The Guardian Plan

528 posts / 0 new
Last post
GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116
The Guardian Plan

Obviously "gun free" schools are not working. Is it time to set up programs for schools to arm teachers who volunteer for a program such as this one in Texas?

Thweatt is the architect of ?The Guardian Plan,? a blueprint for arming school staff, including teachers, that may be catching on, at least in the Lone Star state. Teachers there are allowed to have weapons in the classroom, as Thweatt's faculty members do, but State Attorney General Greg Abbott suggested Monday that lawmakers may consider ways to encourage the practice statewide.

"Bearing arms whether by teachers and guards and things like that will be all a part of more comprehensive policy issues for the legislature to take up in the coming weeks," Abbott said. "And you can be assured in the aftermath of what happened in Connecticut that these legislators care dearly about the lives of students at their schools and they will evaluate all possible measures that are necessary to protect those lives," he said.

More momentum for the idea is evidenced by Austin gun shop dealer Crocket Keller, who announced his store will now extend the same discount on firearm purchases to teachers as it does to veterans.

Thweatt said there have been no incidents since October 2007, when his district adopted the plan giving an unspecified number of teachers and school staff -- dubbed "Guardians" -- authority to carry concealed weapons on school premises. Participating staff are anonymous and known only to Thweatt and the school board, which must approve each application for an employee to become a Guardian. They receive a small stipend annually.

?We?re 18 miles and 30 minutes from the nearest police station," Thweatt said. "So we are our first responders. If something happened here, we would have to protect our children. You know, police officers are true, everyday heroes in my book, but one of them once told me something very revealing. He said, ?Ninety-five percent of the time, we get to the scene late.? I can?t afford to let that happen.?

Each Guardian must obtain a Texas conceal-and-carry permit, and must lock-and-load their weapons with ?frangible? bullets that break apart when colliding with a target. ?They go through people,? assured Thweatt.

?They?re very similar to what the air marshals use. The bullets are glued together with polymers, and we insist upon them because we don?t want the bullet to ricochet off a wall after it?s fired and hit a child.?

Read more: Stop school shootings by letting teachers fire back, say Texas officials | Fox News

smsturner's picture
Joined: 05/11/09
Posts: 1303

Holy crap. It's not working to keep guns out, so let's hand them out to everyone?? And that's going to help? Wow. Just wow.

Gun free schools DO help, because it stops students from bringing them in. This didn't happen bcs a kid brought them in, it happened because someone out there wasn't even human. He could have bombed from the outside. What do we do in that case? There is evil out there and horrid awful things are going to happen. Bringing more violent weapons into a place where our children spend all day is NOT a good answer.

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

Sorry, I disagree. It doesn't stop anything. And how does letting teachers have guns affect whether students are allowed to have them?

Gun-free zones have been the most popular response to previous mass killings. But many law-enforcement officials say they are actually counterproductive. “Guns are already banned in schools. That is why the shootings happen in schools. A school is a ‘helpless-victim zone,’” says Richard Mack, a former Arizona sheriff. “Preventing any adult at a school from having access to a firearm eliminates any chance the killer can be stopped in time to prevent a rampage,” Jim Kouri, the public-information officer of the National Association of Chiefs of Police, told me earlier this year at the time of the Aurora, Colo., Batman-movie shooting. Indeed, there have been many instances — from the high-school shooting by Luke Woodham in Mississippi, to the New Life Church shooting in Colorado Springs, Colo. — where a killer has been stopped after someone got a gun from a parked car or elsewhere and confronted the shooter.

Economists John Lott and William Landes conducted a groundbreaking study in 1999, and found that a common theme of mass shootings is that they occur in places where guns are banned and killers know everyone will be unarmed, such as shopping malls and schools.

I spoke with Lott after the Newtown shooting, and he confirmed that nothing has changed to alter his findings. He noted that the Aurora shooter, who killed twelve people earlier this year, had a choice of seven movie theaters that were showing the Batman movie he was obsessed with. All were within a 20-minute drive of his home. The Cinemark Theater the killer ultimately chose wasn’t the closest, but it was the only one that posted signs saying it banned concealed handguns carried by law-abiding individuals. All of the other theaters allowed the approximately 4 percent of Colorado adults who have a concealed-handgun permit to enter with their weapons.

“Disarming law-abiding citizens leaves them as sitting ducks,” Lott told me. “A couple hundred people were in the Cinemark Theater when the killer arrived. There is an extremely high probability that one or more of them would have had a legal concealed handgun with him if they had not been banned.”

Lott offers a final damning statistic: “With just one single exception, the attack on congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson in 2011, every public shooting since at least 1950 in the U.S. in which more than three people have been killed has taken place where citizens are not allowed to carry guns.”

The Facts about Mass Shootings - John Fund - National Review Online

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

I just don't have the heart to argue with someone who wants to arm educators. I don't want my children going to school surrounded by weapons. Ever. This is simply not the solution.

Joined: 08/17/04
Posts: 2226

I completely agree. I want less guns to no guns in this society so I am NOT on board with teachers being armed. If that happened in their school I would pull them out immediately.

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

Sorry pie in the sky dreams are not reality. You can't turn back the clock and take guns away. They are already there. There is not one gun law that would have prevented what happened. The assault weapons ban that Obama is proposing wouldn't have helped. He didn't use an assault weapon.

