Gunman kills eight at school: Police confused how he walked by "gun free zone" sign

[crumbles]

I swear I'm homeschooling.

Gunman kills eight at Finnish school

Finland was coming to terms with its first school massacre last night after an 18-year-old pupil shot dead seven classmates and his headmistress.

The killings took place only days after a video predicting the date of the slaughter was posted on the YouTube website by someone calling himself " Sturmgeist89". The web page also referred to the "scum of the earth " and the "pathetic human race".

The killer, who may or may not be "Sturmgeist", opened fire with a small, .22-calibre handgun just before noon at the Jokela High School in Tuusula, a town about 40 miles north of Helsinki. During a four-hour siege, he roamed the school from class to class, firing at random and killing five boys, two girls and the female principal, before turning the gun on himself with a bullet to the head. Doctors said he was unlikely to survive. At least 10 children who jumped through windows to escape the carnage were also being treated in hospital last night.

Full Article with video: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/article3138510.ece

[wizmaster]

If the faculty (or some deserving students) had guns and training (emphasis on training since that is VERY important), he would have been taken down and/or put down. Gun control is retarded when you think about it because criminals will not follow gun laws.

[crumbles]

Gun control is retarded when you think about it because criminals will not follow gun laws.Gun control works.

[masherscf]

If the faculty (or some deserving students) had guns and training (emphasis on training since that is VERY important), he would have been taken down and/or put down. Gun control is retarded when you think about it because criminals will not follow gun laws.

Giving faculty guns and training would be a huge distraction. The armed forces and the police spend hours a week on gun training. Carrying a weapon is a conflict on interest for any teacher.

Students with weapons would be an even bigger disaster.

[crumbles]

Students with weapons would be an even bigger disaster.What do you suggest for self defense? Sticks? Some more "criminals aren't allowed here!" signs?

[mikec]

masherscf,
I hate to tell you that you are wrong. Many police officers are pitiful when it comes to firearms training and skills. Most officers only fire their sidearm at the yearly qualification shoot. SWAT/tactical response teams sometimes shoot weekly and most are well skilled in firearms usage.

I have personally seen corrosion on an officer's belt, where they kept their ammo. (Old school leather belt with ammo loops, back maybe 1982 or so.)

One issue with the police, US, is that in the past most officers had military training and they also used firearms as kids. (hunting and target shooting) Today the US military uses simulators, to save $$, and the number of live rounds fired in training is low. Most current police are college grads who usually do not have firearm skills.

BTW, when I carried a .45 on my hip, there was no distraction. I can multi task and it becomes a part of you. The gun I mean.

[masherscf]

What do you suggest for self defense? Sticks? Some more "criminals aren't allowed here!" signs?

I prefer sword-play. I joke, of course.

Why do you assume that carrying a firearm is the "magic-bullet" of self-defense. Speaking as a man who carried a handgun loaded and concealed for many years, I don't think it makes a difference at all.

Shit, I used to load this black-talon high expansion rounds so if I did have to shoot someone the bullet would stay where I wanted it to. I eventually, quit carrying because I decided that I really didn't want to shoot someone.

Now, I would not deny any man to keep a handgun in his house, in his car or on his person as he carries out is daily life. You have a legal and god-given right to protect your home and family with deadly force.

However, speaking as both a gun owner and a faculty member, I don't think that carrying a weapon into the classroom is the answer. Poorly trained law enforcement is irrelevant to that issue.

[crumbles]

Why do you assume that carrying a firearm is the "magic-bullet" of self-defense.I agree it's not always going to win. You have to play out your situation and determine if your firearm can come in to play and be useful. However, I would much rather have it with me to decide if I need it rather than it be sitting at home doing nothing. You don't make those silly decisions with other things that can save your life such as seat belts.

Now, I would not deny any man to keep a handgun in his house, in his car or on his person as he carries out is daily life. You have a legal and god-given right to protect your home and family with deadly force.

However, speaking as both a gun owner and a faculty member, I don't think that carrying a weapon into the classroom is the answer...I'm a big fan of kill the bad guy. A lot, and I mean LOT of people out there root for the bad guy. Hell, I have seen court cases where the VICTIM was punished for using those black talon's you speak of. They apparently are "too deadly" and killed the "bad guy" too violently.

Before I started to carry a gun, I was told to never do so if I was not willing to kill someone. I myself struggled over having to do something like this for quite some time. However, I decided that I would do it if my wife, son, or myself were in imminent danger. If he has no problem killing any of us, I have no problem killing him. People should be allowed to defend themselves. Bad guys don't give a shit if it's illegal to carry somewhere. They love gun control laws. It only helps them out more.

...I don't think it makes a difference at all. It doesn't make a difference to you, because you don't have it in you to kill a bad guy. It would make a difference to me to see the smile on my wifes face the next day with her being alive.

[comhcinc]

well i think everyone knows my thoughts on gun control.........
Gun control works.

ha you know eliminate the guns and you eliminate people with guns using them to shoot people.

that said, the idea of armed faculty has some merit, though i would rather see more armed, well trained, guards instead of teachers and janitors packing heat.

now the idea of armed students is just stupid and crazy.

[masherscf]

that said, the idea of armed faculty has some merit, though i would rather see more armed, well trained, guards instead of teachers and janitors packing heat.

At graduation, the put some faculty members in with the students to keep them in line. They call them "Faculty Marshals."

I just think that carrying a handgun on my belt in the classroom would just be a distraction. I'm sure it wouldn't make me safer.

After 9-11, they locked my school down tight. I've got NYPD campus police just yards away with enough firepower to take down a charging rhino. I feel safe enough.

After an airliner knocks down one of your schools buildings, it put everything else into perspective.

[comhcinc]

i tend to agree with you masher. but if there is enough public outcry about this, and "they" won't hire more guards, then i could see arming faculty

[masherscf]

...then i could see arming faculty

Think back to school and imagine your prof ...with a gun. Actually, I went to a military school, so it's not such a stretch. My favorite physics prof was a Marine at Guadalcanal. Now there's a professor.

[comhcinc]

remember masher i am in college right now, and really i just don't think anyone should have any guns. but and again if that would make people feel " happy and safe" , you know instead of actually trying to fix the problem, then yeah let the janitor pack a glock.....i bet he's got one anyway.

[masherscf]

remember masher i am in college right now, and really i just don't think anyone should have any guns. but and again if that would make people feel " happy and safe" , you know instead of actually trying to fix the problem, then yeah let the janitor pack a glock.....i bet he's got one anyway.

I think we agree.

[phatlip12]

To say "if the students/faculty were armed there would be less deaths" is a false statement. How do you know that? There could be more, there could be less.

Instead of jumping to such drastic measures why not try to fix the problem? Why do so many shootings such as this occur now as opposed to 30 years ago? Where did we as a society go wrong?

[comhcinc]

I think we agree.

yes, we do.

[frankiethewaffle]

OK I am on the side of freedom of arms. Gun control is not feasible. Gun control only takes guns out of the hands of people that own them out of their intent.

