Fox tell Trump to arm Teachers

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Its actually that you hear what you want to hear.

This is what Trump actually said, which kind of echos what he said he said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.c7af90f414fb

" A gun-free zone to a maniac — because they’re all cowards — a gun-free zone is, let’s go in and let’s attack, because bullets aren’t coming back at us.."

Two problems:
1. It wasn't a gun free zone. Guns didn't prevent Vegas, Douglas high, Fort Hood, Columbine...
2. Most of these crazed people are looking for a final shoot out, so the idea of "let's attack, because bullets aren't coming back" doesn't hold up.

[Pete F.]

See below in red

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"If the weapon that the school shooter had was not semiautomatic I would surmise that the coach would have stopped him "

Major Hasan used a pistol, and he killed 13 trained soldiers, and shot more than 30 others, before being stopped. I agree that a pistols are less deadly than rifles with high capacity magazines, but this is one small piece of the puzzle. I suspect Major Hasan had some training and they are all small pieces

"The only time so far that a gun was fired by a pilot was by accident "
The pilot was in a plane and shot thru the fuselage,
not in a school surrounded by classrooms, #^&#^&#^&#^& happens
Not sure what your point is. In my town, I'm not sure a cop has fired a weapon on duty in 20 years. Does that mean they don't need guns?

"Think about the flip side of arming teachers"

I am thinking about it. The flip side might be a price we are willing to pay.
Have your children ever done something stupid or dangerous that you absolutely never would have thought possible, remember far more kids get killed in unintentional shootings than school shootings. There are 100,000 schools in the USA, now think about the statistical possibilities for accidents. And would you want to be the teacher with a gun in his hand when the pumped up and scared cop shows up. The statistics for friendly fire injuries in combat are between 2 and 20% of fatalities and the police have a plan to prevent those for swat teams but they do occur, now throw in some unknown players with guns just to make things interesting.

How about a national guardsman at every single school, every single day, just inside the front door, armed to the teeth. As I have said, I don't like the sight of that. But I like it more than the sight of tiny caskets being covered with dirt.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Foxnews told Trump to compromise on DACA and to ban bump stocks? Interesting...

He has not done anything but talk so far and his acceptable target keeps moving.
Of course he would want to ban bump stocks........Obama approved them.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Two problems:
1. It wasn't a gun free zone. Guns didn't prevent Vegas, Douglas high, Fort Hood, Columbine...
2. Most of these crazed people are looking for a final shoot out, so the idea of "let's attack, because bullets aren't coming back" doesn't hold up.

although not technically a gun free zone, only one allowed to carry was the security guard(s). How many did they have on campus vs how many buildings.

Vegas is not a school, lets stay on topic. that's a different argument.

Fort Hood is actually a Gun Free zone, not allowed to carry unless on security detail/duty. Most military bases are, that is why he killed so many UNARMED SOLDIERS

Columbine was a Gun Free zone.

and my post wasn't in response to arming teachers, it was in response to clarifying what Trump said in regards to arming teachers.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

See below in red

"I suspect Major Hasan had some training "

True. My point was, banning the AR-15 does not mean we don't still have a big problem. You can do a lot of damage with a pistol in a confined space with a lot of people.

"Have your children ever done something stupid or dangerous that you absolutely never would have thought possible"

Yes, which is one reason why I don't allow guns in my house. I didn't say to arm the kindergarteners. I said trained professionals. Even that can backfire, one of them could accidentally or intentionally kill someone. Could happen, it's possible. It's also possible an armed professional can either prevent an attack, or make an attack less tragic with fewer victims. Time for an honest conversation. You talk about accidents, which is one side of the conversation. The other side, is how many lives might be saved? We need to look honestly at both sides, and see if it's worth it. You only brought one side of the conversation, the reasons not to do it.

Most decisions involve weighing the pros and cons. You listed the cons, and ignored the pros.

I know 17 families in FL and 20 in CT who would give ANYTHING for an armed pro to have been at those 2 schools. You forgot to mention that. It's dishonest to not mention that.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"the real issue is that any gun control suggestions are opposed by the NRA"

That's ONE issue, not THE issue.

