But you won't hear about it on the national news, the weapon was a handgun not an "assualt" rifle and only 2 students were wounded. The Shooter, well, a School resource officer Shot him and killed him so...... None of the above fits the national narative on gun control.....
Here's the story......
Gunman dead, two injured after shooting at Great Mills High School in Maryland
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/03/20/gun...yland.html
How it's supposed to work.
Lesson in there.
Will those who need to learn that lesson the most actually absorb it?
Not likely.
As we've seen, the reflexive combatants will only galvanize themselves and seek their echo chamber as their cocoon/shelter from the truth.
Just a quick check... Front page of Huffpo, CNN, and MSNBC. First 3 sites I Checked. Nice try tool.
Yeah was gonna say it's been on the news all day
(03-20-2018, 05:28 PM)majik Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah was gonna say it's been on the news all day and you even linked to a national news website
How sad is your argument when the fact a school shooting happened at all is a GOOD thing?
(03-20-2018, 06:01 PM)DragonFury Wrote: [ -> ]How sad is your argument when the fact a school shooting happened at all is a GOOD thing?
Truth. Everything has to be politicized first and foremost-
then we'll talk about how terrible it was. That's how it is in the media so it's not surprising that folks are thinking the same way. You can almost always tell the difference between someone who lives and breathes by the MSM and those who don't just by how they portray current events.
(03-20-2018, 06:01 PM)DragonFury Wrote: [ -> ]How sad is your argument when the fact a school shooting happened at all is a GOOD thing?
What’s your argument then?
It's certainly not a good thing but the new American tribal mentality is getting more ingrained every day. Your government, media, and social justice warriors want you to pick a side!
Interesting how someone trained to use firearms at the school "stopped the action" so quickly in a "gun free zone". What is more impressive is the trained person "stopped the action" with one shot. Me personally, I've been trained to fire 3 shots.
Do liberals still not want trained personnel in a school whether it's a "resource officer" or a teacher?
(03-20-2018, 09:46 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting how someone trained to use firearms at the school "stopped the action" so quickly in a "gun free zone". What is more impressive is the trained person "stopped the action" with one shot. Me personally, I've been trained to fire 3 shots.
Do liberals still not want trained personnel in a school whether it's a "resource officer" or a teacher?
I can't answer for the "liberals" because I'm not a liberal. But wasn't the "resource officer" at the school a police officer? In fact, he was trained as a SWAT team member. I'm totally in favor of police officers having guns. Teachers, on the other hand, can be pretty wacky. I'm unsure about giving guns to teachers. Some of the teachers I had in high school would have no business going around armed with a gun.
(03-21-2018, 07:13 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ] (03-20-2018, 09:46 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting how someone trained to use firearms at the school "stopped the action" so quickly in a "gun free zone". What is more impressive is the trained person "stopped the action" with one shot. Me personally, I've been trained to fire 3 shots.
Do liberals still not want trained personnel in a school whether it's a "resource officer" or a teacher?
I can't answer for the "liberals" because I'm not a liberal. But wasn't the "resource officer" at the school a police officer? In fact, he was trained as a SWAT team member. I'm totally in favor of police officers having guns. Teachers, on the other hand, can be pretty wacky. I'm unsure about giving guns to teachers. Some of the teachers I had in high school would have no business going around armed with a gun.
I felt that way about a lot of the kids that had handguns at my high school (they weren't legally obtained, by the way), yet they still carried them in once the metal detectors went down.
This wasn't a school shooting, to me anyway, she was his ex-girlfriend or something like that.. this was a targeted attack. I mean, yea, it was at a school but a school shooting, to me, is a crazy douche who tries to kill as many random people as he can.
(03-21-2018, 08:16 AM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: [ -> ] (03-21-2018, 07:13 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]I can't answer for the "liberals" because I'm not a liberal. But wasn't the "resource officer" at the school a police officer? In fact, he was trained as a SWAT team member. I'm totally in favor of police officers having guns. Teachers, on the other hand, can be pretty wacky. I'm unsure about giving guns to teachers. Some of the teachers I had in high school would have no business going around armed with a gun.