Two arguments against what I just said. "Freedom of arms" was intended to defend us against King George. Yeah well there are many more threats to our safety and rights today than those days. If we can be attacked with unarmed planes from our own airports, we have the human right to defend ourselves from any attack. Like King George threatened. (Not that guns should be on civilians on planes.)

Well the real intent of a gun is to KILL! Yes it WAS. First to have further reach and speed than most weapons. In war. You can use a gun with less experience and accuracy. That was a need. (When Wars still happened in such a peaceful way.) Also made for hunting, whether you agree with it or not. Guns now should be in the hands of law abiding citizens for self protection. Gun control takes guns out of legal hands leaving them the victim of violent crime.

Truth is guns are used legally and morally for sport. (Minus the inevitable War.) Whether it be target practice or hunting, if you agree with it or not. It also serves as protection against those that are determined to use them as malicious weapons.

Guns can't be stopped from committing a murder. Only the people holding them can.

[wizmaster]

To say "if the students/faculty were armed there would be less deaths" is a false statement. How do you know that? There could be more, there could be less.

Instead of jumping to such drastic measures why not try to fix the problem? Why do so many shootings such as this occur now as opposed to 30 years ago? Where did we as a society go wrong?

It's not a false statement, just one that can't be proven or disproven. The fact of the matter is if they are trained, it will be benificial. Period. Of course, that level of training is not likely (which is unfortunate). Blaming society is pretty dumb. It's like stating that teens are more promiscuous now then in the past. Not really true but it just seems that way (of course there are more teen pregnancies I believe so teens are getting dumber). School "shootings" aren't new and frankly just a media grabber. What about the people that knife fellow students/teachers? What about those that do it somewhere other then school? I bet it won't be on the media as much as a school shooting within the school.

There were always ****ed up people in school because school is ****ed up (more so for some then others). Hell, I'll go so far to say that it's better nowadays since this sort of stuff would have been downplayed / kept secret in the past and hardly anyone would know. Suicide and murder isn't new to the school scene.

More to my previous point, training makes the difference here. Only those who would be beneficial in an emergency should be allowed to carry on premises. The problem I have with "guards" is the same problem I have with police. More rarely (if ever) equals better. These are human beings in a position of power beyond that of just carrying a weapon. The police are given way too much power nowadays (excused by 9/11 of course) and they frankly suck. They abuse tasers and other "non-lethal" weapons. The suck at shooting (seriously, I don't care how much the bullets cost make constant training more frequent) and yet are supposed to be better then other humans with training. I can go on and on but suffice it to say, I don't want school guards doing the same thing (there's an episode of Dead Zone that comes to mind). A trained teacher/parent/student(eh, maybe not student) is no better or worse (probably better) then a cop or guard. They don't get secret mystical training that makes then Robocop and those that do are specialized (SWAT, military (cough), etc.).

I have other things on my mind so if my train derailed I'll explain my thoughts some other time.

[danielus]

I swear I'm homeschooling.
Gunman kills eight at Finnish school


If I had an opportunity to kill someone without ever being found legally responsible for it - I still would NOT do it. It is beyond any reasonable comprehension why people kill other people.

Why do Christians still support Israel's actions when this same state has murdered thousands of Palestinian children?

Why does Muslim world promotes 9/11 conspiracies, when it is beyond reasonable doubt that Muslim hijackers committed attacks on New York?

Why do people deny Holocaust, Srebrenica genocide, and similar events that happened beyong any doubt?

Why, why, why, why, why many other questions. And the most important question: What the hell is wrong with this world? Can't peace prevail?

[mikec]

I prefer sword-play. I joke, of course.
Poorly trained law enforcement is irrelevant to that issue.

You were the one who said "the police spend hours a week on gun training.", I was just pointing out that is false.



There is no magic solution to solve the issue of violence since many refuse to accept three things: 1) not everyone is going to be rich or a sports star or famous. Some people will just be worker bees. 2) Life is NOT fair and you may not get the real beautiful long legged model. 3) You have to behave and accept life as it is. If your lady leaves you, you don't go and bash her head in or the other guy's head.

Just recently an associate got stomped on by four younger males who for some reason were looking for a fight. 4 vs 1, about a 10 year age difference between him and them. He had to have emergency surgery to save his life. No real reason other then lack of respect. Whatever happened to treat others the way you want to be treated?

[phatlip12]

It's not a false statement, just one that can't be proven or disproven. The fact of the matter is if they are trained, it will be benificial. Period. Of course, that level of training is not likely (which is unfortunate). Blaming society is pretty dumb. It's like stating that teens are more promiscuous now then in the past. Not really true but it just seems that way (of course there are more teen pregnancies I believe so teens are getting dumber). School "shootings" aren't new and frankly just a media grabber. What about the people that knife fellow students/teachers? What about those that do it somewhere other then school? I bet it won't be on the media as much as a school shooting within the school.

There were always ****ed up people in school because school is ****ed up (more so for some then others). Hell, I'll go so far to say that it's better nowadays since this sort of stuff would have been downplayed / kept secret in the past and hardly anyone would know. Suicide and murder isn't new to the school scene.

More to my previous point, training makes the difference here. Only those who would be beneficial in an emergency should be allowed to carry on premises. The problem I have with "guards" is the same problem I have with police. More rarely (if ever) equals better. These are human beings in a position of power beyond that of just carrying a weapon. The police are given way too much power nowadays (excused by 9/11 of course) and they frankly suck. They abuse tasers and other "non-lethal" weapons. The suck at shooting (seriously, I don't care how much the bullets cost make constant training more frequent) and yet are supposed to be better then other humans with training. I can go on and on but suffice it to say, I don't want school guards doing the same thing (there's an episode of Dead Zone that comes to mind). A trained teacher/parent/student(eh, maybe not student) is no better or worse (probably better) then a cop or guard. They don't get secret mystical training that makes then Robocop and those that do are specialized (SWAT, military (cough), etc.).

I have other things on my mind so if my train derailed I'll explain my thoughts some other time.

Yeah, I worded that wrong- nicely said on how it can't being proven or disproven.

Will it be benefit? I don't think so. A teacher doesn't go into the profession under the assumption that they may one day have to use a weapon on a person. A security guard or police officer on the other hand does. If they wanted to carry a gun around they would have became a cop. Leave security issues to security personnel. As you said, this level of training isn't likely, so I think it's best to resort to other means. Install metal detectors in schools, have a cop in every school....

If it's not societies fault then who's fault is it, is something in the water? The fact of the matter is these sorts of shootings just didn't happen like they do today. I'm not saying it NEVER happened....just not like it is today.

As far as everything else you said regarding cops/guards...please (and this is coming from a card carrying member of the ACLU). To say that a teacher may be more qualified to use a firearm then a cop (a person that goes into the job knowing they will probably have to use one of their weapons one day) is simply ludicrous.

[skyz]

And the most important question: What the hell is wrong with this world? Can't peace prevail?

just a guess but maybe what is 'wrong' is people are conditioned to want the 'wrong things' (ipods i phones zillion inch tvs etc.)and are also conditioned to disregard that fact that so many people do not have much if any of the 'right things'(clean water food shelter education health care) and simply do not care about anyone outside their circle of family and friends (if that)

how many would give up their iphone if it meant an education for one other person that they will never meet

[pucklewis]

^He is just manic.