Other issues are the fact that Democrat politicians (who take money from Hollywood the way that Republicans take money from the NRA) are opposed to curbing the violence we bombard our kids with. Democrats tend to oppose policies that encourage "traditional" family values, which like it or not, will reduce gun violence (maybe not mass shootings, but garden variety street crime).

Nothing gets done because each side is too beholden to special interests.

Gun control is one of a handful of things that are driving this. School safety, mental health protocols, etc...

Some one should tell that to the NRA and supporters ! because they are not getting the message...


PS the rest of the world plays the same video games they watch the same movies they have seen same sex marriage and gays and drink at a younger age see sexual things daily .. they have no more god in their lives than we do and they tend not to have mass shootings

and Most allow Guns https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overvi...laws_by_nation


So please stop the "traditional" family values, argument thats everyones responsibility as a parent

[Pete F.]

The USA and Panama are the only ones I see in Guns and Ammo's list of best countrys to own a gun that allow semiautomatics without a permit. I am making the assumption that the best is the most permissive.
http://www.gunsandammo.com/network-t...es-gun-owners/

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Some one should tell that to the NRA and supporters ! because they are not getting the message...


PS the rest of the world plays the same video games they watch the same movies they have seen same sex marriage and gays and drink at a younger age see sexual things daily .. they have no more god in their lives than we do and they tend not to have mass shootings

and Most allow Guns https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overvi...laws_by_nation


So please stop the "traditional" family values, argument thats everyones responsibility as a parent

"Some one should tell that to the NRA "

Agreed. We agree on something!

"please stop the "traditional" family values, argument thats everyones responsibility as a parent"

Yes, it's everyone's responsibility. WAY too many people are derelict in that responsibility. It's irrefutable that it's a major contributor to violence.

[wdmso]

http://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-...after-shooting

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

although not technically a gun free zone, only one allowed to carry was the security guard(s). How many did they have on campus vs how many buildings.

Vegas is not a school, lets stay on topic. that's a different argument.

Fort Hood is actually a Gun Free zone, not allowed to carry unless on security detail/duty. Most military bases are, that is why he killed so many UNARMED SOLDIERS

Columbine was a Gun Free zone.

and my post wasn't in response to arming teachers, it was in response to clarifying what Trump said in regards to arming teachers.

I was responding to Trump's quote. Wouldn't have mattered if you out someone else posted it. I should have just quoted Trump.

Columbine had two armed guards.

No need to tell me what the topic is. Thanks. Whether you think mass shootings outside of schools are relevant to Trumps idea about soft targets is your opinion.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Two problems:
1. It wasn't a gun free zone. Guns didn't prevent Vegas, Douglas high, Fort Hood, Columbine...
2. Most of these crazed people are looking for a final shoot out, so the idea of "let's attack, because bullets aren't coming back" doesn't hold up.

Were the shooters looking for or expecting bullets to come back? The Las Vegas shooter was in an upper story room of a building away from the festival. The festival itself was a gun free or weapons of any kind free zone (the shooter in the attack on the republican base ball game also was also operating outside of the kill area and was stopped by guards on the field using handguns.) Fort Hood massacre--the victims were not allowed to be armed on base. The armed guards at Douglas High and Columbine failed. Better security was required, lesson learned.

What is the evidence that gun free zones hold up? Aren't the vast majority of gun homicides a result of an armed person killing an unarmed person or persons rather than being a shoot out?

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Were the shooters looking for or expecting bullets to come back? The Las Vegas shooter was in an upper story room of a building away from the festival. The festival itself was a gun free or weapons of any kind free zone (the shooter in the attack on the republican base ball game also was also operating outside of the kill area and was stopped by guards on the field using handguns.) Fort Hood massacre--the victims were not allowed to be armed on base. The armed guards at Douglas High and Columbine failed. Better security was required, lesson learned.

What is the evidence that gun free zones hold up? Aren't the vast majority of gun homicides a result of an armed person killing an unarmed person or persons rather than being a shoot out?

There were tons of armed police in Vegas. Arming every person at the Vegas concert wouldn't have prevented the massacre.

There were armed guards at multiple sites with school shootings and the armed guards didn't prevent the event, prevent death or limit the death.

So now we went from guards to multiple armed teachers.