In reality, gun control in a country that already has 200 million privately owned firearms is likely to do little to keep weapons out of the hands of criminals.

Joined: 08/17/04
Posts: 2226

They are my dreams and I hope that it will someday be real. It's real in many countries and it should be in ours since we're so "advanced". Putting MORE guns regardless of the type is not what I want and I wouldn't support it. I send my kids to school to be educated not pretend like they are in a prison with armed guards.

ClairesMommy's picture
Joined: 08/15/06
Posts: 2299

The news said that Obama has already visited the scenes of 4 mass shootings in his first term as President. Hmm. Yep, let's put more guns out there, in our children's classrooms. Makes sense to me. So much sense, in fact, that I can't even do this one. For me, there's nothing to debate.

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3312

I would not be a fan of arming teachers. They already have a full time job, i dont' think they are in a position to take on proper security training to be the first line of defense in an emergency, and without that, i don't see that as a benefit, i see it as a detriment.

I don't nec. have a problem with adding actual security staff though. A friend of mine in a neighboring district reported that there was a police SUV in her school lot yesterday when she arrived there. She talked to him and he said "I am here to look after the kids, and you will see me more often."

But armed teachers? No i don't want that. I think security and law enforcement should be handled by people who's professions are security and law enforcement related.

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

"GloriaInTX" wrote:

Sorry pie in the sky dreams are not reality. You can't turn back the clock and take guns away. They are already there. There is not one gun law that would have prevented what happened. The assault weapons ban that Obama is proposing wouldn't have helped. He didn't use an assault weapon.

oh that's a lie you can tell yourself if you like. But if you look at other countries death rates from gun violence you simply have to admit that there ARE laws that would help. You just don't happen to LIKE those laws, Gloria. I don't believe that America is so much more stupid than England or Scotland or Australia- I think that we know exactly how to curb gun violence and its time we stopped crazy people from standing in our way while our babies are murdered in cold blood.

Rivergallery's picture
Joined: 05/23/03
Posts: 1301

"smsturner" wrote:

Holy crap. It's not working to keep guns out, so let's hand them out to everyone?? And that's going to help? Wow. Just wow.

Gun free schools DO help, because it stops students from bringing them in. This didn't happen bcs a kid brought them in, it happened because someone out there wasn't even human. He could have bombed from the outside. What do we do in that case? There is evil out there and horrid awful things are going to happen. Bringing more violent weapons into a place where our children spend all day is NOT a good answer.

Gun free schools have not stopped students from bringing them in. I think it is a great idea. They are NOT giving guns to everyone, maybe you need to reread the post?
Do you not trust your teachers to protect your children? If not why do you have them there?

Rivergallery's picture
Joined: 05/23/03
Posts: 1301

"Jessica80" wrote:

They are my dreams and I hope that it will someday be real. It's real in many countries and it should be in ours since we're so "advanced". Putting MORE guns regardless of the type is not what I want and I wouldn't support it. I send my kids to school to be educated not pretend like they are in a prison with armed guards.

In many other countries you disarm the populous and the government takes control.. check out Pol Pot, Mao te Tung, Hilter, and Stalin. The amendment was not for hunting or self-protection, it was to protect ourselves from a rogue government. All law abiding citizens should be allowed to own as many and what ever type of weapons they want to. And there should be ZERO repeat offenders, no violent offender should ever be released from prison period. That would eliminate a majority of violent crimes.

Rivergallery's picture
Joined: 05/23/03
Posts: 1301

"Potter75" wrote:

oh that's a lie you can tell yourself if you like. But if you look at other countries death rates from gun violence you simply have to admit that there ARE laws that would help. You just don't happen to LIKE those laws, Gloria. I don't believe that America is so much more stupid than England or Scotland or Australia- I think that we know exactly how to curb gun violence and its time we stopped crazy people from standing in our way while our babies are murdered in cold blood.

You would need to equate violent rates period not just from guns to see if guns deter. Also there are many other factors, so it is a logical fallacy not to include things like recidivism rates, or mental illness, and looking to poverty levels and race and everything.. Look at who is committing the majority of the crimes and then form a plan not the other way around. Punish the offenders not the owners of guns. It is like outlawing cars because the majority of deaths are caused by car accidents.

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

"Rivergallery" wrote:

In many other countries you disarm the populous and the government takes control.. check out Pol Pot, Mao te Tung, Hilter, and Stalin. The amendment was not for hunting or self-protection, it was to protect ourselves from a rogue government. All law abiding citizens should be allowed to own as many and what ever type of weapons they want to. And there should be ZERO repeat offenders, no violent offender should ever be released from prison period. That would eliminate a majority of violent crimes.

Your grasp of history terrifies me. Seriously. Are you honestly arguing that hitler and stalin took power because their people had no weapons? They were HUGELY popular. No one was trying to fight back but simply lacked WEAPONS! That is pure fallacy and it is dangerous to spread this sort of revisionist history.

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

"Potter75" wrote:

oh that's a lie you can tell yourself if you like. But if you look at other countries death rates from gun violence you simply have to admit that there ARE laws that would help. You just don't happen to LIKE those laws, Gloria. I don't believe that America is so much more stupid than England or Scotland or Australia- I think that we know exactly how to curb gun violence and its time we stopped crazy people from standing in our way while our babies are murdered in cold blood.