I felt that way about a lot of the kids that had handguns at my high school (they weren't legally obtained, by the way), yet they still carried them in once the metal detectors went down.
This wasn't a school shooting, to me anyway, she was his ex-girlfriend or something like that.. this was a targeted attack. I mean, yea, it was at a school but a school shooting, to me, is a crazy douche who tries to kill as many random people as he can.
I don't think anyone is saying that all teachers are mandated to be armed, at least I haven't seen that position anywhere. The platform I do see is that teachers who possess a CCW should be permitted to carry on the job (i.e. eliminating the concept of "gun free zone"). Since those permits require a training class and demonstration of competence I believe that platform has merit. I don't favor making your pothead hippy Sociology teacher go out and buy a gun to carry to work.
(03-21-2018, 08:27 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (03-21-2018, 08:16 AM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: [ -> ]I felt that way about a lot of the kids that had handguns at my high school (they weren't legally obtained, by the way), yet they still carried them in once the metal detectors went down.
This wasn't a school shooting, to me anyway, she was his ex-girlfriend or something like that.. this was a targeted attack. I mean, yea, it was at a school but a school shooting, to me, is a crazy douche who tries to kill as many random people as he can.
I don't think anyone is saying that all teachers are mandated to be armed, at least I haven't seen that position anywhere. The platform I do see is that teachers who possess a CCW should be permitted to carry on the job (i.e. eliminating the concept of "gun free zone"). Since those permits require a training class and demonstration of competence I believe that platform has merit. I don't favor making your pothead hippy Sociology teacher go out and buy a gun to carry to work.
I'm not against it; I'm just not sure. If they do have these armed teachers, I definitely think they should never leave the gun in their desk or anywhere but on their person in such a state that no one can grab it from their waist or anything like that. Maybe only allow them to have weapons that will only work for them- like some kind of biometric identification, so no one can get the gun from them and use it. Also, they would need some serious training, and even then, I don't think we can expect every armed teacher to be mentally able to run towards danger. Just because you have a gun doesn't mean you're going to be brave or have good judgment. A police officer is far superior to a teacher in incidents like these, and even police officers fail sometimes.
It might be the best alternative among a whole bunch of bad alternatives.
It's a sad state of affairs that it's come to this. There are way too many guns out there, and it's way too easy to get one, but the horse is out of the barn on that, and there's no going back. Gun control is not a workable solution at this point.
Ok so here's my ignorance again regarding a teacher possessing a firearm..
Do the students know who the teacher is? I'm just thinking, if it's an 'inside job' surely the gunman would know who to take out first?
(03-20-2018, 04:39 PM)The Drifter Wrote: [ -> ]But you won't hear about it on the national news, the weapon was a handgun not an "assualt" rifle and only 2 students were wounded. The Shooter, well, a School resource officer Shot him and killed him so...... None of the above fits the national narative on gun control.....
Here's the story......
Gunman dead, two injured after shooting at Great Mills High School in Maryland
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/03/20/gun...yland.html
So you're saying Fox News. your source, isn't national news?
It was the lead story on MSNBC and CNN early this morning, as well as Fox.
You make a good point, the gunman only wounded two. This may be because it was a more targeted attack, or because he used a handgun and not an AR-15 or similar weapon.
(03-21-2018, 08:27 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (03-21-2018, 08:16 AM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: [ -> ]I felt that way about a lot of the kids that had handguns at my high school (they weren't legally obtained, by the way), yet they still carried them in once the metal detectors went down.
This wasn't a school shooting, to me anyway, she was his ex-girlfriend or something like that.. this was a targeted attack. I mean, yea, it was at a school but a school shooting, to me, is a crazy douche who tries to kill as many random people as he can.
I don't think anyone is saying that all teachers are mandated to be armed, at least I haven't seen that position anywhere. The platform I do see is that teachers who possess a CCW should be permitted to carry on the job (i.e. eliminating the concept of "gun free zone"). Since those permits require a training class and demonstration of competence I believe that platform has merit. I don't favor making your pothead hippy Sociology teacher go out and buy a gun to carry to work.
