Gun control

[thirteenbyseven]

That's right Timmy! Duck and cover!

On KFI 640 radio it was reported that in America a schoolchild is 57 times more likely to be shot than in the next six highest industrialized nations combined.

 

[chicagosam]

That's right Timmy! Duck and cover! On KFI 640 radio it was reported that in America a schoolchild is 57 times more likely to be shot than in the next six highest industrialized nations combined.

And the NRA and Trump will see it as winning. So much winning.

 

[LittleBuzzSaw]

In your post I replied to, you mentioned drugs as an excuse for young people and their actions. At times I agree wholeheartedly with this. Drugs in modern day society have become a huge problem with our youth.

I only wish at times, instead of spending billions overseas on military invasion, prevention our governments would divert some to solving our inhouse issues to do with our youth.

But...we have the same issues you have with drug problems...But, we do not have the issue with 17 year olds mass murdering their schoolmates with guns.

Why? Remember buzz, that once we held the record for mass murder. We were not immune. But, instead of wishy washy excuses of blaming this, blaming that, we as a nation had the balls to act together on our very lax gun law at the time.

I've mentioned often your nation neither has the will, nor the courage to do this. It's too late anyway, guns proliferate your society. You think arming more is the answer....so, one day, every teenager will be walking around with one of these to go to school. (I had photos of guys wearing autos over their shoulders on the street in the US, but can't find it. Think they were hunters...perhaps someone else knows)

Start with teachers, arm them in your book. Then when that fails, arm the students...........is that not what the problem is? Armed students? I really wonder when you will run out of excuses.

Sounds like sending troops overseas to quell terrorists....Sure, the problem is, it only creates more terrorists.[/

Or we can refuse to get caught up in either/or alternatives. By all means, consider ways to make schools safer. And one way, of course, is to have fewer irresponsible gun owners in the surrounding community.

And another is to allow responsible gun carriers who may be teachers to carry.

 

[LittleBuzzSaw]

VICE News

 

[LittleBuzzSaw]

Yep, give some of the teachers guns so the shooters know to kill all the teachers first before shooting at the kids. How much we paying teachers again?

And how would they know which teachers to shoot first?

 

[LittleBuzzSaw]

Mass shooting (by text definition) in one of my favorite restaurants in Oklahoma City on Lake Hefner.

Stopped by a citizen lawfully carrying a concealed handgun.

4 innocent civilians wounded.

Shooter killed by armed citizen...... LONG BEFORE LAW EMFORCEMENT ARRIVED.

Doesn’t fit the “gun control narrative”, so I’m sure this will receive FAR LESS headlines that any other mass/attempted mass shooting.

 

[Brodie888]

And how would they know which teachers to shoot first?

They don't. That's why they shoot all of them the moment they see them.

 

[LittleBuzzSaw]

They don't. That's why they shoot all of them the moment they see them.

As opposed to shooting whom?

 

[Brodie888]

As opposed to shooting whom?

Hypothetically, if you had a room/playground full of kids and a teacher, you'd shoot the teacher first and make sure they are dead. Even if they were the furthest away running in the opposite direction in case they were heading for a weapon.

 

[LittleBuzzSaw]

Hypothetically, if you had a room/playground full of kids and a teacher, you'd shoot the teacher first and make sure they are dead. Even if they were the furthest away running in the opposite direction in case they were heading for a weapon.

Actually, as opposed to your “hypothetical” proposal, teachers have almost never been targeted first, but have been gunned down shielding students; an act that is the pure definition of heroism...... an unarmed guardian who is knowingly so laying their lives down for the defenseless.

So the question now looms........ would you rather an unarmed person die defenseless shielding innocents, or would you rather someone engage a threat and potentially stop them in their tracks?

Make no mistake, I am fully aware that anyone who engages a shooter may be killed, but would you rather them do that unarmed with their back turned or facing the threat face to face with firepower?

 

[LittleBuzzSaw]

EDIT TO MY PREVIOUS POST......

Shooter was engaged by 2 persons who had to return to their vehicles to retrieve their firearms.

One injury was a broken arm, not from gunfire.

Allow people to carry guns or call 911 and wait?

 

[Klingsor]

Mass shooting (by text definition) in one of my favorite restaurants in Oklahoma City on Lake Hefner.

Stopped by a citizen lawfully carrying a concealed handgun.

4 innocent civilians wounded.

Shooter killed by armed citizen...... LONG BEFORE LAW ENFORCEMENT ARRIVED.

Finally, a real solution.

Now if they could just keep the noise of the gunfight down while I eat my burger.

 

[Chrysippus]

Finally, a real solution.
Now if they could just keep the noise of the gunfight down while I eat my burger.

Another reason not to eat at Louie’s... Oh JOKElahoma! Usta be you could a blow job from Oral Roberts in the Prayer Tower...glad the sucker’s dead, though.