Really? Did gun laws in Norway stop that man from killing 77 people?

Rivergallery's picture
Joined: 05/23/03
Posts: 1301

"Potter75" wrote:

Your grasp of history terrifies me. Seriously. Are you honestly arguing that hitler and stalin took power because their people had no weapons? They were HUGELY popular. No one was trying to fight back but simply lacked WEAPONS! That is pure fallacy and it is dangerous to spread this sort of revisionist history.

You do realize they all disarmed the populous first?
You have read the 2nd amendment and understand it?

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

"GloriaInTX" wrote:

Really? Did gun laws in Norway stop that man from killing 77 people?

No. And if you want to hang your hat on a single incident, go ahead. You are still dead wrong.

Google Image Result for http://home.earthlink.net/~lsiemers/images/photos/Gun_deaths_10_devel_nations_graph.jpg

Rivergallery's picture
Joined: 05/23/03
Posts: 1301

"GloriaInTX" wrote:

Really? Did gun laws in Norway stop that man from killing 77 people?

Exactly or the rash of stabbings in Chinese Kindergartens?
Take a look at the recent shooting in Oregon at Clackamas Town Center.. After investigating they KNOW why the gunman stopped... he saw another gun aimed at him.. from someone with a CC weapon! These things are not talked about in main stream media.. Dig deeper please.

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3312

"GloriaInTX" wrote:

Really? Did gun laws in Norway stop that man from killing 77 people?

Gloria, Norway has some of the lowest murder rates in the world. I think there is a very strong case that gun control is effective there. You can't look at an outlier and say "See? it doesn't work" Just becaues the success rate isn't 100% doesn't mean its ineffective.

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

Honestly I need to walk away from the two of you. It saddens me. And Rivergallery, if you want to interpret the second amendment as giving you the right to own full body armor and assault rifles which can shoot hundreds of bullets in minutes......you terrify me. And if you can look at the beautiful faces of these beautiful babies who were mowed down at close range by HUNDREDS of bullets and argue for your AHMURICAN RIGHT GOSHGDANG IT to arm yourself to the teeth......well, I simply wonder what humanity chip you are missing.

My heart breaks and I'm crying again thinking that we could share a country. That we could all three be mothers and draw the same conclusions when we see the bodies of 6 year olds riddled with bullets. You worry about your RIGHTS when babies die. That just breaks my heart.

Over and out.

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

"KimPossible" wrote:

I would not be a fan of arming teachers. They already have a full time job, i dont' think they are in a position to take on proper security training to be the first line of defense in an emergency, and without that, i don't see that as a benefit, i see it as a detriment.

I don't nec. have a problem with adding actual security staff though. A friend of mine in a neighboring district reported that there was a police SUV in her school lot yesterday when she arrived there. She talked to him and he said "I am here to look after the kids, and you will see me more often."

But armed teachers? No i don't want that. I think security and law enforcement should be handled by people who's professions are security and law enforcement related.

No one said arm every teacher. Only those that WANT to go through the proper training. They could even set up a special FBI training course or something. There are many teachers in our society that even have previous military or law-enforcement experience. I was listening to the radio this morning and a teacher called in who was in the reserves and served in Iraq. Why should he not be able to protect his students if the wants to?

Rivergallery's picture
Joined: 05/23/03
Posts: 1301

"KimPossible" wrote:

Gloria, Norway has some of the lowest murder rates in the world. I think there is a very strong case that gun control is effective there. You can't look at an outlier and say "See? it doesn't work" Just becaues the success rate isn't 100% doesn't mean its ineffective.

You don't think it has anything to do with the lower poverty levels? .. not sure I would want to move to a place where someone can do such a violent crime and get out in a MAX of 30 years.

Rivergallery's picture
Joined: 05/23/03
Posts: 1301

"Potter75" wrote:

Honestly I need to walk away from the two of you. It saddens me. And Rivergallery, if you want to interpret the second amendment as giving you the right to own full body armor and assault rifles which can shoot hundreds of bullets in minutes......you terrify me. And if you can look at the beautiful faces of these beautiful babies who were mowed down at close range by HUNDREDS of bullets and argue for your AHMURICAN RIGHT GOSHGDANG IT to arm yourself to the teeth......well, I simply wonder what humanity chip you are missing.

My heart breaks and I'm crying again thinking that we could share a country. That we could all three be mothers and draw the same conclusions when we see the bodies of 6 year olds riddled with bullets. You worry about your RIGHTS when babies die. That just breaks my heart.

Over and out.

What is a milita?

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

"Potter75" wrote:

Honestly I need to walk away from the two of you. It saddens me. And Rivergallery, if you want to interpret the second amendment as giving you the right to own full body armor and assault rifles which can shoot hundreds of bullets in minutes......you terrify me. And if you can look at the beautiful faces of these beautiful babies who were mowed down at close range by HUNDREDS of bullets and argue for your AHMURICAN RIGHT GOSHGDANG IT to arm yourself to the teeth......well, I simply wonder what humanity chip you are missing.

My heart breaks and I'm crying again thinking that we could share a country. That we could all three be mothers and draw the same conclusions when we see the bodies of 6 year olds riddled with bullets. You worry about your RIGHTS when babies die. That just breaks my heart.

Over and out.

