I am frustrated

"OPPOsaurus WRX" (opposaurus) 01/24/2020 at 11:07 • Filed to: None

1

55

there is way too much discussion in school design on how to keep the kids from getting shot.

now don’ t interpret this wrong. I t i s not that I don’ t think we should protect our kids, its that we shouldn’ t have to be protecting them from this sort of thing in the first place.

davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com > OPPOsaurus WRX 01/24/2020 at 11:24

1

Sad reality... Administrators, at this point, can’t say or think, “That will never happen here.”

ttyymmnn > OPPOsaurus WRX 01/24/2020 at 11:26

1

Well, if they refuse to do anything about the guns, you have to do something. I would be interested to know what sort of architectural designs would minimize the risk. 

Highlander-Datsuns are Forever > OPPOsaurus WRX 01/24/2020 at 11:29

0

Our schools have installed double doors at the entrances and you have to be “buzzed” in by the receptionist to e nter the sc hool. The are also doing training with the sheriff s department and other LEO’s. This is Montana and we have not even had a school shooting to my knowledge.

vondon302 > ttyymmnn 01/24/2020 at 11:30

5

I’ve seen plans for curved hallways. So no shooting lanes.

Depessed me that this is even a thing.

Tekamul > OPPOsaurus WRX 01/24/2020 at 11:33

3

2 weeks ago my 11 year old explained to me how to hide in a bathroom if someone is coming to kill you. Hide in the stall, crouching on the toilet, but REMEMBER to leave the door open, or they’ll know it’s occupied.

That's what she learned in school that day. 

vondon302 > OPPOsaurus WRX 01/24/2020 at 11:34

0

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > ttyymmnn 01/24/2020 at 11:41

1

The genie is out of the bottle.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > Tekamul 01/24/2020 at 11:42

0

My 18-YO daughter goes to large crowded events and I tell her every time to keep her head on a swivel and be cognizant of where the exits are at all times.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > vondon302 01/24/2020 at 11:42

0

Like like like like like like like...

farscythe - makin da cawfee! > OPPOsaurus WRX 01/24/2020 at 11:43

0

welp... as the us of a cant provide the safe learning environment kids need

i think the only option is to send every kid a tablet and start doing lessons via video conference in the safety of their own homes

(you can put the teachers in a sealed bunker with a camera..)

BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. > ttyymmnn 01/24/2020 at 11:52

6

Locks only keep out honest people.

Laws only deter the law-abiding.

If it weren’t a gun, it would be something else... like the Boston Marathon pressure cooker, or using a car as a bunt-force object at high speed through the school playground, or while people are arriving or departing.

The only thing that deters an attack, regardless of weapon choice, are the notions that:

it won’t be successful.

it might not be survivable, and if you do survive, it is imprisonment.

it won’t gain you fame, notoriety, or attention... in fact you won’t be heard from ever again, and no one will ever know your name.

That doesn’t happen with a defensive position of putting heads in the sand , and a sign that says guns aren’t allowed.

Disarmament is a poor, and incredibly illogical defensive response.

Thomas Donohue > farscythe - makin da cawfee! 01/24/2020 at 12:03

3

85% of all school age kids that are killed by guns are shot in their own homes.

Send them to school....it’s still safer.

https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2019/02/gun-violence-children-actually-experience/582964/

OPPOsaurus WRX > ttyymmnn 01/24/2020 at 12:06

1

we had some nice glass walls separating classrooms from open learning areas and hallways and they requested we raise the windo w sills above head height so they cant see the kids on t he other side to see where to shoot at them. On another project we had a glass wall on the outside of the cafeteria and we had to make the wall 50% block to provide some cover for the kids inside from shooters outside. another school put one way film over windows in a library so people couldn’ t see in. I’m sure there is more but this is just what I encounter int he past week.

farscythe - makin da cawfee! > Thomas Donohue 01/24/2020 at 12:08

1

eurgh.....

thats somehow so much worse than i expected and yet completely unsurprising at the same time...

