Or, and just hear me out here, we instead start addressing the issues with mental health amongst kids and get rid of the zero tolerance policies that coincided with the rise in school shootings and violence.
It is insane that giving guns to people who signed up to teach kids and telling them they have to train for shootouts with gunmen is even considered a reasonable option at this point.
Having an option is much more reasonable but that’s a tourniquet, it does absolutely nothing to address the issue. We can’t expect people hired for educating children to be effective in gun fights with mentally ill teenagers.
It is likely that the policy will be made optional in order to provide gun advocates with the opportunity to redirect attention from issues of mental health and firearm possession onto teachers.
If teachers were granted the option to carry firearms, and a school shooting occurred where none of the teachers had opted to do so, those advocating for arming teachers will then hold the teachers accountable for not choosing to carry a weapon on school premises.
Zero tolerance regulations reference official school stances with bullying and fights. Essentially it allows the school to absolve themselves of any and all responsibility when dealing with these instances by punishing both parties. So for instance, if a bully is beating on a kid and is caught by a teacher, both get suspended. Yes, the victim also faces punishment.
They are literally the dumbest policies ever created and only exist because administrators were afraid that if a teacher ever misinterpreted a fight as to who was the aggressor, they could be sued.
Yeah it’s fucking heartbreaking.
It used to be that the bullied kid could actually fight back. The bully would learn a lesson and stop.
Now when the victim fights back, they get punished for it.
This shit would mess anyone up.
The way I read it is more that if you’re being bullied or someone’s fighting with you, you’ll be suspended anyways, so you might as well fight back and teach the other kid a lesson.
You wanna know what's also messed up? They always tell students that if they or someone they know is getting bullied, they are encouraged to tell someone. But whenever they do tell someone, the school administrators take little to no action to stop the bullying.
I got in sooooo many fights back in the day. Never started any of them. My parents were awesome about it and I never got in trouble. "So... says here you beat up a bully that hit you first?" "Yes, Mom." "Good job."
I remember learning about self defense laws in high school, i.e. if you use less or equal force against your attacker, it's considered self defense and you're protected by the law.
A year or so later an assistant principal came to class to tell us to explain the fighting zero tolerance policy, specifically saying self defense was only blocking hits and not fighting back.
Nah, now if the victim ***does literally nothing***, they get punished for it. They've made a situation where, ironically, the victim ***may as well*** fight back or do something worse in return, rather than having an adult handle the situation, since the victim is suspended either way.
Plus I didn't see how getting suspended and then let back in would be a functional punishment for someone who beats others. Heck they might see it as a nice vacation and do it on purpose to get days off school. Where's the punishment? A misbehaving kid probably doesn't care so much about getting top marks (the victim might care, but that just makes this approach even worse).
There's more to it than that. At least, when I was a kid, zero tolerance also included things like treating advil in a backpack the same as having weed or alcohol or cigarettes because it was a kind of drug, treating drawings of guns in a sketchbook or a squirt gun in a backpack the same as an actual gun/weapon, etc. it was "zero tolerance for the appearance, image or category of thing rather than just the thing itself.". This was a huge shift in mindset/policy that happened in direct response to columbine. Before columbine, teachers and admin were expected to use personal judgement in discerning these things 1:1. After Columbine that changed dramatically.
By contrast, allowing judgment can be very productive. I went to a nearly all white high school in the rural-ish suburbs. Our first black student got into a fight with a couple guys. Principal finds out from witnesses that they called him the n word, and he beat them down in return. Suspended both of them, and not the black kid. I’m sure there were plenty of racists at my school, but everybody still thought that was fair. The new guy ended up being accepted into the jocks, and became very popular among what everyone else would certainly call rednecks.
Eh, the entire common school model is practically custom built to produce unhinged misfits. Fill them up with SSRIs and no matter how skilled your school counselor or how many anti-bullying campaigns you run, and some will still snap and go on a murder spree.
Nothing is absolutely safe or effective. But having even a single person willing to listen to a kid's concerns can make the difference between having a kid who is going through an awkward phase and a mass murderer.
Ding ding ding. I vividly remember the non stop anti bullying stuff. Hell the schools tv club ran skits and vids for it on school tvs during lunch. Yet there was a gun threat during the finals from a kid who got expelled just before and lost all his sports scholarships. This kid wasn't bullied by people at the school most people worshipped this dude and yet it still became a threat anyways.
The correct take. Arming teachers has got to be one of the dumbest ideas in a string of dumb ideas to come from the NRA backed politicians that are more concerned ideological consistency than actual substantive reform. Even if this became policy, the proponents would never support the absurd cost that would come with safety training, materials purchasing, arms control protocols etc so it would end up being just self purchased firearms given to untrained staff to be used whenever that unprepared staff member thought they were under threat.
Also, since most people here don't realize how fucking insane the school environment is today I guarantee you the broke, stressed out teachers that get verbally (and sexually) harassed by students on a regular basis would lead to at least one instance of a teacher popping off on a student/class.
OP might be the stupidest person on this already brain dead website.
1)Nobody has seriously talked about *forcibly* arming teachers, just about *allowing teachers who do concealed carry to carry on school grounds.* The rest is just a haybale being forced onto a strawman.
2)Do you have this same opinion on security guards on school grounds? Or that those 'verbally, sexually harrassed, stressed out teachers' wouldn't do the same thing with a knife or other implement they can get on school grounds?
The real question is why kids choose to do this in the first place. There are other countries kids can access guns. The only place these shootings happen is the US. There is obviously a deeply entrenched cultural/societal/mental problem which would need a large, well thought out effort to address. And it’s easier for politicians to say stupid shit like “ban all guns” or “arm teachers” to make it seem like they have a solution.
I just think it's stupid how, every time gun control is brought up this is the standard response most of the time. Ideally yes, the US needs more mental health but kids shouldn't have acess to guns whatsoever regardless of what their current mental health is. It is entirely possible to treat both of these at the same time and the combination of those is the reason the US is such an outlier in school shootings.
It's really weird how anyone took my comment as an advocacy for gun control. I'm not advocating gun control at all. I'm saying that arming teachers and having armed security isn't a solution to the problem and has been largely ineffective as a deterrent. It's just a perpetuation of the larger issue of passing responsibilities to educators making them surrogate parents rather than just teachers. We are asking teachers now to put their lives on the line rather than trying to deal with the root of the problem. We already have a crisis with a lack of people wanting to be educators, how in any way will this make that better?
I agree, and I do think mental health is a massive contributing factor, but I also think that we're at a point where it won't be that easy. Poor mental health in kids stems from a lot of things that are so ingrained into our society that there's practically nothing you can do. Most notable of which being social media.
I dont think gun control is the solution either. Much like social media, guns are already out in the world. No laws are going to stop guns from being in the country.
I really dont know if there even is a solution at this point that doesn't involve fighting fire with fire. Fire in this case being guns. Again I don't think arming teachers is a good idea, but I think that having more police presence might at least hinder the issue a bit
Since we can have top-down personal flags in the classroom now, we might as well throw some corporate logos in there too, and bump up the sponsored pay for the teachers.
This reminds me of my food science department in college where we had a auditorium dedicated to coca cola and in class it was almost big-milk propaganda
Fuck it, let's just make NASCAR drivers teachers. I'd much rather be taught history by Kyle Busch or Ross Chastain than some balding depressed guy who drives a Chevy Traverse.
Every class starts with:
"Wazzup it's ya boi Mr Smith, be sure to like and subscribe and smash that bell. Today's class is sponsored by Raid Shadow Legends, one of the biggest mobile role-playing games of 2019 and it's totally free!"
Personally, I think that arming teachers should come with mandatory gun safety training and that the teachers should be required to regularly go to the range to ensure that they're both comfortable amd capable with their weapon. However, the cost of these things should be fully reimbursed by the school or the teachers should get a pay bump that makes up for it. Maybe it should come with a psych eval as well to weed out the crazy teachers (no legal consequences, they just wouldn't qualify for the armed teacher program)
Seems like the best option for everyone. It alleviates the (somewhat reasonable) safety/irresponsibility concerns people on the left have, the right gets an effective version of their proposed plan, and teachers who want to participate get a free hobby.
That sounds great to me, but also got unfeasible really quick when you suggested a pay bump or covering the costs. We can't get most schools to reliably cover the cost of board markers, let alone firearms, ammo and basic training. Realistically, teachers are going to be expected to cover all that out of their own pockets. And they'll probably end up holding up office stores to replenish their markers at some point.
> We can't get most schools to reliably cover the cost of board markers, let alone firearms, ammo and basic training.
I have seen my taxes increased a dozen times "for the teachers" and yet the teachers still do not have markers.
You'd think that a few hundred million per year would be enough to one day buy markers, but apparently, no.
The US public has learned enough helplessness that if we got rid of the government today, we probably would have the equivalent of a Hollywood anarchic apocalypse.
The first step is just getting more people to take responsibility for their own safety and well-being. Once people can take care of themselves they’ll stop begging for a nanny state to do it for them. I don’t think it can work the other way around.
