Gun Control ?

[Farmer77]

1 hour ago, simplybill said:

The airlines have been allowing pilots to carry concealed weapons for years, and there haven’t been any problems. There are teachers who have that same sheepdog mentality that will do anything necessary to protect the children they teach. If a teacher is willing to undergo the same rigorous training that pilots do, then I have no qualms about letting them be that added layer of protection.

 

IDK I'm a huge fan of teachers so don't take this the wrong way at all but pilots are a completely different caliber of human being than teachers. Pilots train every day of their lives for life and death situations, teachers not so much, and do we really want our educators focused on defense? I mean can they truly do both jobs appropriately? 

[Rlyeh]

5 hours ago, Paranormal Panther said:

Some American towns are safer than Asian and European countries. The crime rate greatly varies from region to region. We go from comparative dystopias to comparative utopias. We're such a diverse, mammoth country that blanket statements don't apply if one wishes to have an *honest* conversation about the subject.  

"Some American towns are safer than Asian and European countries."

You're actually comparing a town to a country. My house is safer than some countries too.

But what does any of this have to do with your invisible friend? If you wanted an honest conversation you wouldn't be defending such asinine statements.

[simplybill]

8 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

IDK I'm a huge fan of teachers so don't take this the wrong way at all but pilots are a completely different caliber of human being than teachers. Pilots train every day of their lives for life and death situations, teachers not so much, and do we really want our educators focused on defense? I mean can they truly do both jobs appropriately? 

I understand what you’re saying. Many airline pilots are former military pilots, and probably have more situational experience.

However, in the school shootings there often are ‘hero’ teachers who are recognized for their heroism in protecting their students: Scott Beigel in Parkland, Angela McQueen in Mattoon, Illinois, Megan Silberberger in Marysville, Washington, for example.Those teachers had a personal dedication to their students that surpasses even that of trained police officers (as we saw in Parkland, where the armed deputy didn’t even enter the school to engage the gunman). Teachers that have the sheepdog mentality would be the perfect candidates for ‘marshall’ training. 

 

[+DieChecker]

1 hour ago, Farmer77 said:

IDK I'm a huge fan of teachers so don't take this the wrong way at all but pilots are a completely different caliber of human being than teachers. Pilots train every day of their lives for life and death situations, teachers not so much, and do we really want our educators focused on defense? I mean can they truly do both jobs appropriately? 

I think if they can be trained and shown to be competent, they should be able to carry a gun, and be financially compensated also. Maybe get 10% (Or 20% even) more pay for having extra training and responsibility. Win - win situation. Arm these teachers with guns containing less then lethal rounds and you then are also protecting (to a degree) anyone hit collaterally, while still taking down the average shooter.

[Why not]

52 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

IDK I'm a huge fan of teachers so don't take this the wrong way at all but pilots are a completely different caliber of human being than teachers. Pilots train every day of their lives for life and death situations, teachers not so much, and do we really want our educators focused on defense? I mean can they truly do both jobs appropriately? 

I don't think anyone is talking about arming all teachers. I agree with your pilot to teacher anologe but, I'm sure there are plenty of teachers who could be trained properly and also have the right mentality to handle it. Just say for instance there are 100 teacher in a school, 10 to maybe 15 armed and trained teaches positioned properly around the school should work. It would depend on school layout and other variables but, you get the picture.

Another BIG issue to take into STRONG consideration is the way the media goes about handling and reporting on these horrors afterwards. These mentally ill little devils are feeding off of the notoriety and publicity of the previous deranged kids. This last case is a prime example. CNN did no one any good with their hit-job, agenda driven "town hall"  yesterday.  CNN is running themselves into the ground and their total collapse can't come soon enough.

[+DieChecker]

3 hours ago, psyche101 said:

If asked the very question myself. It's also 2018,  some people with guns aren't going to scratch modern warfare weapons. They will just end up dead if they storm thier government. 

No offense Psyche, but that is nonsense. Civilians in civil war zones across the world have consistently stood up to invasion forces and often given a good showing. An armed US populous, if it turned on the FedGov, would be unstoppable. 

Once armed civilians get involved, warfare quickly becomes a losing proposition for any military retaining morality.

[Farmer77]

6 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

I think if they can be trained and shown to be competent, they should be able to carry a gun, and be financially compensated also. Maybe get 10% (Or 20% even) more pay for having extra training and responsibility. Win - win situation. Arm these teachers with guns containing less then lethal rounds and you then are also protecting (to a degree) anyone hit collaterally, while still taking down the average shooter.