The hippie Sociology teacher may be less likely to have an itchy trigger finger than the ex-Marine Math teacher with PTSD.
Stereotypes are fun.
Anyone carrying a weapon in a crowded school as part of an effort to make said school safer should receive more training than what's taught in a CCW class.
(03-21-2018, 10:47 AM)rollerjag Wrote: [ -> ] (03-21-2018, 08:27 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think anyone is saying that all teachers are mandated to be armed, at least I haven't seen that position anywhere. The platform I do see is that teachers who possess a CCW should be permitted to carry on the job (i.e. eliminating the concept of "gun free zone"). Since those permits require a training class and demonstration of competence I believe that platform has merit. I don't favor making your pothead hippy Sociology teacher go out and buy a gun to carry to work.
The hippie Sociology teacher may be less likely to have an itchy trigger finger than the ex-Marine Math teacher with PTSD.
Stereotypes are fun.
Anyone carrying a weapon in a crowded school as part of an effort to make said school safer should receive more training than what's taught in a CCW class.
Marines can't shoot for crap.
No way, no how should teachers be armed at school. Their job is to teach and they can barely do that. The idea is to minimize the issues and not to escalate. There is additional and unacceptable risk involved with arming teachers in an inherently aggressively charged environment.
State and Federal need to stop leaning towards the cheapest alternatives when it comes to school safety/security. You set a federal standard for school design and set aside funding to upgrade those legacy facilities. We have all these codes for bridges, highways, buildings, etc., why not schools as it pertains to security? There also needs to be a study to determine the proper number of armed school resource officers required per the population. If money is an issue, deputize volunteers after significant training. There are Reserve officers on the streets, why not in schools? Heck, I know several retired military that would willingly do it for a ham sandwich if it meant making the kids safer.
(03-21-2018, 10:25 AM)DarloJAG84 Wrote: [ -> ]Ok so here's my ignorance again regarding a teacher possessing a firearm..
Do the students know who the teacher is? I'm just thinking, if it's an 'inside job' surely the gunman would know who to take out first?
It's an active discussion among those looking for better solutions. One of the more inspired ideas is having that information anonymous or unknown to the student body for such security reasons.
That's also a good reason for the policy/law to be local (state level) and not dictated by the federal government.
Just as private industry innovates, so do local authorities. They know best how to adapt and serve their local constituents.
Better ideas boil to the top. Those ideas, in turn, are shared among states. Bottom up, and not top down. That drives progress through best practice analysis.
(03-21-2018, 11:28 AM)B2hibry Wrote: [ -> ]No way, no how should teachers be armed at school. Their job is to teach and they can barely do that. The idea is to minimize the issues and not to escalate. There is additional and unacceptable risk involved with arming teachers in an inherently aggressively charged environment.
State and Federal need to stop leaning towards the cheapest alternatives when it comes to school safety/security. You set a federal standard for school design and set aside funding to upgrade those legacy facilities. We have all these codes for bridges, highways, buildings, etc., why not schools as it pertains to security? There also needs to be a study to determine the proper number of armed school resource officers required per the population. If money is an issue, deputize volunteers after significant training. There are Reserve officers on the streets, why not in schools? Heck, I know several retired military that would willingly do it for a ham sandwich if it meant making the kids safer.
IMO, the better of the ideas shared is that those teachers would be allowed to apply and qualify voluntarily for that responsibility and not required to do so.
I agree that armed resources not including teachers should be a staple of any safety plan, I just feel qualified and trained volunteer teachers would make such a plan even safer. If it's a small school without any qualified or interested participant teachers, then that's not a problem. Armed resources would still be staffed. I see teachers as a supplement, and not the core security force. I would be surprised if that wasn't the intent of those who are supporting the idea as well. Those opposing such ideas can be extremely (and purposefully) misleading and misrepresentative of the facts.