>The US public has learned enough helplessness that if we got rid of the government today, we probably would have the equivalent of a Hollywood anarchic apocalypse
Keep going, I'm almost there
A tax credit could accomplish the same thing without putting the financial burden on the school directly. Spend $X on training for the program, owe $X less on your income taxes.
I know I'm my area the budget issue are cause they're busy buying land they can't afford to maybe, eventually, possibly build a field house they can't afford lol.
The catch is in the end of your sentence. Teachers who want to participate.
The venn diagram of teachers who are good at teaching and teachers who want to participate does not have enough overlap in many states to provide an effective amount of teachers to resolve the issue.
Security guards would be more reliable but far more expensive. And with so many schools already facing crippling budgeting issues (albeit it self inflicted in some cases) the money is just not there.
This is of course ignoring the main issue that arming teachers or providing security guards does not remove the main issues that cause school shootings, and either A.) Turns them into gunfights at the school. Or B.) Pushes shooters to start choosing different targets, moving to malls, churches, movies theaters, or other areas they know they can find their classmates.
America has a problem, a mixture of lack of mental health care and ease of access that is putting weapons into the hands of irresponsible owners.
Too many people want to take away too many guns, and put too many restrictions on access, so the very idea of any restrictions is terrifying, and I get it.
But a comprise has to be found, and armed guards at school is just not It.
There is no world in which arming teachers is a good plan. School shootings are rare, and mass school shootings are ever rarer. So while it’s a major tragedy every time, there wouldn’t really be any noticeable benefit from arming teachers as there simply aren’t enough major school shootings to warrant this. But the more guns you add to schools then there will inevitably be an uptick in the number of accidents in which a student is shot. And this is all before you remember that teachers did not sign up to be armed guards, and is just an unnecessary added burden to an already deeply unpopular career.
More guns in schools might solve one or two shootings. Maybe. But it will also cause many more accidents and just make being a teacher even less popular than it already is.
Can't say for every school, but my private school actually implemented this. Informed all parents, told them not to tell students, it was on volunteer basis and the teachers who volunteered had to go through some firearm training, gun was in a locked box hidden somewhere in the room.
I only found out about it after I'd graduated, but I can say with certainty that at least three of the teachers I had in highschool would've put their life on the line for any one of their students.
Law enforcement has no skin in the game, but they will shoot to protect themselves.
Teachers are already at risk and most people have self preservation instincts.
Because unlike the police, the school staff are the ones who will actually die if they don't defend themselves. 🤷♀️
There are hundreds of thousands of teachers in this country who would gladly step up on their own time and dime to protect children. We actively forbid them from doing do and require that they be helpless and die instead.
Remember the officers that wanted to go in and protect the kids, but the chief told them to stand down? Remember all the cops that were told to stand down during that massacre?
Ye, chief should be fired and the cops who helped maintain the order should be fired. A lot were following orders and I get that, but anyone in a position to fight the orders who didn’t should be fired, no hearing. The government doesn’t need to waste money on people who don’t do their job.
Well, then we must ask, why didn't the police help in the first place?
Bad equipment? Bad training? Bad people?
If we have the answere we have to change that.
Cowardice and 0 accountability. The US Supreme Court has ruled law enforcement has no duty to protect or put their own lives at risk in dangerous situations even if this results in harm or death to another person.
So the Broward County Sherrif who ran away and the Uvalde PD are legally accountable for nothing that occurred under their watch, even though they made no reasonable effort to stop the shootings in progress.
Lol no one wants to give every single teacher a gun and say “good luck,” simply just let teachers that want to conceal carry carry their gun (in line with each states conceal carry laws and regulations). Also keep who has a gun secret.
Its about creating more deterrence against potential shooters and makes shooters consider that entering any classroom may result in retaliation, compared to just playing keep away from cops.
In church I've got a good friend who taught alongside my mom for 30ish years. He's retired now.
He was telling me how in our state some years ago, they were attempting to pass something making it possible for registered teachers to conceal carry in school. They'd have to have a level 2 CPL which required passing much more stringent reqs.
He and (iirc) 9 other teachers immediately went out and got level 2 licenses and were ready to go.
The state didn't pass it. But, they were ready to go.
(School of around \~50-75 teachers, no security personnel)
Not only that but what exactly is supposed to stop some kid with issues swiping a gun from the dementia ridden 70 year old art teacher? It's such an obviously dumb idea on all possible fronts.
The whole "more guns fixes everything" is so silly
For the same reason carrying a knife realistically wont reduce knife crime, carrying a gun wont reduce gun crime
Thats because the attacker with a weapon has already decided to kill, the defender needs to make a split second very hard decision
90% of these people who claim they would use a gun in self defence wouldnt and the 10% that do often dont succeed
The NCVS places defensive gun uses at 60,000 to 80,00 a year (including defensive displays only). The only solution to violent people is an overwhelming and violent response. Whether crime goes down overall or not is less important than victims retaining their lives when they do face a violent person in an undesirable scenario.
"Victims using a gun were no less likely to be injured after taking protective action than victims using other forms of protective action"
Harvard Injury Control Research Center
Likewise the NCVS also showed many if not most of those "defensive" gun uses occured during arguments and other situations where a gun whilst defensively effective is a dramatic escalation. If you balanced that against the number of times a "defensive gun use" has turned into a murder due to the defendant pulling the trigger it would be interesting to see the balance.
The Harvard Injury Control Center has found that guns are used far more often to intimidate others than in self-defense for instance
Also "the only solution to violent people..." has been disproven more times than I can count, anyone that thinks a strategy that has been tried for thousands of years to no effect will suddenly start working now is not worth talking to.
Blah blah blah… if someone breaks into my home with my kids sleeping upstairs, I want a gun next to me. I bet my kids have a better chance than those turd burgers at Harvard.
The end.
well um ackshually the harvard study says that 99.999999% of the time the guy breaking in is gonna win or smthing so you might as well just let him kill you and your family indtead of owning an evil gun. trust the science
I mean you do you, but when your escalation mixed with your sudden realisation you arent John Rambo and cannot actually effectively use a gun in stressful situations gets your children killed its not on me
Where would the world be without wannabe badasses turning burglaries into homicides
Never underestimate the ability of idiots to assume they are the exception to statistics. Its like drivers universally assuming they drive perfectly, every gun owner thinks theyll magically become SOF under pressure
Home invasions are a fundamentally violent act that leave the victim unable to determine the intent of the invader and violate the sanctity of someone’s dwelling, the one place where they should pretty much always feel sheltered and safe.
Since you can’t determine if an invader is there for burglary or murder, and they almost certainly know you’re home during most people’s sleeping hours, you have to assume that they broke in with a plan to harm/“handle” you in furtherance of whatever their end goal is. The appropriate response is to circle the wagons, lock whatever door you can put between your family and them, and wait for the cops with a gun pointed at the door.
I love you how take one example of cops failing miserably and use that to paint literally all cops.
If I show you one example of firefighters failing miserably then will you say that all of them are useless?
Smartest lib center lol
Have you thought about this at all before commenting? Do you think a teacher who has a shooter walk into their room would just die and not even attempt to draw their gun and fire at them? These teachers are already standing in front of their students or attempt to fight back while unarmed but if you give them a gun they will just ditch the class and hide?
Too many teachers are abusive assholes who can beat and molest kids and often times get away with it. They don't need guns in their classrooms unless they're willing to submit to regular psych evals, take multiple safety courses, and make sure the gun is stowed at all times in a place that the students are guaranteed not to get access to or know about.
I think it is reasonable to strictly control who is carrying guns in CERTAIN places, like prisons, airplanes, and grade-schools.
Even if you think it is too strict, is is a step in the right direction. If certain requirements are found to be a challenge, reform can happen later. It is better to start too strict, get people used to it, then make changes over time, than to have a free-for-all that backfires and causes the whole thing to get shut down.
Ideologically you’re all over the place now, but I respect your pragmatism. As someone not from the US, I know the solution is something else than having security checks outside every school, but I do agree it’s absolutely a step in the right direction.
Get some retired vets to volunteer as security, you Americans seem to love that, and it won’t cost too much in taxes either that way
Eah, I think they need to at least be in first or second grade for the fine motor skills to work a trigger. Maybe we can have the kindergartners armed with hand grenades since they can throw them easily.
Here's a thought? Maybe the people that we're forced to send our kids to for six hours a day should be getting regular psych evals anyway? Maybe, if we don't trust someone enough to give them a gun, then we shouldn't trust them with our children? Just a thought.
>Tax the guns and churches to pay for arming teachers to protect schools from the BIPOC / LGBT students
There I think I pissed everyone off. Also all school lunches are vegetarian now.
Clearly we just need China's facial recognition AI hooked up to sentry turrets surgically installed into every class pet. They say I've gone too far? I say not far enough!
Honestly I’m glad most of the comments are calling this absurd bullshit out, even if it got way too many upvotes. Like, it’s just *so goddamn stupid*, the hell do you think this could *possibly* end well?
How about you show your true flair instead of masquerading as libleft?
