one's view.

 

[IC FBGCav]

Alan Dershowitz disagrees with me on gun control and offers a different alternative:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/12/19/dershowitz_our_schools_should_be_as_safe_as_our_congress.html

“There are better ways of addressing school safety,” Dershowitz said. “Look, I recently was in Congress and in the White House. And to get into any of those buildings, you have to go through one door first, and it locks behind you. Then you have to go through another door, and you get tested for metal and everything else. Our schools should be as safe as our Congress.”

“Look at buildings — you go to visit a law firm today, you can’t just walk up to see the partner,” Dershowitz said. “You have to go and present ID. It’s the reality of life. It’s far less restrictive of freedom if we have that than if we start locking people up based on suspicion, start controlling video games, start tinkering with the Second Amendment in its broadest sense. I think there are things we can do to make our schools safer, and they will require compromises with convenience. But we have to make our schools safer.”

Ah yes so lets turn schools into prisons with metal detectors and double locking doors with security checkpoints. That's a much less intimidating environment than a couple welll trained teachers with a pistol hidden on their person.

You put a lot more faith in teachers than I do. There are many that are not even good at their first profession teaching.

You lump bad teachers and good teachers together and think he wants to put a gun into each one's hands?

There will always be bad decisions by school/county/state/federal management. They don't intend to hire bad teachers but they do. They won't intend to arm irresponsible teachers but they will.

Would you like a cop in schools? There are bad cops as well.

That question has nothing to do with this discussion, if you have no response just don't answer. No need try divert things to fit your view.Your reply should be, yes they would arm irresponsible teachers. Is there a difference between irresponsible teachers and cops?

you are right, there will always be irresponsibility among humanity. My goal to change irresponsibility will be with more mandatory (police like and saftey) training. My point is we trust cops and the military in Gun Free Zones. I don't see why we can not trust a member of the school staff who is trained similarly.

First, they get sick, then two armed teachers, then three ect. It is a logistical nightmare. Not that I am saying I want cops in schools. But at least there is more supervision over them, they are better trained and it is their chosen profession.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

There are teachers out there that used to be in the military. There are teachers out there that used to be police officers.

What percentage of elementary school teachers do you think fall into these two categories? I don't think I've ever met one. I'd be surprised if there were a lot of these.

I can promise you it's a bigger percentage than are allowed to carry.

Well, that's not very helpful.

 

[tom22406]

Alan Dershowitz disagrees with me on gun control and offers a different alternative:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/12/19/dershowitz_our_schools_should_be_as_safe_as_our_congress.html

“There are better ways of addressing school safety,” Dershowitz said. “Look, I recently was in Congress and in the White House. And to get into any of those buildings, you have to go through one door first, and it locks behind you. Then you have to go through another door, and you get tested for metal and everything else. Our schools should be as safe as our Congress.”

“Look at buildings — you go to visit a law firm today, you can’t just walk up to see the partner,” Dershowitz said. “You have to go and present ID. It’s the reality of life. It’s far less restrictive of freedom if we have that than if we start locking people up based on suspicion, start controlling video games, start tinkering with the Second Amendment in its broadest sense. I think there are things we can do to make our schools safer, and they will require compromises with convenience. But we have to make our schools safer.”

Ah yes so lets turn schools into prisons with metal detectors and double locking doors with security checkpoints. That's a much less intimidating environment than a couple welll trained teachers with a pistol hidden on their person.

You put a lot more faith in teachers than I do. There are many that are not even good at their first profession teaching.

You lump bad teachers and good teachers together and think he wants to put a gun into each one's hands?

There will always be bad decisions by school/county/state/federal management. They don't intend to hire bad teachers but they do. They won't intend to arm irresponsible teachers but they will.

Would you like a cop in schools? There are bad cops as well.

That question has nothing to do with this discussion, if you have no response just don't answer. No need try divert things to fit your view.Your reply should be, yes they would arm irresponsible teachers. Is there a difference between irresponsible teachers and cops?

you are right, there will always be irresponsibility among humanity. My goal to change irresponsibility will be with more mandatory (police like and saftey) training. My point is we trust cops and the military in Gun Free Zones. I don't see why we can not trust a member of the school staff who is trained similarly.

