Current Events > Question for the "We should arm teachers" crowd on CE.

(+) Yeah! (+)

Ranting__Nord posted...

Nobody's really clarified how a teacher with a gun that's already been shot is going to stop someone else with a gun. I'm also pretty sure you'd be hard pressed to find someone that's willing to point a gun at a 6 year old, pull the trigger, and extinguish their life. And I'm pretty sure Ulvalde, for example, had a complex safety plan in place that didn't help.

Ulvalde was an aging school that was falling apart. The door failing to lock like it was supposed to was how the gunman got in. The plans infrastructure failed.

FAQ-Checker posted...

Ulvalde was an aging school that was falling apart. The door failing to lock like it was supposed to was how the gunman got in. The plans infrastructure failed.

if a lock can fail, then why do we even have locks at all? why aren't you advocating for getting rid of all locks because they aren't 100% effective like you are advocating for not having any form of control control because it's not 100% effective?

Punished_Blinx posted...

Yeah it's a conundrum after giving gun nuts half a century of what they wanted. This is the result.

Think how bad it's gonna look in another 50 years unchecked?

Well I mean when you finally get lawmakers to get on board I fully expect you to get in the stack with Whoopi Goldberg when it is time to come take them./s

Also you said half a century of gun nuts getting what they wanted? You are aware that gun laws are more restrictive now than they were 50 years ago right? The biggest gun control act of all time (and still in place) happened in 1986, and from 1994-2003 it was even more restricted. I mean you used to be able to buy a machine gun at sears, and about 90 years ago they were cheap and commonplace.

meestermj posted...

It is not an unlawful searchbif its a codified law, and if the inspections and penalties are codified it would be a lawful seizure.

Its an unlawful search by the very premise; youre proposing that, in order to exercise one Constitutional right, people need to give up part of another. Its asinine, and its inherently unconstitutional.

The 4th amendment protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, and its absolutely unreasonable to suggest that any gun owner is subject to inspections within the confines of their own homes.

It would never stand.

DoesntMatter posted...

if a lock can fail, then why do we even have locks at all? why aren't you advocating for getting rid of all locks because they aren't 100% effective like you are advocating for not having any form of control control because it's not 100% effective?

Me saying that no law would have stopped this specific situation is not the same thing as me saying no laws should exist. You understand that, right?

Im pretty sure metal detectors can fail too.
What if there was laws that made it so the woman wouldnt have had a gun? That probably would have stopped this.

Ranting__Nord posted...

Im pretty sure metal detectors can fail too.

So you would give teachers the option to arm themselves as a backup?

Patchwork posted...

Its an unlawful search by the very premise; youre proposing that, in order to exercise one Constitutional right, people need to give up part of another. Its asinine, and its inherently unconstitutional.

The 4th amendment protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, and its absolutely unreasonable to suggest that any gun owner is subject to inspections within the confines of their own homes.

It would never stand.

But, but, stationing British soldiers inside your residence wouldn't be unconstitutional if we codified it!!!

Ranting__Nord posted...

What if there was laws that made it so the woman wouldnt have had a gun? That probably would have stopped this.

And what law would that be?

yemmy posted...

Well I mean when you finally get lawmakers to get on board I fully expect you to get in the stack with Whoopi Goldberg when it is time to come take them./s

Also you said half a century of gun nuts getting what they wanted? You are aware that gun laws are more restrictive now than they were 50 years ago right? The biggest gun control act of all time (and still in place) happened in 1986, and from 1994-2003 it was even more restricted. I mean you used to be able to buy a machine gun at sears, and about 90 years ago they were cheap and commonplace.

Guns being available at a place like Sears was a failure to begin with yes and things would be even worse if that was never remedied.

It's still failing today though.

FAQ-Checker posted...

And what law would that be?

Well Im in favor of getting rid of all guns. And no, arming teachers as a backup wouldnt be my solution. Can you answer my question about the teacher firing back after being shot? Or if theyre supposed to shoot first?

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Uh what. Thats exactly what happened. I didnt even offer an opinion there. Thats just what happened. Ulvade was like a 70+ year old school. It was falling apart and the door lock failed. No one remembers the teacher getting falsely blamed for leaving the door open?