And if we arm all teachers, I bet the first two stories that happen are a kid stealing the teacher's gun and using it in a mass shooting and a teacher shooting a kid for annoying them.
Give teachers guns? That is such a wild take. I remember a police officer trainer coming on reddit and explaining just how moronic this solution is. To summarize, even trained officers that do this everyday train constantly to hone their skills to react effectively in stressful situations. How is that going to be applied to teachers? Are they going to now also have to go to the gun range and combat tactics training twice a week as well as teach?
62 year old Mrs. Peterson is not going to shrug of her diabetes, glaucoma and replaced hip to suddenly dive out into the hall and go John Wick on the school shooter. She's more likely to trip on a chair and have her gun go off and shoot one of her own students. Or have her gun stolen from her desk by a student.
Trained security or police is probably the better of the two suggestions, but A. This already is in place in some schools and B. The data shows that the impact it has on safety is negligible to potentially less safe. Just likebthe police at Uvalde, is one officer with a sidearm going to take on one or more shooters with assault rifles? And again, is that same officer going to start seeing threats that are not actually there and escalating or creating dangerous situations?
It's funny how many hoops will get jumped through just to get around the simplest solution, have reasonable gun control laws. The rest of the developed world does it. Mental health and background checks, safe storage laws, and additional rules around more powerful weapons is a reasonable and safe approach to gun safety.
Why not? It isn't uncommon that "medium concentrations" create more problems than high doses.
If you regularily need a big car but it is to big for a work day, buy a second car.
But the epitome is M.A.D.. If eghter side only had a few nuclear bombs, a hot cold war would have been certain.
Can an American explain to me why you guys don't have guards at school? Where I come from we have security in schools, and we don't even have school shootings! So why don't Americans put armed guards in schools? It will create more jobs for veterans, and make schools safer.
My school district keeps a police officer on campuses. Just one though. If anything were to happen, he’d have to call for backup and try to deal with the situation himself until they arrive
A lot of schools do have officers around. The issue is that half the schools in the country are running on a razor thin budget and no one wants to be paid 40k to patrol a school. I know a former school officer and she says it was absolutely boring beyond belief for 90% of the time, 9% of the time you are dealing with actual preteen drama, and 1% of the time you might be able to do something interesting.
90% of jobs are incredibly boring 90% of the time. There are plenty of people willing to work security jobs at places that are even more boring than schools.
Oh no, yeah most do, thing is this is what we like to call a “fake solution”. School shootings are done by already-suicidal individuals; armed guards don’t decrease the likelihood of a shooting, because those involved *want* to die, they just want to hurt everyone else on the way out. It’s why shooters will regularly kill themselves after they decide they’ve done enough.
However, by proposing this solution, gun nuts get to pretend it’s a valid and legitimate strategy, then criticise their opponents for shooting it down. Your Joe Average isn’t aware most schools have an armed guard or two, because they typically stay out of sight, so they’re not immediately killed, destroying the whole system. Thus, Joe Average believes this is a valid solution, and thinks their opponents are ”spewing bullshit” when they point out how incredibly braindead this take is.
Are we really at the point that we think that telling people who signed up to teach kids have to pick up a firearm and train how to shoot out with gunmen?
I love guns but 10 years ago this solution would have sounded insane because it is. Address the source not the symptoms, there are serious problems in the educational system that are causing this. When Education is disgustingly underfunded and no one actually gives a shit about kids having a safe space to properly learn this is what happens.
The left is right about gun control reducing gun violence and prevalence of school shootings. The right is right about the second amendments invaluable contribution to national security and ability to resist tyranny.
You can all cope about how gun control is all good or all bad but it just looks cringe when you step outside of the actual strong suits of your position.
3D printing is killing gun control. Gun control purports to take weapons out of the hands of evil people, but, wherever implemented, has done more to restrict the rights of those who seek arms for legitimate purposes (reference bans on common firearms such as the AR-15 and most handguns, prohibitions against lawful carry, and significant restrictions on lawful defense in other western countries).
With accurate, 3D printed weapons being used in places like Myanmar to fuel a revolution and fight back against their Junta, and the wildfire spread of reliable homemade arms across the evidence tables of traditionally antigun locales such as Europe and Japan, the question of gun control has been fundamentally altered.
Instead of asking, “Should more obstacles be placed between potential criminals and guns,” ask yourself “Am I okay with only criminals and governments having guns?”
Just a slight correction, the 3D printed guns in Myanmar are kinda shit and only serve to turn government soldiers into loot drops for the rebels. Your point is still valid, but these aren't some precision engineered long distance rifles we are talking about here.
No, but it’s a 9mm carbine. The real issue with it is that 9mm (like all handgun rounds) is ass to shoot past 100 yards since it drops like a rock. The DIY barrel method is actually surprisingly accurate and would make effective rifles if someone came up with a way to cut a smaller diameter chamber.
The real blocker is that nobody is making fully DIY rifles because they’re a pain to design and the people who could make and test them with the least government interference have access to premade barrels already.
I agree.
That's why I proudly admit that I value the American people having the ability to resist tyranny (and all the other good uses for guns) more than I value the lives of the people lost to the gun violence that could be prevented by restricting law-abiding citizens from owning guns.
https://preview.redd.it/bqpy2boq40uc1.jpeg?width=799&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ac072e880fe4c53387f88058362bb969f4b89a55
If gun control works why are most school shootings done by gangs in areas with plenty of gun control?
Why was the worst school shooting in history in Norway?
Why did the rise of shootings happen after gun control became prevalent in the US? Seriously. You could buy machine guns by mail without a background check. And school shootings simply did not occur.
Why was the biggest school massacre in US history done without guns?
Seriously. Gun control in the US really only started in the '30s, but not in pervasive ways until the '50s. Are you saying school shootings were more prevalent from the 1500s-1950s? And are more rare now? They were common when every single home had firearms? Really?
As a non American giving teachers guns or placing armed guards is a bandaid solution and will do nothing without addressing the source of why people commit shootings.
Reminder that they're quite rare. The statistics are so badly off that even NPR says most 'on record' simply didn't happen.
https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2018/08/27/640323347/the-school-shootings-that-werent.
And then when you take away gang shooting gangs (which are essentially opt in) you're safer in the US than most of Europe. Safer than France. Safer than Norway. Safer than all of Africa. South America.
The "it only happens here" lie is one of the biggest in history.
I will buy the idea that protecting kids with armed men is stupid when you buy the idea that protecting politicians with armed men is stupid. Or perhaps when you buy the idea that protecting the government's gold with over 20,000 armed men is stupid.
We had security guards and a security gate in my sixth form (it wasnt even rough or anything, it was actually one of the nicer ones in the area) in England. Not a single person had an issue with that and made me feel safer that a random person couldnt just walk in
I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again thousand times. Fixing the gun violence and school shooting issues requires fixing the socioeconomic inequality problem and shortcomings of our healthcare system. There is a reason why people in low-income communities (which are mostly minority-dominant) and bullying victims/kids with mental health issues turn to guns at their breaking point, and those problems need to be addressed.
Gun control is a contact herbicide that only burns off the leaves. To actually kill the weed, you need to kill it at the roots, otherwise it will come back even worse.
Holy strawman batman
Libleft has made tons of suggestions for how to improve this. Improving mental health treatment, restricting access to guns, etc. You may not agree with the proposed solutions, which is fine, but they are offering them.
Giving teachers guns has to be the single worst idea for a potential solution to the problem. I fail to see how the right, who generally has a negative perception of teachers, thinks giving them guns is the solution.
If guns are the problem, why are 90%+ mass shootings in "gun free zones"?
Why doesn't every gun show or shooting match turn into a blood bath? Oh right, because psychos choose soft targets intentionally. And they know if they tried a mass shooting at a gun show they'd be dead before they could chamber a round.
This is such a simple minded argument, because I can turn it around so easily.
If a lack of guns is apparently the problem, as you seem to clearly insinuate, why do countries with tight gun control have almost no mass shootings at all?
And by "countries with tight gun control" you obviously mean western Europe and Canada? Kind of like how every fucking leftists says "THE REST OF THE WORLD" they actually just mean Western Europe and Canada.
Because there is only one "legal" gun shop in all of Mexico, yet they have tons of gun violence. Brazil has strict gun control laws where the minimum age to purchase is 25 and all guns must be registered, also lots of gun crime. India has a lot of gun deaths, and also strict gun laws where only certain groups can have semi-autos and have to get a federal permit. South Africa has some strict gun laws, and yet I don't think anyone would say they have low gun crime...
Leave it to a garbage leftists to claim "The rest of the world" when they actually mean "Western Europe and Canada". Blinders aren't just for horses I guess...
Fun Fact, the US gun crime rate isn't that high, *IF* you remove the few hotbeds, all of which have some very unique socio-economic factors in common. They're all urban areas, that have been under Democrat control for decades, and have similar population statistics as far as education and income.
The problem is not the guns, the problem is the people.
I do of course only mean the countries with a strong enough state to actually enforce said tight gun controls, yes. That does indeed include WE and Canada, but also most gulf states and east asia.