That is all.

[crumbles]

Where did we as a society go wrong?Are you kidding me? This is the easiest question on this planet to answer. People are fucking pussies now. Instead of punishing the bad guy, it's feel sorry for the bad guy. On top of that, no one wants to take responsibility for anything anymore. Once parents wake up and stop asking the government to think for them, maybe society can finally step forward out of this.

[tokenuser]

Are you kidding me? This is the easiest question on this planet to answer. People are fucking pussies now. Instead of punishing the bad guy, it's feel sorry for the bad guy. On top of that, no one wants to take responsibility for anything anymore. Once parents wake up and stop asking the government to think for them, maybe society can finally step forward out of this.I tink we might actually agree on something here.

People have become pussies. Noone is willing to take responsibility for thier own actions. Why? Because the consequences are not severe enough. It all about "rehabilitating the offender so that they can become a worthwhile member of society".

So, we need stiffer penalties.

We don't need vigilante justice.

[masherscf]

People are fucking pussies now. Instead of punishing the bad guy, it's feel sorry for the bad guy. On top of that, no one wants to take responsibility for anything anymore.

I've often thought they should bring back public flogging for petty crimes. Getting twenty lashes in the town square puts a bit of a damper on the old "dine and dash."

In small towns the local paper publishes a "police blotter" so, if you get stopped for speeding....the whole town knows it.

Anyhow, I find your response typically conservative. That can either be good or bad, depending on how you feel about such things. Your statement suggests a time that people weren't "pussies."

[crumbles]

Your statement suggests a time that people weren't "pussies."Yes, there was that time. It used to be action = consequence. Now it's action = consequence... oh wait... shit, that might be racist... wait wait, how about if we spin it this way instead of actually punishing him.... or do that instead....

Shit, even BASEBALL USED TO BE DIFFERENT!!!! I remember when if you hit a home run, it was almost a guarentee that the next time at bat the pitcher would bean you in the face.

People are pussies now and everyone is sue happy and quick to call the race card instead of actually owning up to their own problems. My kid shot how many people at school today? Sorry, not his fault or my fault as a parent. It's the guns fault.

[comhcinc]

Are you kidding me? This is the easiest question on this planet to answer. People are fucking pussies now. Instead of punishing the bad guy, it's feel sorry for the bad guy. On top of that, no one wants to take responsibility for anything anymore. Once parents wake up and stop asking the government to think for them, maybe society can finally step forward out of this.

i can almost agree with that, but then you say things like:


Yes, there was that time. It used to be action = consequence. Now it's action = consequence... oh wait... shit, that might be racist... wait wait, how about if we spin it this way instead of actually punishing him.... or do that instead....

Shit, even BASEBALL USED TO BE DIFFERENT!!!! I remember when if you hit a home run, it was almost a guarentee that the next time at bat the pitcher would bean you in the face.

People are pussies now and everyone is sue happy and quick to call the race card instead of actually owning up to their own problems. My kid shot how many people at school today? Sorry, not his fault or my fault as a parent. It's the guns fault.
see? then you start talking crazy again.

[crumbles]

see? then you start talking crazy again.Yea, that crazy factual argument. Totally nuts!

[comhcinc]

Yea, that crazy factual argument. Totally nuts!
yes it is crazy to think that is factual.

[crumbles]

yes it is crazy to think that is factual.Are you going to elaborate, or is this another one of your awesome "you're wrong because I said so, yet I'm not going to tell you why!" arguments.

[comhcinc]

Are you going to elaborate, or is this another one of your awesome "you're wrong because I said so, yet I'm not going to tell you why!" arguments.

sure why not i got the time.


Yes, there was that time. It used to be action = consequence. Now it's action = consequence... oh wait... shit, that might be racist... wait wait, how about if we spin it this way instead of actually punishing him.... or do that instead.... unless you are talking about your pal scooter libby, then you are completely incorrect. in fact in this great country, minorities are punished much worst than whites, even through whites commit more crimes


Shit, even BASEBALL USED TO BE DIFFERENT!!!! I remember when if you hit a home run, it was almost a guarentee that the next time at bat the pitcher would bean you in the face. yes baseball has really gone down hill since they outlawed throwing balls at batters...........wait a minute..........that was never legal, otherwise lou gehrig might have got parkinson's disease before he got, well lou gehrig's disease.


People are pussies now and everyone is sue happy and quick to call the race card instead of actually owning up to their own problems. My kid shot how many people at school today? Sorry, not his fault or my fault as a parent. It's the guns fault.
what race card? wasn't this a white kid? why do you feel the need to bring that up? and yes if the kid didn't have the gun, he couldn't have shot anyone.

[crumbles]

sure why not i got the time.Not a surprise... Hillary's not up for election for another 12 months or so...

unless you are talking about your pal scooter libby, then you are completely incorrect. in fact in this great country, minorities are punished much worst than whites, even through whites commit more crimesI was talking about how society as a whole has become more pussified rather than one specific thing. People don't take responsibility for their actions anymore. My kid punched your kid? Oh, sorry, that was ADHD. My kid failed? I don't like that. Let's get rid of F's on report cards and use symbols now. Oh, and stop using red ink, it makes my kid feel bad. Have the answer to the question in class? I'm sorry, don't raise your hand, it makes the others who don't know the question feel bad. Got an A on that test? I better not hear you say: "YES!" outloud. Otherwise you're in trouble for making others feel bad. Did your kid do something wrong? Don't spank him, Dr. Phil will get you. We are raising a group of pussies who are taught to rely on the government.

yes baseball has really gone down hill since they outlawed throwing balls at batters...........wait a minute..........that was never legal, otherwise lou gehrig might have got parkinson's disease before he got, well lou gehrig's disease.Besides that being the worst sentence on this planet, I think it might have tied for worst argument on this planet as well. I'm just saying that was part of the game. Now, people are too pussified to deal with it. If you don't like getting hit in the head, don't play.

what race card? wasn't this a white kid? why do you feel the need to bring that up? and yes if the kid didn't have the gun, he couldn't have shot anyone.Again, I'm not talking about this specific incident, rather society as a whole. People play the race card way to much now. Hell, Jessie Jackson has made a career of it.

[tokenuser]

what race card? wasn't this a white kid? why do you feel the need to bring that up? and yes if the kid didn't have the gun, he couldn't have shot anyone.Now who's being racist??

Couldn't it hae been a Laplander or a Swede at the Finnish school that went postal? Does race immediately mean black vs white?

Or maybe it was in Finland, MN? Hmmm ... its pretty white up there as well I guess.

The way some people jump to conclusions is amazing :rolleyes:

[comhcinc]

Now who's being racist??

Couldn't it hae been a Laplander or a Swede at the Finnish school that went postal? Does race immediately mean black vs white?

Or maybe it was in Finland, MN? Hmmm ... its pretty white up there as well I guess.