First, they get sick, then two armed teachers, then three ect. It is a logistical nightmare. Not that I am saying I want cops in schools. But at least there is more supervision over them, they are better trained and it is their chosen profession.

How about military as another option?Plenty of those guys looking for work in this country and I'm sure they would take pride in guarding our children.

 

[jafo]

Now that some of you posters have come up with some fantastic ideas to restrict and/or ban guns for citizens, could you come up with some solutions that will keep the guns out of the hands of...y'know...criminals?

 

[IC FBGCav]

How about military as another option?Plenty of those guys looking for work in this country and I'm sure they would take pride in guarding our children.

Different group of people same problem. No matter what we do to our schools, you will not stop a crazy armed insane person from doing damage. When you are willing to give up your life to hurt others, you will not be stopped before the committing murder no matter what the gun laws are.

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

There are teachers out there that used to be in the military. There are teachers out there that used to be police officers. There are trained individuals that are more than capable of handling this, currently working in the teaching profession. Beyond that, picking up these skills is certainly attainable within the three months off that most teachers have every year. Why prevent them from being able to assist in a Sandy Hook type event?

I think the risk with having guns added into classrooms is far greater than the benefit of someone possibly ending up in the right place at the right time to intervene in a situation like this. No matter what training people have or had, if you are performing a job you shouldn't also be required to also monitor a gun around children. I'd pull my son out of any school that allowed firearms on campus by anyone other than an on duty officer.

 

[[icon]]

Gun Control Survey posted:

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=672346

 

[ATC1]

There are teachers out there that used to be in the military. There are teachers out there that used to be police officers. There are trained individuals that are more than capable of handling this, currently working in the teaching profession. Beyond that, picking up these skills is certainly attainable within the three months off that most teachers have every year. Why prevent them from being able to assist in a Sandy Hook type event?

It's a fair question. My answer is that I don't believe what your talking about is representative of most school teachers, and I don't think it's a good idea to be encouraging this sort of thing on a nationwide basis.Perhaps in certain specific cases what you're talking about could be allowed: if a teacher had police or military experience, and wanted to carry a firearm, then the school district in question would have to approve of it. I imagine that also every parent who had a child in that classroom would also have to sign off. I don't think I personally would do so unless I had total confidence in that teacher.

Serious question here Tim. Do you actively look for the "Gun Free Zone" sign before you enter buildings with your child? Do you only take her into building with these signs? Does your child freak out if a police officer was to talk to her with a gun on his hip?

As a parent of 2 small ones, I understand your concern. If proper laws were in place to make sure I could trust a person with a CCP like a police officer in the school I would have no problems with it.

I'm even thinking that maybe there would be a requirement that a certain number of the school's staff should be trained. Not necessarily the teachers that have complete interaction with the kids. It would not be ideal, but it would be better.

 

[moleculo]

Now that some of you posters have come up with some fantastic ideas to restrict and/or ban guns for citizens, could you come up with some solutions that will keep the guns out of the hands of...y'know...criminals?

included in my proposal:
[*]Registration would require some sort of identification on the gun - a stamped ID, a plate added, something like that. Possibly a yearly sticker, just like we put on our license plates. The gun owner must also keep a paper receipt as well - just like you have in your car.

[*]If you are found in possession of a gun w/o ID and registration, the gun is to be immediately confiscated and will be returned when the owner presents proper papers.

If a bad guy is found to possess a gun without proper registration, it is confiscated immediately. If the bad guy is actually not bad and can get his records, he can get his gun back with only having to deal with the bureaucratic headache. If it is an illegal gun, he won't be able to get it back.

It's not an immediate solution but through attrition, illegal guns will disappear.

 

[ATC1]

How about military as another option?Plenty of those guys looking for work in this country and I'm sure they would take pride in guarding our children.

Different group of people same problem. No matter what we do to our schools, you will not stop a crazy armed insane person from doing damage. When you are willing to give up your life to hurt others, you will not be stopped before the committing murder no matter what the gun laws are.