OK I can get behind arming them with non lethal rounds.  I've simply seen too many people absolutely crumble when the SHTF for me to think arming teachers , or anyone whose job isn't specifically to deal with the SHTF,  with lethal munition is a good idea. 

Even then I'm still not sure that's the greatest idea. The professional world has moved to specialties for a reason. 

Edited February 23, 2018 by Farmer77

[+DieChecker]

7 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

• 2018, 14 February - Marjory Stoneman Douglas High school shootings - (17 dead)
• 2017, November 14 - Rancho Tehama Reserve shootings - (6 dead)
• 2017 April 10 - North Park Elementary School shooting - (3 dead)
• 2015, 1 October - Umpqua Community College shooting - (10 dead)
• 2014, October 24- Marysville Pilchuck High School shooting - (5 dead)
• 2013, June 7 - 2013 Santa Monica shooting - (6 dead)
• 2013, January 15 - (3 dead) ^[28]
• 2012, December 14- Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings - (28 deaths)
• 2012, 2 April - Oikos University shooting - (7 deaths)
• 2012, February 27 - Chardon High School shooting - ( 3 dead)
• 2010, February 12 - University of Alabama in Huntsville shooting - (3 dead)
• 2008, February 14 - Northern Illinois University shooting - (6 deaths)
• 2007, 6 April - Virginia Tech massacre - (33 deaths)
• 2006, October 2 - West Nickel Mines School shooting - (6 deaths)
• 2005, 21 March - Red Lake shootings - (10 deaths)
• 2002, January 16 - Appalachian School of Law shooting - (3 dead)
• 1999, 20 April - Columbine High School massacre - (15 deaths)
• 1998, May 21 - Thurston High School shooting - (4 deaths)
• 1998, March 24 - Mitchell Johnson and Andrew Golden - (5 deaths)
• 1997, December 1 - Heath High School shooting - (3 dead)
• 1997, October 1 - Pearl High School shooting - (3 dead)
• 1996, August 15 - San Diego State University shooting - (3 dead)
• 1996, February 2 - Frontier Middle School shooting - (3 dead)
• 1992, May 1 - Lindhurst High School shooting - (3 dead)
• 1991, 1 November - University of Iowa shooting - (6 deaths)
• 1989, 17 January - Stockton schoolyard shooting - (6 deaths)^[29]
• 1976, 12 July - California State University, Fullerton massacre - (7 deaths)
• 1974, December 30 - Olean High School shooting - (3 dead)
• 1970, 4 May - Kent State shootings (4 deaths)
• 1966, 12 November - Mesa, Arizona - (5 deaths) ^[30]
• 1966, 1 August - University of Texas tower shooting - (17 deaths)
• 1940, May 6 - Pasadena - (5 deaths) ^{[22][31][32][25]}
• 1898, December 13 - Charleston - (6 deaths) ^[26]
• 1893, March 26 - Plain Dealing high school - (4 deaths) ^[27]
• 1868, December 22 - (3 dead) ^[33]
• 1764, July 26 - Enoch Brown (10 deaths)

 

more than enough examples that maybe, JUST MAYBE, that right the Founding Fathers May be, but they might ALSO have not imagined the future we find ourselves in now. That’s the beauty of your system, you can examine things from the present perspective and add new amendments. 

So that is a total of 264 deaths in your examples. 

Would you want to repeal Freedom of Speech, or Freedom of Religion, or the Right to Gather, if there were 264 deaths involved in those?

I don't want to say "just" 264 deaths, but in the context of say, deaths in Chicago, in one year (650) is that a statistically significant number?

I don't want to see anyone shot, but really Appeals to Emotion, and such, are all the Media is trying to do here.

[+DieChecker]

5 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

OK I can get behind arming them with non lethal rounds.  I've simply seen too many people absolutely crumble when the SHTF for me to think arming teachers , or anyone whose job isn't specifically to deal with the SHTF,  with lethal munition is a good idea. 

Even then I'm still not sure that's the greatest idea. The professional world has moved to specialties for a reason. 

Perhaps it is time for it to move again? Toward not only an educator, but a Guardian as well.

[Farmer77]

Just now, DieChecker said:

Perhaps it is time for it to move again? Toward not only an educator, but a Guardian as well.

If our education system were the best in the world and our educators were so proficient at their jobs that they had demonstrated the capability to take on more duties I would agree. As is though ? 

IDK I guess I don't really have an answer or position  I'm just talking it out. 