The way some people jump to conclusions is amazing :rolleyes:

well the kid was white. now if he was claiming to get unfairly treated at the finnish school because he was a swede, then maybe rush might have something there. this hasn't happened yet, (that i know of)

[phatlip12]

I tink we might actually agree on something here.

People have become pussies. Noone is willing to take responsibility for thier own actions. Why? Because the consequences are not severe enough. It all about "rehabilitating the offender so that they can become a worthwhile member of society".

So, we need stiffer penalties.

We don't need vigilante justice.

In reference to SOME things I agree. When speaking of school shootings I disagree. These are mentally disturbed people. One thing all of these shootings have in common is the shooter ends up blowing his brains out when its done. These shooters don't wake up and say "I think I'll kill a ton of people today, nothing will happen to me!". The fact that they end up killing themselves may be a sign that they are WELL AWARE of the consequences of their actions and don't want to face them.

I think "societies downfall" is more the cause of the drug problem and poverty.

[crumbles]

People are pussies now...Even though I DESPISE those stupid ass emails that your friends always FW to EVERYONE in their email list (I really love it when they don't even use the BCC option so everyone gets my email list, along with any viruses, and spyware) I got this today and it made me think of the point I was making earlier in this thread about how America has changed into a bunch of pussies. It made me laugh:

-------------

1967 vs. 2007

Scenario: Jack goes quail hunting before school, pulls into school parking lot with shotgun in gun rack.

1967 - Vice principal comes over to look at Jack's shotgun. He goes to his car and gets his shotgun to show Jack.

2007 - School goes into lockdown, and FBI is called. Jack is hauled off to jail and never sees his truck or gun again. Counselors called in for traumatized students and teachers.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scenario: Johnny and Mark get into a fistfight after school.

1967 - Crowd gathers. Mark wins. Johnny and Mark shake hands and end up best friends. Nobody goes to jail; nobody is arrested; nobody is expelled.

2007 - Police called. SWAT team arrives. Johnny and Mark are arrested and charged with assault. Both are expelled even though Johnny started it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scenario: Jeffrey won't be still in class, disrupts other students.

1967 - Jeffrey sent to office and given a good paddling by the principal. He returns to class, sits still, and does not disrupt class again.

2007 - Jeffrey is diagnosed with ADD and given huge doses of ritalin. Becomes a zombie. School gets extra money from state because Jeffrey has a learning disability.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scenario: Billy breaks a window in his neighbor's car and his dad gives him a whipping with his belt.

1967 - Billy is more careful next time, grows up normal, goes to college, and becomes a successful businessman.

2007 - Billy's dad is arrested for child abuse. Billy is placed in foster care and joins a gang. State psychologist tells Billy's sister that she remembers being abused herself, and their dad goes to prison. Billy's mom has affair with psychologist.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scenario: Mark gets a headache and takes some aspirin to school.

1967 - Mark shares aspirin with principal out on the smoking dock.

2007 - Police called. Mark is expelled from school for drug violations. Car is searched for drugs and weapons.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scenario: Pedro fails high school English.

1967 - Pedro goes to summer school, passes English, goes to college.

2007 - Pedro's cause is taken up by state. Newspaper articles appear nationally explaining that teaching English as a requirement for graduation is racist. ACLU files class action lawsuit against state school system and Pedro's English teacher. English banned from core curriculum. Pedro is given a diploma anyway, but ends up mowing lawns for a living because he cannot speak English.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scenario: Johnny takes apart leftover firecrackers from 4th of July, puts them in a model airplane paint bottle, and blows up a red ant bed.

1967 - Ants die.

2007 - Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, Homeland Security, and FBI called. Johnny is charged with domestic terrorism. The FBI investigates parents; siblings are removed from home; computers confiscated. Johnny's dad goes on a terror watch list and is never allowed to fly again.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scenario: Johnny falls while running during recess and scrapes his knee. He is found crying by his teacher, Heather. Heather hugs him to comfort him.

1967 - In a short time, Johnny feels better and goes on playing.

2007 - Heather is accused of being a sexual predator and loses her job. She faces three years in state prison. Johnny undergoes five years of therapy.

[phatlip12]

Scenario: Jack goes quail hunting before school, pulls into school parking lot with shotgun in gun rack.

1967 - Vice principal comes over to look at Jack's shotgun. He goes to his car and gets his shotgun to show Jack.

2007 - School goes into lockdown, and FBI is called. Jack is hauled off to jail and never sees his truck or gun again. Counselors called in for traumatized students and teachers.


Thats because kids didn't bring guns to school to kill tons of people back in 1967. Why do they now?


Scenario: Johnny and Mark get into a fistfight after school.

1967 - Crowd gathers. Mark wins. Johnny and Mark shake hands and end up best friends. Nobody goes to jail; nobody is arrested; nobody is expelled.

2007 - Police called. SWAT team arrives. Johnny and Mark are arrested and charged with assault. Both are expelled even though Johnny started it.


No the SWAT team wouldn't be called and typically nobody would be arrested. They would be suspended, not expelled. Very dramatic response for 2007.




Scenario: Jeffrey won't be still in class, disrupts other students.

1967 - Jeffrey sent to office and given a good paddling by the principal. He returns to class, sits still, and does not disrupt class again.

2007 - Jeffrey is diagnosed with ADD and given huge doses of ritalin. Becomes a zombie. School gets extra money from state because Jeffrey has a learning disability.


Again, dramatic response for 2007. I agree many children are often diagnosed with ADD whereas they don't have it. However, thats not to say ADD doesn't exist. What if 1967 Jeffrey DOES have ADD? He's more then likely being a kid though. The kid shouldn't be beaten with a paddle nor should he be put on ritalin for not sitting still in class one.

*Personal question*
How would you feel about your child getting beaten by a paddle from another adult when you're not there? I personally wouldn't stand for that (nor would I beat my child with a paddle to begin with).




Scenario: Billy breaks a window in his neighbor's car and his dad gives him a whipping with his belt.

1967 - Billy is more careful next time, grows up normal, goes to college, and becomes a successful businessman.

2007 - Billy's dad is arrested for child abuse. Billy is placed in foster care and joins a gang. State psychologist tells Billy's sister that she remembers being abused herself, and their dad goes to prison. Billy's mom has affair with psychologist.


I would argue that being beaten by a belt is child abuse. I'm not the type of person that thinks spanking is child abuse. Personally, I doubt I'll discipline my child by spanking. I wasn't spanked as a child, my parents found other alternatives to punishment that worked just fine. I don't look down on anyone that spanks, its just not the ideal solution for me personally. I would consider a belt to be child abuse though. Again, over dramatic on the 2007 part (the story with the psychologist).



Scenario: Mark gets a headache and takes some aspirin to school.

1967 - Mark shares aspirin with principal out on the smoking dock.

2007 - Police called. Mark is expelled from school for drug violations. Car is searched for drugs and weapons.


Again, you didn't have kids popping vicodin and percoet in the classroom back in 1967 though. I understand where the school is coming from but they really do need to lighten up if they know it's simply aspirin.