See IMHO I don't think so. I think it could prevent some shootings, and if not reduce the number of victims because of a quicker reaction time of someone qualified to stop them.

 

[[icon]]

If a bad guy is found to possess a gun without proper registration, it is confiscated immediately. If the bad guy is actually not bad and can get his records, he can get his gun back with only having to deal with the bureaucratic headache. If it is an illegal gun, he won't be able to get it back.

It's not an immediate solution but through attrition, illegal guns will disappear.

The bolded is already in place (if you can't produce registration for most guns, you must give them up). It's had no measurable impact on the number of illegal guns on the streets.

 

[moleculo]

If a bad guy is found to possess a gun without proper registration, it is confiscated immediately. If the bad guy is actually not bad and can get his records, he can get his gun back with only having to deal with the bureaucratic headache. If it is an illegal gun, he won't be able to get it back.

It's not an immediate solution but through attrition, illegal guns will disappear.

The bolded is already in place (if you can't produce registration for most guns, you must give them up). It's had no measurable impact on the number of illegal guns on the streets.

what would get the illegal guns off the streets then?

 

[[icon]]

If a bad guy is found to possess a gun without proper registration, it is confiscated immediately. If the bad guy is actually not bad and can get his records, he can get his gun back with only having to deal with the bureaucratic headache. If it is an illegal gun, he won't be able to get it back.

It's not an immediate solution but through attrition, illegal guns will disappear.

The bolded is already in place (if you can't produce registration for most guns, you must give them up). It's had no measurable impact on the number of illegal guns on the streets.

what would get the illegal guns off the streets then?

What would get the illegal drugs off the streets? Honestly (and sadly), nothing. You can put a small dent in it through great expense and effort, but historically speaking these sort of efforts rarely result in significant results and often have a side effect of increasing collateral crime associated with the maintenance of the black market. Look at the crime rates during the peak of prohibition or the war on drugs.

Unfortunately I think any detailed "trace" program beyond what is already in place would have a horrible Return on Investment. I AM all for compromising on the Gun Show sale loopholes... make all weapons sales go through appropriate channels. Fine. I can agree with that.

 

[Otis]

How about a ten round maximum, but an authorized facility can still have high capacity magazines to be rented and used in those facilities?

I think this is a great idea. Do you think pro-gun types would go for it? It's a great compromise.

Otis, I thought you were in the camp to ban semi-automatic weapons?

I liked the idea of keeping them in restricted facilities. The ten round stuff is silly.

 

[ATC1]

There are teachers out there that used to be in the military. There are teachers out there that used to be police officers. There are trained individuals that are more than capable of handling this, currently working in the teaching profession. Beyond that, picking up these skills is certainly attainable within the three months off that most teachers have every year. Why prevent them from being able to assist in a Sandy Hook type event?

I think the risk with having guns added into classrooms is far greater than the benefit of someone possibly ending up in the right place at the right time to intervene in a situation like this. No matter what training people have or had, if you are performing a job you shouldn't also be required to also monitor a gun around children. I'd pull my son out of any school that allowed firearms on campus by anyone other than an on duty officer.

What about the principal, vice principal, janatorial staff. Those not in the actual classroom.

 

[Otis]

I haven't weighed in with a proposal yet, so here goes:

Treat fire-arms similar to cars - that is, require registration and insurance for their operation.

Registration

[*]Registration would require some sort of identification on the gun - a stamped ID, a plate added, something like that. Possibly a yearly sticker, just like we put on our license plates. The gun owner must also keep a paper receipt as well - just like you have in your car.

[*]If you are found in possession of a gun w/o ID and registration, the gun is to be immediately confiscated and will be returned when the owner presents proper papers.

[*]Registration must be renewed annually (bi-annually?). Part of the renewal process is a safety inspection, which both verifies safe operating condition of the gun as well as condition of registration tags.

[*]Safety inspection does not need to be performed by a LEO, it could simply be the guy at the shooting range, a licensed dealer, someone from your hunt-club, or pretty much anyone who has taken some basic training and says an oath.

