Skip to main content

View Diary: Guns in our schools (104 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  By which you mean, utterly useless (18+ / 0-)

    There was an armed police officer at Columbine. He was useless, despite being trained. There were armed police at Virginia Tech, and they were useless. Colorado has permissive concealed carry laws, and they were useless in the Aurora theater. Arizona has permissive concealed carry laws, and they were useless in Tucson.

    If you want to engage a killer with a rifle and body armor, you need multiple people with similar equipment. Because if the killer is smart - as many of them seem to be - he's going to know where the security forces are, and he's going to take a single guard out. As happened at the Holocaust museum.

    Economics is a social *science*. Can we base future economic decisions on math?

    by blue aardvark on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 08:09:27 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  I know this is an off-the-wall idea, but I thought (17+ / 0-)

      the idea was teachers were to teach children and youth.  The concept that they should be armed security guards  certainly diminishes their role as instructors.  There is barely enough time to cover all the malaraky necessary to get students to pass standardized tests now, so how in the wolrd is there time to carry out militia duties, too????

      •  It also only reinforces the theme of the NRA (12+ / 0-)

        teaching kids from an early age the only way you can protect yourself is with a gun. Parents might feel safer knowing there is an armed guard at their child's elementarty school, however kids will just accept it in their stride, and the lesson will be implanted in their young minds, that guns are necessary to protect yourself. That is a danger that I have not heard discussed at all. I don't think I want the little children growing up with that mindset.

        •  NRA's reasoning fails, totally, to comprehend the (5+ / 0-)

          basic purpose of schools.  Just sending kids off to armed camp becomes more like summer camp at the police academy rather than going to learn to read and cipher!

          •  You learn more at school than just to read and (7+ / 0-)

            cipher. That part is easy, what is hard is to teach children right and wrong, how to get along with others, and be good citizens. Teachers have to deal with conflicting information when it comes to teaching these values, reading and ciphering offers no conflictiing inforamtion.  Try telling children there are better ways to settle your differences when they come to school every day seeing armed guards. Better we should limit the amount of guns and protect our kids that way, then we are not just protecting their little bodies, but their little minds as well.

        •  Yep (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Kevskos, blue aardvark

          My fear too. And it's not just that incidents of violence will increase (which they will, of course).  The saturation of guns and the mindset of "you must be armed to be safe" is an inherently violent society.  The threat of violence would be pervasive, a daily experience of trauma and fear.

          And what kills me about this "arm everyone" approach is that it is self-fulfilling, and you can see this in the gun-rush that happens after each massacre.  The NRA and gun manufacturers have a vested interest in more episodes of violence precisely because it makes the all-violence-all-the-time world they imagine closer to a reality.  It's that classic pathology of that guy who's entire identity is premised on "protecting" his family--it's only a matter of time before that entitled violence is directed inward, against those he's supposed to be protecting.  

    •  The last thing we want to do is throw out a (5+ / 0-)

      challenge to people with a pathological obsession to the mentality, "I'll show them!"

      Less accessible fire arms, Better screening, mental health care covered in single payer system.

      •  That's your hangup. (0+ / 0-)

        'Showing them' is having a panic attack then demanding every law abiding, peace-loving citizen trade their tools of self defense for the security theatre of a 'gun free zone.'

        The whole decade needs an asterisk.

        by James Kresnik on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 10:03:25 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Different guns are designed for different purposes (6+ / 0-)

          As we have seen, killers can and do come armed with weapons that you aren't going to be carrying, and body armor to boot.

          You are, as the policeman at Columbine was, essentially unarmed if the killer has an AR-15 and you have a pistol. Your "tool of self defense" may as well be a paperweight.

          So, either everyone carries heavy weapons, or no one has access to them. And since option one is silly, option two is your only option.

          If your .45 or .357 makes you feel safe, that's because you've seen too much theater of the Dirty Harry variety. We have yet to have a heavily armed killer stopped with a handgun, despite numerous chances.

          Economics is a social *science*. Can we base future economic decisions on math?

          by blue aardvark on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 10:11:17 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Oh yes James do please tell me how very (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          blueoasis, blue aardvark

          dangerous the world is and then try and convince me that guns are the answer to every confrontation. Because really I have no experience there.

          I live in a bubble, like all women do. [snark]

          It's not a hang up. And I never said it had to be a gun free zone.

          Making guns less accessible to belligerent asses who show a lack the ability to consider their actions in terms of effects on their neighbors, family members or community? though--I don't have a problem with that at all.

          It still shocks me that the Conn Shooter's Mother KNEW he had issues, and not only kept guns in the house with him, but took him out and showed him how to use them with accuracy. If I face palm myself any more, I will leave a dent in my head over that one.

          And If this makes me a bad guy--well, if some feel the need to stock up on ammo like they are going to be living in some War-Front somewhere, then I am going to look at them sideways. Who else will they be going to use all those bullets on, but the people in their community?

          Having a gun for self defense in the home I get. But if you need more than a box of bullets to get the job done, then maybe you need to move.

          Having a gun for hunting, I get that too. But once again, sportsmanship dictates not decapitating your prey with a spray of bullets. Killing for meat is one thing, Killing for the pleasure of killing is simply disturbing.

          And if your family members show signs of mental instability like suicidal or homicidal ideations, it seems that common sense would dictate that it's time to either get rid of the weapons, or at least store them in another location.

          Is that really too much to ask?

          Because the technology our government has now, not including the drones, well I don't care how well trained your militia is, it wouldn't take much to clean a place out, no matter how much you stockpiled in your basement.

          If some of these paranoid gun owners were really worried about the direction our government was going, perhaps they should have protested the patriot act instead of the new medical care coverage. Perhaps they should be more concerned about police brutality against peaceful protesters, rather than illegal immigrants, god or abortion.

          •  So you want to give Michael Bloomberg (0+ / 0-)

            the power to determine who exactly is a 'belligerent asshole?'

            I really don't think that will work out as well as you think:

            Sorry, but I simply trust my fellow citizens to do the right thing far more than I would trust the likes of Michael Bloomberg.

            Dropping gun and violent crime in the face of soaring gun  sales demonstrate that that trust is well placed.

            The whole decade needs an asterisk.

            by James Kresnik on Tue Jan 08, 2013 at 06:32:38 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site