Another dumber than dirt demoncrat

[cheri1122]

I guess when there is no logical response, a silly one is warranted...

So here's your logical response: putting words in the mouths of those who never said or implied them ["another Democrat thinks people are either to {sic} stupid"] and jeering at the invention is not a logical [or intelligent] response.
If teachers wanted to be armed protectors, they would have pursued education in law enforcement. Ditto for everyone from convenience store clerks to brain surgeons. According to your 'logic', they should all carry weapons, just in case.
And if all gun owners were intelligent people, I wouldn't have read in today's local [Nashville, Ar] police blotter about handguns being stolen from unlocked vehicles. Yes, handguns, plural. How stupid is that?!

 

[layoutshooter]

I don't remember school shootings being a concern until the last 15 or 20 years. A breakdown in moral and social order produces all kinds of unanticipated problems. There is no quick fix for the societal mess we have in the US. Too often nowadays, a teenager with hurt feelings reaches for a gun. Somewhere in all of this is a misplaced and over-inflated sense of self among our youngsters.

I do agree that there is a problem with MANY people out there today, not just young people.

Having said that, to state that school shootings were not a concern until the last 20 years, or so, is to ignore the reality of history.

List of school shootings in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and then there was this

Bath School disaster - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[layoutshooter]

Yeah, well, people have the right to be an idiot, too, but we don't hold that against them. Mainly because no one is talking about having only one officer on campus.

Oh, wait....

How many on each campus? One at every door? How many would that be, per school district? How much are they to be paid? How will it be afforded? How many "extra" will you need to cover days off, sickness etc? How much will the benefits cost? No one seems to want to answer these questions.

Don't want teachers and staff armed? Fine, that is OKEE DOKEE. What is your alternative?

 

[Turtle]

I do agree that there is a problem with MANY people out there today, not just young people.

Having said that, to state that school shootings were not a concern until the last 20 years, or so, is to ignore the reality of history.

List of school shootings in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and then there was this

Bath School disaster - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Just because something happened before in history doesn't mean it was all that much of a concern historically. If it was, then clearly none of us would even know a time where teachers were unarmed in class, as by the end of the 1880s there would have been a national cry to have teachers armed, and they'd be armed ever since. The cry for armed teachers is a rather new cry, which makes me think it's a political solution based on an agenda rather than a workable solution.

Have armed citizens ever successfully intervened to bring down a potential mass shooter? Yeah, but it's very, very rare. It's so rare that when it happens, people with the agenda will be all over it like white on rice, and will jump up and down screaming, "See! See! See!"

The the fact is (meaning, true, verifiable, look it up) most citizen armed interventions are not successful at all at preventing, mitigating or stopping anything, and are either involved after the fact (in chase and apprehension) or most likely, they are left severely injured or have been killed.

Armed intervention by retired and off-duty police officers who have been trained to react are far more common, and far more successful. One glaring example was the 2002 shooting at the Appalachian Law School where a student about to be suspended opened fire killing 3 people, and was quickly subdued by three other students. The three students who subdued him were police officers working on getting their law degrees. People will sometimes, often actually, point to these incidents and go, "See! See! See!" to bolster their position that armed citizens everywhere will prevent mass shootings. And they are utterly ignorant for doing so.

 

[layoutshooter]

And the solution is?

 

[Turtle]

How many on each campus?

Depends on the size and layout of the campus.

One at every door?

Locked doors that only open from the inside, probably not. Open doors and entrances, probably, depending on the layout of the building.

How many would that be, per school district?

Depends on how many schools, and doors, in the school district.

How much are they to be paid?

I would think the average salary of a teacher, or of a police officer, which are roughly the same, should be plenty.

How will it be afforded?

The same way the salaries of teachers and police officers are currently afforded.

How many "extra" will you need to cover days off, sickness etc?

A very minimal number, possibly none. An elementary school with 3 armed officers can probably get by for one day with 2 in the event of a sick day, and days off are pretty much covered by the weekends, anyway. A larger high school with weekend classes and activities are going to have more officers and work them in shifts, so there would be more than enough to fill in as needed.