What saddens me and breaks my heart is that some of those teachers KNEW the gunman was coming and could do NOTHING but try to hide their children or shield them with their bodies. The shooting was heard over the loudspeaker and all the teachers in the school knew they were in danger and could do nothing but sit there like ducks waiting to be slaughtered. If it makes me sick to my stomach that they had no way to protect themselves because liberals want to dream about the perfect society instead of live in the real world.

Rivergallery's picture
Joined: 05/23/03
Posts: 1301

"Potter75" wrote:

Honestly I need to walk away from the two of you. It saddens me. And Rivergallery, if you want to interpret the second amendment as giving you the right to own full body armor and assault rifles which can shoot hundreds of bullets in minutes......you terrify me. And if you can look at the beautiful faces of these beautiful babies who were mowed down at close range by HUNDREDS of bullets and argue for your AHMURICAN RIGHT GOSHGDANG IT to arm yourself to the teeth......well, I simply wonder what humanity chip you are missing.

My heart breaks and I'm crying again thinking that we could share a country. That we could all three be mothers and draw the same conclusions when we see the bodies of 6 year olds riddled with bullets. You worry about your RIGHTS when babies die. That just breaks my heart.

Over and out.

You want to now want to paint me evil so you can justify things? I can use the statement on you that YOU can look at holocaust victims and say we should open ourselves up to another rogue government. Thing is history has shown time and again, you disarm the public you can open yourselves up to this.. You want another Hitler? As far as I know the % of law abiding citizens that own guns committing a crime with said guns is incredibly LOW. The shooter in this case was already committing crimes, he STOLE the guns for one, wasn't 21 so couldn't even own one of the guns, and one was illegal in the state as far as I know.. So.... Gun laws do not stop violent crime... CULTURE does.. low inequality, low mental illness, strong sense of a collective right and wrong that is taught to children. Not whatever you feel is right for you is right.. etc.

Have we so soon forgotten 9/11? Those men were armed with Boxcutters. If a few of the people in that last plane that crashed into the field would have been armed I venture to make a calculated guess that they would have killed the terrorists. Possibly not in the other cases if they didn't know what was going on.. depends on who was armed.

Rivergallery's picture
Joined: 05/23/03
Posts: 1301

"GloriaInTX" wrote:

What saddens me and breaks my heart is that some of those teachers KNEW the gunman was coming and could do NOTHING but try to hide their children or shield them with their bodies. The shooting was heard over the loudspeaker and all the teachers in the school knew they were in danger and could do nothing but sit there like ducks waiting to be slaughtered. If it makes me sick to my stomach that they had no way to protect themselves because liberals want to dream about the perfect society instead of live in the real world.

And two, as far as I read, the counselor and Principal rushed at the shooter. If they had been trained in firearms and been packing they would have shot at him I think, if they were willing to step out to stop him. He would have died. If the staff when he entered the school had been carrying all the children would be alive.

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3312

"GloriaInTX" wrote:

No one said arm every teacher. Only those that WANT to go through the proper training. They could even set up a special FBI training course or something. There are many teachers in our society that even have previous military or law-enforcement experience. I was listening to the radio this morning and a teacher called in who was in the reserves and served in Iraq. Why should he not be able to protect his students if the wants to?

Sorry Gloria, I don't like it. They already have a job and i don't think this is part of it. Are there some who would already be fully qualified? Perhaps...but i don't want to play the game of figuring out which ones are and which ones aren't. I dont' want our full time teachers spending more time being trained on the clock for something they shouldnt' have to do or bear the responsiblity of doing, even if they want to. And i don't want to waste any time in our educations system telling someone who wants to that they haven't qualified for some reason or another.

If we think we need security at schools, then I think we should hire or outsource appropriate staff focused on that actual task. Like other places do.

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3312

"Rivergallery" wrote:

You don't think it has anything to do with the lower poverty levels? .. not sure I would want to move to a place where someone can do such a violent crime and get out in a MAX of 30 years.

I think it can be attributed to a lot of things. Why are you so positive that gun control is not part of that equation?

Rivergallery's picture
Joined: 05/23/03
Posts: 1301

"Potter75" wrote:

Your grasp of history terrifies me. Seriously. Are you honestly arguing that hitler and stalin took power because their people had no weapons? They were HUGELY popular. No one was trying to fight back but simply lacked WEAPONS! That is pure fallacy and it is dangerous to spread this sort of revisionist history.

"No one was trying to fight back"? Really.. what a lie.

Rivergallery's picture
Joined: 05/23/03
Posts: 1301

"KimPossible" wrote:

Sorry Gloria, I don't like it. They already have a job and i don't think this is part of it. Are there some who would already be fully qualified? Perhaps...but i don't want to play the game of figuring out which ones are and which ones aren't. I dont' want our full time teachers spending more time being trained on the clock for something they shouldnt' have to do or bear the responsiblity of doing, even if they want to. And i don't want to waste any time in our educations system telling someone who wants to that they haven't qualified for some reason or another.

If we think we need security at schools, then I think we should hire or outsource appropriate staff focused on that actual task. Like other places do.

I think this is a good option. But I do not think we should deny anyone from CC if they can obtain one legally, this includes teachers.

Rivergallery's picture
Joined: 05/23/03
Posts: 1301

"KimPossible" wrote:

I think it can be attributed to a lot of things. Why are you so positive that gun control is not part of that equation?