However, no the police wouldn't be called, no he wouldn't be expelled. Drama drama drama!





1967 - Pedro goes to summer school, passes English, goes to college.

2007 - Pedro's cause is taken up by state. Newspaper articles appear nationally explaining that teaching English as a requirement for graduation is racist. ACLU files class action lawsuit against state school system and Pedro's English teacher. English banned from core curriculum. Pedro is given a diploma anyway, but ends up mowing lawns for a living because he cannot speak English.

Not even going to bother analyzing this one as it's huge joke. Drama!




Scenario: Johnny takes apart leftover firecrackers from 4th of July, puts them in a model airplane paint bottle, and blows up a red ant bed.

1967 - Ants die.

2007 - Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, Homeland Security, and FBI called. Johnny is charged with domestic terrorism. The FBI investigates parents; siblings are removed from home; computers confiscated. Johnny's dad goes on a terror watch list and is never allowed to fly again.
[/quote/

This is getting more and more ridiculous. No, this wouldn't happen.


[quote=crumbles]
Scenario: Johnny falls while running during recess and scrapes his knee. He is found crying by his teacher, Heather. Heather hugs him to comfort him.

1967 - In a short time, Johnny feels better and goes on playing.

2007 - Heather is accused of being a sexual predator and loses her job. She faces three years in state prison. Johnny undergoes five years of therapy.

No, Heather is safe here. No, if Heather was Jim then he would be in trouble. Nobody cares if the teachers a chick. "Nice" <<south park

I agree here, this can be taken too far sometimes

[crumbles]

...
[Peter, Michael, and Samir are chatting as they hang around the printer]
Peter Gibbons: Our high school guidance counselor used to ask us what you'd do if you had a million dollars and you didn't have to work. And invariably what you'd say was supposed to be your career. So, if you wanted to fix old cars then you're supposed to be an auto mechanic.
Samir: So what did you say?
Peter Gibbons: I never had an answer. I guess that's why I'm working at Initech.
Michael Bolton: No, you're working at Initech because that question is bullshit to begin with. If everyone listened to her, there'd be no janitors, because no one would clean shit up if they had a million dollars.
Samir: You know what I would do if I had a million dollars? I would invest half of it in low risk mutual funds and then take the other half over to my friend Asadulah who works in securities...
Michael Bolton: Samir, you're missing the point. The point of the exercise is that you're supposed to figure out what you would want to do if...
[printer starts beeping]
Michael Bolton: "PC Load Letter"? What the **** does that mean?

Phatlip, I think you missed the point of the exercise. I was just making a joke and found it funny that other people agree with me that America has turned into a bunch of pussies. I don't think everything in there is supposed to be taken word for word.

[reoze]

To say "if the students/faculty were armed there would be less deaths" is a false statement. How do you know that? There could be more, there could be less.

Instead of jumping to such drastic measures why not try to fix the problem? Why do so many shootings such as this occur now as opposed to 30 years ago? Where did we as a society go wrong?

How the hell do you figure that? If someone wanted to bring a gun to school to shoot someone, the carrying a handgun into a gun free zone MISDEMEANOR is not going to stop them. Not that I advocate guns to students, but I feel teachers who own a CCW permit should be allowed to carry concealed on campus. There's really no reason that they should not be able to. You shouldn't need any more training as a teacher to carry a weapon as you do any other person in this world, therefor the distraction side of it isn't quite there.

Not to mention if there was a person in your university or highschool who was thinking about bringing a gun to school and shooting a few people I'm sure they'd think twice if there was a chance it was a building full of teachers packing heat.

[phatlip12]

How the hell do you figure that? If someone wanted to bring a gun to school to shoot someone, the carrying a handgun into a gun free zone MISDEMEANOR is not going to stop them. Not that I advocate guns to students, but I feel teachers who own a CCW permit should be allowed to carry concealed on campus. There's really no reason that they should not be able to. You shouldn't need any more training as a teacher to carry a weapon as you do any other person in this world, therefor the distraction side of it isn't quite there.

Not to mention if there was a person in your university or highschool who was thinking about bringing a gun to school and shooting a few people I'm sure they'd think twice if there was a chance it was a building full of teachers packing heat.

There is no way of knowing if that would result in more or less deaths though. It can't be proven. And no, they wouldn't think twice. All these school shootings have one thing in common, the shooter kills himself. Death isn't a fear.

[reoze]

There is no way of knowing if that would result in more or less deaths though. It can't be proven. And no, they wouldn't think twice. All these school shootings have one thing in common, the shooter kills himself. Death isn't a fear.

No but it's proven that gun free zones aren't exactly causing less school shootings, if one thing isn't working you don't keep doing it in fear of the other thing not working either. If you go around your entire life not doing anything until it's proven then you won't get very far. This entire world was based on taking chances and successes.

[phatlip12]

No but it's proven that gun free zones aren't exactly causing less school shootings, if one thing isn't working you don't keep doing it in fear of the other thing not working either. If you go around your entire life not doing anything until it's proven then you won't get very far. This entire world was based on taking chances and successes.

Again, it doesn't matter if it's a gun free zone or not. If a person wants to go in a school shooting people then it's going to happen. The shooter doesn't care if it's a gun free zone or not if he's going to blow his brains out when its all said and done.

Also, it's not as simple as "taking a chance". If peoples lives are in jeopardy based on a decision then it's not as easy as that.

Lets base you logic in another scenario:

Scenario:

The worlds first parachuter's

Greg: "I don't know Bill, are you sure your bed sheet is going to work?"

Bill: "It may"

Greg: "Well, don't you want to be sure...you may die"

Bill: "If you go around your entire life not doing anything until it's proven then you won't get very far. This entire world was based on taking chances and successes. Geronimo.......oh shit!"

SPLAT

;)

[reoze]

Again, it doesn't matter if it's a gun free zone or not. If a person wants to go in a school shooting people then it's going to happen. The shooter doesn't care if it's a gun free zone or not if he's going to blow his brains out when its all said and done.

Also, it's not as simple as &quot;taking a chance&quot;. If peoples lives are in jeopardy based on a decision then it's not as easy as that.

Lets base you logic in another scenario:

Scenario:

The worlds first parachuter's

Greg: &quot;I don't know Bill, are you sure your bed sheet is going to work?&quot;

Bill: &quot;It may&quot;

Greg: &quot;Well, don't you want to be sure...you may die&quot;

Bill: &quot;If you go around your entire life not doing anything until it's proven then you won't get very far. This entire world was based on taking chances and successes. Geronimo.......oh shit!&quot;

SPLAT

;)

Well the first parachuter needed to take that leap of faith in order for it to be proven working. Like we both said, school shootings will continue to happen, it's what WE do about it that makes the difference, obviously telling the children to leave their guns at home when they go to school to kill everyone isn't working. So more drastic measures need to be taken.

[phatlip12]

Well the first parachuter needed to take that leap of faith in order for it to be proven working. Like we both said, school shootings will continue to happen, it's what WE do about it that makes the difference, obviously telling the children to leave their guns at home when they go to school to kill everyone isn't working. So more drastic measures need to be taken.

