School Shootings -- We must do something!

[tallfoo]

I would like to see the OP put something like this in the opinions section at OregonLive.com. Both sides need to actually debate instead of arguing separately.

 

[caarecengi]

I'm a taxpayer and I'm for security too. But, it is expensive.

Hell.....when are we building that border wall?

School security......that's down the list for me. OK, Ok, ok.....as a first step for school security. Take this test. Figure out which way would a murder probably go?

View attachment 448406

Armed security and re-designing school perimeters/entry points, metal detectors, etc.... will be very costly. Not that they aren't good suggestions. But for now......I'd like to see a wall. On the Mexican border. Before a wall goes up around a school.

Aloha, Mark

FACT: 11 teens die daily behind the wheel - how many of those are distracted/impaired driving (texting, talking with friends, smoking weed before/while driving, etc)? Where is the OUTRAGE over that crap? Or do we just accept that this will happen?

Then again, you could mandate a nationwide 35MPH speed limit for students < age 18 and prevent them from driving on the highways - it would save lives.

The bottom line is that we love our freedoms - and we have free will.
The problem of indiscriminate violence has been around since the story of Cain and Abel - and you're 20 times more likely to be shot by a handgun than by a rifle, but you're also 20 times more likely to be stabbed then injured by a gunshot wound. And these stats are per the CDC website, not some 'fake news' crap

 

[civil_lib]

I do not think that mandatory arming of teachers is a good idea. 48 years ago I was a policeman in a "Park Precinct". The sworn police officers in the precinct were primarily graduate students or teachers. When we had to qualify on the shooting range, some of the teachers missed the 3 foot diameter target ... from 10 feet away! Even with lots of training, they were not good shots. Most had never fired a gun before. On the other hand, if a teacher wants to carry a gun, and shows proficiency, let them.

 

[Diamondback]

I do not think that mandatory arming of teachers is a good idea. 48 years ago I was a policeman in a "Park Precinct". The sworn police officers in the precinct were primarily graduate students or teachers. When we had to qualify on the shooting range, some of the teachers missed the 3 foot diameter target ... from 10 feet away! Even with lots of training, they were not good shots. Most had never fired a gun before. On the other hand, if a teacher wants to carry a gun, and shows proficiency, let them.

Nobody's talking about *mandating* anything... the range of options are from offering volunteers the chance to participate in a school version of pilots' FFDO program, to at most radical allowing teachers who hold CCW permits to exercise them on campus.

Conservative who doesn't like guns: doesn't carry a gun.
Leftist who doesn't like guns: wants to force everyone else to be disarmed too.

Nice try at a strawman, by the way...

 

[ZigZagZeke]

A provocative topic title, yes? Well it got you here!

First and foremost, I feel we need to do whatever we can to prevent the radical left from using every mass shooting as political ammunition to further their agenda of disarming the population, or banning certain specific tools they deem "evil".

And as for the latest target of the media (AR-15s), you know the statistics: Rifles as a whole are the least abused firearms in America. According to the FBI all rifles combined (that's everything from a .22 lever action, to grandpa's hunting rifle, to AR-15s) account for less than 2% of all homicides and less than 3% of all firearms related homicides. (Expanded Homicide Data Table 8)

Why, then, are firearms like the AR-15 always the target of left-wing political gun control proposals? That is a serious question. In my eyes it's because it was a weapon used the last few publicized mass shootings, and mainstream media likes to increase hype and vilify devices, but this topic probably warrants its own separate discussion.

Now it is absolutely true that the violent tragedies you hear about on the news are something that deeply affects all of us. It hits every one of us very emotionally, regardless of being liberal or conservative, or left or right.

There are those on the anti-gun side that try to leverage the latest school shooting for furthering their gun control agenda, but for most Americans that aren't part of a political agenda machine, I assert the following is true:

* For those that lean left, there's a tendency to feel the government should do something to help prevent these types of tragedies, and it is easy for them to get duped by a liberal gun control argument. It satisfies their need to *feel* like they've "done something", and they miss out on any sort of productive dialog with the opposite side about what we REALLY should be doing about anything.