It might be part of the culture, but if you take our current culture and make stricter gun laws.. thus removing them from law abiding citizens.. not criminals. What will happen? Can you show me where in our culture where most armed citizenry has caused more violent crimes? Because I am seeing the opposite. I am seeing Cops as being the mop up crew, and those with CC if there are stopping the crime if possible... The man in Oregon didn't even have to fire a shot.. he was well trained and knew he wouldn't be able to get a shot off without a risk to others (so he didn't shoot), but he took aim and the shooter fled. Where have these violent offenders come from? Have they come from the Legal CC crowd?

ETA- you do remember that Norway was occupied by the ****s in WWII? Do you want our country to be like them? WWII wasn't that long ago was it?

ok one more edit---- Talking about WWII our most decorated soldier.. Audie Murphy.. was what before the war? He was a farm boy, what did he do? He was prolific with a gun, he shot animals for his family's food.. we don't want people to be trained to do what they may be called to do anymore? See this is what I don't understand...

I do understand not wanting to own guns. I understand not wanting violence.. I get it.. NO ONE WANTS VIOLENCE. Facts are humans will always hurt each other. And if the evil is not stopped often by violence it will not stop by itself.... WWII is such a great example... You think it would have stopped without guns? Without the "GOOD citizens" owning guns?

Sapphire Sunsets's picture
Joined: 05/19/02
Posts: 672

"GloriaInTX" wrote:

What saddens me and breaks my heart is that some of those teachers KNEW the gunman was coming and could do NOTHING but try to hide their children or shield them with their bodies. The shooting was heard over the loudspeaker and all the teachers in the school knew they were in danger and could do nothing but sit there like ducks waiting to be slaughtered. If it makes me sick to my stomach that they had no way to protect themselves because liberals want to dream about the perfect society instead of live in the real world.

complete ITA.

If they had been armed it would be a completely different story.

Something has to change. If people hadn't noticed already things everywhere in this country are ALOT different then when we were kids and going to school. School should be a place where kids can feel safe and be able to learn not have to worry about people coming in and shooting them.

Also, saying to leave it up to law enforcement? What happens when they are miles away? They can't just jump through a time capulse and be there. They had security, they had one of those buzzer things that the majority of all schools in this country have and he broke and or shot through that.

I'd love to hear a better idea but until we can actually get and keep people with obvious mental issues off the streets this seems like it's the only answer.

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3312

"Rivergallery" wrote:

It might be part of the culture, but if you take our current culture and make stricter gun laws.. thus removing them from law abiding citizens.. not criminals. What will happen? Can you show me where in our culture where most armed citizenry has caused more violent crimes? Because I am seeing the opposite. I am seeing Cops as being the mop up crew, and those with CC if there are stopping the crime if possible... The man in Oregon didn't even have to fire a shot.. he was well trained and knew he wouldn't be able to get a shot off without a risk to others (so he didn't shoot), but he took aim and the shooter fled. Where have these violent offenders come from? Have they come from the Legal CC crowd?

First, i don't know of any highly reliable actual evidence, aside from anecdotal observation, that shows that CC'rs are better at protecting the country than our own law enforcement.

Second, Drastically changing how hard it is to get a gun and what you can do with it does *more* than just take guns out of the hands of 'good people'. So you can't just assume everything else will be the same and now its just that the good people won't have guns to protect everyone else with.

It would seem in this country we have a problem. Our murder rates, particularly with guns is extremely high. What we are doing is NOT working. As with anything, i think to fix the problem, it needs to be tackled from several different angles. But i see nothing to suggest that tighter gun control should be off the table as a way to fix it. And we are at a point where we cannot afford the luxury of just blowing it off with a "pssshhh, it will never work so lets not bother" attitude. We have a responsiblity to try. We owe it to these families....and everyone else.

FTR, we are a gun owning family.

smsturner's picture
Joined: 05/11/09
Posts: 1303

Really interesting article on how our 'gun culture' is viewed by other places in the world

The Connecticut school massacre: How the world sees us - Yahoo! News

AlyssaEimers's picture
Joined: 08/22/06
Posts: 6560

I think it is a little soon after this tragedy to have this kind of a debate. Emotions are raw.

DH's school has an armed officer at his school. That is his sole job to guard the school. I think that frees the teachers up to teach. I would hate to be worried about shooting someone at the same time trying to teach math. I also can't imagine some nosey kid looking for the answer key to his teachers desk and finding a gun. That could go bad in so many ways. I think another alternative would be tasers if they were properly trained and out of reach from the kids.

I do not think the answer is to ban all guns anywhere. They do have their place. They should not be given out to the mentally ill and should have to be kept locked up.

Rivergallery's picture
Joined: 05/23/03
Posts: 1301

"KimPossible" wrote:

First, i don't know of any highly reliable actual evidence, aside from anecdotal observation, that shows that CC'rs are better at protecting the country than our own law enforcement.

Second, Drastically changing how hard it is to get a gun and what you can do with it does *more* than just take guns out of the hands of 'good people'. So you can't just assume everything else will be the same and now its just that the good people won't have guns to protect everyone else with.