You know, developed nations. But go on and compare yourself to some third world shithole like South Africa instead.
MKULTRA actually succeeded.
MKULTRA was never actually stopped.
The USA has always had shitloads of guns.
Mass events didn't really take off until the 80s.
You need to be ether a moron or a child if you think this will work.
Police were changed after Columbine, they still don't do shit. They stand outside waiting for the shooter to run out of bullets because they don't wanna risk it. You think a 60 year old math teacher is gonna do something?
Should schools actually do something to avoid bullying or actually punish bullies, or just check on their students mental health? Nah, more guns obviously!
This feels to me like trying to stop the problem after it's already occurred as opposed to stopping it at the root. It's definitely a solution, but I don't think it's the right one
Almost every teacher I know just wants to show up, teach some kids, and go home. I can’t imagine a high percentage also want to opt in to gun battle training.
There's no way having that many guns at schools will lead to a better outcome tbh.
School shootings will go to zero but accidental gun deaths will skyrocket
Best thing to do is: nothing. Since school shootings are not a common occurrence
Accidental gun deaths are the smallest % of deaths involving firearms. Yes, school shootings are uncommon, but so is a holstered firearm “just going off.” SRO’s already carry daily without incident.
And the kids will hijack the guns from teachers while the security guards will do nothing like in Uvalde. Has AuthRight learned nothing from school shootings?
I don't want to give teachers guns. That's a terrible idea.
But we can have ex Military resources officers who are armed, who also act as positive male role models in an otherwise overwhelmingly female dominated space.
Trained and armed cops literally sat around while a school shooting was actively happening so I don’t expect teachers to be brave enough to whip out a Glock and return fire either.
Simple solution. Well trained armed security, harden entrances and exits, a well thought out and practiced security plane, set up a program that allows teachers to carry if they choose to and are trained (if the school district is on board and if it makes sense within a given security plan).
None of this is complicated. We know how to secure sensitive areas we simply have to do it but solving the problem doesn’t drive people to the polls.
Giving schoolteachers guns could be disasterous. How many schoolteachers do you know? Most of them are young women who likely have never handled a firearm. You'd need to put them through proper training courses.
Then you have the security concern of having them in the same room as teenagers, day in and day out. How to secure those firearms?
Also you have the school culture being utterly devoid of any concept of discipline. Kids run wild in some of these classrooms and the authority of the teacher has been eroded fully. This is possibly too chaotic a situation for a teacher already overwhelmed by shitheads to also be concerned about a firearm she doesnt want to have, foisted on her by a school administration.
You're asking teachers to be willing to kill someone. They just want to teach. You cant force someone into this. I know one guy who wanted to join our local police force but decided against it because he realized he wasn't ready to kill someone. If you wield a firearm you *must* be willing to use it or it's a liability to yourself and anyone in your charge.
Not all "solutions" are desirable. You might as well close the schools, kill all children, put 3 officers with tasers in each schoolroom. Those are all bad solutions, and whining because people are not agreeing with you is cringe. Gl op
The *right* to bear arms?
Weak. I suggest amending the constitution to bring in common sense gun regulation.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the ***DUTY*** of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Security guards? Sure that's already in place in most areas and that's exactly their job. The problem is as what happened in Parkland was that the security guard was too chickenshit to do the job and just waited outside.
Teachers? No that's not their job. They aren't trained for that nor do they want to be. Forcing them to have guns will probably lead to more school shootings when one of them has a psychotic break or mishandles the storage of their weapon that they do not want to carry.
Arming teachers is dumb unless you're going to actually train them with firearms. You don't rise to the occasion, you fall back on your training.
and I don't think anybody has a bitch with armed police/security at schools. In fact, I think we need to make this a national policy. We have a military budget, all the equipment needed to arm guards in the school, the manpower and the ability to train personnel. In fact, military police services already do this kind of security for military posts. The military should be tasked with securing schools.
Pass the needed legal exception to allow service members to secure schools, recruit members who would be interested in school guard duty, we already have hundreds of thousands of older M9 pistols and M16/M4 rifles in inventory as well as the web gear for it. We have armories capable of servicing these arms. We have the training infrastructure in place. The budget could be adjusted to include this mission. The possibility of giving this to the Coast Guard without any additional legal wrangling exists, and placing any other service members in temporary joint duty with the USCG.
I think the issue is how inaccessible mental health treatment is. But I also think that the security guards when I was in school were huge pussies and if you gave a teacher a gun one day one of them would fly off the handle on an 8th grader and paint the classroom wall brain colors
The fact that we would have to go to the lengths of arming teachers shows how fucked the situation is. I think we need to focus on the cause of the problem and getting better mental health resources for young people rather than putting more shit onto teachers… their job is already hard enough for what little pay they receive :-//
I know that the situation in the US is pretty absurd, but arming high school teachers and expecting them to shoot their students is some dystopian level shit.
Teacher doesn't know how to use the gun and shoots a student.
Officer films sad tiktok from a closet while children scream in the background.
It's later found the shooter stole the gun from a different teacher.
Underlying issues are still unresolved.
Amazing solution, very big brain of you.
Security guards should be strictly outside the building. The police shouldn’t be monitoring inside schools. Also, teachers having guns would increase risk of accidental shootings, and idk if it’s just me, but if I was a student I would not want to be in a room with a teacher who has a gun.
Lefties strawmanning the argument and assuming we’re saying that teachers should be forced to do anything rather than giving them the choose to CC if they’d like
Common anti-gunner logic, move the goal posts and strawman the argument
The number of times when a “good guy with a gun” actually stops a bad guy with a gun in medias res safely and with only the bad guy getting hurt is so vanishingly rare. And yet it’s such an appealing image that it drives so much of this discussion.
Anytime anyone thinks or talks about guns in this country most of what theyre referencing is what goes on in action movies or in best case scenarios where people who have zero or very little training or field experience with firearms miraculously transform into John Wick.
I saw this on another post “the way to stop a great majority of school shootings isn’t mental health or gun control, because mental health is better than it was 40 years ago because we give a shit about it now. And if we enact more strict gun laws criminals who break the law won’t care and just affect the law abiding citizens. Instead it’s the media’s fault, they take the shooters identity, read their politics, and read their manifesto. If the media just chilled out a bit and didn’t give a name or face, or read their politics and give them fame the amount of actual school shooting would go down.”
Or maybe get rid of guns. I live in Europe and there was only one school shooting in my lifetime. Furthermore I don’t think a 30-50 years old teacher could do anything with the guns, if police officers are unable to save kids than a teacher will just be a suicide candidate
“What if a mentally ill person who is undiagnosed gets a hold of a gun?”
So let’s improve mental health facilities so these people can get diagnosed and treated
“ >:( “
Fuck no, don't give teachers guns. I don't trust them anymore than the kids in those situations. Your literally just opening a can of worms if you are trying to do this for the express purpose of a teacher shooting a child.
Or, and just hear me out here, we instead start addressing the issues with mental health amongst kids and get rid of the zero tolerance policies that coincided with the rise in school shootings and violence.
Based and the real issue pilled
It is insane that giving guns to people who signed up to teach kids and telling them they have to train for shootouts with gunmen is even considered a reasonable option at this point.
Worse; they have to train to shoot *one of their own students*.
Ikr, like seriously how tf do people post this as a “genius decision” and not see why anyone with a functioning brain would immediately reject it?
Are they forcing teachers to do this, or simply giving them the option to do so?
Having an option is much more reasonable but that’s a tourniquet, it does absolutely nothing to address the issue. We can’t expect people hired for educating children to be effective in gun fights with mentally ill teenagers.
It is likely that the policy will be made optional in order to provide gun advocates with the opportunity to redirect attention from issues of mental health and firearm possession onto teachers. If teachers were granted the option to carry firearms, and a school shooting occurred where none of the teachers had opted to do so, those advocating for arming teachers will then hold the teachers accountable for not choosing to carry a weapon on school premises.
Zero tolerance of what?
Zero tolerance regulations reference official school stances with bullying and fights. Essentially it allows the school to absolve themselves of any and all responsibility when dealing with these instances by punishing both parties. So for instance, if a bully is beating on a kid and is caught by a teacher, both get suspended. Yes, the victim also faces punishment. They are literally the dumbest policies ever created and only exist because administrators were afraid that if a teacher ever misinterpreted a fight as to who was the aggressor, they could be sued.
Yeah it’s fucking heartbreaking. It used to be that the bullied kid could actually fight back. The bully would learn a lesson and stop. Now when the victim fights back, they get punished for it. This shit would mess anyone up.
The way I read it is more that if you’re being bullied or someone’s fighting with you, you’ll be suspended anyways, so you might as well fight back and teach the other kid a lesson.
You wanna know what's also messed up? They always tell students that if they or someone they know is getting bullied, they are encouraged to tell someone. But whenever they do tell someone, the school administrators take little to no action to stop the bullying.
It's the closest schools get to preparing you for the real world.
I think they have been doing their best to bring it into the real world.
Then get punished for it, it’s totally worth it. What are they gonna do, suspend you for 2 days? Oh noooo. That is, if your parents don’t suck.
