The Gun Control Debate Thread

[twa]

22 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

 

 

The best option is almost certainly to increase SROs but that would undoubtedly be extremely expensive and probably have diminishing returns after a point.

 

The best chokepoint is at or before the point of purchase.

 

Yes, and it is expensive and can be worked around unless you have a large number.

 

I'm certainly for that, but like location there are ways around point of purchase(doesn't mean we should not try) 

[Going Commando]

It's a nonsense solution that will increase incidents of gun violence.  It's just meant to obfuscate and distract and ultimately send the public focus sideways so that nothing actually gets done.  And sell more guns.

[twa]

7 minutes ago, Burgold said:

I don't think it's hardening the school at all. I think it's adding risk to the environment. As I said  before, I was a teacher. I couldn't imagine pulling my gun let alone using it on a student. I can easily imagine a hormone enraged teenager stealing my gun or getting it off me and causing great harm.

 

Each and everyone of us who went to a middle school or high school have seen teens lose it. You really want to provide them access to weapons? 

 

Giving guns to teachers is at best a PR stunt to increase the illusion of safety. At worse, it creates more tragedies. My bet's on the latter especially as the Devos/Trump budge continues to slash money to schools, mental health services, and everything else which suggests to me that the teacher is out of pocket for any training or safety equipment.

 

It is adding a risk while providing some security and deterrence....just as adding a SRO adds risk while providing....

 

Biometric locks or smart safes reduce your concerns of students taking them, you could add hand to hand combat training if that would make ya feel better....with some of the kids it would be beneficial for every teacher.

 

It is far from a PR stunt and costs less and provides more overall protection than a couple SRO's.

 

[twa]

12 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

It's a nonsense solution that will increase incidents of gun violence.  It's just meant to obfuscate and distract and ultimately send the public focus sideways so that nothing actually gets done.  And sell more guns.

 

we need more incidences of gun violence directed at stopping school shooters.

If a foundation provided the guns and equipment would ya'll drop the sell more guns nonsense ?

 

Or will it be like your fear of guns in school period?

[The Evil Genius]

When did it become a teacher's job to stop a bullet from your child?

[PeterMP]

34 minutes ago, Burgold said:

I don't think it's hardening the school at all. I think it's adding risk to the environment. As I said  before, I was a teacher. I couldn't imagine pulling my gun let alone using it on a student. I can easily imagine a hormone enraged teenager stealing my gun or getting it off me and causing great harm.

 

Each and everyone of us who went to a middle school or high school have seen teens lose it. You really want to provide them access to weapons? 

 

Giving guns to teachers is at best a PR stunt to increase the illusion of safety. At worse, it creates more tragedies. My bet's on the latter especially as the Devos/Trump budge continues to slash money to schools, mental health services, and everything else which suggests to me that the teacher is out of pocket for any training or safety equipment.

 

I haven't seen anybody (here at least) advocating forcing teachers to have a gun.  It is for teachers with the desire and willing to go through extra hoops (screening, testing, etc).

 

I've talk seen people here about introducing things that would make it extremely difficult for students to get and use the gun (gun safes, biometric locks, etc.)

[Burgold]

Where’s the money coming from, Peter? Schools are already broke and the Trump administration is further cutting their budgets. I’m just looking at it from s practical POV. 

 

To answer TWAs question— no, if the guns, safety locks, safes, and training were all donated I’d still be against it because it is a bad idea. 

 

The money net issue is just the topper. 

[Llevron]

End public schooling and we wont even have this problem. I bet we get more movement on that than Gun Control. 

 

Yall think im playing but tell me they dont want to give funding to private schools who will protect children better as they always have. I guarantee you this will be an argument at some point while Trump is in the house. 

[Bang]

lol "if they were donated by a foundation"...  that buys them.

SO guns are still sold, which is the end desire. No matter what, the answer from the brainwashed is to put more money in gun manufacturers hands, and more guns into the public. 

 

Love these new memes saying how it's a 'no brainer' to hire vets to carry in schools.

Right, because none of them have any mental issues after coming back from war.

 

This country is ****ing insane. 

 

 

~Bang

Edited February 20, 2018 by Bang

[youngestson]

15 minutes ago, Llevron said:

End public schooling and we wont even have this problem. I bet we get more movement on that than Gun Control. 

 

Yall think im playing but tell me they dont want to give funding to private schools who will protect children better as they always have. I guarantee you this will be an argument at some point while Trump is in the house. 