It would seem in this country we have a problem. Our murder rates, particularly with guns is extremely high. What we are doing is NOT working. As with anything, i think to fix the problem, it needs to be tackled from several different angles. But i see nothing to suggest that tighter gun control should be off the table as a way to fix it. And we are at a point where we cannot afford the luxury of just blowing it off with a "pssshhh, it will never work so lets not bother" attitude. We have a responsiblity to try. We owe it to these families....and everyone else.

FTR, we are a gun owning family.

1- I did not say that CC'rs are better.. just that if there are more of them and if they are already on the scene they will have the opportunity to prevent it.. If they are not allowed to own the weapons there is no way a CC'r would be able to stop it.
2- Assumptions can definitely be made if you look at what happens to societies when guns are highly regulated. Registration: The Nazi Paradigm - by Stephen P. Halbrook
3- I agree something needs to change, but I do not think it comes in regulating law abiding citizens, it comes in not releasing criminals. And aiding with mental health care patients.. DO NOT allow violent people out on our streets period.. Then we wouldn't have to worry about criminals getting guns because there would be so little of them.. only those that had never committed a crime before would every commit a violent crime

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3312

"AlyssaEimers" wrote:

I think it is a little soon after this tragedy to have this kind of a debate. Emotions are raw.

This will vary from person to person IMO. I still cry every day about what happened on Friday but as a concerned parent and citizen, i'm ready to talk about what we need to do.

No one who doesn't want to talk about it yet should feel pressured to do so, but at this point i think those who want to talk about it shouldn't be pressured not to. Its important and i think some people feel an urgency to make noise about it, before it fades away into dust like it has so many other times when its easy to just go back to what feels like or normal lives and our normal routines and become complacent about it again. I did not want to talk about it Friday, but as time moves on...i want it to be discussed before people don't want to bother to anymore.

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

"KimPossible" wrote:

It would seem in this country we have a problem. Our murder rates, particularly with guns is extremely high. What we are doing is NOT working. As with anything, i think to fix the problem, it needs to be tackled from several different angles. But i see nothing to suggest that tighter gun control should be off the table as a way to fix it. And we are at a point where we cannot afford the luxury of just blowing it off with a "pssshhh, it will never work so lets not bother" attitude. We have a responsiblity to try. We owe it to these families....and everyone else.

FTR, we are a gun owning family.

Just for the record.... homicide and gun homicide rates are going DOWN not up.

FBI — Expanded Homicide Data Table 8

Rivergallery's picture
Joined: 05/23/03
Posts: 1301

"smsturner" wrote:

Really interesting article on how our 'gun culture' is viewed by other places in the world

The Connecticut school massacre: How the world sees us - Yahoo! News

Can't really get behind any of the people from these nation and their view of our right to bear arms... sorry. Britain? (We bailed them out of WWII) Germany? (Nation that caused WWII), Australia (keep in mind they are an Island nation (we are not), but have also had a dramatic racial history, and started as a penal colony so was born out of violence), Isreal (their teachers have guns strapped to them), India (take a peak at their religious and domestic violence rates)... Hope you see my point. These articles are sound bites for a mass media culture, with nothing deeper than the 5'o clock sound bites.

Rivergallery's picture
Joined: 05/23/03
Posts: 1301

"KimPossible" wrote:

This will vary from person to person IMO. I still cry every day about what happened on Friday but as a concerned parent and citizen, i'm ready to talk about what we need to do.

No one who doesn't want to talk about it yet should feel pressured to do so, but at this point i think those who want to talk about it shouldn't be pressured not to. Its important and i think some people feel an urgency to make noise about it, before it fades away into dust like it has so many other times when its easy to just go back to what feels like or normal lives and our normal routines and become complacent about it again. I did not want to talk about it Friday, but as time moves on...i want it to be discussed before people don't want to bother to anymore.

I totally agree :):) and think it really should be talked about as it seems to be that legislation will soon be passed further restricting our gun rights, and we should be informed, regardless of which side we take, we should understand what the government wants to do. We should know what has happened in countries that have gone this way, and decide.. #1 is it worth the risk. #2 do we want to mover further away from our constitution.
I do see it as a risk.. I would rather risk an accidental shooting than a homicidal maniac or a rogue government... AND if a teacher is properly trained they should NOT have their gun in their desk (which someone brought up).. They would have it strapped to them at all times, and know how and when to properly use it.

Rivergallery's picture
Joined: 05/23/03
Posts: 1301

"GloriaInTX" wrote:

Just for the record.... homicide and gun homicide rates are going DOWN not up.

FBI — Expanded Homicide Data Table 8

Gloria can you find any stats to show how many of those guns were legally obtained?

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3312

1- I did not say that CC'rs are better.. just that if there are more of them and if they are already on the scene they will have the opportunity to prevent it.. If they are not allowed to own the weapons there is no way a CC'r would be able to stop it.

It is hard to argue against the notion that if some good person has a gun on them when someone is threatening lives that they can use it to stop the criminal. However, what we are sacrificing in return is not as easily measurable. How many accidental and inappropriate uses of guns by otherwise good people do we see. How much easier have we made it for criminals to get guns and use them, either by getting them themselves or taking them from good people, just so the CC'rs can continue to carry.

You cannot tell me without a doubt that you know that the trade off comes out in our favor in the end. And I think we are at a point where we need to try. If we are wrong, we can keep fixing. I don't think its responsible for us to not even consider it at this point.