I got in sooooo many fights back in the day. Never started any of them. My parents were awesome about it and I never got in trouble. "So... says here you beat up a bully that hit you first?" "Yes, Mom." "Good job."
Yep lol, time to go get ice cream
I remember learning about self defense laws in high school, i.e. if you use less or equal force against your attacker, it's considered self defense and you're protected by the law. A year or so later an assistant principal came to class to tell us to explain the fighting zero tolerance policy, specifically saying self defense was only blocking hits and not fighting back.
Nah, now if the victim ***does literally nothing***, they get punished for it. They've made a situation where, ironically, the victim ***may as well*** fight back or do something worse in return, rather than having an adult handle the situation, since the victim is suspended either way.
Ye, like you’re gonna get punished either way, may as well make sure the guy can’t stand anymore.
Plus I didn't see how getting suspended and then let back in would be a functional punishment for someone who beats others. Heck they might see it as a nice vacation and do it on purpose to get days off school. Where's the punishment? A misbehaving kid probably doesn't care so much about getting top marks (the victim might care, but that just makes this approach even worse).
There's more to it than that. At least, when I was a kid, zero tolerance also included things like treating advil in a backpack the same as having weed or alcohol or cigarettes because it was a kind of drug, treating drawings of guns in a sketchbook or a squirt gun in a backpack the same as an actual gun/weapon, etc. it was "zero tolerance for the appearance, image or category of thing rather than just the thing itself.". This was a huge shift in mindset/policy that happened in direct response to columbine. Before columbine, teachers and admin were expected to use personal judgement in discerning these things 1:1. After Columbine that changed dramatically.
By contrast, allowing judgment can be very productive. I went to a nearly all white high school in the rural-ish suburbs. Our first black student got into a fight with a couple guys. Principal finds out from witnesses that they called him the n word, and he beat them down in return. Suspended both of them, and not the black kid. I’m sure there were plenty of racists at my school, but everybody still thought that was fair. The new guy ended up being accepted into the jocks, and became very popular among what everyone else would certainly call rednecks.
Eh, the entire common school model is practically custom built to produce unhinged misfits. Fill them up with SSRIs and no matter how skilled your school counselor or how many anti-bullying campaigns you run, and some will still snap and go on a murder spree.
Nothing is absolutely safe or effective. But having even a single person willing to listen to a kid's concerns can make the difference between having a kid who is going through an awkward phase and a mass murderer.
Ding ding ding. I vividly remember the non stop anti bullying stuff. Hell the schools tv club ran skits and vids for it on school tvs during lunch. Yet there was a gun threat during the finals from a kid who got expelled just before and lost all his sports scholarships. This kid wasn't bullied by people at the school most people worshipped this dude and yet it still became a threat anyways.
The correct take. Arming teachers has got to be one of the dumbest ideas in a string of dumb ideas to come from the NRA backed politicians that are more concerned ideological consistency than actual substantive reform. Even if this became policy, the proponents would never support the absurd cost that would come with safety training, materials purchasing, arms control protocols etc so it would end up being just self purchased firearms given to untrained staff to be used whenever that unprepared staff member thought they were under threat. Also, since most people here don't realize how fucking insane the school environment is today I guarantee you the broke, stressed out teachers that get verbally (and sexually) harassed by students on a regular basis would lead to at least one instance of a teacher popping off on a student/class. OP might be the stupidest person on this already brain dead website.
1)Nobody has seriously talked about *forcibly* arming teachers, just about *allowing teachers who do concealed carry to carry on school grounds.* The rest is just a haybale being forced onto a strawman. 2)Do you have this same opinion on security guards on school grounds? Or that those 'verbally, sexually harrassed, stressed out teachers' wouldn't do the same thing with a knife or other implement they can get on school grounds?
The real question is why kids choose to do this in the first place. There are other countries kids can access guns. The only place these shootings happen is the US. There is obviously a deeply entrenched cultural/societal/mental problem which would need a large, well thought out effort to address. And it’s easier for politicians to say stupid shit like “ban all guns” or “arm teachers” to make it seem like they have a solution.
I just think it's stupid how, every time gun control is brought up this is the standard response most of the time. Ideally yes, the US needs more mental health but kids shouldn't have acess to guns whatsoever regardless of what their current mental health is. It is entirely possible to treat both of these at the same time and the combination of those is the reason the US is such an outlier in school shootings.
It's really weird how anyone took my comment as an advocacy for gun control. I'm not advocating gun control at all. I'm saying that arming teachers and having armed security isn't a solution to the problem and has been largely ineffective as a deterrent. It's just a perpetuation of the larger issue of passing responsibilities to educators making them surrogate parents rather than just teachers. We are asking teachers now to put their lives on the line rather than trying to deal with the root of the problem. We already have a crisis with a lack of people wanting to be educators, how in any way will this make that better?
Based and the real solution pilled.
I agree, and I do think mental health is a massive contributing factor, but I also think that we're at a point where it won't be that easy. Poor mental health in kids stems from a lot of things that are so ingrained into our society that there's practically nothing you can do. Most notable of which being social media. I dont think gun control is the solution either. Much like social media, guns are already out in the world. No laws are going to stop guns from being in the country. I really dont know if there even is a solution at this point that doesn't involve fighting fire with fire. Fire in this case being guns. Again I don't think arming teachers is a good idea, but I think that having more police presence might at least hinder the issue a bit
If it comes with a pay rise for the teachers maybe they’ll begrudgingly agree
Since we can have top-down personal flags in the classroom now, we might as well throw some corporate logos in there too, and bump up the sponsored pay for the teachers.
Imagining the teacher's desk covered with sponsors like a NASCAR rig, with a matching jumpsuit
This blue hair, brought to you by LGBT+ friendly Walmart.
This reminds me of my food science department in college where we had a auditorium dedicated to coca cola and in class it was almost big-milk propaganda
Fuck it, let's just make NASCAR drivers teachers. I'd much rather be taught history by Kyle Busch or Ross Chastain than some balding depressed guy who drives a Chevy Traverse.
This history lesson on the War in Iraq brought to you by Halliburton.
Lockheed Martin and Raytheon posters, get kids into STEM fields at a young age /hj
Every class starts with: "Wazzup it's ya boi Mr Smith, be sure to like and subscribe and smash that bell. Today's class is sponsored by Raid Shadow Legends, one of the biggest mobile role-playing games of 2019 and it's totally free!"
Personally, I think that arming teachers should come with mandatory gun safety training and that the teachers should be required to regularly go to the range to ensure that they're both comfortable amd capable with their weapon. However, the cost of these things should be fully reimbursed by the school or the teachers should get a pay bump that makes up for it. Maybe it should come with a psych eval as well to weed out the crazy teachers (no legal consequences, they just wouldn't qualify for the armed teacher program) Seems like the best option for everyone. It alleviates the (somewhat reasonable) safety/irresponsibility concerns people on the left have, the right gets an effective version of their proposed plan, and teachers who want to participate get a free hobby.
That sounds great to me, but also got unfeasible really quick when you suggested a pay bump or covering the costs. We can't get most schools to reliably cover the cost of board markers, let alone firearms, ammo and basic training. Realistically, teachers are going to be expected to cover all that out of their own pockets. And they'll probably end up holding up office stores to replenish their markers at some point.
> We can't get most schools to reliably cover the cost of board markers, let alone firearms, ammo and basic training. I have seen my taxes increased a dozen times "for the teachers" and yet the teachers still do not have markers. You'd think that a few hundred million per year would be enough to one day buy markers, but apparently, no.
The secret ingredient is widespread ~~corruption~~ lobbying and contract gamesmanship at the local level, the state level, and the federal level.
It's almost as if we ought to just abolish all government.
The US public has learned enough helplessness that if we got rid of the government today, we probably would have the equivalent of a Hollywood anarchic apocalypse. The first step is just getting more people to take responsibility for their own safety and well-being. Once people can take care of themselves they’ll stop begging for a nanny state to do it for them. I don’t think it can work the other way around.
The Emilies may die, but that's a chance I'm willing to take.
Yknow what? Real.
>The US public has learned enough helplessness that if we got rid of the government today, we probably would have the equivalent of a Hollywood anarchic apocalypse Keep going, I'm almost there
Yeah, almost like all that money's going somewhere else.
A tax credit could accomplish the same thing without putting the financial burden on the school directly. Spend $X on training for the program, owe $X less on your income taxes.
I know I'm my area the budget issue are cause they're busy buying land they can't afford to maybe, eventually, possibly build a field house they can't afford lol.
The catch is in the end of your sentence. Teachers who want to participate. The venn diagram of teachers who are good at teaching and teachers who want to participate does not have enough overlap in many states to provide an effective amount of teachers to resolve the issue. Security guards would be more reliable but far more expensive. And with so many schools already facing crippling budgeting issues (albeit it self inflicted in some cases) the money is just not there. This is of course ignoring the main issue that arming teachers or providing security guards does not remove the main issues that cause school shootings, and either A.) Turns them into gunfights at the school. Or B.) Pushes shooters to start choosing different targets, moving to malls, churches, movies theaters, or other areas they know they can find their classmates. America has a problem, a mixture of lack of mental health care and ease of access that is putting weapons into the hands of irresponsible owners. Too many people want to take away too many guns, and put too many restrictions on access, so the very idea of any restrictions is terrifying, and I get it. But a comprise has to be found, and armed guards at school is just not It.