I've already seen in in more far-right corners of the internet.

 

So yeah, it's probably just a matter of time till they start preaching that connection. No more "government" schools = no more school shootings.  

[GoDeep81]

1 hour ago, Burgold said:

I don't think it's hardening the school at all. I think it's adding risk to the environment. As I said  before, I was a teacher. I couldn't imagine pulling my gun let alone using it on a student. I can easily imagine a hormone enraged teenager stealing my gun or getting it off me and causing great harm.

 

Each and everyone of us who went to a middle school or high school have seen teens lose it. You really want to provide them access to weapons? 

 

Giving guns to teachers is at best a PR stunt to increase the illusion of safety. At worse, it creates more tragedies. My bet's on the latter especially as the Devos/Trump budge continues to slash money to schools, mental health services, and everything else which suggests to me that the teacher is out of pocket for any training or safety equipment.

Well, that's your opinion. And a good case for you not being one of the teachers to CCW on school grounds. At the very least we got to discuss it and didn't call each other an idiot or worse. 

[TradeTheBeal!]

12 minutes ago, Bang said:

lol "if they were donated by a foundation"...  that buys them.

SO guns are still sold, which is the end desire. No matter what, the answer from the brainwashed is to put more money in gun manufacturers hands, and more guns into the public. 

 

Love these new memes saying how it's a 'no brainer' to hire vets to carry in schools.

Right, because none of them have any mental issues after coming back from war.

 

This country is ****ing insane. 

 

 

~Bang

 

Absolutely and completely insane.

[PeterMP]

1 hour ago, Burgold said:

Where’s the money coming from, Peter? Schools are already broke and the Trump administration is further cutting their budgets. I’m just looking at it from s practical POV. 

 

To answer TWAs question— no, if the guns, safety locks, safes, and training were all donated I’d still be against it because it is a bad idea. 

 

The money net issue is just the topper. 

 

Then make that point.  Don't make points that aren't related to what anybody is saying.

 

Though, I don't see how you can simultaneously claim the money is the topper, and if somebody donates the things needed, it is still a bad idea.

 

Do you think it is a bad idea to have an armed SRO on high school campus where in most cases those people don't have any more training than the local cops, which with respect to guns is pretty minimal?

 

If you think that's a bad idea, should we have armed cops in high traffic areas?  Should NYC have armed cops patrol Time Square on a regular basis?

 

(My answer is it would be up the teacher, but not affect the teacher's employment or pay.  If the teacher has the means, time, and desire to do so, fine, but I want teachers that are first and foremost focused and interested in teaching.  If twa's kids are teaching and good at it and are already good with guns, have guns and the the other necessary equipment, are willing to go through and pay for additional periodic "official" training and (psych) evaluation, then sure.)

Edited February 20, 2018 by PeterMP

[PCS]

 

[Popeman38]

5 minutes ago, PCS said:

 

Good.  Now there is precedent.  Each state should now have drafts of the bill ready to send to debate. Make the state legislatures vote on it. 

 

Step one is now complete.

[TheGoodBits]

Was listening to NPR yesterday. They had on a gun guy to talk about what an AR15 is and how it’s no different than any other semi-auto rifle and how if you are trained well it doesn’t matter if you have a 30 round magazine or a bunch of 5 round magazines because you can reload so quickly (which I think is nonsense btw). 

 

But I realized that trying to ban “assault rifles” is a pointless endeavor. You have to ban characteristics, and one of those main characteristics is the detachable magazine one. 

 

I think you have to make it REALLY difficult for someone to own a semi automatic, detachable magazine firearm, whether that’s a pistol, AR15, etc. Long waiting periods, fairly expensive and intrusive background checks (they will interview people who know you like in Canada), and maybe even require you to go in front of a judge like they do for concealed carry permits. And do that for EACH firearm. 

 

Also require all current owners to pass a that background check within say 5 years. No direct private party transfers, everything through an FFL. FFL can take a bigger cut of the background check proceeds too, so the dealers don’t go broke because it’s difficult to sell guns now. 

Edited February 20, 2018 by skinsfan_1215

[Die Hard]

5 hours ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

Arming teachers....

 

Shoot the one that looks more evil... your intuition is never wrong! :-)

[PeterMP]

8 minutes ago, skinsfan_1215 said:

Was listening to NPR yesterday. They had on a gun guy to talk about what an AR15 is and how it’s no different than any other semi-auto rifle and how if you are trained well it doesn’t matter if you have a 30 round magazine or a bunch of 5 round magazines because you can reload so quickly (which I think is nonsense btw). 