Sorry, I accidently hit the edit button on your post instead of quote. Thats why it said I modified your post. I didn't change anything, just a heads up...
Yes, but why not do some further investigating first instead of jumping (no pun intended) to such drastic conclusions? Going into both scenarios blindfolded and hoping for the best is both irresponsible and stupid.

[reoze]

Sorry, I accidently hit the edit button on your post instead of quote. Thats why it said I modified your post. I didn't change anything, just a heads up...
Yes, but why not do some further investigating first instead of jumping (no pun intended) to such drastic conclusions? Going into both scenarios blindfolded and hoping for the best is both irresponsible and stupid.

No but there have been documented reports and statistics proving the fact that homeowners with guns, and CCW's do in fact reduce crime.

The other side of it is people will jump up and scream gun control, Guns are just like any other commodity, If they can't keep illegal aliens and drugs out of this country there is no way in hell they'd ever be able to keep guns out, if there is a will there is a way.

[phatlip12]

No but there have been documented reports and statistics proving the fact that homeowners with guns, and CCW's do in fact reduce crime.

The other side of it is people will jump up and scream gun control, Guns are just like any other commodity, If they can't keep illegal aliens and drugs out of this country there is no way in hell they'd ever be able to keep guns out, if there is a will there is a way.

An intruder in the home is a very different scenario then that of a school shooting. You know who does and doesn't belong in your home but chaos pursues in a school shooting. Anyone may be the shooter. There havent been documented reports in regards to school shootings.

Allowing guns in school is a pretty damn dramatic change too (that may work for better or worse). I think it's best to have actual cops in schools in addition to prevention saftey features (metal detectors).

[reoze]

It's actually very similar and even instills MORE of a sense of deturrence into the situation. Think about it, school filled with potential CCW holding faculty or one person that has about a 30% statistical chance of owning a gun in his home.

Fact of the matter is if CCW's were allowed on campuses there would most likely be AT LEAST one person bringing it to work every day.

On the matter of cops in schools, who's going to pay for extra cops? Police forces are always recruiting and most of them still struggle to keep their numbers, most of which cannot afford 2-3 cops per school per city in more rural towns. Whereas faculty and staff bringing their legally owned legally able to carry weapons to school would be free. I fail to see how this could in any way cause MORE violence because if that person wanted to take his weapon and use it in a violent way nothing would stop him anyway.

[crumbles]

It's actually very similar and even instills MORE of a sense of deturrence into the situation. Think about it, school filled with potential CCW holding faculty or one person that has about a 30% statistical chance of owning a gun in his home.I just found a great Thomas Jefferson quote that goes right along with this. Thanks Mr. Jefferson for my new signature!

[damnedeyez]

There is no way of knowing if that would result in more or less deaths though. It can't be proven. And no, they wouldn't think twice. All these school shootings have one thing in common, the shooter kills himself. Death isn't a fear.

Actually, I think it would cause some to think twice...some of these shooters seem to be aiming for body count and media attention. Sure, they're not afraid of death, but they may hesitate at the thought that they could be taken out after they fire one shot...rather than at their own hands after they've gunned down a handful of others.

Then again, I don't think most mass shooters give too much consideration to the thought of other citizens carrying...they likely only think about authorities.

[phatlip12]

Actually, I think it would cause some to think twice...some of these shooters seem to be aiming for body count and media attention. Sure, they're not afraid of death, but they may hesitate at the thought that they could be taken out after they fire one shot...rather than at their own hands after they've gunned down a handful of others.

Then again, I don't think most mass shooters give too much consideration to the thought of other citizens carrying...they likely only think about authorities.

These people have mental issues, if they want to shoot...they'll do it.

[reoze]

In that case then one of our law abiding citizens with a right to own a firearm and carries one regularly would end up shooting him before further damage is done. That is about as good as you're going to get with this situation.

[phatlip12]

In that case then one of our law abiding citizens with a right to own a firearm and carries one regularly would end up shooting him before further damage is done. That is about as good as you're going to get with this situation.

Or he may confuse the other Asian student as being the shooter and kill him. Or he may hit one of the dozen other students scrambling through the halls. *Put a metal detector in every school *Cop in every school *Surveillance cameras in the hallways *Have drills in the event of such an emergency (we did when I was in high school) "But how are we gona pay for that?" How are we going to pay for the guns and training for the teachers? If we're going to do it this way it can't be as simple as allowing teachers with conceal carry permits to come to school. What if school A has 3 teachers with permits and schools B and C no teachers. Screw schools B and C? Both options are going to require money. I think my option is more sensible as: A. It's less drastic B. It's likely many teachers wont feel comfortable carrying a gun or using one. Teachers go into the profession knowing their duties...teaching. The possibility of killing someone isn't on the list. What if (and this is very likely) all the teachers in school B don't feel comfortable with the gun? Leave the gun to the cops...the ones that are trained and willing to carry (and use) if necessary.

[phatlip12]

In that case then one of our law abiding citizens with a right to own a firearm and carries one regularly would end up shooting him before further damage is done. That is about as good as you're going to get with this situation.

Or he may confuse the other Asian student as being the shooter and kill him. Or he may hit one of the dozen other students scrambling through the halls.

*Put a metal detector in every school
*Cop in every school
*Surveillance cameras in the hallways
*Have drills in the event of such an emergency (we did when I was in high school)

&quot;But how are we gona pay for that?&quot;

How are we going to pay for the guns and training for the teachers? If we're going to do it this way it can't be as simple as allowing teachers with conceal carry permits to come to school. What if school A has 3 teachers with permits and schools B and C no teachers. Screw schools B and C? It's all or nothing. Both options are going to require money. I think my option is more sensible as:

A. It's less drastic
B. It's likely many teachers wont feel comfortable carrying a gun or using one. Teachers go into the profession knowing their duties...teaching. The possibility of killing someone isn't on the list. What if (and this is very likely) all the teachers in school B don't feel comfortable with the gun? Leave the gun to the cops...the ones that are trained and willing to carry (and use) if necessary.

[reoze]

Or he may confuse the other Asian student as being the shooter and kill him. Or he may hit one of the dozen other students scrambling through the halls.

*Put a metal detector in every school
*Cop in every school
*Surveillance cameras in the hallways
*Have drills in the event of such an emergency (we did when I was in high school)

&quot;But how are we gona pay for that?&quot;

How are we going to pay for the guns and training for the teachers? If we're going to do it this way it can't be as simple as allowing teachers with conceal carry permits to come to school. What if school A has 3 teachers with permits and schools B and C no teachers. Screw schools B and C? It's all or nothing. Both options are going to require money. I think my option is more sensible as:

A. It's less drastic
B. It's likely many teachers wont feel comfortable carrying a gun or using one. Teachers go into the profession knowing their duties...teaching. The possibility of killing someone isn't on the list. What if (and this is very likely) all the teachers in school B don't feel comfortable with the gun? Leave the gun to the cops...the ones that are trained and willing to carry (and use) if necessary.