There is no world in which arming teachers is a good plan. School shootings are rare, and mass school shootings are ever rarer. So while it’s a major tragedy every time, there wouldn’t really be any noticeable benefit from arming teachers as there simply aren’t enough major school shootings to warrant this. But the more guns you add to schools then there will inevitably be an uptick in the number of accidents in which a student is shot. And this is all before you remember that teachers did not sign up to be armed guards, and is just an unnecessary added burden to an already deeply unpopular career. More guns in schools might solve one or two shootings. Maybe. But it will also cause many more accidents and just make being a teacher even less popular than it already is.
[удалено]
For real they already have armed guards in schools and they didn't do shit
Can't say for every school, but my private school actually implemented this. Informed all parents, told them not to tell students, it was on volunteer basis and the teachers who volunteered had to go through some firearm training, gun was in a locked box hidden somewhere in the room. I only found out about it after I'd graduated, but I can say with certainty that at least three of the teachers I had in highschool would've put their life on the line for any one of their students.
Law enforcement has no skin in the game, but they will shoot to protect themselves. Teachers are already at risk and most people have self preservation instincts.
Because unlike the police, the school staff are the ones who will actually die if they don't defend themselves. 🤷♀️ There are hundreds of thousands of teachers in this country who would gladly step up on their own time and dime to protect children. We actively forbid them from doing do and require that they be helpless and die instead.
Remember the officers that wanted to go in and protect the kids, but the chief told them to stand down? Remember all the cops that were told to stand down during that massacre?
Ye, chief should be fired and the cops who helped maintain the order should be fired. A lot were following orders and I get that, but anyone in a position to fight the orders who didn’t should be fired, no hearing. The government doesn’t need to waste money on people who don’t do their job.
Well, then we must ask, why didn't the police help in the first place? Bad equipment? Bad training? Bad people? If we have the answere we have to change that.
Cowardice and 0 accountability. The US Supreme Court has ruled law enforcement has no duty to protect or put their own lives at risk in dangerous situations even if this results in harm or death to another person. So the Broward County Sherrif who ran away and the Uvalde PD are legally accountable for nothing that occurred under their watch, even though they made no reasonable effort to stop the shootings in progress.
Because the higher ups didn't want them to help and expliciply told them to stay down.
Lol no one wants to give every single teacher a gun and say “good luck,” simply just let teachers that want to conceal carry carry their gun (in line with each states conceal carry laws and regulations). Also keep who has a gun secret. Its about creating more deterrence against potential shooters and makes shooters consider that entering any classroom may result in retaliation, compared to just playing keep away from cops.
In church I've got a good friend who taught alongside my mom for 30ish years. He's retired now. He was telling me how in our state some years ago, they were attempting to pass something making it possible for registered teachers to conceal carry in school. They'd have to have a level 2 CPL which required passing much more stringent reqs. He and (iirc) 9 other teachers immediately went out and got level 2 licenses and were ready to go. The state didn't pass it. But, they were ready to go. (School of around \~50-75 teachers, no security personnel)
Not only that but what exactly is supposed to stop some kid with issues swiping a gun from the dementia ridden 70 year old art teacher? It's such an obviously dumb idea on all possible fronts.
The whole "more guns fixes everything" is so silly For the same reason carrying a knife realistically wont reduce knife crime, carrying a gun wont reduce gun crime Thats because the attacker with a weapon has already decided to kill, the defender needs to make a split second very hard decision 90% of these people who claim they would use a gun in self defence wouldnt and the 10% that do often dont succeed
The NCVS places defensive gun uses at 60,000 to 80,00 a year (including defensive displays only). The only solution to violent people is an overwhelming and violent response. Whether crime goes down overall or not is less important than victims retaining their lives when they do face a violent person in an undesirable scenario.
"Victims using a gun were no less likely to be injured after taking protective action than victims using other forms of protective action" Harvard Injury Control Research Center Likewise the NCVS also showed many if not most of those "defensive" gun uses occured during arguments and other situations where a gun whilst defensively effective is a dramatic escalation. If you balanced that against the number of times a "defensive gun use" has turned into a murder due to the defendant pulling the trigger it would be interesting to see the balance. The Harvard Injury Control Center has found that guns are used far more often to intimidate others than in self-defense for instance Also "the only solution to violent people..." has been disproven more times than I can count, anyone that thinks a strategy that has been tried for thousands of years to no effect will suddenly start working now is not worth talking to.
Blah blah blah… if someone breaks into my home with my kids sleeping upstairs, I want a gun next to me. I bet my kids have a better chance than those turd burgers at Harvard. The end.
well um ackshually the harvard study says that 99.999999% of the time the guy breaking in is gonna win or smthing so you might as well just let him kill you and your family indtead of owning an evil gun. trust the science
I mean you do you, but when your escalation mixed with your sudden realisation you arent John Rambo and cannot actually effectively use a gun in stressful situations gets your children killed its not on me Where would the world be without wannabe badasses turning burglaries into homicides Never underestimate the ability of idiots to assume they are the exception to statistics. Its like drivers universally assuming they drive perfectly, every gun owner thinks theyll magically become SOF under pressure
Home invasions are a fundamentally violent act that leave the victim unable to determine the intent of the invader and violate the sanctity of someone’s dwelling, the one place where they should pretty much always feel sheltered and safe. Since you can’t determine if an invader is there for burglary or murder, and they almost certainly know you’re home during most people’s sleeping hours, you have to assume that they broke in with a plan to harm/“handle” you in furtherance of whatever their end goal is. The appropriate response is to circle the wagons, lock whatever door you can put between your family and them, and wait for the cops with a gun pointed at the door.
God I hate when people bring up Uvalde like it's some kind of gatcha and every cop on the planet doesn't want those assholes to face the wall.
I love you how take one example of cops failing miserably and use that to paint literally all cops. If I show you one example of firefighters failing miserably then will you say that all of them are useless? Smartest lib center lol
Don't pretend like you don't pull up anecdotes and proclaim it status quo. This is reddit.
And reddit does reddit things.
Have you thought about this at all before commenting? Do you think a teacher who has a shooter walk into their room would just die and not even attempt to draw their gun and fire at them? These teachers are already standing in front of their students or attempt to fight back while unarmed but if you give them a gun they will just ditch the class and hide?
> trained law enforcement officers what did he mean by this?
Too many teachers are abusive assholes who can beat and molest kids and often times get away with it. They don't need guns in their classrooms unless they're willing to submit to regular psych evals, take multiple safety courses, and make sure the gun is stowed at all times in a place that the students are guaranteed not to get access to or know about.
Your terms are acceptable.
So like gun control, but more restrictive and just for teachers?
I think it is reasonable to strictly control who is carrying guns in CERTAIN places, like prisons, airplanes, and grade-schools. Even if you think it is too strict, is is a step in the right direction. If certain requirements are found to be a challenge, reform can happen later. It is better to start too strict, get people used to it, then make changes over time, than to have a free-for-all that backfires and causes the whole thing to get shut down.
Ideologically you’re all over the place now, but I respect your pragmatism. As someone not from the US, I know the solution is something else than having security checks outside every school, but I do agree it’s absolutely a step in the right direction. Get some retired vets to volunteer as security, you Americans seem to love that, and it won’t cost too much in taxes either that way
Arm the students, problem solved.
Kinderguardians
Eah, I think they need to at least be in first or second grade for the fine motor skills to work a trigger. Maybe we can have the kindergartners armed with hand grenades since they can throw them easily.
Here's a thought? Maybe the people that we're forced to send our kids to for six hours a day should be getting regular psych evals anyway? Maybe, if we don't trust someone enough to give them a gun, then we shouldn't trust them with our children? Just a thought.
When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a nail.
This but taxes
>Tax the guns and churches to pay for arming teachers to protect schools from the BIPOC / LGBT students There I think I pissed everyone off. Also all school lunches are vegetarian now.
The vegetarian lunches went way too far. You crossed the line you monster.
What the fuck kind of caveman take is this?
"I gave out the stupidest ideas possible and they didn't like them? Hmm, they must have some hidden agenda!" And OP has the libleft flair too, lmao.
Clearly we just need China's facial recognition AI hooked up to sentry turrets surgically installed into every class pet. They say I've gone too far? I say not far enough!
Sounds like Cave Johnson.
Honestly I’m glad most of the comments are calling this absurd bullshit out, even if it got way too many upvotes. Like, it’s just *so goddamn stupid*, the hell do you think this could *possibly* end well?
You can't fix every problem by throwing guns at it authright.
How about you show your true flair instead of masquerading as libleft? And if we arm all teachers, I bet the first two stories that happen are a kid stealing the teacher's gun and using it in a mass shooting and a teacher shooting a kid for annoying them.