* For those that lean right, there's a tendency to immediately react to media reports with a "Keep your hands out off my guns!" attitude, get very defensive about our Constitutionally protected rights, and miss out on any sort of productive dialog with the opposite side about what we REALLY should be doing about anything.

We're stuck in the situation where there not only isn't a way to agree on anything, there doesn't even seem to be a way to discuss anything.

It is very common for most of us to make this argument: "Murders happen! A crazy madman will find tools to accomplish their evil goals, and the fact that a gun was an obtainable tool means it is often going to be used for their purposes. If not a gun, then a machete, a bomb, or a delivery truck."

The problem is, when you make that argument, the point of it is to stifle the progression of gun control measures, and it doesn't actually further the discussion around how to make society any safer. @Blackpowdrkeg said it in another thread regarding "why does anybody need an AR-15?": if your goal is to convince the gun-control advocates to change their minds, you will have to address THEIR concerns rather than your own. That sentiment rings true here as well.

People want to feel safe. For us gun owners, feeling safe has a lot to do with taking responsibility for our own safety. For non-gun owners, feeling safe for them seems to be a lot more complex; they find themselves having feelings like, "Well the police will protect me!", and "If people didn't have these semi-automatic weapons to begin with, they wouldn't be able to harm me!" (which is where the "Why does anyone *need* and AR-15?" question comes from), and "I don't want to have to worry about being a victim of gun violence!". That "gun violence" term has always puzzled me. I always figured all violence is equally as bad; being shot or stabbed or clubbed to death or run over by a vehicle are no different. Violence is violence! But I digress.

The point of this whole topic:

We need a path forward. If we want to curtail the constant threat of bans on specific devices or outright attacks on our Constitutionally protected rights, we better come up with a way to have a discussion about how to make public places like schools safer. Because none of us wants to hear that next news report about a school shooting. We need to brainstorm. We need to find common ground that can find support from the left and the right. No, we're not going to get support from the anti-gun coalition that are hell bent on disarming the population. But we just may be able to get support from those that are actually LOOKING for ways to increase security and safety of places like schools. Why can't we actually brainstorm, together, on ways to do this?

This is where the brainstorming starts:

* ELIMINATE GUN FREE ZONES - Gun free zones are dangerous, reckless and negligent. By saying you can't bring in a gun, all they do is make a defenseless victim zone, where criminals do what they want, and you law abiding honest decent people with a gun are banned. Mentally unstable law-breaking people who get their hands on a firearm and intend to do harm at a school obviously do *not* pay attention to a gun free zone policy. A school that is a gun free zone currently just prevents teachers, staff, and other law abiding citizens in a school zone from having a firearm themselves, and thus reduces their ability to properly intervene when a tragedy is unfolding before their very eyes. Gun free zones serve to lessen the security instead of increase it. Gun free zones are an example of Security Theater.

Now, am I advocating that we arm every teacher and require them to defend the kids in their classroom with their own firearm? No. There are teachers who have never touched a gun, would never want to touch a gun, and would never be comfortable with a gun. I am advocating, however, that the restriction be dropped. Do not make them a criminal because they simply are exercising their right to bear arms and are willing to defend others.

* INSTALL TOP-OF-THE-LINE SCHOOL SECURITY SYSTEMS - It took about $400,000 for the Southwestern High School in Shelbyville, Indiana to install a state of the art security system that actually has active countermeasures against an active shooter. (Read about it here: The 'Safest School in America' Has a $400K Security System) Now I'd take this even a step further. There's actually software out there that can analyze still photographic images (or frames from a captured security camera stream) that can positively identify a firearm on a person. That sort of software should be engineered and integrated into a security system such that the recognition of someone holding a firearm on school property can at least set off an alert. An early warning like this might just give that extra advantage.

* ARMED SECURITY - At the Great Mills High School in Maryland, a School Resource Officer intervened within one minute in an active-shooter situation and stopped a possible massacre from occurring. This didn't get much media coverage, but this is something that should be well understood and explored. There is no denying that having armed personnel on campus made a huge difference.