[Unusual Tournament]

15 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

OK I can get behind arming them with non lethal rounds.  I've simply seen too many people absolutely crumble when the SHTF for me to think arming teachers , or anyone whose job isn't specifically to deal with the SHTF,  with lethal munition is a good idea. 

Even then I'm still not sure that's the greatest idea. The professional world has moved to specialties for a reason. 

not just for the reason you mentioned (very valid of course) but it doesn't seem right arming every teacher or even any teacher. maybe a security guard or even a police officer permanently stationed in a school might be a better idea. you know it seems that all these school shootings are done by current students and recently left ones. so how 'bout increasing the age of firearm ownership to say over 30? 

[+and-then]

On 2/20/2018 at 6:24 PM, Likely Guy said:

...and the universities, and the day care centres, and public pools, and public parks, and the YM and YWCAs - well basically anywhere where young people might gather.

Yep, that'll solve the problem.

Solve it?  No... save some lives?  Absolutely.  What's wrong with that approach?

[Paranormal Panther]

1 hour ago, Rlyeh said:

"Some American towns are safer than Asian and European countries."

You're actually comparing a town to a country. My house is safer than some countries too.

But what does any of this have to do with your invisible friend? If you wanted an honest conversation you wouldn't be defending such asinine statements.

That's cute, but my point is that it's a complex situation due to our demographics and geography. You can't make blanket statements about our whole country without sounding like a clueless moron. I don't know what you mean by "invisible friend", but it sounds quite asinine. You make no sense.

[Rlyeh]

Just now, Paranormal Panther said:

That's cute, but my point is that it's a complex situation due to our demographics and geography. You can't make blanket statements about our whole country without sounding like a clueless moron. I don't know what you mean by "invisible friend", but it sounds quite asinine. You make no sense.

Of course you don't because you didn't bother to read what I was originally responding to, which was the claim these things happen because people don't have God. You could've read it and saved yourself "sounding like a clueless moron".

[Farmer77]

12 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

so how 'bout increasing the age of firearm ownership to say over 30? 

I'm actually really impressed the republicans are talking about raising the age to 21. I know it seems small but for that side of the aisle to show any willingness to touch that holy 3rd rail is a great sign of progress. 

[Paranormal Panther]

5 minutes ago, Rlyeh said:

Of course you don't because you didn't bother to read what I was originally responding to, which was the claim these things happen because people don't have God. You could've read it and saved yourself "sounding like a clueless moron".

Go jump in the lake. Play your games with someone else.

[Unusual Tournament]

Just now, Farmer77 said:

I'm actually really impressed the republicans are talking about raising the age to 21. I know it seems small but for that side of the aisle to show any willingness to touch that holy 3rd rail is a great sign of progress. 

isn't the legal drinking age in the states 21? if it is sounds a little crazy to allow someone to own a gun at age 18

[Farmer77]

Just now, Captain Risky said:

isn't the legal drinking age in the states 21? if it is sounds a little crazy to allow someone to own a gun at age 18

Yeah it is. IDK man I'm so torn on the issue. I owned my first rifle at 10, grew up carrying guns everywhere, even had a gun save my life more than once and beyond all that I am a true believer in an armed populace being able to prevent the wholesale slaughter of innocents by tyrannical forces. BUT man we have got a **** pile of a mess in this nation. 

[psyche101]

48 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

No offense Psyche, but that is nonsense. Civilians in civil war zones across the world have consistently stood up to invasion forces and often given a good showing. An armed US populous, if it turned on the FedGov, would be unstoppable. 

Once armed civilians get involved, warfare quickly becomes a losing proposition for any military retaining morality.

Hey DC

 

How is it nonsense? An old fashioned Bombing raid would knock the stuffing out of any insurgency, let alone the new toys they have, look at the people who took that national park a couple years ago. All they had to do was lock them in and sit and wait. They did themselves in. With plans generals and the best warfare has to offer it would be over before you started. It's not a few thousand using human shields hiding in caves that they would be dealing with. 

Drones would win the war not guns. 

[+DieChecker]

1 hour ago, Farmer77 said:

If our education system were the best in the world and our educators were so proficient at their jobs that they had demonstrated the capability to take on more duties I would agree. As is though ? 

IDK I guess I don't really have an answer or position  I'm just talking it out. 

I'd rather we have simply competent teachers who also could protect their students. We don't need every teacher to be a teacher of the year, or a Harvard taught PhD.