 

But I realized that trying to ban “assault rifles” is a pointless endeavor. You have to ban characteristics, and one of those main characteristics is the detachable magazine one. 

 

I think you have to make it REALLY difficult for someone to own a semi automatic, detachable magazine firearm, whether that’s a pistol, AR15, etc. Long waiting periods, fairly expensive and intrusive background checks (they will interview people who know you like in Canada), and maybe even require you to go in front of a judge like they do for concealed carry permits. And do that for EACH firearm. 

 

Also require all current owners to pass a that background check within say 5 years. No direct private party transfers, everything through an FFL. FFL can take a bigger cut of the background check proceeds too, so the dealers don’t go broke because it’s difficult to sell guns now. 

 

If they make AR15-like weapons illegal and leave hand gun laws alone, one thing I think you are going to see is somebody walk into a school or similar setting with 3 or 4 pre-loaded automatic (and yes I saw the debate about the use of this term, but this what they were called when I was young and took hunter safety and so I'm sticking with it) pistols and do as much damage as they would have with an AR-15 and extended clip.

[Renegade7]

Is the "March for our Lives" in DC in March cancelled?  I got the facebook notification that it was on yesterday, then today I got one that says its canceled.  When I look online, I can't tell.  I'm going if they do, I'm not on-call.

[twa]

1 hour ago, The Evil Genius said:

When did it become a teacher's job to stop a bullet from your child?

 

It is not, yet some still do it willingly......I would offer another option.

[Popeman38]

38 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

If they make AR15-like weapons illegal and leave hand gun laws alone, one thing I think you are going to see is somebody walk into a school or similar setting with 3 or 4 pre-loaded automatic (and yes I saw the debate about the use of this term, but this what they were called when I was young and took hunter safety and so I'm sticking with it) pistols and do as much damage as they would have with an AR-15 and extended clip.

It already happened. The VT mass shooting incident was done with 2 handguns. 

[twa]

58 minutes ago, skinsfan_1215 said:

 

 

I think you have to make it REALLY difficult for someone to own a semi automatic, detachable magazine firearm, whether that’s a pistol, AR15, etc. Long waiting periods, fairly expensive and intrusive background checks (they will interview people who know you like in Canada), and maybe even require you to go in front of a judge like they do for concealed carry permits. And do that for EACH firearm. 

 

Also require all current owners to pass a that background check within say 5 years. No direct private party transfers, everything through an FFL. FFL can take a bigger cut of the background check proceeds too, so the dealers don’t go broke because it’s difficult to sell guns now. 

 

Do you think it would pass?

I can guarantee the handgun portion will have extreme opposition.

[Koala]

2 hours ago, twa said:

 

we need more incidences of gun violence directed at stopping school shooters.

If a foundation provided the guns and equipment would ya'll drop the sell more guns nonsense ?

 

Or will it be like your fear of guns in school period?

 

Unless Im reading it wrong, the way you word this is as if you have a problem with someone having an automatic "fear of guns in school".  You realize, all sane adults have an automatic fear of guns in school, right?

[twa]

56 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

If they make AR15-like weapons illegal and leave hand gun laws alone, one thing I think you are going to see is somebody walk into a school or similar setting with 3 or 4 pre-loaded automatic (and yes I saw the debate about the use of this term, but this what they were called when I was young and took hunter safety and so I'm sticking with it) pistols and do as much damage as they would have with an AR-15 and extended clip.

 

That is certainly a issue.

 

One of the main problems with stopping a shooter is there is no one there to do it for awhile, or in some cases one or two SRO's or such.

 

Even with revolvers and/or pump weapons you can eliminate the adults and then take your time with the kids.

Maybe HS kids could gang rush one, but that is a rather poor option.

[twa]

2 minutes ago, Koala said:

 

Unless Im reading it wrong, the way you word this is as if you have a problem with someone having an automatic "fear of guns in school".  You realize, all sane adults have an automatic fear of guns in school, right?

 

I fear guns all the time, in school or not.

I do not let fear affect my reasoning though,which is what I see from people that object to any guns in screened and trained hands.

 

Of course if you don't fear a shooter or such at the school then it could be reasonable.

What threat level is below your fear level is the question you must ask yourself.
The same is true for anyone having a gun for self defense.....is the need there