Actually most cops I've spoken to get the minimum firearms training possible, and a lot of them are don't even like carrying around a weapon.

metal detectors - Alright this is about the dumbest idea I've heard of. Not only will you have to buy a metal detector for every single door in the school but you'd also have to have numerous people manning each detector along with an x-ray scanner, after each and every child in that school sets off the metal detector with a ball point pen or a pair of keys, maybe some loose change for lunch money each person will have to be searched with a handheld metal detector. After about 30 seconds of this, they'd turn them off. It's not as if you could tell kids to leave any metal object at home, because it is not even possible. Not to mention someone REALLY determined could get a gun past a metal detector anyway, since after school hours when most clubs and sports events are going on most of the staff is also gone, therefor nobody to man the metal detectors. Another situation could be the person just pulling a Keanu Reeves and walking through the detector with a few guns anyway then start shooting, Metal detectors are worthless for STOPPING someone, it's a deterrent not a solution.


"A cop" - Right a cop in every school will still take away more cops than we have available, and ontop of that, one single cop doesn't stand a whole lot of a chance of getting to the situation in time before the person in question does his damage. Then there's the possibility that the person in question will actually shoot the cop first, police officers are giant bullseyes in my opinion for someone in that mental state. Teachers on the other hand most likely will not be walking around with their 6 round .357 magnum revolver in a nice leather holster hanging off their belt as you'd act like they would, it is called concealed carry for a reason, and nobody else in the school would ever know except that teacher.

Cameras - What good would these do. Hey little timmy is shooting everyone again, should we call the cops? Yeah now that we can see him on camera he'll do less damage, possibly even allowed us to call the cops faster because we're deaf and can't hear 140 decibel gunshots echoing through the halls

and unless training drills involved a massive group of kids playing "kill the man with the gun" hiding under your desk in the fetal position isn't going to do you much good when a 9mm bullet rips straight through your wooden desk and then your chest.


Once again another fact you seem to be ignoring is, not only will your suggested plans cost millions, but the easiest simplest solution would cost nothing, thats right, not a single dollar. The suggested idea is not to arm the schools but to allow teachers to bring their own legally owned, legal to carry firearms. You do not need training programs as you already need to go through an extensive course to obtain a CCW which covers mostly the points you brought up about innocent bystanders, when and when not to shoot, etc.

As far as innocent bystanders, if they're close enough to the guy with the gun then they're probably just outright stupid, these shootings don't happen in the middle of classrooms where everyone can smack the guy in the head within arms reach, these people roam he halls with guns, then fire randomly into classrooms, and they definitely don't do it when class gets let out, therefor, innocent people being in the vicinity of the armed student at the time of the shooting is a very low chance, and even if there was a chance of it, a cop can't shoot any better then anyone else so how would that solve that problem?

[phatlip12]

Actually most cops I've spoken to get the minimum firearms training possible, and a lot of them are don't even like carrying around a weapon.

metal detectors - Alright this is about the dumbest idea I've heard of. Not only will you have to buy a metal detector for every single door in the school but you'd also have to have numerous people manning each detector along with an x-ray scanner, after each and every child in that school sets off the metal detector with a ball point pen or a pair of keys, maybe some loose change for lunch money each person will have to be searched with a handheld metal detector. After about 30 seconds of this, they'd turn them off. It's not as if you could tell kids to leave any metal object at home, because it is not even possible. Not to mention someone REALLY determined could get a gun past a metal detector anyway, since after school hours when most clubs and sports events are going on most of the staff is also gone, therefor nobody to man the metal detectors. Another situation could be the person just pulling a Keanu Reeves and walking through the detector with a few guns anyway then start shooting, Metal detectors are worthless for STOPPING someone, it's a deterrent not a solution.


&quot;A cop&quot; - Right a cop in every school will still take away more cops than we have available, and ontop of that, one single cop doesn't stand a whole lot of a chance of getting to the situation in time before the person in question does his damage. Then there's the possibility that the person in question will actually shoot the cop first, police officers are giant bullseyes in my opinion for someone in that mental state. Teachers on the other hand most likely will not be walking around with their 6 round .357 magnum revolver in a nice leather holster hanging off their belt as you'd act like they would, it is called concealed carry for a reason, and nobody else in the school would ever know except that teacher.

Cameras - What good would these do. Hey little timmy is shooting everyone again, should we call the cops? Yeah now that we can see him on camera he'll do less damage, possibly even allowed us to call the cops faster because we're deaf and can't hear 140 decibel gunshots echoing through the halls

and unless training drills involved a massive group of kids playing &quot;kill the man with the gun&quot; hiding under your desk in the fetal position isn't going to do you much good when a 9mm bullet rips straight through your wooden desk and then your chest.


Once again another fact you seem to be ignoring is, not only will your suggested plans cost millions, but the easiest simplest solution would cost nothing, thats right, not a single dollar. The suggested idea is not to arm the schools but to allow teachers to bring their own legally owned, legal to carry firearms. You do not need training programs as you already need to go through an extensive course to obtain a CCW which covers mostly the points you brought up about innocent bystanders, when and when not to shoot, etc.

As far as innocent bystanders, if they're close enough to the guy with the gun then they're probably just outright stupid, these shootings don't happen in the middle of classrooms where everyone can smack the guy in the head within arms reach, these people roam he halls with guns, then fire randomly into classrooms, and they definitely don't do it when class gets let out, therefor, innocent people being in the vicinity of the armed student at the time of the shooting is a very low chance, and even if there was a chance of it, a cop can't shoot any better then anyone else so how would that solve that problem?

Well at least in your plan school A will be safe. I guess all the shooters in the county will transfer to schools B and C and D where no teachers have conceal carry permits or feel comfortable brining a gun to school. All or nothing.

Ps. Many schools ALREADY have metal detectors in them, just not all of them. Also, I live in a rural/surburban area and my school typically also had a cop in it (in addition to the other schools in the county). My old high school now even has cameras in the hallway. And no, the drills aren't as you described. The drill involved locking the door and getting away from the door and any windows. Drills are good to have, it's easy to shoot dozens of people running/screaming in the halls but it's a little more difficult getting in a locked classroom.

[damnedeyez]

Well at least in your plan school A will be safe. I guess all the shooters in the county will transfer to schools B and C and D where no teachers have conceal carry permits or feel comfortable brining a gun to school. All or nothing.

...and said shooters will know which teachers carry and which schools don't have any that do?


Edit: Oh wait, public outcry from people not wanting kids in school with a teach carrying concealed will require it be known publicly which schools don't have teachers that carry. Silly me.

[phatlip12]

...and said shooters will know which teachers carry and which schools don't have any that do?


That was sarcasm. His plan left out the safety of students that go to school with teachers that don't have conceal carry permits/don't feel comfortable with a gun in school. Gee, I hope I choose the right school for little Billy! If I choose wrong he just may go to a school that doesn't follow the "wonderful" plan as none of the teachers have conceal carry permits. Eenie meenie, meiny mo...