[+DieChecker]

1 hour ago, Farmer77 said:

Yeah it is. IDK man I'm so torn on the issue. I owned my first rifle at 10, grew up carrying guns everywhere, even had a gun save my life more than once and beyond all that I am a true believer in an armed populace being able to prevent the wholesale slaughter of innocents by tyrannical forces. BUT man we have got a **** pile of a mess in this nation. 

It is true, but the demographics of gun violence don't mesh well with Identity Politics, so solving the violence isn't going to be a Progressive issue. Just making those violent people less lethal then is their answer.

The Conservative answer likewise isn't very good, which is usually to arm the "good" people. Because that forces those good people to be required to act and to bare responsibility. Which is not a good thing if forced onto you.

[+DieChecker]

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

Hey DC

 

How is it nonsense? An old fashioned Bombing raid would knock the stuffing out of any insurgency, let alone the new toys they have, look at the people who took that national park a couple years ago. All they had to do was lock them in and sit and wait. They did themselves in. With plans generals and the best warfare has to offer it would be over before you started. It's not a few thousand using human shields hiding in caves that they would be dealing with. 

Drones would win the war not guns. 

So, what you describe won the war in Syria a long time ago? No, the situation in Syria and Iraq, with ISIS is such that a couple tens of thousands of uneducated, untrained fanatics held off the world powers for years and years. And you suggest that a bombing raid will stop insurrectionists flat? Why didn't Hitler win in Russia? He had vastly better machines and troops? Look at the US v Vietnam war. Look at the Taliban war in Afghanistan. Look at any number of wars where the enemy can hide among the civilians. It is not an easy war. 

Or, are you suggesting that the US military just carpet bomb rebelling regions? Kill fifty non combatants for every rebel killed? 

Now who is not being realistic??

True, if the assumption is that a hundred, or even a thousand, people turned against the US FedGov, the end result would not be in doubt. But, that isn't what is being discussed here. This is about a revolution against a dictatorial US government that has failed to respond to the will of the people, and a huge percentage of the population decides to fight back. At that point, the FedGov has already lost. Without guns they'd be much less powerful and be much easier to ignore.

[Why not]

1 hour ago, Captain Risky said:

isn't the legal drinking age in the states 21? if it is sounds a little crazy to allow someone to own a gun at age 18

It sounds a little crazy allowing someone to own a gun at 18?  Hell, we send 18 year olds to war to get their asses shot off.

I don't know anymore. Maybe 21 is a good idea.   All I know is that if a criminal wants to buy a gun, you could make legel age 55 and it would do no good.

This needs to be stopped but, there are a lot more issues that need to be looked into besides new gun laws. Guns are not going away. Mental illness, kids prescribed depression and anti anxiety meds at such young ages, media coverage of these horrors being glorified to the next want-to-be "professional school shooter", the list goes on and on.

.

[Farmer77]

How does the group feel about banning racists from owning guns? The last two major shootings have been perpetrated by people who openly declared their racist beliefs, should we remove the ability to buy guns from those who openly proclaim their hate for another race? 

[Unusual Tournament]

24 minutes ago, Why not said:

It sounds a little crazy allowing someone to own a gun at 18?  Hell, we send 18 year olds to war to get their asses shot off.

I don't know anymore. Maybe 21 is a good idea.   All I know is that if a criminal wants to buy a gun, you could make legel age 55 and it would do no good.

This needs to be stopped but, there are a lot more issues that need to be looked into besides new gun laws. Guns are not going away. Mental illness, kids prescribed depression and anti anxiety meds at such young ages, media coverage of these horrors being glorified to the next want-to-be "professional school shooter", the list goes on and on.

.

sadly, its not about the majority of law abiding 18 year old's anymore but about the idiots out there. when i first read of the shooters remarks, wanting to be a "professional school shooter" my blood went to ice. imagine the horror some of those families must have gone through and worse still to come. i have a social worker friend that showed us a video on the development of the teenage brain and how on going it is up to the age of 27 and even beyond for some. thats not to say that all teenagers are not capable of making logical and sensible decisions like fight or flight or distinguish between reality and pretend, just that maturity and the ability to work through even the most basic of emotions and situations is more than a number. 

i understand the ongoing gun debate in the U.S. is highly charged and i see both sides but thinking that someone automatically becomes a responsible adult at 18 can drive a dangerous vehicle (i bet more teenagers dies in auto accidents than gun violence), own a gun and even go to war is ludicrous, imo.  

Edited February 23, 2018 by Captain Risky