Passing a gun ban would be an impractical way to solve the gun problem, unless you have a way to get current owners (like the killer's mom, who he swiped the murder weapon from) to give up their weapons. I recommend against force -- unless the government, in an attempt to look like it's in control, ends up with another Ruby Ridge.
No, a better solution will be to make guns unfashionable. From what I've studied about psychology they seem an impractical self-defense weapon for anybody not trained to kill. There's also the very real danger of friendly fire. My proposed alternative is bear mace. Not the dinky little keychain cans but foggers that're supposed to stop raging junkies.
No, I don't care about the lives of crazed gunmen but I feel that if every staff member had a can of bear fogger then there'd be a lot less deaths. I know this reads similar to the "If every teacher had a gun…" claims but as I've said before people tend to hesitate with guns (unless they're psychos or wannabe vigilantes). Even if a teacher is trained to kill there's one psycho and dozens of innocents. Who's more likely to be hit with a stray shot?
So…let's get talking! Show me evidence for or against my idea.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm a supporter of the Second Amendment, but I think arming all the teachers and faculty is not the answer. There are US military vets who are home now and some haven't found jobs. Hiring vets to help protect the children would be doing both parties a great favor.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Non-leathal approaches would certainly be a good compromise, and a bear fogger sounds just the ticket. If things go to custard at least there's no crossfire killing bystanders.
There's really no need for teachers to have guns, and it just opens up a whole range of risks to give guns to them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"If things go to custard"--Shifty, you just gave me a new phrase to throw around!
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry if it comes of as angry, but...
Why does it feel like no one knows you need a permit to actually carry a concealed weapon?
Also I seriously laugh at the notion it is a impractical self-defense weapon. A lot of people think a gun for self defense means kill/fatally wound the other guy. For a sane person, it will be a last resort. In many cases, someone knowing you have a concealed weapon will scare off a threat.
In addition, if you do in fact have a legal concealed weapon (and a permit) you most likely are proficient with it (they often require you to show proficiency with a firearm in live-fire courses). That alone highly reduces the chance there's a misfire and someone else get's hurt.
--
Also banning guns is a bunch of crap. It can't really be done at this point without extreme backlash. This would extremely punish the law-abiding people and sane gun owners that actually use them for self-defense or hobbies. If drugs in america taught me anything, people are still going to illegally obtain guns/drugs. In 1927, the biggest mass murder in a school happened not by guns, but by dynamite. Even banning both: People are still going to kill people.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am all for arming Bears with Maces...
Although Chuck Norris once used a bear as a mace.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry if it comes of as angry, but...
Why does it feel like no one knows you need a permit to actually carry a concealed weapon?
Also I seriously laugh at the notion it is a impractical self-defense weapon. A lot of people think a gun for self defense means kill/fatally wound the other guy. For a sane person, it will be a last resort. In many cases, someone knowing you have a concealed weapon will scare off a threat.
In addition, if you do in fact have a legal concealed weapon (and a permit) you most likely are proficient with it (they often require you to show proficiency with a firearm in live-fire courses). That alone highly reduces the chance there's a misfire and someone else get's hurt.
--
Also banning guns is a bunch of crap. It can't really be done at this point without extreme backlash. This would extremely punish the law-abiding people and sane gun owners that actually use them for self-defense or hobbies. If drugs in america taught me anything, people are still going to illegally obtain guns/drugs. In 1927, the biggest mass murder in a school happened not by guns, but by dynamite. Even banning both: People are still going to kill people.No one seriously is proposing banning guns...
Which seems odd, it works elsewhere.
I wonder if those who proposed the second amendment to your constitution imagined armed teachers in primary schools that had to be locked up once the kids were inside.
Anyone could wander into my primary school, they'd have been seen and contacted by staff: "Hello, are you looking for someone?" They wouldn't have been left unattended with us.
But we weren't locked away behind high fences.
The idea seems absurd, like just throwing up your hands and declaring society ruined rather than trying to build decent communities.
|
Anyone could wander into my primary school, they'd have been seen and contacted by staff: "Hello, are you looking for someone?" They wouldn't have been left unattended with us.
But we weren't locked away behind high fences.
And back when I was in elementary/primary school in the 1970's, while we had fences, the gates were not locked during school hours. And if someone wondered onto the campus they were approached by the staff as well...
Point is, the world has changed...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And back when I was in elementary/primary school in the 1970's, while we had fences, the gates were not locked during school hours. And if someone wondered onto the campus they were approached by the staff as well...
