FOOD FOR THOUGHT AND DUMB GUN LAWS

[MamaRoo]

If armed guards really are the solution maybe we should bring the boys home from Afghanistan and put a couple in each school. The school won't have to worry about the budget and adding another name to the payroll and both the students and the soldiers will be much less likely to be killed. I'm still not sure if I'm really sold on the armed guards idea. We'll see.

If you consider the rate of suicide among returning veterans as an indication of undiagnosed mental illness/PTSD, then I think putting armed returning soldiers into a building full of loud, boisterous children is a very very very poor idea.

 

[Manic J]

Specious arguments:


Regulating guns is against the second amendment

Everyone should be as well armed as the military.

Edited to save space as I'll respond to these two sentences.

1. Regulating guns is against the second amendment. Not entirely, no, we are already "well regulated".. i.e. there are Federal and State regulations in place regulating guns. e.g. Owning a 50 cal. Browning Automatic Rifle is a whole different world as compared to owning a semi automatic 30/06. See NFA firearms, or The National Firearms Act of 1968.

2. Everyone should be as well armed as the military. Well when you put it like that it sounds a bit ridiculous, now doesn't it? That is not what is meant when people refer to or quote the 2nd amendment. We are not looking for anti aircraft or anti tank capabilities. Nobody wants to carry grenades, and 60mm mortars around town either.
The second amendment reads like this .......

[ A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.]

Such a simple sentence, yet so much meaning. It has been interpreted to mean different things to different people creating many legal battles. Cornell University Law School has an interesting analysis from the Congressional Research Service available for viewing on-line if you are interested ......... http://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/html/amdt2_user.html#amdt2_hd2

 

[dainerra]

As for arming teachers...of all the teachers I know, I can't think of a single one that would be willing to carry at school.

of all the teachers I know, I only know 2 who WOULDN'T be willing to carry at school

 

[chickened]

The presidents armed guards are with him. Wrong they are stationed about the whitehouse,rooftops and where needed.

Schools are huge places, and the cops still have to get from one end to another. Bigger school more cops.

Specious arguments:

Bows were the assault rifles of their time True

Regulating guns is against the second amendment True

The pope, the president and movie stars have armed guards True

Everyone should be as well armed as the military. Matter of opinion but within our rights

As for arming teachers...of all the teachers I know, I can't think of a single one that would be willing to carry at school. Many do already but do not advertise so. I would also venture to guess that if the teachers you know experience your dogmatism that we here do they probably would never broach such a subject with you for the sake of tranquility.

You only get one chance with a psycho when you are in their sights... use it well. It is real easy to armchair quarterback a violent situation but I assure you when someone sticks a gun in your face (I have had it happen to me) you do what you must to defend yourself IN THE MOMENT Like Rebel said you have no idea what you are talking about because you have never been there.

 

[waterdog]

The presidents armed guards are with him.

Schools are huge places, and the cops still have to get from one end to another.

Specious arguments:

Bows were the assault rifles of their time

Regulating guns is against the second amendment

The pope, the president and movie stars have armed guards

Everyone should be as well armed as the military.

As for arming teachers...of all the teachers I know, I can't think of a single one that would be willing to carry at school.

I am friends with several teachers and I am positive all of them would be Very happy to carry a firearm.
Also very disturbing comments about people with disabilities

 

[chickened]

If you consider the rate of suicide among returning veterans as an indication of undiagnosed mental illness/PTSD, then I think putting armed returning soldiers into a building full of loud, boisterous children is a very very very poor idea.

Hiding and hoping is a very poor idea also.

 

[Q9]

This is interesting. I caught the tail end of a piece on NPR, so I can't tell you the situation, but I believe it was someone who had been involved in a shooting. He said it took 8 seconds for the (guard? police?) to reach the shooter, and in those 8 seconds the shooter killed several people. I'm envisioning the schools on my town - long buildings, many with separated buildings - a single guard wouldn't be much help. The assumption that a teacher is qualified (or would want) to carry a weapon is also a stretch for me. They are just people, as flawed as anyone, with bad days and hangovers and breakups and all the crazy things that happen in a person's life that might lead them to choose to take a firearm (if it's available) and do harm to themselves or others.

Also, are the guns stored in the school? Taken home? Who checks to make sure they're properly stored? And if they are properly stored, could they be retrieved quickly enough to make a difference?
What about that 1 careless moment at recess when the gun is left in the desk and a child finds it? Or the bad kid of the school makes a determined effort to steal the gun? Or the bullets? (they can be used to make great explosives with some cardboard and duct tape)

You're thinking that the people carrying the weapons will have your mindset, I'm thinking that these people have a lot of crap to deal with already, and may not be the best choice to deliberately arm.

Thanks for the thoughtful response. I think, however, that you would be surprised by the competence of CCW holders. Generally speaking, someone who takes the time to get a license is willing to take the time to practice, and often to take a tactical course. In addition, there have been many instances when instructors have provided free or discounted training sessions to teachers and school staff.

