I have not seen anyone saying that ALL teachers should be armed. I have only seen this idea based on a volunteer basis yet most here respond like it would be a requirement.
Most are just responding that's it's a stupid idea based on empirical evidence. Those saying it's a good idea are typically just using slogans and bullshit.
A bit funny to me that people somehow think that arming teachers is a solution, when especially teachers are some of the most underpaid, frustrated and psychologically-down (check the burnout and depression rates) workers in society. Morons in favour of this proposal live in a deluded bubble and somehow think that only students are potential threats. You think arming the potentially frustrated teacher is a good idea, when he can unload his weapon in a classroom full of unprotected children? Sad how irrational and brainwashed some here are. Armed teachers would be the very opposite of a solution, you'd just introduce an overwhelming number of new threats, and that doesn't even take students taking the teacher's weapon into account.
Imagine the teacher who gets to be the first one that accidentally shoots a student (lawsuits, life-long guilt). Imagine the teacher that is standing there with a gun in hand when the police storm the school. Yea... this is such a dangerously insane idea. Thanks trump.
To do better than the cowardly cops on the scene all one would have to do would be to try. On top of that, while it's true that accuracy drops in live shooting scenarios.....what do you think that kid's accuracy was like? He was in a school of 3000, fired for 6 minutes and hit right around 30 people total. You know how I can tell you haven't actually read anything in this thread though? You seem to think that I thought arming teachers was a good idea and I've said exactly the opposite multiple times now. Putting your ignorance on display like this is a bad look. Try to do better in the future.
-"Sir show your driver license and registration please, by the way, are you a teacher?" -" .... yes" -"DO NOT move! " pulling out his gun and calling for backup "we have an armed suspect here..."
It is stupidity at it's finest to think solving a gun problem is more guns....glad to see this board is not that stupid. DD
What a piece of ****. Trump campaign emails photo of Parkland survivor, asks for donations (CNN)President Donald Trump's re-election campaign used a photo of a survivor of the Parkland, Florida, shooting in an email Saturday that asks its recipients to donate money to the campaign. The email contains a photo of 17-year-old Madeleine Wilford in a hospital bed surrounded by her family, Trump and the first lady. The President visited Wilford on February 16, two days after the attack at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, which left 17 dead. "The nation has turned its attention to the senseless school shooting in Parkland, Florida," the email reads. "Trump is taking steps toward banning gun bump stocks and strengthening background checks for gun purchasers," it says. "The President has made his intent very clear: 'making our schools and our children safer will be our top priority.'" Near the end of the message, there's a link to the campaign's donations page. The campaign did not immediately return CNN's request for comment. Trump previously used the photo in an Instagram post uploaded on the same day as the hospital visit.
No but you make it sound you would do a better job than others. Which if cops have a terrible accuracy percentage what makes you think you would do better in a live shooting. Also this goes to show why semi automatic are deadly under anybody that decides to use one in close encounters. So yes I read the thread. The more I read your posts the more I think you take your talking points from Ben Shapiro or you are him. Which would explain a lot.
I'm not sure arming teachers is a good idea. If anything I think the teachers should be trained how to handle a shooting or bad situation and keeping everyone safe.
Along with banning guns for killing kids (not likely going to happen), there are also many things you can do to reduce the killing. Bullet proof door, glass. Automatic lock down metal doors to isolate killer in case of gun killing emergency. On site trained security guard. Metal detectors. I'm pretty sure there are other ways. Cost a ton and we should tax gun producers and consumers for all of it.
Rimbaud posted this earlier and it seemed to get no reaction. Everyone should read it, so I'm bumping his post. It explains perfectly why assault rifles like an AR-15 should be banned. An MD explains the difference between a bullet wound from a typical handgun and an AR-15. The difference is astonishing.