Were the shooters looking for returned bullets? We can only go based on social media posts and post crime analyses It is often the case that the analysis indicates that the perpetrators plan to go down in a shootout with police. Would a shootout with teachers change that? I don't think we know.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[zimmy]

This is worth reading.
https://www.charlottefive.com/arming-teachers/
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Were the shooters looking for returned bullets? We can only go based on social media posts and post crime analyses It is often the case that the analysis indicates that the perpetrators plan to go down in a shootout with police.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The last shooting the kid dropped the gun and blended in with the students to escape.

Not exactly what I call a blaze of glory
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Reports are that a deputy showed up while the shooting was taking place and did not go in. I'm sure all the armed teachers would have taken down the gunman though.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Nebe]

Do the teachers have to buy bullets just like they have to. It their own classroom supplies?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Reports are that a deputy showed up while the shooting was taking place and did not go in. I'm sure all the armed teachers would have taken down the gunman though.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So since crime rates aren’t zero when cops are on duty, should we abandon the police? Come on Paul, nothing is 100 percent foolproof, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a good idea. All ideas look bad, if all you do is list the con’s and not the pro’s.

Armed guards aren’t foolproof. Reagan was shot in 1980. Does that mean the secret service doesn’t make the potus safer?

This is why nothing gets done. When either side responds to the other sides ideas, they list all the flaws of the suggestion. And none of the benefits. It’s not honest.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

On CNN, Marco Rubio was asked if he'd stop taking contributions from the NRA.

Because of course if you accept money from a group which lobbies on behalf of lawful and responsible gun owners, it is entirely your fault when a maniac shoots up a school.

Yep. Now we're THIS mindless.

[Slipknot]

Metal detectors will help


forget arming teachers but get rid of gun free zones, if a teacher wants to carry concealed and is proficient with that then let them. We can't arm kids who seem to be the ones under fire in these shootings so provide metal detectors like courthouses have and/or provide some kind of bulletproof cover to get behind.
Then work on the culture in this country that produces the unstable evil that exists.
Guns are not evil, just because they exist is not the place to lay blame and take rights away from others.

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

On CNN, Marco Rubio was asked if he'd stop taking contributions from the NRA.

Because of course if you accept money from a group which lobbies on behalf of lawful and responsible gun owners, it is entirely your fault when a maniac shoots up a school.

Yep. Now we're THIS mindless.

Or it could be that those constituents believe he votes with the dollars the NRA provides him in mind as opposed to their interests. That isn't what is mindless. There really is no hope.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

So since crime rates aren’t zero when cops are on duty, should we abandon the police? Come on Paul, nothing is 100 percent foolproof, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a good idea. All ideas look bad, if all you do is list the con’s and not the pro’s.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think the best solution is to not sell someone a AR-15 so if a teacher with some training has a pistol he is not in a gunfight with someone who is shooting back with a weapon of war. Obviously metal detectors would help and every school that has probably been built in the last 10 years has metal doors that lock from the inside, bulletproof glass etc etc. The gym I play basketball in tonight had the signs on the inside of the doors where in an emergency they would just shift the sign from the right to the left side of the door which would be over the glass so the person on the outside cannot look in. there was just velcro strips there. Someone thought of a very cheap way to prevent a gunman from looking in.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

I think the best solution is to not sell someone a AR-15 so if a teacher with some training has a pistol he is not in a gunfight with someone who is shooting back with a weapon of war. Obviously metal detectors would help and every school that has probably been built in the last 10 years has metal doors that lock from the inside, bulletproof glass etc etc. The gym I play basketball in tonight had the signs on the inside of the doors where in an emergency they would just shift the sign from the right to the left side of the door which would be over the glass so the person on the outside cannot look in. there was just velcro strips there. Someone thought of a very cheap way to prevent a gunman from looking in.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"I think the best solution is to not sell someone a AR-15"

It might be effective. It also might not be constitutional. It also doesn't help anyone who will get killed in Chicago.

You brought up the fact that armed guards are not guaranteed to work 100% of the time. You were responding to an argument that nobody has ever made, not in the history of the world. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

"Someone thought of a very cheap way to prevent a gunman from looking in"

And despite the fact that such methods would have been useless in FL (he pulled the fire alarms first to get everyone into the hallway), those methods can do dome good. So can armed guards.

Basketball has always been my favorite sport. I'm not very good at it, never was, but it's such a great game. Great to play, great to watch. Have a great weekend Paul.