What other ideas are there?

You forgot about re-instituting our dismantled state mental hospital systems that used to house and treat the dangerously mentally ill and keep them isolated from society. They were closed in the 1970's, about the time that these mass shootings started. Coincidence? As a social psychology researcher I don't believe in coincidence. Other factors may be involved, but currently there is no where for a concerned family member or law enforcement to take someone in that category for long term treatment.

 

[WaGuy52]

There's something different today that young people are so willing to go down the road of killing others. Talk to teachers, there's less respect, less... something.
Someone said that civility is the glue that binds society together. The glue is losing hold. Making these attacks discussions about guns distracts discussions about the real cause.
People say "the government must do something". That statement itself proclaims the problem.. it implies people no longer even think they can solve problems, rather they need a "big government" to solve it for them.
When did we as a society abdicate reason? When did we abdicate problem solving? When did we abdicate civility over "me first"? When did goals, hard work, and success get replaced with instant gratification? There's something wrong with the youth and their reasoning skills when masses of them jump on the "tide pod challenge" or the "cinnamon challenge". ... and it has nothing to do with firearms.
I don't know if I'm making a point, or just ranting... maybe both.

 

[Voidshot9]

There's something different today that young people are so willing to go down the road of killing others. Talk to teachers, there's less respect, less... something.
Someone said that civility is the glue that binds society together. The glue is losing hold. Making these attacks discussions about guns distracts discussions about the real cause.
People say "the government must do something". That statement itself proclaims the problem.. it implies people no longer even think they can solve problems, rather they need a "big government" to solve it for them.
When did we as a society abdicate reason? When did we abdicate problem solving? When did we abdicate civility over "me first"? When did goals, hard work, and success get replaced with instant gratification? There's something wrong with the youth and their reasoning skills when masses of them jump on the "tide pod challenge" or the "cinnamon challenge". ... and it has nothing to do with firearms.
I don't know if I'm making a point, or just ranting... maybe both.

No, you're not ranting. I think you're making excellent points. The culture of personal responsibility seems have been diminished and it is very tough to understand why.

Also, fifty years ago, if a heinous crime was committed with someone with a weapon, did everyone focus on the weapon used? From what I heard, no we did not. So somewhere along the way the narrative changed. Is it related to the divide between political sides becoming wider and wider in the time since? I think it might be.

We've gotten to the point where it is almost impossible to have useful dialog between opposing sides. Everybody just shuts down. So the only useful dialog that ends up happening is within the isolated confines of each political extreme, and the ideas that pop out of each are generally offensive to those inside the opposite political pocket.

 

[nwslopoke]

Something = Entitlement. Also my semi educated opinion in the last few decades of kids staying inside resetting the Playstation when the score isn't high enough and everyone gets a trophy is a big part of this. Kids need to take a loss so they can learn how to lose. Now even a small loss can short circuit these kids brains. Of course the meds don't help.

On the TV show Sandford and Son. Lamont took all sorts of abuse and name calling with threats a 5 across the lips. But it never occurred to him to lash out and kill a bunch of people.

 

[olyroller]

I am not meaning to minimize the deaths of kids in our schools, but we need to remember that our children have a greater chance of dying from being struck by lightning than from a school shooting. These are rare events that are overhyped by the media. Don't buy into the hype. Before we spend billions hardening our schools, let's just see what taking down the gun free zone signs will do. Let's allow teachers to carry concealed if they want to, as every law abiding American should be allowed to do. They have a right to protect their own lives don't they? Let's spend the money on better efforts to identify and stop potential young killers. I suspect that after Parkland the FBI is going to do just that. And has anyone investigated to see if the students at Parkland were cyberbullying this kid, and helping to set him off. Maybe a little effort to teach students the potential ramifications of that kind of behavior would be useful.