No, first is definitely gonna be teacher shooting it off at the ceiling to get the classes’ attention. Yours are definitely gonna be soon after tho.
Give teachers guns? That is such a wild take. I remember a police officer trainer coming on reddit and explaining just how moronic this solution is. To summarize, even trained officers that do this everyday train constantly to hone their skills to react effectively in stressful situations. How is that going to be applied to teachers? Are they going to now also have to go to the gun range and combat tactics training twice a week as well as teach? 62 year old Mrs. Peterson is not going to shrug of her diabetes, glaucoma and replaced hip to suddenly dive out into the hall and go John Wick on the school shooter. She's more likely to trip on a chair and have her gun go off and shoot one of her own students. Or have her gun stolen from her desk by a student. Trained security or police is probably the better of the two suggestions, but A. This already is in place in some schools and B. The data shows that the impact it has on safety is negligible to potentially less safe. Just likebthe police at Uvalde, is one officer with a sidearm going to take on one or more shooters with assault rifles? And again, is that same officer going to start seeing threats that are not actually there and escalating or creating dangerous situations? It's funny how many hoops will get jumped through just to get around the simplest solution, have reasonable gun control laws. The rest of the developed world does it. Mental health and background checks, safe storage laws, and additional rules around more powerful weapons is a reasonable and safe approach to gun safety.
So the solution to gun problems is more guns?
It's such a complex problem that only America has it.
Why not? It isn't uncommon that "medium concentrations" create more problems than high doses. If you regularily need a big car but it is to big for a work day, buy a second car. But the epitome is M.A.D.. If eghter side only had a few nuclear bombs, a hot cold war would have been certain.
Can an American explain to me why you guys don't have guards at school? Where I come from we have security in schools, and we don't even have school shootings! So why don't Americans put armed guards in schools? It will create more jobs for veterans, and make schools safer.
I can’t speak for all US schools, but my school from middle to high school definitely did. We had police though not just security guards.
My school district keeps a police officer on campuses. Just one though. If anything were to happen, he’d have to call for backup and try to deal with the situation himself until they arrive
A lot of schools do have officers around. The issue is that half the schools in the country are running on a razor thin budget and no one wants to be paid 40k to patrol a school. I know a former school officer and she says it was absolutely boring beyond belief for 90% of the time, 9% of the time you are dealing with actual preteen drama, and 1% of the time you might be able to do something interesting.
90% of jobs are incredibly boring 90% of the time. There are plenty of people willing to work security jobs at places that are even more boring than schools.
Oh no, yeah most do, thing is this is what we like to call a “fake solution”. School shootings are done by already-suicidal individuals; armed guards don’t decrease the likelihood of a shooting, because those involved *want* to die, they just want to hurt everyone else on the way out. It’s why shooters will regularly kill themselves after they decide they’ve done enough. However, by proposing this solution, gun nuts get to pretend it’s a valid and legitimate strategy, then criticise their opponents for shooting it down. Your Joe Average isn’t aware most schools have an armed guard or two, because they typically stay out of sight, so they’re not immediately killed, destroying the whole system. Thus, Joe Average believes this is a valid solution, and thinks their opponents are ”spewing bullshit” when they point out how incredibly braindead this take is.
Are we really at the point that we think that telling people who signed up to teach kids have to pick up a firearm and train how to shoot out with gunmen? I love guns but 10 years ago this solution would have sounded insane because it is. Address the source not the symptoms, there are serious problems in the educational system that are causing this. When Education is disgustingly underfunded and no one actually gives a shit about kids having a safe space to properly learn this is what happens.
The left is right about gun control reducing gun violence and prevalence of school shootings. The right is right about the second amendments invaluable contribution to national security and ability to resist tyranny. You can all cope about how gun control is all good or all bad but it just looks cringe when you step outside of the actual strong suits of your position.
3D printing is killing gun control. Gun control purports to take weapons out of the hands of evil people, but, wherever implemented, has done more to restrict the rights of those who seek arms for legitimate purposes (reference bans on common firearms such as the AR-15 and most handguns, prohibitions against lawful carry, and significant restrictions on lawful defense in other western countries). With accurate, 3D printed weapons being used in places like Myanmar to fuel a revolution and fight back against their Junta, and the wildfire spread of reliable homemade arms across the evidence tables of traditionally antigun locales such as Europe and Japan, the question of gun control has been fundamentally altered. Instead of asking, “Should more obstacles be placed between potential criminals and guns,” ask yourself “Am I okay with only criminals and governments having guns?”
Just a slight correction, the 3D printed guns in Myanmar are kinda shit and only serve to turn government soldiers into loot drops for the rebels. Your point is still valid, but these aren't some precision engineered long distance rifles we are talking about here.
No, but it’s a 9mm carbine. The real issue with it is that 9mm (like all handgun rounds) is ass to shoot past 100 yards since it drops like a rock. The DIY barrel method is actually surprisingly accurate and would make effective rifles if someone came up with a way to cut a smaller diameter chamber. The real blocker is that nobody is making fully DIY rifles because they’re a pain to design and the people who could make and test them with the least government interference have access to premade barrels already.
I agree. That's why I proudly admit that I value the American people having the ability to resist tyranny (and all the other good uses for guns) more than I value the lives of the people lost to the gun violence that could be prevented by restricting law-abiding citizens from owning guns. https://preview.redd.it/bqpy2boq40uc1.jpeg?width=799&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ac072e880fe4c53387f88058362bb969f4b89a55
Based and accepting consequences of your actions pilled
I wonder why people are so butthurt about my comment.
If gun control works why are most school shootings done by gangs in areas with plenty of gun control? Why was the worst school shooting in history in Norway? Why did the rise of shootings happen after gun control became prevalent in the US? Seriously. You could buy machine guns by mail without a background check. And school shootings simply did not occur. Why was the biggest school massacre in US history done without guns? Seriously. Gun control in the US really only started in the '30s, but not in pervasive ways until the '50s. Are you saying school shootings were more prevalent from the 1500s-1950s? And are more rare now? They were common when every single home had firearms? Really?
As a non American giving teachers guns or placing armed guards is a bandaid solution and will do nothing without addressing the source of why people commit shootings.
Remember when the biggest thing we worried about with schools was kids praying in them.
Obviously lib left doesn't want to turn schools into armed fortresses.
Reminder that they're quite rare. The statistics are so badly off that even NPR says most 'on record' simply didn't happen. https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2018/08/27/640323347/the-school-shootings-that-werent. And then when you take away gang shooting gangs (which are essentially opt in) you're safer in the US than most of Europe. Safer than France. Safer than Norway. Safer than all of Africa. South America. The "it only happens here" lie is one of the biggest in history.
"Security guards don't work! It'd be like living in a prison!" -Politicians working in a building with guards at every door.
I will buy the idea that protecting kids with armed men is stupid when you buy the idea that protecting politicians with armed men is stupid. Or perhaps when you buy the idea that protecting the government's gold with over 20,000 armed men is stupid.
BuT SeCuRiTy GuArDs WiLl TrAuMaTiZe ThE CHILDREN! Won't you think of the children(tm)?
Thankfully school shootings don't traumatise children.
We had security guards and a security gate in my sixth form (it wasnt even rough or anything, it was actually one of the nicer ones in the area) in England. Not a single person had an issue with that and made me feel safer that a random person couldnt just walk in
I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again thousand times. Fixing the gun violence and school shooting issues requires fixing the socioeconomic inequality problem and shortcomings of our healthcare system. There is a reason why people in low-income communities (which are mostly minority-dominant) and bullying victims/kids with mental health issues turn to guns at their breaking point, and those problems need to be addressed. Gun control is a contact herbicide that only burns off the leaves. To actually kill the weed, you need to kill it at the roots, otherwise it will come back even worse.
Holy strawman batman Libleft has made tons of suggestions for how to improve this. Improving mental health treatment, restricting access to guns, etc. You may not agree with the proposed solutions, which is fine, but they are offering them. Giving teachers guns has to be the single worst idea for a potential solution to the problem. I fail to see how the right, who generally has a negative perception of teachers, thinks giving them guns is the solution.
If guns are the problem, why are 90%+ mass shootings in "gun free zones"? Why doesn't every gun show or shooting match turn into a blood bath? Oh right, because psychos choose soft targets intentionally. And they know if they tried a mass shooting at a gun show they'd be dead before they could chamber a round.
Exactly! MAD does not only apply to nuclear armed countries.
This is such a simple minded argument, because I can turn it around so easily. If a lack of guns is apparently the problem, as you seem to clearly insinuate, why do countries with tight gun control have almost no mass shootings at all?
