Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso
high school teacher — a reserve police officer — accidentally discharged his gun during a lesson at Seaside High School in Seaside, Calif.,
"No one was seriously injured during the incident." I bet the students ears beg to differ
the term accidental discharge is no longer used in the Military they call it a negligent discharge and discipline follows for the supervisor and the trigger puller
He was Trained .. and we haven't even started a nation wide arming program
the laws of probability more guns equal more accidents & gun violence
|
What would it take, for a little honesty to take place here?
I am not a huge advocate of arming teachers. But no one said it would be perfect. If teachers have guns, there is the potential for more violence...the guns could go off accidentally, the teacher could snap and shoot up the school, a student could take the gun and shoot up the school. Those are the "cons" of arming teachers.
WDMSO, when you evaluate an idea, do you only look at the cons, or do you consider the pros, as well?
The idea of arming teachers offers the following potentially significant pros - it may deter some would-be shooters, it may help stop shootings from being worse than they otherwise would be.
Arming teachers might lead to some additional violence. But it's possible, that the violence it prevents, more than offsets that. So while the idea doesn't solve the problem, it might be an improvement over the status quo. That's the argument we need to have.
"the laws of probability more guns equal more accidents & gun violence"
When you ignore the deterrent effect, and you ignore the potential ability for a teacher to reduce the casualties of a shooting, you are right.
We will never get anywhere with thoughtless partisan rants.
Your logic is that perfect is the enemy of 'better'. It's thoughtless and dishonest.