Good questions; my assumption is that they would simply be carried concealed, as is typical of a normal CCW holder. Modern holsters are very effective at preventing the firearm from falling out, yet allowing easy accesss in an emergency. As far as careless moments go, that's really a risk with anything, but I think that it's not as big a risk as one might think. I know that for many - including myself - owning a firearm is humbling, especially when you realize what it can do. That leads to extra care around it; most gun folks are absolute rule nazis when it comes to gun safety.

If I were in charge, I would not mandate carrying by teachers and staff, but I would allow it and encourage it. I know my dad (a high school teacher) is extremely frustrated with his school's no-guns policy. He's licensed to carry concealed, but he's not allowed to carry in the school. The school's response to an active shooter? It literally boils down to "Turn off lights, lock door, hide in corner." He suggested that they change their policies (it's a private school), but the folks in charge didn't seem to like the idea.

 

[MamaRoo]

Thanks for the thoughtful response. I think, however, that you would be surprised by the competence of CCW holders. Generally speaking, someone who takes the time to get a license is willing to take the time to practice, and often to take a tactical course. In addition, there have been many instances when instructors have provided free or discounted training sessions to teachers and school staff.

Again, I think your standpoint is one of assuming most people are as particular as you when it comes to weapons. And it's probably true that most people are, it's the few that aren't that I think pose the problem. And it's somehow letting these few slip into a school that concerns me.
This pdf is long, but it lists the ccw holders that killed people with a gun. http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/ccwprivatecitizens.pdf

Granted, it was usually spouse, friend, or self, but the person who fired on the crowd in Arizona, and shot Gabriella Giffords, for example, was legally carrying a concealed weapon:

The guy that shot 6 people at a Seattle cafe was legally carrying a concealed handgun. Sadly, his family knew about his mental illness and tried to get his permit revoked,

Quote: I know these are not the norm, but they are out there.

 

[mom'sfolly]

So far the solutions I've heard are: arm the teachers, and have armed cops at schools.

Others have said we need better regulations on the mentally ill owning guns. How? Most of the recent shooters had legal access to guns. What laws would have prevented their brand of crazy from getting the guns? On the Fort Hood shooter, the fault for allowing him weapons lies with the superiors who ignored his radicalization and well documented mental lapses. In a civilian situation it is much harder to control. You can't even get a commitment order, in most cases, without an immediate threat, which most courts consider weapon brandishing or suicide attempts. Aspberger's syndrome certainly wouldn't (and probably shouldn't) disqualify people from buying a gun.

In the case of the Aurora shooter, flagging internet purchases, and investigating may have stopped the shooter. Considering the Patriot Act (not something I like), this is probably perfectly legal.

I don't have the answers, but I am pretty sure they don't involve arming everyone. This isn't an easy issue. I get kind of tired of the knee jerk reaction that any regulation is unconstitutional (the courts have ruled repeatedly on this), and that more guns are the only answer. What seems to be missing here is a middle ground of understanding.

Most Americans live in urban areas. Most Americans, today, do not hunt. Most Americans do not believe that they or anyone else here needs to fight off the government or foreign invaders. Most people cannot fire off hundreds of rounds on their own property. No one who hunts needs a 30 round magazine, the wildlife threat simply isn't that great.

So what are the solutions? How do we keep guns from those who shouldn't have them? Do we profile? No young, white male should have a gun? Do we regulate? Do we arm? Do we jail the mentally ill? What illnesses qualify?

My gut says a multi-pronged approach is needed; one that addresses both access to weapons, weapons in public places, how access to schools and other places is handled and better mental health care, treatment and diagnosis.

A background search is only as good as the database it is using. It won't weed out the undiagnosed, the ones with evil intent who haven't yet committed a crime, or impulse killers.

 

[chickened]

Again, I think your standpoint is one of assuming most people are as particular as you when it comes to weapons. And it's probably true that most people are, it's the few that aren't that I think pose the problem. And it's somehow letting these few slip into a school that concerns me.
This pdf is long, but it lists the ccw holders that killed people with a gun. http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/ccwprivatecitizens.pdf

Granted, it was usually spouse, friend, or self, but the person who fired on the crowd in Arizona, and shot Gabriella Giffords, for example, was legally carrying a concealed weapon:

The guy that shot 6 people at a Seattle cafe was legally carrying a concealed handgun. Sadly, his family knew about his mental illness and tried to get his permit revoked,

I know these are not the norm, but they are out there.

Mental illness diagnosises should not be on the CC form it should be dealt with prior to applying. Mi should be in its own category and a database available for law enforcement. Privacy in medical records would have to change to adequately address this issue.

I have heard more women request handgun training and ownership so as to not be a victim of DV as of lately. Gun ownership among women is rising.