 

[justcuz]

Your point is well taken but we aren't driving the narrative. We are responding to real cases of having all our Rights ignored and abused. School shooting are just one of the mechanisms used. Sorry, I should say, school shootings that were allowed to occur. When school shootings or mass attacks are stopped or the shooter neutralized they become a non media event.

Alas, that was my point, we should be driving the narrative to point out in the greater scheme of things, more citizen's loved ones are lost to those items I pointed out, especially the number of you adults passing due to substance overdose.

Further, these shooting have decreased over the years, again a point everyone fails to use to disengage those sticking to the erroneous information.

Events shall never be a non newspeek event since that is how they make their money is sensational shock and awe!

 

[civil_lib]

Nobody's talking about *mandating* anything... the range of options are from offering volunteers the chance to participate in a school version of pilots' FFDO program, to at most radical allowing teachers who hold CCW permits to exercise them on campus.

Conservative who doesn't like guns: doesn't carry a gun.
Leftist who doesn't like guns: wants to force everyone else to be disarmed too.

Nice try at a strawman, by the way...

That was not intended as a strawman. I can recall an eastern state that was in the news recently that was trying to pass a law that mandated teachers carry guns. I don't have the time to research this, but it was in one of the left-wing lists I monitor.

 

[caarecengi]

That was not intended as a strawman. I can recall an eastern state that was in the news recently that was trying to pass a law that mandated teachers carry guns. I don't have the time to research this, but it was in one of the left-wing lists I monitor.

Sounds like New Hampshire or Maine
I know people in ME - they all carry
And NH - their motto is "Live Free or Die" and they have very liberal gun laws

 

[ma96782]

I do not think that mandatory arming of teachers is a good idea. 48 years ago I was a policeman in a "Park Precinct". The sworn police officers in the precinct were primarily graduate students or teachers. When we had to qualify on the shooting range, some of the teachers missed the 3 foot diameter target ... from 10 feet away! Even with lots of training, they were not good shots. Most had never fired a gun before. On the other hand, if a teacher wants to carry a gun, and shows proficiency, let them.

Really? I doubt that ANY politician(s) would/has/had proposed.....MANDATORY ARMING OF TEACHERS.

Even Kennesaw, GA is smart enough to have exceptions.

Maybe, the media is putting out more STUPIDNESS just to raise ratings? Or maybe you're saying that, to raise eyebrows?

Anyway, I believe that most politicians, are a little smarter than that. OK, Ok, ok......I hope. Though, YES. Some are REAL IDIOTS.

As I have heard it.......
TEACHERS and ADMINISTRATORS (including staff) with CCWs would be given the OK to CCW. No more "Gun Free School Zone" for them. That is: IF THEY WANT TO CCW. BTW.....TRUMP did float the idea of more pay for those that did choose to CCW. IMHO.....a dumb idea.

Aloha, Mark

 

[nwslopoke]

This is nothing new. We had armed security officers in Jr High in the late 1979s. Bret Harte Jr High. LA, Ca. 92nd/Hoover.

 

[IOM]

Why have those "Gun Free Zone " signs not been taken down yet...???

They are nothing more then a neon sign saying: SHOOT HERE...

For starters, just saying...

 

[ma96782]

Why have those "Gun Free Zone " signs not been taken down yet...???

They are nothing more then a neon sign saying: SHOOT HERE...

For starters, just saying...

LOL....the signs are there to make LIBERALS "feel" safer.



Aloha, Mark

 

[MxOverkill]

A provocative topic title, yes?

What other ideas are there?

Chasing solutions to symptoms is never very effective...

 

[rick benjamin]

Lock the doors
But
Janitors block em open for convenience
Teachers block em open for airflow
Admins unlock em, too busy to let visitors in
Students n teachers block em open for their friends

 

[Voidshot9]

Chasing solutions to symptoms is never very effective...

Doctors will admit the same about incurable diseases, and all they can do is treat symptoms...

Sure, we can talk about the idealistic world where we can identify and eliminate causes of these people's madness and what drives them to shoot up a school.. Problem is, the next predator has already been born and raised. They've already been conditioned by their environment. They're already a lost cause.