BoatShoes;1346880 wrote:Prior to last week people thought doomsday preppers were relatively harmless odd balls in society until one of their similarly troubled children mowed down a bunch of Kindegartners. I might've said that was unrealistic last week. Who could be so demented in 2012 as to massacre a bunch of 5 year olds that has access to weapons that could do it???

Putting weapons in the hands of teachers across the country would be a disaster in comparison to the relatively straightforward solution of making schools more secure from people who have no good reason to be there. They don't have to be fortresses to be harder to get into. By and large modern school buildings are pretty solidly built aside from the use of a lot of glass. Just stop using glass and that makes quite a difference.

Genius Legislators across the country like Louie Farking Gohmert??

I mean do you realize that it is more likely that kids will end up dead because guns accidentally discharging???

Arming teachers is ludicrous. Just more John Wayne fantasies like the one's the mother of this murderer had.

ccrunner609;1346711 wrote:There are 117,00 schools in the US and none of them can keep someone out that really wants in. If you think money spent on keeping them out and practicing hide and seek are the best method.....we have passed that era friday.

Pick6;1346884 wrote:So much I could debate in this post, but Ill choose to point out your line of "more likely that kids will end up dead because of accidental discharge". First off, Ive handled guns for 15+ years and have never had this "accidental discharge" you speak of. Even in the extremely rare and unlikely event of an accidental discharge, you do realize the only possible way it could kill a kid is if the gun was you know...ACTUALLY POINTED AT THEM. How is a gun going to be pointing at a student when a teacher/official/sheriff/whatever has it strapped to them facing the floor?


I ask you this, are you a gun handler?

BoatShoes;1346885 wrote:Sigh. A pretty solid door without glass and a strict admission policy keeps a would be mass murderer out long enough for the cops to arrive in almost every case. Every Bank in the country is way less fortified than most schools are capable of and they manage pretty well without every banker carrying holding a piece because they've put in place cost effective security procedures and these are places of commerce that doesn't have small discernible group of people that should only be allowed in every day.

Desiring to put guns in the hands of educators is really just an extension of this fetish for vigilante justice reigning down in a barrage of bullets it appears to me because it doesn't make practical sense.

WebFire;1346887 wrote:It may not happen often, but it can and does. Just watch the video I posted. An LEO in a school says "I'm the only one here trained to handle this weapon" (paraphrasing) then manages to shoot himself in the foot while holstering.

And that's a trained LEO.

Pick6;1346884 wrote:So much I could debate in this post, but Ill choose to point out your line of "more likely that kids will end up dead because of accidental discharge". First off, Ive handled guns for 15+ years and have never had this "accidental discharge" you speak of. Even in the extremely rare and unlikely event of an accidental discharge, you do realize the only possible way it could kill a kid is if the gun was you know...ACTUALLY POINTED AT THEM. How is a gun going to be pointing at a student when a teacher/official/sheriff/whatever has it strapped to them facing the floor?


I ask you this, are you a gun handler?

Pick6;1346889 wrote:Except not in this case.

You're right, most banks have this effective person on their payroll called a security guard.

BoatShoes;1346880 wrote:Prior to last week people thought doomsday preppers were relatively harmless odd balls in society until one of their similarly troubled children mowed down a bunch of Kindegartners. I might've said that was unrealistic last week. Who could be so demented in 2012 as to massacre a bunch of 5 year olds that has access to weapons that could do it???

Pick6;1346889 wrote:Except not in this case.

You're right, most banks have this effective person on their payroll called a security guard.

BoatShoes;1346905 wrote:Dude...banks in shitty parts of cleveland have unarmed rent-a-cops.

O-Trap;1346910 wrote:First off, you might have said it was unrealistic? What world of rainbows and unicorns do you live in? I'd have said it was an inevitability, given enough time.

BoatShoes;1346905 wrote:Dude...banks in shitty parts of cleveland have unarmed rent-a-cops.

ccrunner609;1346899 wrote:I also.....thats why the pool of people that are running schools need to be and have more skills in other areas. Like some say, arm the damn janitor, PE teacher, science teacher.....I know alot of school employees capable of this.

BoatShoes;1346917 wrote:Yeah well the Sun's going to swallow the Earth after enough time. People wake up in the morning thinking that it's realistic that a solider could die in afghanistan...nobody expects 20 kindegartners to get mowed down for no apparent reason.

ccrunner609;1346931 wrote:Agree, you cant stop this but you can lesson the impact. Soft targets like schools are always gonna be soft. We arent building schools like prisons and we arent paying for full time security.

ccrunner609;1346893 wrote:Kids arent behind those big locked doors all day. THey are at recess, lunch, going to gym and music.........at any given time, a elementary hallway has 50+ kids in them, a MS and HS has 100's every 40 minutes during class changes.

WebFire;1346954 wrote:We can hypothesize all day long to argue with one another. I mean, a guy could snipe people in these said areas too. Then your gun is useless. It's a stretch but it could happen right?

Pick6;1346734 wrote:Show me a link where a teacher went bat **** crazy and shot up his school? You cant. You can keep making up unlikely scenarios to support your "argument", and Ill keep using realistic scenarios as well as sources to back up my argument.

Interesting that legislators are bringing up arming school teachers, but nobody is bringing up your fortress idea..because its stupid and unrealistic.

gut;1346960 wrote:How many kids have brought a gun into school and shot it up like this? The kids outnumber the teachers 30 to 1 or more, it would only be a matter of time before a teacher snaps, or makes a bad judgement when they feel threatened (because teachers have been attacked by students). You're making a pretty ridiculous argument that because it's never happened, it won't. Well, we didn't think this sort of thing would happen, either, 15 years ago.

And let me guess, most of these legislators are pandering to the NRA. Like I said, more guns is always the solution, except when it isn't. With all the guns, knives and gang violence in the schools I don't remember the solution being to arm the staff.

You don't have to make schools a fortress to make unauthorized access very difficult. And it's cheaper than your idea. Guaranteed more effective - you want to minimize body count, I want to eliminate it.

WebFire;1346954 wrote:We can hypothesize all day long to argue with one another. I mean, a guy could snipe people in these said areas too. Then your gun is useless. It's a stretch but it could happen right?

Pick6;1346961 wrote:Well you are very naive if you think you can eliminate it.

BoatShoes;1346901 wrote: Armed personnel in schools increases the chances of unintentional death much more than it increases the chance that these weekend warriors will take down a mass murderer in the extremely unlike event that it occurs.

O-Trap;1346963 wrote:I'm sure it will. There have been snipers in the past. Schools are soft targets. The two will eventually cross.