- Assumptions can definitely be made if you look at what happens to societies when guns are highly regulated. Registration: The **** Paradigm - by Stephen P. Halbrook

My anti-virus software wouldn't let me go to the site. It came with this computer but it seems kind of stupid because I saw a glimpse of the site before it stopped me, so I"m not entirely sure how its protecting me LOL. Anyway, i saw that it said something about hitler. I'm assuming this is about tyrannic governments taking control of their citizens? I will say that I do not believe for one minute that in this point in the evolution of our society we are in any sort of serious threat of this happening. I'm willing to take this 'risk' in order to make an attempt to protect more of our citizens every day for a current problem that we know exists...right now. There are nations that live with tighter gun laws who have not fallen to dictators.

I agree something needs to change, but I do not think it comes in regulating law abiding citizens, it comes in not releasing criminals. And aiding with mental health care patients.. DO NOT allow violent people out on our streets period.. Then we wouldn't have to worry about criminals getting guns because there would be so little of them.. only those that had never committed a crime before would every commit a violent crime

I agree with a lot of this. I'm not sure about the never releasing criminals thing. Only because it seems like an awful lot of these people are first time offenders, and I don't think our system can handle the load you are suggesting. Essentially you are saying "look elsewhere to fix the problem besides gun control"

I'm just saying saying look everywhere to fix the problem.

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

"Potter75" wrote:

No. And if you want to hang your hat on a single incident, go ahead. You are still dead wrong.

Its not a single incident

Germany
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/12/world/europe/12germany.html

Britain
He must have chased the pupils all over the place, shooting at them til l they fell - News - The Independent

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3312

"GloriaInTX" wrote:

Just for the record.... homicide and gun homicide rates are going DOWN not up.

FBI ? Expanded Homicide Data Table 8

It doesnt' matter much to me though, if they are always astronomically high relative to what is possible.

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3312

"Rivergallery" wrote:

I do see it as a risk.. I would rather risk an accidental shooting than a homicidal maniac or a rogue government.

We were posting exactly opposite sentiments at the same time Smile

I'm guessing this might be one of the big differences in the feelings people have on the debate.

Rivergallery's picture
Joined: 05/23/03
Posts: 1301

Repeat offender stats
US - finding rates from 30-56% of violent crimes are from repeat offenders.. THE rate should be ZERO. and we could easily as a society make it so.. unless they escape from Prison. HOW.. NO BAIL period. And no release even for violent crimes, all rape, murder, attacks etc should carry a life or a death sentence. You ever rape someone, or murder instant life in prison. They would not be out doing it, and it would deter people from committing them, as it would be consistant. Especially if there was a heavy handed death penalty. I would even rather be heavy handed and even though it has never happened.. put to death one innocent person than allow the 30-56% of violent crimes to continue. It seems to me we should start there, not with laws that already are not working.. the people committing these crimes are already not supposed to have guns, and are already breaking the law.. why would another law stop them?
Study: Prisons failing to deter repeat criminals in 41 states - USATODAY.com
Why are so many Felons Repeat Offenders?

Not just a US problem-
Canada -
Repeat-offender rate four times higher than reported? Vancouver Sun
UK - 1/2million crimes by repeat offenders
Repeat offenders responsible for half a million crimes - Telegraph

Spacers's picture
Joined: 12/29/03
Posts: 4100

"AlyssaEimers" wrote:

DH's school has an armed officer at his school. That is his sole job to guard the school. I think that frees the teachers up to teach. I would hate to be worried about shooting someone at the same time trying to teach math. I also can't imagine some nosey kid looking for the answer key to his teachers desk and finding a gun. That could go bad in so many ways. I think another alternative would be tasers if they were properly trained and out of reach from the kids.

I do not think the answer is to ban all guns anywhere. They do have their place. They should not be given out to the mentally ill and should have to be kept locked up.

ITA with this. Teachers should be teaching, not carrying guns. Here's something I wrote on FB this morning:

"The problem *IS* guns. You simply can't kill dozens of people when you're armed with knives because those people know they have a fighting chance against you. And you don't need an assault rifle and explosive bullets to kill a deer or protect your home. There is absolutely no reason why anyone in America, at least anyone outside of law enforcement, should have that type of gun, those kinds of bullets. No reason at all. The Second Amendment says "a well-armed militia." It doesn't say anywhere that Joe Redneck gets to own multiple assault rifles and explosive bullets. It's time to put a stop to this. Kids shouldn't be dying in schools, and if Adam Lanza's mom didn't have those guns in her house, he wouldn't have been able to kill them all so easily."

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3312

"Rivergallery" wrote:

Repeat offender stats
US - finding rates from 30-56% of violent crimes are from repeat offenders.. THE rate should be ZERO. and we could easily as a society make it so.. unless they escape from Prison. HOW.. NO BAIL period. And no release even for violent crimes, all rape, murder, attacks etc should carry a life or a death sentence. You ever rape someone, or murder instant life in prison. They would not be out doing it, and it would deter people from committing them, as it would be consistant. Especially if there was a heavy handed death penalty. I would even rather be heavy handed and even though it has never happened.. put to death one innocent person than allow the 30-56% of violent crimes to continue. It seems to me we should start there, not with laws that already are not working.. the people committing these crimes are already not supposed to have guns, and are already breaking the law.. why would another law stop them?
Study: Prisons failing to deter repeat criminals in 41 states - USATODAY.com
Why are so many Felons Repeat Offenders?