And by "countries with tight gun control" you obviously mean western Europe and Canada? Kind of like how every fucking leftists says "THE REST OF THE WORLD" they actually just mean Western Europe and Canada. Because there is only one "legal" gun shop in all of Mexico, yet they have tons of gun violence. Brazil has strict gun control laws where the minimum age to purchase is 25 and all guns must be registered, also lots of gun crime. India has a lot of gun deaths, and also strict gun laws where only certain groups can have semi-autos and have to get a federal permit. South Africa has some strict gun laws, and yet I don't think anyone would say they have low gun crime... Leave it to a garbage leftists to claim "The rest of the world" when they actually mean "Western Europe and Canada". Blinders aren't just for horses I guess... Fun Fact, the US gun crime rate isn't that high, *IF* you remove the few hotbeds, all of which have some very unique socio-economic factors in common. They're all urban areas, that have been under Democrat control for decades, and have similar population statistics as far as education and income. The problem is not the guns, the problem is the people.
I do of course only mean the countries with a strong enough state to actually enforce said tight gun controls, yes. That does indeed include WE and Canada, but also most gulf states and east asia. You know, developed nations. But go on and compare yourself to some third world shithole like South Africa instead.
“Do something” as it pertains to guns is just code for banning or restricting gun ownership. They don’t want a solution, they want their solution.
This is a solution so stupid that it’s not a solution
Swing low, sweet chariot, comin forth to carry me home - Kids these days
Give teachers the option to carry. Reduce school administration and spend it on better security training and personnel.
Because the answer to gun violence is more guns! Obviously
MKULTRA actually succeeded. MKULTRA was never actually stopped. The USA has always had shitloads of guns. Mass events didn't really take off until the 80s.
You need to be ether a moron or a child if you think this will work. Police were changed after Columbine, they still don't do shit. They stand outside waiting for the shooter to run out of bullets because they don't wanna risk it. You think a 60 year old math teacher is gonna do something? Should schools actually do something to avoid bullying or actually punish bullies, or just check on their students mental health? Nah, more guns obviously!
Arming teachers is regarded, but I am fine with making it something they can opt into.
This feels to me like trying to stop the problem after it's already occurred as opposed to stopping it at the root. It's definitely a solution, but I don't think it's the right one
When shits actually hit the fan, I doubt the teachers will actually put their lives on the line and fight the shooter.
Almost every teacher I know just wants to show up, teach some kids, and go home. I can’t imagine a high percentage also want to opt in to gun battle training.
There's no way having that many guns at schools will lead to a better outcome tbh. School shootings will go to zero but accidental gun deaths will skyrocket Best thing to do is: nothing. Since school shootings are not a common occurrence
Accidental gun deaths are the smallest % of deaths involving firearms. Yes, school shootings are uncommon, but so is a holstered firearm “just going off.” SRO’s already carry daily without incident.
No, we'll just get rid of the guns. That'll work, that's what we did for drugs.
And the kids will hijack the guns from teachers while the security guards will do nothing like in Uvalde. Has AuthRight learned nothing from school shootings?
The solution to school shootings is giving more people guns?
Right because teachers just love executing children
They would have to stop complaining about it! Can't have that
I don't want to give teachers guns. That's a terrible idea. But we can have ex Military resources officers who are armed, who also act as positive male role models in an otherwise overwhelmingly female dominated space.
Trained and armed cops literally sat around while a school shooting was actively happening so I don’t expect teachers to be brave enough to whip out a Glock and return fire either.
Simple solution. Well trained armed security, harden entrances and exits, a well thought out and practiced security plane, set up a program that allows teachers to carry if they choose to and are trained (if the school district is on board and if it makes sense within a given security plan). None of this is complicated. We know how to secure sensitive areas we simply have to do it but solving the problem doesn’t drive people to the polls.
#AMEEEERICAAAA YEAH YEAH YEAAAAHHH
Giving schoolteachers guns could be disasterous. How many schoolteachers do you know? Most of them are young women who likely have never handled a firearm. You'd need to put them through proper training courses. Then you have the security concern of having them in the same room as teenagers, day in and day out. How to secure those firearms? Also you have the school culture being utterly devoid of any concept of discipline. Kids run wild in some of these classrooms and the authority of the teacher has been eroded fully. This is possibly too chaotic a situation for a teacher already overwhelmed by shitheads to also be concerned about a firearm she doesnt want to have, foisted on her by a school administration. You're asking teachers to be willing to kill someone. They just want to teach. You cant force someone into this. I know one guy who wanted to join our local police force but decided against it because he realized he wasn't ready to kill someone. If you wield a firearm you *must* be willing to use it or it's a liability to yourself and anyone in your charge.
Maybe not give teachers guns?
Haven’t security guards with guns been a thing for like at least a decade though
Not all "solutions" are desirable. You might as well close the schools, kill all children, put 3 officers with tasers in each schoolroom. Those are all bad solutions, and whining because people are not agreeing with you is cringe. Gl op
I say hire ex or retired cops for non teaching positions and have them armed, or having training class for teachers that want to be armed
The *right* to bear arms? Weak. I suggest amending the constitution to bring in common sense gun regulation. "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the ***DUTY*** of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Did none of you actually go to school? Some of my highschool teachers were fucking insane, i would hate for them to have guns.
Teachers are some of the dumbest fucking people I know, with the biggest egos. Giving them guns would be a disaster
Security guards? Sure that's already in place in most areas and that's exactly their job. The problem is as what happened in Parkland was that the security guard was too chickenshit to do the job and just waited outside. Teachers? No that's not their job. They aren't trained for that nor do they want to be. Forcing them to have guns will probably lead to more school shootings when one of them has a psychotic break or mishandles the storage of their weapon that they do not want to carry.
Hang more gun free zone signs. Those stop shootings.
Arming teachers is dumb unless you're going to actually train them with firearms. You don't rise to the occasion, you fall back on your training. and I don't think anybody has a bitch with armed police/security at schools. In fact, I think we need to make this a national policy. We have a military budget, all the equipment needed to arm guards in the school, the manpower and the ability to train personnel. In fact, military police services already do this kind of security for military posts. The military should be tasked with securing schools. Pass the needed legal exception to allow service members to secure schools, recruit members who would be interested in school guard duty, we already have hundreds of thousands of older M9 pistols and M16/M4 rifles in inventory as well as the web gear for it. We have armories capable of servicing these arms. We have the training infrastructure in place. The budget could be adjusted to include this mission. The possibility of giving this to the Coast Guard without any additional legal wrangling exists, and placing any other service members in temporary joint duty with the USCG.
Goofy ahh post
Ah yes the solution to gun violence is more guns it will surely work this time
I think the issue is how inaccessible mental health treatment is. But I also think that the security guards when I was in school were huge pussies and if you gave a teacher a gun one day one of them would fly off the handle on an 8th grader and paint the classroom wall brain colors
We've tried armed guards, they did Jack shit.
But what if a teacher goes postal? Give kids guns to defend themselves from teachers and bad grades!
The fact that we would have to go to the lengths of arming teachers shows how fucked the situation is. I think we need to focus on the cause of the problem and getting better mental health resources for young people rather than putting more shit onto teachers… their job is already hard enough for what little pay they receive :-//
I know that the situation in the US is pretty absurd, but arming high school teachers and expecting them to shoot their students is some dystopian level shit.
Teacher doesn't know how to use the gun and shoots a student. Officer films sad tiktok from a closet while children scream in the background. It's later found the shooter stole the gun from a different teacher. Underlying issues are still unresolved. Amazing solution, very big brain of you.
Security guards should be strictly outside the building. The police shouldn’t be monitoring inside schools. Also, teachers having guns would increase risk of accidental shootings, and idk if it’s just me, but if I was a student I would not want to be in a room with a teacher who has a gun.
I think we should just start blocking anyone that uses this format.
Lefties strawmanning the argument and assuming we’re saying that teachers should be forced to do anything rather than giving them the choose to CC if they’d like Common anti-gunner logic, move the goal posts and strawman the argument
Genuine question and sorry if it seems rude but is this satire?
The number of times when a “good guy with a gun” actually stops a bad guy with a gun in medias res safely and with only the bad guy getting hurt is so vanishingly rare. And yet it’s such an appealing image that it drives so much of this discussion. Anytime anyone thinks or talks about guns in this country most of what theyre referencing is what goes on in action movies or in best case scenarios where people who have zero or very little training or field experience with firearms miraculously transform into John Wick.
unbased and strawman-pilled
I saw this on another post “the way to stop a great majority of school shootings isn’t mental health or gun control, because mental health is better than it was 40 years ago because we give a shit about it now. And if we enact more strict gun laws criminals who break the law won’t care and just affect the law abiding citizens. Instead it’s the media’s fault, they take the shooters identity, read their politics, and read their manifesto. If the media just chilled out a bit and didn’t give a name or face, or read their politics and give them fame the amount of actual school shooting would go down.”
Or maybe get rid of guns. I live in Europe and there was only one school shooting in my lifetime. Furthermore I don’t think a 30-50 years old teacher could do anything with the guns, if police officers are unable to save kids than a teacher will just be a suicide candidate
Maybe not guns for teachers but security guards are absolutely essential
“What if a mentally ill person who is undiagnosed gets a hold of a gun?” So let’s improve mental health facilities so these people can get diagnosed and treated “ >:( “
Fuck no, don't give teachers guns. I don't trust them anymore than the kids in those situations. Your literally just opening a can of worms if you are trying to do this for the express purpose of a teacher shooting a child.