Insurance

[*]establish some sort of liability costs associated with gun ownership. For sake of discussion, let's say $250k for loss of life and medical bills up to $250k for injuries. These liabilities are only payable if the gun was used in a crime.

[*]Gun owners must purchase insurance and proof of insurance must be presented upon request - along with registration above.

[*]Similar to cars, insurance rates can be allowed to vary, based on a number of factors such as:

[*]number of kids in house

[*]mental state of all residents

[*]gun type (based on probability that a particular gun will be used in a crime)

[*]location of owner residence - probability of gun being stolen

[*]discount for safes

[*]discount for trigger lock

[*]discount for annual gun safety courses

[*]discount for periodic range time

[*]whatever else the actuaries find that increases/decreases gun crime risk

[*]if a gun is stolen, the gun owners insurance company will still have at least a partial fiscal responsibility for above damages, so it is in their interest to ensure that owners do whatever they can to keep their weapons secure.

[*]no liabilities are to be paid when the gun was used in self-defense, including Castle Doctorine usage. That is, if a bad guy breaks into my house and I shoot him, my insurance owes him nothing.

I have no idea if anything like this has been proposed or not. IMO, this could have helped @ Sandy Hook, Va Tech, etc by providing financial incentive to keep their arms secured, as well as limit availability of illegal arms without an outright ban. I can see that if someone wants to keep a whole bunch of dangerous guns around, it's going to get expensive pretty quick if he's not adequately equipped to store them nor has proper safety certification... on the other hand, a simple 6-shot revolver that is stored in a high-quality safe and operated by someone who takes regular training will be really cheap to insure.

I don't see how the bolded is true. This woman went through all the legal mechanisms required to get her guns and used them regularly. This would have made no difference here.

I'm assuming her guns weren't stored securely - assuming this on the basis that they were used against her. Had it been a significant financial penalty for her to have multiple weapons not adequately stored in a location with a resident mental-health patient, she likely would have either stored her guns off-site or had a better safe.

Enormous assumption here.Just like you would think most people who own guns in the first place - given the dangerous nature - would have them in safes or out of the reach of their children. As parents frequently learn via tragic accidents, that's not the case.

 

[moleculo]

There are teachers out there that used to be in the military. There are teachers out there that used to be police officers. There are trained individuals that are more than capable of handling this, currently working in the teaching profession. Beyond that, picking up these skills is certainly attainable within the three months off that most teachers have every year. Why prevent them from being able to assist in a Sandy Hook type event?

I think the risk with having guns added into classrooms is far greater than the benefit of someone possibly ending up in the right place at the right time to intervene in a situation like this. No matter what training people have or had, if you are performing a job you shouldn't also be required to also monitor a gun around children. I'd pull my son out of any school that allowed firearms on campus by anyone other than an on duty officer.

what if the armed person wasn't a teacher, tasked with daily supervision of students...what if this person was an administrator, or a "resource" officer or counselor or something like that?

 

[Gr00vus]

There are teachers out there that used to be in the military. There are teachers out there that used to be police officers. There are trained individuals that are more than capable of handling this, currently working in the teaching profession. Beyond that, picking up these skills is certainly attainable within the three months off that most teachers have every year. Why prevent them from being able to assist in a Sandy Hook type event?

I think the risk with having guns added into classrooms is far greater than the benefit of someone possibly ending up in the right place at the right time to intervene in a situation like this. No matter what training people have or had, if you are performing a job you shouldn't also be required to also monitor a gun around children. I'd pull my son out of any school that allowed firearms on campus by anyone other than an on duty officer.

I think all you'd really accomplish by putting guns in the classroom is guaranteeing the teacher gets shot right away.

 

[ATC1]

There are teachers out there that used to be in the military. There are teachers out there that used to be police officers. There are trained individuals that are more than capable of handling this, currently working in the teaching profession. Beyond that, picking up these skills is certainly attainable within the three months off that most teachers have every year. Why prevent them from being able to assist in a Sandy Hook type event?