Point is, the world has changed...
It might surprise you, but right to this very day it is pretty much the norm all around the planet.
Point it, it wasn't the 'world' that changed.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I grew up and went to high school in the late 70s and early 80s. My school was in a very small, rural Arkansas town where most everyone (except me) liked to hunt. I can remember pickup trucks with rifles in gun racks during deer season, and one guy even killed a deer on his way to school one morning and they stored it in the cafeteria freezer until the end of the day for him. We carried pocket knives and openly displayed them to not only our friends, but our teachers would sometimes show us the ones they had on them at the time. Never, not one time, did anyone try to assault someone with either guns or knives.
I miss those days.
And the music was better... lol
I"ve been maced or peppersprayed twice, to pretty minimal effect. If you're a 70 year old lady a blind and ticked off burglar is still a threat.
I"ve been maced or peppersprayed twice, to pretty minimal effect. If you're a 70 year old lady a blind and ticked off burglar is still a threat.
I wonder if those who proposed the second amendment to your constitution imagined armed teachers in primary schools that had to be locked up once the kids were inside.
No, because that type of primary education is a 19th century invention?
I now return you to your regularly scheduled acrimonious gun debate.
|
I grew up and went to high school in the late 70s and early 80s. My school was in a very small, rural Arkansas town where most everyone (except me) liked to hunt. I can remember pickup trucks with rifles in gun racks during deer season, and one guy even killed a deer on his way to school one morning and they stored it in the cafeteria freezer until the end of the day for him. We carried pocket knives and openly displayed them to not only our friends, but our teachers would sometimes show us the ones they had on them at the time. Never, not one time, did anyone try to assault someone with either guns or knives.
I miss those days.
And the music was better... lol
80s and 90s were like that where im from.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the op is trying to say people should be able to carry mace instead of guns.
I at first thought he ment mace rated to take down bears. As that would be superstrong stuff.
I like my ideas of giving maces to bears or giving bears to Chuck Norris to use as a mace. I can imagine nothing more terrifying than a very grumpy bear being swung at me by Chuck as he axe kicked me in the face.
Okay, stupid question time: Is bear mace a specific kind of mace spray? Or is it a literal mace, like the bludgeoning weapon, made with bear teeth or something?
It's pepper spray on steroids. 2 million heat units on the Scoville scale.
Okay, stupid question time: Is bear mace a specific kind of mace spray? Or is it a literal mace, like the bludgeoning weapon, made with bear teeth or something?It's pepper spray on steroids. 2 million heat units on the Scoville scale.
Cool or should I say Hot.....
Chuck Norris duel wielding mace bears armed with bear mace.....
Just one word: halberds.
I"ve been maced or peppersprayed twice, to pretty minimal effect. ...
!!!
WTF?Has Black Friday shopping just gotten really out of control, or do you live in a rough area or something.
PS I know (not from experience) pepperspray is illegal in NYC, and if you use it against a cop, you are in serious legal trouble.
I could be wrong, but I think the idea of using bear mace in an enclosed space with the perpetrator is likely to incapacitate the person using it as well.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
A self-selected group of people who fantasize about weapons constantly is probably not going to come up with a solution.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A self-selected group of people who fantasize about weapons constantly is probably not going to come up with a solution.
You shouldn't talk about gamers that way. Some of us is good people.
I rarely fantasize about weapons...
I"ve been maced or peppersprayed twice, to pretty minimal effect. ...!!!
WTF?Has Black Friday shopping just gotten really out of control, or do you live in a rough area or something.
My random encounter dice are weighted.
First time was in highschool: honors biology class. Someone was keeping mace on a keychain (i don't know why. The school and the area around it were very safe unless you were low on the pecking order, and she wasn't) It just went off and hit me in the side of the head, shoulder etc. I was okish, most of the rest of the class was gagging.
Second time was in college. A frat party got out of hand, we went to toss people out. One of the criminal justice guys objected to having to leave and whipped out his pepper spray and started spraying everyone. The one person i was worried about not being able to toss out bodily went down crying and pulling at his shirt. I grabbed a smaller partyier and used them to shove people out the door.
those and tasers are technically illegal upstate but no one seems to care.
It probably works fairly well, so long as the bear is not holding a gun.