It's really telling that I'm mostly pro gun, and regularly plink with my BiL yet the people in this thread are just rabid foaming at the mouth pro gun.

None of you are willing to entertain any possible solution besides "more guns".
Just admit it. You care less about the lives of actual children than you do about "muh rights".

You know what? Anyone that thinks relying on a multi century old document to dictate their life in current day has no place in a rational thinking society.

You know why we have ammendments? Because sometimes we realize the constitution is either wrong or lacking, so we fix it.

It's time to fix the fucking problem.

Why do people act like amendment 18 and 21 never existed?

Punished_Blinx posted...

Guns being available at a place like Sears was a failure to begin with yes and things would be even worse if that was never remedied.

It's still failing today though.

I just fail to see how you think guns are only a half century old, or that a shitload of people didn't have guns more than half a century ago, or maybe why you thought the same weapons weren't available to us half a century ago. Wait, I have an idea, maybe it is because people weren't shooting each other like crazy half a century ago.

But the laws were more lax on guns, and semi automatic rifles with large magazines DID exist back then, and gun ownership was at the same rate as it is now, so how could this be?

Well obviously it is the guns fault. /S

FAQ-Checker posted...

Me saying that no law would have stopped this specific situation is not the same thing as me saying no laws should exist. You understand that, right?

i understand that you've been saying this entire time that stricter gun control measures would be useless because they are never going to be 100% effective, so we shouldn't bother with them

why aren't you saying the same thing about locks?

Punished_Blinx posted...

Guns being available at a place like Sears was a failure to begin with yes and things would be even worse if that was never remedied.

Now wait a minute. Lets remember just how old Sears is/was. They were selling guns back when they were delivered by horse. (Im assuming. Not really sure when they first started selling guns.) I think your point would have made more sense if you said Kmart or Walmart.

Ranting__Nord posted...

Well Im in favor of getting rid of all guns.

Well how the hell are you going to do that?

Can you answer my question about the teacher firing back after being shot? Or if theyre supposed to shoot first?

Thats an impossible question that would differ in every situation, but my opinion would be that the teacher would be justified in firing the moment they saw any gun.

FAQ-Checker posted...

but my opinion would be that the teacher would be justified in firing the moment they saw any gun.

So the punishment for the crime of having a gun is death?

yemmy posted...

I just fail to see how you think guns are only a half century old, or that a shitload of people didn't have guns half a century ago, or maybe why you thought the same weapons weren't available to us half a century ago. Wait, I have an idea, maybe it is because people weren't shooting each other like crazy half a century ago.

But the laws were more lax on guns, and semi automatic rifles with large magazines DID exist back the, and gun ownership was at the same rate as it is now, so how could this be?

Well obviously it is the guns fault. /S

Dude the fucking President was shot in the head in the 60s.

A guy shot several people from a clocktower as well.

Those moments should have been the wake up call that a regular person can do a lot of damage with a gun.

Instead more and more guns got pumped into the US and now here you are. In a topic where there's a conversation about how a door didn't stop a classroom of kids being killed.

Also make no mistake "I want to get rid of all the guns" and "only police and military should have guns" are synonymous statements. One can't exist without the other.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

I feel like youre projecting A LOT here. Me pointing out that the schools safety infrastructure failed is not me absolving the shooter of guilt. Come back down to Earth.

Ranting__Nord posted...

So the punishment for the crime of having a gun is death?

In certain situations, it can be. The teacher has a greater responsibility to all the other lives in that room. If you draw a gun in a classroom then youve forced that teachers hand.

I can't believe people are seriously arguing about a teacher needing to gun down a 6 year old kid in their classroom.

The fucking crazy thing is it's America so it's probably just a matter of time at this point.

Punished_Blinx posted...

Dude the fucking President was shot in the head in the 60s.

Good thing that never happened before the 60s!

The kid was 6 so what if they thought they could bring it to show and tell or just to show their friends? They pull it out and get murdered.

Punished_Blinx posted...

Dude the fucking President was shot in the head in the 60s.

Yes and now doing something like that would damn near be impossible. After that happened we beefed up security on the president.

Punished_Blinx posted...

Instead more and more guns got pumped into the US and now here you are. In a topic where there's a conversation about how a door didn't stop a classroom of kids being killed.

"Pumped into the US" oh you mean sold to people who wanted them?