I think the risk with having guns added into classrooms is far greater than the benefit of someone possibly ending up in the right place at the right time to intervene in a situation like this. No matter what training people have or had, if you are performing a job you shouldn't also be required to also monitor a gun around children. I'd pull my son out of any school that allowed firearms on campus by anyone other than an on duty officer.

what if the armed person wasn't a teacher, tasked with daily supervision of students...what if this person was an administrator, or a "resource" officer or counselor or something like that?

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

There are teachers out there that used to be in the military. There are teachers out there that used to be police officers. There are trained individuals that are more than capable of handling this, currently working in the teaching profession. Beyond that, picking up these skills is certainly attainable within the three months off that most teachers have every year. Why prevent them from being able to assist in a Sandy Hook type event?

I think the risk with having guns added into classrooms is far greater than the benefit of someone possibly ending up in the right place at the right time to intervene in a situation like this. No matter what training people have or had, if you are performing a job you shouldn't also be required to also monitor a gun around children. I'd pull my son out of any school that allowed firearms on campus by anyone other than an on duty officer.

What about the principal, vice principal, janatorial staff. Those not in the actual classroom.

Nope. If we are talking a dedicated security officer, where that is all they do and job number one is to secure their own firearm, I'd be okay with it.

 

[Otis]

Damn, Moleculo and Sinn Fein's ideas are much more complicated than simply having a national database, (which we would need to execute them anyhow.) I like the idea of gun registration and insurance, but it would be such a fight to try to get those that I figured one little step at a time...

This is the ultimate goal, one little step at a time.....to all gun being banned.

This viewpoint is so bizarre to me. You think we want to get guns banned to prove a point. HA HA WE LIBS SCREWED YOU! WE FINALLY ACCOMPLISHED OUR MISSION OF WINNING THE BIG IMPORTANT ARGUMENT!! WE WIN!It's so strange that you people would view it that way. I don't self associate as a "liberal" at all, and a lot of my views are conservative. I come to this issue seeking a problem and looking for a reasonable solution. I could give a crap about the politics. But I get the sense many of you view this as a politics and "FREEEEDOM!" issue, as opposed to what it is to the rest of us -- a safety issue.

 

[Otis]

Listen, I'm a gun owner, but I'm also open to discussing ideas and not outright pulling an Otis or NRA stance of just crossing my arms and screaming NO to all proposals.

Gun dude lie again. I've considered other compromises. And my original position was never "NO GUNS."

 

[Otis]

Give me a list of all the potential rape victims who have prevented the rape because they were packing heat.

This is a weak argument Otis. You're not really helping here. Of course there are armed women who have defended themselves from rape with the use of firearms, and good for them. I hope more women arm themselves and learn how to use these weapons; I really do.

Why is it a weak argument, Tim? I suspect this happens very, very, very infrequently. I'm asking. And I'm not here to help you.

Probably difficult to get statistics on this one. The raper would have to declare their intentions before they were stopped. After this, if you stop them it probably still doesn't get classified as a rape. Maybe you could come up with a list of potential victims that were stopped with pepper spray for us to demonstrate its superiority. While you're at it, maybe a list of victims that pepper sprayed their attackers and it didn't incapacitate them.

Difficult to get statistics on this one? That's convenient.How about we broaden it -- how about some studies/statistics about times women have been attacked but they fended off an attacked with a gun they wore on their hip?

 

[ATC1]

There are teachers out there that used to be in the military. There are teachers out there that used to be police officers. There are trained individuals that are more than capable of handling this, currently working in the teaching profession. Beyond that, picking up these skills is certainly attainable within the three months off that most teachers have every year. Why prevent them from being able to assist in a Sandy Hook type event?

I think the risk with having guns added into classrooms is far greater than the benefit of someone possibly ending up in the right place at the right time to intervene in a situation like this. No matter what training people have or had, if you are performing a job you shouldn't also be required to also monitor a gun around children. I'd pull my son out of any school that allowed firearms on campus by anyone other than an on duty officer.

I think all you'd really accomplish by putting guns in the classroom is guaranteeing the teacher gets shot right away.

I can tell when a gun shot goes off in another part of the building. Get the kids covered and observe. Shooter in the classroom I would expect the first target will always be the teacher, so I will have the shooter's fire. Cover myself and react.