Not just a US problem-
Canada -
Repeat-offender rate four times higher than reported? Vancouver Sun
UK - 1/2million crimes by repeat offenders
Repeat offenders responsible for half a million crimes - Telegraph

I do think its very logical that a one time offender could be likely to offend again. But while you point to some countries that have this problem...there are others that don't. So maybe you don't have to keep them locked up forever. I'm not saying what the solution is, I'm not entirely sure, i'm just saying there must be some differences and we could try to figure out what those differences are.

Either way...i suppose this is a different debate. I really have nothing against examining our prison system and fixing it too. Trust me, I know its not perfect.

ETA:, just wanted to at least point out, that we are not talking about a gross majority of crimes happening from repeat offenders. At most about half....and even if we could apply that specifically to homicides, our homicide rates would still be a lot hire than many other countries if cut in half....

ETA: what i just said makes no sense actually...i'm getting the math all messed up. If half of our criminals are repeat offenders, that is not half of all crimes committed as a whole. its even less than that. In other words, most crimes are carried out by first time offenders.

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

"Spacers" wrote:

ITA with this. Teachers should be teaching, not carrying guns. Here's something I wrote on FB this morning:

"The problem *IS* guns. You simply can't kill dozens of people when you're armed with knives because those people know they have a fighting chance against you. And you don't need an assault rifle and explosive bullets to kill a deer or protect your home. There is absolutely no reason why anyone in America, at least anyone outside of law enforcement, should have that type of gun, those kinds of bullets. No reason at all. The Second Amendment says "a well-armed militia." It doesn't say anywhere that Joe Redneck gets to own multiple assault rifles and explosive bullets. It's time to put a stop to this. Kids shouldn't be dying in schools, and if Adam Lanza's mom didn't have those guns in her house, he wouldn't have been able to kill them all so easily."

But she did already have the guns. The cat is out of the bag. You can't put it back in. What do you suggest, rounding up the millions of guns that are already out there? Do you realistically think that would EVER happen and people would willingly give up their guns? If so you are not living in the real world. Adam Lanza didn't kill those kids with assault rifles.

Rivergallery's picture
Joined: 05/23/03
Posts: 1301

"KimPossible" wrote:

It is hard to argue against the notion that if some good person has a gun on them when someone is threatening lives that they can use it to stop the criminal. However, what we are sacrificing in return is not as easily measurable. How many accidental and inappropriate uses of guns by otherwise good people do we see. How much easier have we made it for criminals to get guns and use them, either by getting them themselves or taking them from good people, just so the CC'rs can continue to carry.

You cannot tell me without a doubt that you know that the trade off comes out in our favor in the end. And I think we are at a point where we need to try. If we are wrong, we can keep fixing. I don't think its responsible for us to not even consider it at this point.

My anti-virus software wouldn't let me go to the site. It came with this computer but it seems kind of stupid because I saw a glimpse of the site before it stopped me, so I"m not entirely sure how its protecting me LOL. Anyway, i saw that it said something about hitler. I'm assuming this is about tyrannic governments taking control of their citizens? I will say that I do not believe for one minute that in this point in the evolution of our society we are in any sort of serious threat of this happening. I'm willing to take this 'risk' in order to make an attempt to protect more of our citizens every day for a current problem that we know exists...right now. There are nations that live with tighter gun laws who have not fallen to dictators.

I agree with a lot of this. I'm not sure about the never releasing criminals thing. Only because it seems like an awful lot of these people are first time offenders, and I don't think our system can handle the load you are suggesting. Essentially you are saying "look elsewhere to fix the problem besides gun control"

I'm just saying saying look everywhere to fix the problem.

It was a study done on the laws Germany passed before and during WWII regarding guns.
Our System could easily handle it if there was the dealth penalty in acted swifter. Wouldn't you want to reduce it by 30-65%? A LOT of them are NOT first time offenders.. Wink

Rivergallery's picture
Joined: 05/23/03
Posts: 1301

"Spacers" wrote:

ITA with this. Teachers should be teaching, not carrying guns. Here's something I wrote on FB this morning:

"The problem *IS* guns. You simply can't kill dozens of people when you're armed with knives because those people know they have a fighting chance against you. And you don't need an assault rifle and explosive bullets to kill a deer or protect your home. There is absolutely no reason why anyone in America, at least anyone outside of law enforcement, should have that type of gun, those kinds of bullets. No reason at all. The Second Amendment says "a well-armed militia." It doesn't say anywhere that Joe Redneck gets to own multiple assault rifles and explosive bullets. It's time to put a stop to this. Kids shouldn't be dying in schools, and if Adam Lanza's mom didn't have those guns in her house, he wouldn't have been able to kill them all so easily."

"Joe Redneck"... who is usually in a militia? An average Joe... Who historically has been in militias in our country? The average Joe... SO yes I think the Average american should be allowed to own a gun.. whether you want to slang a farmworker and call him a redneck or not.. Or are you saying that they are stupid and should have to pass a test before getting a conceal carry permit?.... already happens, and is NOT CONSTITUTIONAL ANYWAY :). Why shouldn't an average farmer have an assault rifle.. is there documentation to show these people are the ones committing these crimes?

Pages

Topic locked