 

[LittleBuzzSaw]

Finally, a real solution.

Now if they could just keep the noise of the gunfight down while I eat my burger.

The shooter wore ear pro.

I used to live in Edmond and know one of the officers who was first on scene.

 

[Brodie888]

Actually, as opposed to your “hypothetical” proposal, teachers have almost never been targeted first, but have been gunned down shielding students; an act that is the pure definition of heroism...... an unarmed guardian who is knowingly so laying their lives down for the defenseless.

So the question now looms........ would you rather an unarmed person die defenseless shielding innocents, or would you rather someone engage a threat and potentially stop them in their tracks?

Make no mistake, I am fully aware that anyone who engages a shooter may be killed, but would you rather them do that unarmed with their back turned or facing the threat face to face with firepower?

Well that's my point. If teachers become known to carry in school, they will become the first target. Teachers who choose not to carry will also become targets because shooters will just assume.

Teachers shouldn't be expected to become human shields. That's what trained professionals are for.

I really don't know how much benefit a saturday night special will have against a nut job running around with an AR15. But more to the point, most other countries don't have armed teachers and yet they don't have a school shooting every week like we do. How did they make schools safer than us without arming teachers?

 

[LittleBuzzSaw]

Well that's my point. If teachers become known to carry in school, they will become the first target. Teachers who choose not to carry will also become targets because shooters will just assume.

Teachers shouldn't be expected to become human shields. That's what trained professionals are for.

I really don't know how much benefit a saturday night special will have against a nut job running around with an AR15. But more to the point, most other countries don't have armed teachers and yet they don't have a school shooting every week like we do. How did they make schools safer than us without arming teachers?

Shot placement.

Have you ever been a student of an advanced shooting school?

 

[Silbot.]

Well that's my point. If teachers become known to carry in school, they will become the first target. Teachers who choose not to carry will also become targets because shooters will just assume.

Teachers shouldn't be expected to become human shields. That's what trained professionals are for.

I really don't know how much benefit a saturday night special will have against a nut job running around with an AR15. But more to the point, most other countries don't have armed teachers and yet they don't have a school shooting every week like we do. How did they make schools safer than us without arming teachers?

A simpler point: Teachers aren't paid enough to teach. Why would a sane teacher accept the additional responsibility of defending the class they partially have to finance out-of-pocket with both their lives and lethal force? That's a lot to ask for less than $50k/year, plus accepting full responsibility for your kids during the day, yet having no real power to actually do anything for (or about) them.

Are they going to offer these teachers additional "danger pay?" If so, where is that money coming from exactly? Chicago can't seem to afford textbooks and calculators for summer session. That seems pretty basic. So, if they can't do that, how are they going to buy guns n' ammo and then properly train these people, not to mention compensate them adequately for both teaching and playing good cop on the side?

 

[phonehome]

Oh so now those teachers need to go to "advanced shooting school"

Who is going to pay for that ?

To stay "proficient" they are going to have to shoot/qualify on a regular basis at least once a year who is going to pay for that ?

An easy internet search will find you example after example where cops, trained cops, trained in firearms initially and requal'd and a regular basis when face with actual UOF situations even against suspects who are "not shooting back" are in fact NOT EVEN ARMED who are within 10 even 5 yards these "trained LEO's can empty an entire mag 10 to up to 17 rounds and MISS with over half more than few examples where they do not hit even ONCE.

But that 1rst grade teacher is going to be the quickest on the trigger and make a one shot kill at that shooter that may be well over 25 yards away and do it before he/she gets hit 5 or 6 223 rounds that get sprayed in her/his general direction any one of which is enough to kill or otherwise take her/him out of the eqaution

 

[phonehome]

More BULLSHIT

Has lived "everywhere" knows "everyone" has done "everything"

 

[TexanStar]

A simpler point: Teachers aren't paid enough to teach. Why would a sane teacher accept the additional responsibility of defending the class they partially have to finance out-of-pocket with both their lives and lethal force? That's a lot to ask for less than $50k/year, plus accepting full responsibility for your kids during the day, yet having no real power to actually do anything for (or about) them.

Are they going to offer these teachers additional "danger pay?" If so, where is that money coming from exactly? Chicago can't seem to afford textbooks and calculators for summer session. That seems pretty basic. So, if they can't do that, how are they going to buy guns n' ammo and then properly train these people, not to mention compensate them adequately for both teaching and playing good cop on the side?

Texas has 170 school districts which allow teachers to conceal carry. A number of those also drill for active shooter scenarios.

I just mention this from the standpoint that this is something that already exists in some places. Recent talks are more about expanding it, but it's not like this is something new.

With that said, whether it's school resource officers, or armed teachers, all of those are reactive... stopping a shooter who's already started shooting. They can mitigate the total body count, but they don't stop deaths from happening altogether.

What we really need is legislation that curbs the likelihood that someone will shoot up a school in the first place.