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"I think the best solution is to not sell someone a AR-15"

It might be effective. It also might not be constitutional. It also doesn't help anyone who will get killed in Chicago.

You brought up the fact that armed guards are not guaranteed to work 100% of the time. You were responding to an argument that nobody has ever made, not in the history of the world. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

"Someone thought of a very cheap way to prevent a gunman from looking in"

And despite the fact that such methods would have been useless in FL (he pulled the fire alarms first to get everyone into the hallway), those methods can do dome good. So can armed guards.

Basketball has always been my favorite sport. I'm not very good at it, never was, but it's such a great game. Great to play, great to watch. Have a great weekend Paul.

I want to know why people think that fully automatic ar-15’s are “too scary” for civialian ownership if the argument that banning a semi automatic one is unconstitutional siting the well regulated militia argument. A militia needs military tools that are equal to the tools that our governments soldiers have access too. It does not make sense to me.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

On CNN, Marco Rubio was asked if he'd stop taking contributions from the NRA.

Because of course if you accept money from a group which lobbies on behalf of lawful and responsible gun owners, it is entirely your fault when a maniac shoots up a school.

Yep. Now we're THIS mindless.

States and share holders request their retirement or investments be divested for all sorts of reason environment human rights dictatorships ..

So a constituent asking his or her rep to stop taking money from the NRA who they see as caring only for its self and feel act irresponsibility .. isn't all that surprising, nor was his response or lack of one

[wdmso]

Trump says violent video games 'shape' young minds

Last week, Kentucky Governor Matt Bevin, reacting to the Florida shooting, also singled out video games as an influence on the way younger people viewed the world.

But lets blame Video games who does he blame in Kentucky for the
1,330 overdose deaths in Kentucky in 2016, 31% were among people ages 35-44.

Hollywood lack of morals ?

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

So since crime rates aren’t zero when cops are on duty, should we abandon the police? Come on Paul, nothing is 100 percent foolproof, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a good idea. All ideas look bad, if all you do is list the con’s and not the pro’s.

Armed guards aren’t foolproof. Reagan was shot in 1980. Does that mean the secret service doesn’t make the potus safer?

This is why nothing gets done. When either side responds to the other sides ideas, they list all the flaws of the suggestion. And none of the benefits. It’s not honest.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Jim the issue is the failed logic by the Right that some how arming people is the answer .. the failed response from the armed officer blow a hole so big in that theory .

some will call him a coward , maybe he was defending Covering the escape of other students , did he know it was only 1 shooter

Even in combat you cant predict how you or your men will respond under fire

[spence]

One thing on this issue I haven't heard mentioned is if you have an armed teacher(s) and there's an active shooter they have to respond to...

...

Who's taking care of that classroom of kids?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Or it could be that those constituents believe he votes with the dollars the NRA provides him in mind as opposed to their interests. That isn't what is mindless. There really is no hope.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

In a neutral context, I have no problem with asking politicians about the donors they take money from. In that context, the obvious implication is that if Rubio won't reject the NRA, then he has no sympathy for this kid.

Both sides will occasionally weaponize tragedy to advance an agenda. It's repulsive when either side does it. That's what CNN did, they are a complete joke.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

States and share holders request their retirement or investments be divested for all sorts of reason environment human rights dictatorships ..

So a constituent asking his or her rep to stop taking money from the NRA who they see as caring only for its self and feel act irresponsibility .. isn't all that surprising, nor was his response or lack of one

In that particular setting, it wasn't a question, it was a set up. And Rubio (though I agree with him on most issues) is too much of an intellectual lightweight to respond appropriately.

If Rubio dodges like he did, he looks like a coward. If he explains the facts of life to a teenager who probably has 5 funerals to go to this week, he comes across as heartless. It was a set up from which Rubio had no escape, because there is no escape.

When is CNN going to have an abortion survivor on, and ask a Democrat senator when they are going to stop taking money from Planned Parenthood? Never, because CNN is openly pursuing a left-wing ideology.

[PaulS]

I believe there have been laws restricting semi automatics and large capacity magazines that have upheld by courts. The laws say the 2nd amendment doesn't apply to semi autos. Don't know if they have been challenged. Maybe Virginia or Maryland?