[damnedeyez]

Not really, his plan would involve knowing the teachers might be armed as a deterrent. It'd be more of one the first time a teacher took out a shooter. Part of it is the shooters not knowing who else is armed.

[phatlip12]

Not really, his plan would involve knowing the teachers might be armed as a deterrent. It'd be more of one the first time a teacher took out a shooter. Part of it is the shooters not knowing who else is armed.

Unlikely considering the shooter almost always blows his brains out. Whats the deterrent if he doesn't care if he lives or dies? He just wants to shoot some people and then die himself. No deterrent there...

[damnedeyez]

Unlikely considering the shooter almost always blows his brains out. Whats the deterrent if he doesn't care if he lives or dies? He just wants to shoot some people and then die himself. No deterrent there...

Most of these guys seem to want the control of either getting a large body count or taking themselves out on their terms...just because they take themselves out doesn't mean they wouldn't hesitate if they thought they wouldnt' get far. Given the choice between a Mall or a Police station, most would likely choose the mall since it offers least resistance, unless they had a specific issue with the Police. (ok, so that may be speculation on my part, but it's rampant in all of the arguments here.

[phatlip12]

Most of these guys seem to want the control of either getting a large body count or taking themselves out on their terms...just because they take themselves out doesn't mean they wouldn't hesitate if they thought they wouldnt' get far. Given the choice between a Mall or a Police station, most would likely choose the mall since it offers least resistance, unless they had a specific issue with the Police. (ok, so that may be speculation on my part, but it's rampant in all of the arguments here.

Ok, using your same argument (regarding the specific issue with the Police)...

These shootings happen at school, body count isn't a factor...they shoot at school for a reason. The shooter has a specific issue with the people in that school. It's often found that school shooters showed signs of resentment towards fellow classmates. It's not a game to them, it's revenge. You also seem to be forgetting the mental state of these disturbed individuals.

[damnedeyez]

Ok, using your same argument (regarding the specific issue with the Police)...

These shootings happen at school, body count isn't a factor...they shoot at school for a reason. The shooter has a specific issue with the people in that school. It's often found that school shooters showed signs of resentment towards fellow classmates. It's not a game to them, it's revenge. You also seem to be forgetting the mental state of these disturbed individuals.

I'm taking mental state into account...there isn't just one mental state for all shooters.

Revenge is something I was referring to earlier, about them not wanting to be taken out before they get anywhere. In cases where it's just "I'm going out, but taking people with me" it may not be as much a deterrent, but if there are specific targets, they will likely want to get said targets and not be stopped beforehand.

[reoze]

Well when deterrence does not work, death is the alternative for most of these people, so what is wrong with not bringing it to these little psychotic bastards a bit sooner before they can do the most amount of damage possible? In almost every case of a school shooting the person in question has had quite a few minutes before police or swat showed up to the scene.'

as far as children knowing who is concealed, why would they? When they walk around every day statistically about 1/10 people they pass is carrying a weapon, maybe these parents should actually expose them to something like that instead of sheltering them for the rest of their lives from the outside world.

[phatlip12]

Well when deterrence does not work, death is the alternative for most of these people, so what is wrong with not bringing it to these little psychotic bastards a bit sooner before they can do the most amount of damage possible? In almost every case of a school shooting the person in question has had quite a few minutes before police or swat showed up to the scene.'

as far as children knowing who is concealed, why would they? When they walk around every day statistically about 1/10 people they pass is carrying a weapon, maybe these parents should actually expose them to something like that instead of sheltering them for the rest of their lives from the outside world.

You're completely missing the point. Your plan lacks structure and doesn't apply to every school. You said teachers with conceal carry permits are to come to school with their gun. What about the schools that have NO teachers with conceal carry permits? In the event of a shooting in a school with teachers with no conceal carry permits how does your plan apply, how does it keep those kids safe? We've already established that deterance doesn't work due to the shooters intent and mental state so thats not an argument.

Thats why I kept saying all or nothing. You can't develop a plan that will keep 10% of the kids safe.

[reoze]

Well if a school didn't have any teachers holding a CCW then they have no less protection then they did if they didn't get rid of no gun zones. While those schools that did have CCW holding teachers would have much more protection. There is never one solution which solves all problems in life, but there is usually one which will solve quite a few of them.

[phatlip12]

Well if a school didn't have any teachers holding a CCW then they have no less protection then they did if they didn't get rid of no gun zones. While those schools that did have CCW holding teachers would have much more protection. There is never one solution which solves all problems in life, but there is usually one which will solve quite a few of them.


So your plan involves keeping a very small minority of students "safe"? Ok then, again...I hope I choose the right school for little Billy.

[reoze]

More like very large, there is usually up to and over 50 teachers in a school, if the statistics are right there should be at least 5 guns per school, which is a lot more than 0.

[phatlip12]

More like very large, there is usually up to and over 50 teachers in a school, if the statistics are right there should be at least 5 guns per school, which is a lot more than 0.

Well why don't you show me some numbers then? Lets say one teacher carries in every school, is the teacher to run around the school rambo style with his/her pistol?

[damnedeyez]

We've already established that deterance doesn't work due to the shooters intent and mental state so thats not an argument.

Thats why I kept saying all or nothing. You can't develop a plan that will keep 10% of the kids safe.

No, we didn't. You just seem to think there's only one mental state and limited intent to anyone who goes on a shooting spree in a school, (and I'm sure not going to get into it again.)

There's also no way to keep them all 100% safe outside of drastic measures like building a bubble around them with no contact with the outside.

[phatlip12]

No, we didn't. You just seem to think there's only one mental state and limited intent to anyone who goes on a shooting spree in a school, (and I'm sure not going to get into it again.)

There's also no way to keep them all 100% safe outside of drastic measures like building a bubble around them with no contact with the outside.

I wasn't talking to you, thats why I didn't quote you.

[reoze]

Well why don't you show me some numbers then? Lets say one teacher carries in every school, is the teacher to run around the school rambo style with his/her pistol?

Well quite frankly, yes, excluding the entire mentioning of rambo in your comment that is a very valid solution for a single teacher to search for and take down a shooter inside of a school to protect his/her students.

[phatlip12]

Well quite frankly, yes, excluding the entire mentioning of rambo in your comment that is a very valid solution for a single teacher to search for and take down a shooter inside of a school to protect his/her students.

Ah I see what your saying, so in order to do this we would have to come up with money to pay teachers more. If part of the job includes putting your life in jeopardy then there has to be a hazard pay. Being the sole individual hunting down a shooter(s) (columbine had more then one shooter) is certainly putting your life in danger. This is getting better and better, am I on camden camera?

A teachers new duty is to hunt down and kill a school shooter in the event of a shooting. I want to be a software engineer, I hope my job duties don't suddenly change in the future making me hunt down and kill an armed robber. That would seriously suck...

[reoze]

You obviously will believe what you want without consideration of fact or opinion so be it. Have fun I'm done with this thread if thats what you really think this entire thread adds up to is teachers "putting their life on the line".

So yes you're right if there is someone in a school the best thing to do is to lock the door and hope he shoots the other person that is standing next to you and do nothing about it.