Also the president gets beefed up security, but kids just get a door? Why are we only giving kids a door?

yemmy posted...

Yes and now doing something like that would damn near be impossible. After that happened we beefed up security on the president.

Shame that isn't feasible for everyone else

yemmy posted...

"Pumped into the US" oh you mean sold to people who wanted them?

And look where you are half a century later because of it.

At least own up to it. This is the society you get when it's filled with guns.

yemmy posted...

Also the president gets beefed up security, but kids just get a door? Why are we only giving kids a door?

You know schools in other first world countries don't have to resemble prisons to keep kids safe right?

Ranting__Nord posted...

The kid was 6 so what if they thought they could bring it to show and tell or just to show their friends? They pull it out and get murdered.

Like I said, its an impossible situation. And I say that as someone whos best friend in the 90s actually got in trouble for bringing an antique gun to school for a history project. But the world changed. Teachers have a responsibility to safe guard the other children and we dont live in a world where you can give the benefit of the doubt anymore. If a kid whips out a gun in class then a teacher is morally obligated to act, even if that means lethal force.

I think thats my problem with guns in general. Until youve actually shot someone with your gun, your only crime is simply having the thing. And the transition from one to the other is an instant.

That and the fact that their only purpose is murder.

FAQ-Checker posted...

but my opinion would be that the teacher would be justified in firing the moment they saw any gun.

No rational human being is going to shoot a six year old with a gun you fucking lunatic. They're going to try and get it away from them.

Our mods, ladies and gentlemen

TheOtherMike posted...

No rational human being is going to shoot a six year old with a gun you fucking lunatic. They're going to try and get it away from them.

You may be right, but that decision may also cost some children their lives. Like I said, its an impossible situation.

yemmy posted...

Our mods, ladies and gentlemen

Still superior to the users that want coldblooded childmurderers as teachers.

Foppe posted...

Still superior to the users that want coldblooded childmurderers as teachers.

Lol

Gun worshippers embrace child murder every time they shrug and say "nothing can be done" when school shootings happen, all because they can't stand the thought of not having the easiest possible access to their favorite toys.

So it's no surprise they're cool with it here.

Just because I think theyre bad and dumb doesnt mean you cant think theyre good. Sometimes I hope to change an opinion, but I dont think I will. So Ill be done with the thread.

Foppe posted...

Still superior to the users that want coldblooded childmurderers as teachers.

I don't want it. I just recognize it as an option in a no-win scenario.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

I don't know... have you seen the Brazil subreddit? There's probably not many school shootings just because no one makes it to the school.

FAQ-Checker posted...

I don't know... have you seen the Brazil subreddit? There's probably not many school shootings just because no one makes it to the school.

wow, so basically you're saying that nations other than the US are poor and uneducated, and that's why they don't have school shootings?

DoesntMatter posted...

wow, so basically you're saying that nations other than the US are poor and uneducated, and that's why they don't have school shootings?

Uh... no. You just said that.
I just said Brazil was wilin' out.

yemmy is no longer an active member. And I think some of his posts ITT were deleted.

Anyway, I'm personally pro-gun in some respects, mainly that as long as the rich elite and the police get to have them then the poorest among us should as well, especially minority groups. I think it's fine to own a gun to hunt. I think it's fine to own a gun to defend your home. I think it's fine to own a gun because you like to go to the range and practice your marksmanship. I think that's all perfectly fine.

But that doesn't mean there can't be laws and regulations and practices that hold gun owners more accountable for their safe storage and keep them away from schools and out of the hands of literal children.

And as a teacher I abhor the thought of ever even knowing there's a gun in my classroom. Arming teachers is the worst possible solution to the problem I've ever heard, and I'm appalled that some people actually said the quiet part out loud in this topic: they're okay with teachers shooting children in their ideal world.

Also gun enthusiasm is perfectly fine but gun culture is cringe. I'm talking about the conventions with concealed carry fashion shows and don't tread on me flags at every vendor. That shit is toxic and can go away. The NRA should be seized, gutted, and its shareholders prosecuted. Take all of their money. Funnel it all towards the victims of gun violence and towards gun violence prevention.

ZMythos posted...

The NRA should be seized, gutted, and its shareholders prosecuted.

What are you going to charge them with?