NRA slams gun-background system flaws it helped create https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/23/us/n...ated-in-gun-background-system-invs/index.html (CNN)On Wednesday, during CNN's town hall with survivors of last week's mass shooting at a high school in South Florida, National Rifle Association representative Dana Loesch lamented the holes in the FBI's National Instant Background Check System, or NICS. "This madman passed a background check. How was he able to pass a background check? He was able to pass a background check because we have a system that's flawed," Loesch said on stage. "It is not federal law for states to report convictions to the NICS system. It is not federally mandated. That's the big question, and I wish that this network had also covered this more." In fact, it was the NRA that led the effort to block the federal mandate, by financing and arguing the US Supreme Court case that let states off the hook. The 1997 decision in Printz v. United States threw out part of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, and made it optional for local courts, police departments and states to submit background information on residents. The Brady Act, passed in 1993, established the federal system that screens firearm purchases at licensed dealers. While the FBI built its high-tech NICS system, local police were tasked with conducting the background checks However, the NRA teamed up with local sheriffs in Montana and Arizona to challenge the law, saying local law enforcement shouldn't be forced to work for the feds. In 1997, the Supreme Court sided with the NRA and Ravalli County Sheriff Jay Printz of Montana. Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the court's opinion, which was largely driven by the concepts of federalism. The Constitution's 10th Amendment limited the federal government power over state and local governments, the court decided. When the FBI finally got the NICS system up and running in 1998, states submitted criminal and mental health records only voluntarily. Now, decades later, it's still optional. "The Printz decision says you cannot 'commandeer' state officials to operate a federal program. Being forced to transmit information to the federal government would fall under Printz. Printz is the reason why this cannot be mandated," said Eric Columbus, a former Justice Department official who encountered similar 10th Amendment issues while developing policy during the Obama administration. States cannot be forced to turn over records that prohibit firearm purchases -- like felony convictions, misdemeanor convictions of domestic violence, or involuntary commitments to mental health institutions. To work around that, the Justice Department offers local agencies incentives to do so in the form of federal grant money. Some have used the money to improve public internet access to court records, which are used by FBI NICS examiners. But the system is still incomplete. When a prospective gun buyer's name is submitted for a background check, NICS staffers have only three days to compile any outstanding records. If their work is not concluded by then, gun shops are allowed to sell the weapon to the buyer anyway. The resulting gaps in the nation's background check system is costing lives. The white supremacist shooter who killed nine people at a black church in Charleston, South Carolina, in 2015 was able to buy a Glock pistol because the FBI did not have a record of his drug arrest. The NRA did not respond to questions from CNN about this issue. On Thursday at CPAC, the Conservative Political Action Conference, the CEO of the NRA delivered a speech that again criticized gaps in the background check system. In his speech, Wayne LaPierre played a video he put out three years ago, in which he said, "For God's sake, put every prohibited person in the system. That's what common sense gun laws look like." LaPierre went on to blame Democratic politicians and major news organizations for the incomplete record system. "When another monster slips through the cracks, the very cracks that they have enabled in the system, as the records of prohibited persons remain out of the database, it will happen again," LaPierre told the CPAC crowd. With the Printz decision in place, some legal scholars doubt that the US Congress could pass any law to make the FBI's databases complete. "I think that Printz does constrain information sharing mandates, as well as other mandates. It certainly established a rule that the federal government cannot force states to help them enforce federal law, including forcing them to do background checks," said Ilya Somin, a professor of law at George Mason University who writes about limits on federal government. The Supreme Court didn't directly address the possibility of a state mandate to report to the federal database, leaving open another legal avenue. Local courts and governments could be forced to send data to the FBI -- but each one of the nation's 50 states would have to pass that law itself. CNN's Collette Richards contributed to this report.
No, I made it sound like if I was a cop at that school I'd have gone in and that I would have a pretty good job at stopping the shooter if I came across him because that's the truth. As to Ben Shapiro, I'm not sure what his opinion on all of this is, but I've agreed with him in the past so it wouldn't surprise me if his opinion was similar to mine.
I said it before. They should post those pictures (w/ prior approval). Let the public see what these killer weapons do to kids.
Down is up. We have a m' f'ing m'fer, who said he'd shoot an mf'er in the mf'ing streets and you would m'fing like it,(he was right)now turn around and say video games and music are so violent. Same guy that describes a "beautiful girl" getting skinned. come on guys, watch your language in the threads no need for foul mouths.
Trump is using the same talking point from 1999 after the Columbine shooting lol. Someone tell dotard it's 2018. Every developed country in the world has access to the same movies and video games. Trump supporter echo chambers blame video games, movies, and mental illness. LOL