 

[Otis]

My favorite part of this thread is all the rational and logical anti-gun posters like Otis throwing around insults, treating others in very demeaning ways, ignoring facts and refusing to accept anything other than everything they think will help, and then repeatedly calling anyone that disagrees with them ignorant, unwilling to compromise and any number of other great things. That's the best.

Yeah. We're ignoring facts.

 

[tom22406]

As somebody else already pointed out in his case mine was exactly the same in that we had a retired police officer who was in charge of student safety and various other problems that may have occured at the school and he was packing heat.Never once was it an issue and in all honesty it became second nature to see him walking the halls and the parking lot.We all just accepted it and knew if #### hit the fan you would have to deal with him.

 

[Otis]

My favorite part of this thread is all the rational and logical anti-gun posters like Otis throwing around insults, treating others in very demeaning ways, ignoring facts and refusing to accept anything other than everything they think will help, and then repeatedly calling anyone that disagrees with them ignorant, unwilling to compromise and any number of other great things. That's the best.

As compared to the rational, logical, and willing to compromise pro-gun people?

The treatment of the Otis's is far worse than anything back the other way, though I hardly think they would recognize it, since there are witches to burn and stuff.

Astounding that you, a gun owner with an enormous arsenal of guns in his home, would see it that way. Astounding.

 

[ATC1]

Give me a list of all the potential rape victims who have prevented the rape because they were packing heat.

This is a weak argument Otis. You're not really helping here. Of course there are armed women who have defended themselves from rape with the use of firearms, and good for them. I hope more women arm themselves and learn how to use these weapons; I really do.

Why is it a weak argument, Tim? I suspect this happens very, very, very infrequently. I'm asking. And I'm not here to help you.

Probably difficult to get statistics on this one. The raper would have to declare their intentions before they were stopped. After this, if you stop them it probably still doesn't get classified as a rape. Maybe you could come up with a list of potential victims that were stopped with pepper spray for us to demonstrate its superiority. While you're at it, maybe a list of victims that pepper sprayed their attackers and it didn't incapacitate them.

Difficult to get statistics on this one? That's convenient.How about we broaden it -- how about some studies/statistics about times women have been attacked but they fended off an attacked with a gun they wore on their hip?

bump

For my GB, Otis:

New Mexico woman shot intruder

Sandoval grabbed a knife, put the knife to her chin and told her to take off her clothes. The woman told deputies she then reached under her pillow, grabbed a loaded gun and shot him. She fled from her home and called 911.

Officials say Sandoval died at the scene.

No charges have been filed.

Accused Rapist Shot

No charges will be filed against the Cape Girardeau woman who shot and killed a registered sex offender trying to break back into her home.

Rapist shot in the eye

An Ohio man accused of raping a woman at gunpoint appeared in court wearing a bandage over his right eye — an injury suffered after police say the woman shot him in the face before escaping.

28-year-old woman forced to shoot and kill intruder Lisa Goude called police when she noticed a man lurking outside her house at about 1:15 a.m. Just two minutes into the call, the man broke through the glass of a kitchen window and entered the home.

The 28-year-old intruder refused to leave and attempted to enter Goude’s bedroom.

Goude retrieved a handgun and shot the man once before instructing him to leave her home once again. Despite suffering a gunshot wound, the intruder reportedly came at Goude causing her to fire two more rounds.

After suffering two gunshots to the neck and one to the abdomen, the intruder was pronounced dead at the scene.

That last link has 80 pages archiving similar.

DGUs (defensive gun uses) are worth understanding. A DGU is any use by a civilian of a gun, including verbal warnings and just showing the weapon, along with pulling and firing the weapon in thwarting a crime in progress. Some NRA shill did empirical polling and extrapolated an often cited 2.5 million annual DGUs. It is a bogus number. Again the anti gun CDC did their own independent research and claimed only a half million successful DGUs annually. It's a big number.

We average a little over 200 justifiable homicides annually, not always like those linked above regarding women and rapists, but legal lethal self defense nonetheless. 2300 in the last decade. Mass killings will never match the number of people who legally defend themselves under the reasonable belief their life was endangered.