I refuse to abrogate my constitutionally guaranteed rights to arm bears!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I say that if you want to go with a non-lethal form of self defense such as this, that should be encouraged. I'm not anti-gun when it comes to self defense, but guns aren't for everyone, and if we can provide for another tool that doesn't kill the assailant, I'm all for it. That way, if somebody isn't comfortable with a gun, they can still have at least some protection.
As for issuing it in a school setting, I'd much prefer it over a firearm. At least if a teacher misuses spray (and I do think there will be inevitable incidents of misuse) there won't be corpses. As pro-gun as I am, I can't say the same about a pistol or shotgun.
Studies have shown that unarmed community law enforcement at a school is actually more effective at lowering crime than an armed officer.
There are also studies showing that the presence of an armed officer lowers student performance (though there's a racial divide on this, white kids had lower performance, while black kids had not change).
Aren't the liberals supposed to propose government programs that do the opposite of what is intended?
Aren't the liberals supposed to propose government programs that do the opposite of what is intended?
Only in fantasy land, at least if you mean American liberals.
Only in fantasy land, at least if you mean American liberals.
Aren't the liberals supposed to propose government programs that do the opposite of what is intended?
It was a joke, sorry for not including [sarcasm] tags.
It was a joke, sorry for not including [sarcasm] tags.Only in fantasy land, at least if you mean American liberals.
Aren't the liberals supposed to propose government programs that do the opposite of what is intended?
It's the internet. No harm done. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll probably regret posting in a political thread, but...
No one seriously is proposing banning guns.
If you mean on this board, perhaps not. If you mean in general, you aren't paying attention. There are many groups out there who seek to ban private ownership of firearms completely.
Will that "extremely punish the law-abiding people and sane gun owners"?
Yes. Your view of "sensible" & "sane" is probably very different from that of most gun owners.
If a weapon is concealed, how is the potential threat scared off?
The knowledge that a specific person has a concealed weapon may not scare someone off. In fact, odds are it will make them the first target if someone decides to become violent. The knowledge that any number of people may be armed, however, is far more likely to deter them if they feel they are likely to be killed by a bystander defending themselves or others.
Which seems odd, it works elsewhere.
Current statitstics indicate that there are between 270 & 310 million guns in civilian hands in the United States. I'll leave it to you to do the math, but do consider that many of those who own them would rather give up almost any other right guaranteed by the Constitution than the one right which gives them the option to defend or retake those rights. Though I suppose you can campaign a constitutional amendment, I imagine it will work slightly less well than Prohibition.
I wonder if those who proposed the second amendment to your constitution imagined armed teachers in primary schools that had to be locked up once the kids were inside.
Quite possibly, especially given that one of the policies of the British was to utilize private homes to house their troops and the point of the Second Amendment was not to defend the right to hunt (as that would have seemed about as odd a notion as defending the right to farm in their day), but rather the right to defend themselves from tyranny, both foreign & domestic. I would be rather surprised if there wasn't at least a few cases of British soldiers during the revolution finding themselves in schools with children about.
Regarding the original poster - I usually recommend against using mace or pepper spray of any kind as its effects are far too unpredictable and can easily incapacitate the user as much or more than the assailant. It's also very common for the military to train in acclimating themselves to teargas which is stronger than most anything commonly available on the civilian market. If you aren't willing to use lethal force to defend yourself, your best bet is to try to make a lot of noise and run towards a crowd.
-TimD
GeraintElberion wrote:
I wonder if those who proposed the second amendment to your constitution imagined armed teachers in primary schools that had to be locked up once the kids were inside.Quite possibly, especially given that one of the policies of the British was to utilize private homes to house their troops and the point of the Second Amendment was not to defend the right to hunt (as that would have seemed about as odd a notion as defending the right to farm in their day), but rather the right to defend themselves from tyranny, both foreign & domestic.
Quite possibly, especially given that one of the policies of the British was to utilize private homes to house their troops and the point of the Second Amendment was not to defend the right to hunt (as that would have seemed about as odd a notion as defending the right to farm in their day), but rather the...Ah... the old tyranny myth.
The second ammendment was about having an armed citizen militia rather then a standing army. The framers writings and actions demonstrate this, as does over two hundred years of case law until the thoery that the Second Amendment was about personal gun ownership was invented in the 1970s and enshrined by a nitwit and his sock puppet in the 2000s.
Hmm. How strange, I thought Malcolm X died before the seventies.
Yes, as I recall, they passed a gun control law and then he got killed.