How much will the benefits cost?

Too much, same as teachers and police officers currently, because they'll be in a union.

No one seems to want to answer these questions.

Wait. What? Huh?

Don't want teachers and staff armed? Fine, that is OKEE DOKEE. What is your alternative?

Asked and answered. Oh, I see, now I understand why you say, "No one seems to want to answer these questions." It's because they do get answered, but you ignore them. If the answer was, "Let's arm teachers, administrators and janitors," that's an answer you'd hear. Got it.


The problem with this issue is that people want to work it politically, furthering their political agenda (be it pro-gun or anti-gun). Instead, they need to work the problem. In this case, the problem is school security, namely, lack thereof. If you work the problem, it's not hard to conclude that security needs to be increased. How do you do that? You don't do it by simply adding more tools of security, you do it by adding more people trained in security.

Guns don't kill people, people do.

Guns don't provide security, people do.

 

[Turtle]

And the solution is?

Just click it.

 

[layoutshooter]

But NOTHING is being done. NOTHING will be done. Safety is NOT the primary concern here.

You say I am "ignoring" solutions" but no solution is being put into place. So I must assume that, for the time being, there are none.

 

[aquitted]

My wife is a school teacher she says she doesn't want to learn how to use a gun thats not her job.

 

[Turtle]

But NOTHING is being done. NOTHING will be done. Safety is NOT the primary concern here.

You're right, safety is not the primary concern, at least not of those who are in the forefront of implementing changes. Their own political agenda is the primary concern.

You say I am "ignoring" solutions" but no solution is being put into place. So I must assume that, for the time being, there are none.

No solution is being put into place, therefore there are no solutions.

How do you function day to day using that logic? How to you drive a truck with that logic? If you have a flat tire, and you haven't yet started putting air into the tire, do you really believe there is no air, or that there is no way to get air into the tire?

I think what you mean to say is, "There is no solution that meets my political approval, and until there is one, I won't bother entertaining alternatives."

 

[LDB]

My wife is a school teacher she says she doesn't want to learn how to use a gun thats not her job.

Then she shouldn't be one of the ones that volunteers because they want to do it. Maybe nobody at a particular school will want to so nobody will volunteer. Perfectly fine. They should have the option if they so choose.

And I can't speak for anyone else, but anyone idiotic enough to believe my position is based on politics is an idiot since we're so eager to say idiot in this thread. That specific issue isn't political for me, it's strictly based on greater safety for students. It can be properly structured and implemented to achieve that. I'll leave it to the idiots to disagree and be wrong.

 

[Ragman]

And I can't speak for anyone else, but anyone idiotic enough to believe my position is based on politics is an idiot since we're so eager to say idiot in this thread.

This from the person that call anybody that disagrees with him politically - A dumber than dirt moron.

 

[muttly]

He said that 'specific issue.'

 

[Turtle]

That specific issue isn't political...

I just sprayed Mt Dew out of my nose.

And I'm drinking iced tea.

 

[aristotle]

This from the person that call anybody that disagrees with him politically - A dumber than dirt moron.

Even Charlie Brown knows the perils of going about unarmed:

Charlie Brown in Indian Country at Scratchpad, the home of temporary mini-wikis!

 

[RLENT]

I just sprayed Mt Dew out of my nose.

And I'm drinking iced tea.

I need to make the time to at least peek in here daily ... just too much comedic goodness to miss ...

 

[cheri1122]

This from the person that call anybody that disagrees with him politically - A dumber than dirt moron.

From the person who titled the thread "Another dumber than dirt demoncrat [sic]", and wondered how a Governor who supports armed security in schools could place political hatred of guns ahead of security for students - how could anyone possibly think it's political?

 

[Turtle]

From the person who titled the thread "Another dumber than dirt demoncrat [sic]", and wondered how a Governor who supports armed security in schools could place political hatred of guns ahead of security for students - how could anyone possibly think it's political?

Because they think politics only mean government party politics. They've never heard of office politics, for example. Or fail to understand that politics in general is to deal with people in an opportunistic, manipulative, or devious way, as for job advancement or to further a belief.