Another school Shooting Nevada

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Drugs and guns are not the same thing. It is easier to get drugs through a prohibition than it is to get guns. Just ask Australia.

As for teachers, it is today's world (I am a teacher) unless someone demands that teachers pack heat.

Also, it is quite unfair to demand that teachers carry guns despite the fact that some teachers would be opposed to doing so. I thought that the Republicans were the party of individual liberty - where's the individual liberty of requiring people to carry guns just so they can teach?

You need to read what I posted. I said pick teachers who are willing (that would mean they want to go) take classes to carry. See above.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by firstdown

You need to read what I posted. I said pick teachers who are willing (that would mean they want to go) take classes to carry. See above.

No, I read that. Your words amount to, "You can't teach unless you are willing to carry a gun." Where on earth is the individual liberty in that?

[donofriose]

Adding or removing guns will not solve the problem that is causing the mass shootings. Until we address the multiple problems we have as a nation, such as glorifying the killers by always talking about them on the news, we will always have problems with mass shootings. The fact that people want to kill children for whatever reason is the true issue. Obviously our current approach is not working.

To me saying you should take away the guns to stop the killings is like saying you should take away birth control to stop pregnancies. Guns promote violence just as much as birth control promotes sex. But acting like those two things are the reason people will do those acts, is in my opinion foolish.

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by Lotus

No, I read that. Your words amount to, "You can't teach unless you are willing to carry a gun." Where on earth is the individual liberty in that?

That's your attempt at reframing an argument to suit your position.

Shouldn't you be writing a local ordinance for the prevention of Unicorn stampedes?

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Lotus

No, I read that. Your words amount to, "You can't teach unless you are willing to carry a gun." Where on earth is the individual liberty in that?

This is what I said:
"You pick teachers who are willing to take the proper training and make them take intensive classes on how to handle a gun."

So if you can't understand that I'll try and make it clear. You find teachers that under their free will and desire want to carry. They then must take the proper training under their own will and desire so they can carry a gun under their own will and desire. At anytime they decide they do not want to carry a gun they can stop under their own will and desire.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by firstdown

You don't just hand a teacher a gun and say if anything happens start shooting. You pick teachers who are willing to take the proper training and make them take intensive classes on how to handle a gun. Guns don't go off by accident when handled properly. Cops and people with carry permits carry guns all the time and they don't just accidently go off. The problem with your scenario is that we know what happens when the teachers are not armed and its not good. These people seem to pick places where they know people are not armed.

It didn't seem to deter the shooters at the DC Navy Yard or Fort Hood.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by firstdown

This is what I said:
"You pick teachers who are willing to take the proper training and make them take intensive classes on how to handle a gun."

So if you can't understand that I'll try and make it clear. You find teachers that under their free will and desire want to carry. They then must take the proper training under their own will and desire so they can carry a gun under their own will and desire. At anytime they decide they do not want to carry a gun they can stop under their own will and desire.

I see your argument now. So how does that stop attacks involving teachers who don't want to carry guns?

A much simpler and complete solution is simply to take guns off the street. It worked in Australia, it can work here.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

It didn't seem to deter the shooters at the DC Navy Yard or Fort Hood.

I guess you don't know that service members cannot carry a gun on base. That's why the shooters could carry on such an attack.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I guess you don't know that service members cannot carry a gun on base. That's why the shooters could carry on such an attack.

No MP's on base? No guns in those buildings at all?

[BaltimoreSkins]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Your correct. We need to arm our teachers.

I strongly disagree with this. Even trained professionals have trouble hitting their targets in combat situations and they have routinely received multiple hours of gun training. Providing a teacher with 60 hours of training in identifying suspects, proper shooting technique under duress, and maintaining those skills would be counterproductive. While I assume you mean the teachers will be a deterrent and a shooting will be avoided, if a shooting occurs you will most likely have an intensely escalated situation. Instead trained professionals should be in place at all schools.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by BaltimoreSkins

I strongly disagree with this. Even trained professionals have trouble hitting their targets in combat situations and they have routinely received multiple hours of gun training. Providing a teacher with 60 hours of training in identifying suspects, proper shooting technique under duress, and maintaining those skills would be counterproductive. While I assume you mean the teachers will be a deterrent and a shooting will be avoided, if a shooting occurs you will most likely have an intensely escalated situation. Instead trained professionals should be in place at all schools.

Agreed.

NYPD: 9 Civilians Near Empire State Building Were All Shot By Police: Gothamist

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Agreed.

NYPD: 9 Civilians Near Empire State Building Were All Shot By Police: Gothamist

Then it goes on to say they were not actually shot.

Police Commissioner Ray Kelly told reporters today that cops inadvertently wounded nine people yesterday after a disgruntled ex-employee killed his former boss near the Empire State Building. Kelly said the bystanders were not hit directly by police, but rather the officers' struck "flowerpots and other objects around, so ... their bullets fragmented and, in essence, that's what caused the wounds." Altogether, the two officers who confronted Jeffrey Johnson fired 16 rounds—one officer shot nine while another one shot seven.

So what your saying if a shooter came into the school and started shooting people you would rather be in the room with the unarmed teacher?

[RedskinRat]

Part of the deterrent to arming teachers is the same as CCW with civilians, criminals no longer know who the soft target is. Currently they are all too aware. Like in the Ft. Hood and similar situations where the shooter knew they would have no opposition.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Then it goes on to say they were not actually shot.

Police Commissioner Ray Kelly told reporters today that cops inadvertently wounded nine people yesterday after a disgruntled ex-employee killed his former boss near the Empire State Building. Kelly said the bystanders were not hit directly by police, but rather the officers' struck "flowerpots and other objects around, so ... their bullets fragmented and, in essence, that's what caused the wounds." Altogether, the two officers who confronted Jeffrey Johnson fired 16 rounds—one officer shot nine while another one shot seven.

So what your saying if a shooter came into the school and started shooting people you would rather be in the room with the unarmed teacher?

Right, flower pots. That's believable. It was later confirmed by other sources that people were hit by bullets. But does it really matter what they were hit by? Bottom line is people were injured when caught in the crossfire of trained professionals. How are lesser trained individuals supposed to hold up in a similar situation?

My point is armed or not, someone intent on shooting up a public place isn't going to be deterred either way.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Right, flower pots. That's believable. It was later confirmed by other sources that people were hit by bullets. But does it really matter what they were hit by? Bottom line is people were injured when caught in the crossfire of trained professionals. How are lesser trained individuals supposed to hold up in a similar situation?

My point is armed or not, someone intent on shooting up a public place isn't going to be deterred either way.

So you post the link and now you say its not correct.LOL