WRXforScience > davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com 01/24/2020 at 12:10

3

They could since statistically these are still rare events (even though each is a tragedy). D esigning schools with shooters in mind is a combination of cash grab, political ‘action’ for the sake of appearances, and safety theater.

OPPOsaurus WRX > Tekamul 01/24/2020 at 12:10

0

yep, sometimes i feel sorry for bringing the kids into this world. that is not a le sson we should need to teach.

OPPOsaurus WRX > Highlander-Datsuns are Forever 01/24/2020 at 12:11

0

door buzzers are  standard at any school i’ve gone to with the new job.

Jewish Stig > Tekamul 01/24/2020 at 12:12

1

This  is the saddest thing i heard this week.

OPPOsaurus WRX > WRXforScience 01/24/2020 at 12:14

1

I said something along that line to my boss after the meeting. It sux we have to do this with 99.999 9% of the effort not being used ever but its that .0001% that really matter and the public shit show there would be if something did happen and you hadn’ t taken measures to mitigate it.

and 100 more > BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. 01/24/2020 at 12:15

0

You’re right, you’re absolutely correct, but if nobody is able to get traction on improving the overall mental/ emotional state of the country, then what should be done? I don’t oppose gun ownership , but the Right & the 2A crowd refuse to even acknowledge that there is a problem, even when confronted with facts and statistics. “ It’s a conspiracy to take away my rights! ” No, it’s a plea to either make safer, smarter, healthier citizens, OR, refusing that option, limit firearm access to people who are not able to be emotionally and mentally stable enough to own responsibly.

I mean, not that the L eft is able to make a cogent argument for improving mental health (or healthcare in general), but when you’re opposed on both sides of a problem, and the problem isn’t even acknowledged by the opposition, then what do you do?

and 100 more > farscythe - makin da cawfee! 01/24/2020 at 12:18

0

Which is all fine and well, until they start doxxing each other. Death by SWAT.

davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com > BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. 01/24/2020 at 12:19

1

I agree with most of this, but limiting the easy availability of semi-automatic firearms and high-capacity magazines also seems prudent.

Since the government refuses to do it, I’m surprised that gunsellers across the country haven’t come up with their own modern DO NOT SELL list. Seems like, if a parent/sibling/teacher/coach/social worker/ pastor/policeman raises the red flag about someone, we should be able to do something to protect the community, and them from themselves...

We able need a serious commitment to mental health services.

farscythe - makin da cawfee! > and 100 more 01/24/2020 at 12:20

1

welp... i tried... theres just no saving american kids

ill go buy a trumpet and learn to play the last post

davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com > Tekamul 01/24/2020 at 12:20

0

So sad...

facw > BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. 01/24/2020 at 12:24

1

This is silly. Criminals can easily get guns because we make it extremely easy to get guns. There aren’t huge secret gun factories pumping out guns for criminals, if you clamp down on what people get legally you control the illegal supply.

And yes, there are alternative ways to hurt people, but they are generally either not as easy, or not as deadly (or both).

facw > OPPOsaurus WRX 01/24/2020 at 12:27

2

It’s depressing. And it’s especially bad if putting these things in for extremely low probability events leads to sub optimal design for more realistic problems (e.g. limiting lines of sight might help with a shooting that will almost certainly never happen, but make it harder to keep an eye on students, increasing the risks associated with much more likely problems like bullying or drugs.)

OPPOsaurus WRX > facw 01/24/2020 at 12:34

1

yep, that type of problem definitely happens. I’m sure it affects cost. MY daughters’ school just had a huge addition/renovation and the front doors feel like that should be on a vault instead of a school.

CB > OPPOsaurus WRX 01/24/2020 at 12:42

0

You have to squint to see it, but my elementary school had the classrooms in a huge semi-circle around the library, no doors on them, and it had classrooms that were connected inside by either a pit or doors. Probably the worst design to prevent a school shooting. But damn if it wasn’t a nice school.

BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. > and 100 more 01/24/2020 at 12:42

1

There is one over-arching problem with government regulation.

They do it wrong. They never seem to regulate without collateral or unintended consequences. They never seem to implement it well, and it is almost impossible to correct or retract after it is done.

I don’t trust government. I don’t even trust them very well to do what they are constitutionally established to do, and I certainly don’t trust when they step beyond their enumerated powers, that were set as a limitation for very good reason, and the 2nd Amendment is no less important than the first, 4th, 5th, or any of the bill of rights. Once it is gone, it would be almost impossible to regain, WHEN, not if it proves to be a bad idea.

I trust people far more than institutions that have abused trust. Like the people who are actually good cops. Like the people who were trained and responsible to be armed citizens in the texas church were they minimized loss of life, and ended the active shooter crisis.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/29/us/church-shooting-texas/index.html

The article states that the unnamed attacker (not gunman, not shooter... ATTACKER, MURDERER, CRIMINAL) was transient but had links to the area, and had been arrested and had prior issues with law enforcement.

Laws obviously didn’t hinder the attacker, who probably didn’t have a legal weapon in the first place.

The Citizens who did have legal weapons, and training to use them, were an effective defense.

Mental health issues are a distinct, and very real issue, but the whole world can’t just be half the population dispensing therapy to the other half, and then vice versa to make sure everybody feels good. The self-esteem movement hasn’t exactly improved people’s outlook... if anything it has made people more self-conscious and dissatisfied, and less empathetic to others, which turns others into adversaries or even enemies, rather than neighbors or friends... or even simply people with the right to co-exist.

People who lack purpose and direction in their lives tend to react to that in all sorts of irrational ways, and it can build into some serious personal problems and lashing out.

Political correctness, vilification of almost everything in society, the social justice movement that radicalizes and vilifies anyone other than themselves, and other divisiveness that is hatred based on politics and opinion, is no better than hatred based on skin color, gender, ethnicity, religion, or any other criteria, and it is human nature to default to division.

The society and culture fans those flames of division and hatred on the criteria that it prefers, including opposition and hatred of the people who meet criteria it decries.

As Abraham Lincoln so profoundly re-stated... “A House divided against itself cannot stand.” and a society and culture that succumbs to the basest aspects of human nature, to divide and separate, and eventually hate... is contributing to the problem at least as much as those they oppose.

Until the society and culture can realize that a change to a personal ethic of respect, mutual coexistence, and eventually trust, based in what religious tradition calls “loving your neighbor as yourself.” and doing the constant work of elevating ourselves and each other above our basest nature, (not perfection, just a realistic and positive outlook) then the rest of this is just symptoms of the same decay.

It doesn’t start at the government, the school, the churches, or anywhere other than the people.

The people make up the government of the people, by the people, and for the people. At least they are supposed to.

The people make up the public and private schools at the local level.

The people make up the church congregations.

The people change their viewpoint at the individual level, and spread it through their actions in their communities, and it builds from the bottom up. It never works from the failing institutions at the top downward.

ttyymmnn > OPPOsaurus WRX 01/24/2020 at 12:56

0

I have no words.

Milky > BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. 01/24/2020 at 12:59

0

Gotta be honest I dont buy that argument one bit.

There is a knife or vehicle attack  every once in a while, no doubt. But those kill few, not many. Guns are a hobby that kills people, just own up to it.

BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. > facw 01/24/2020 at 13:02

1

That has never worked. Look at alcohol p rohibition. It didn’t end alcohol use, it created a much larger black market.

There are already LAYERS of laws to prevent criminals from getting guns. If they are ineffective, then that is further logic to say that MORE LAYERS OF INEFFECTIVENESS WILL CONTINUE TO BE INEFFECTIVE!!!

A government powerful enough to give you the gun control you want, contrary to the EXPLICIT PROHIBITION of the government from doing that in the 2nd Amendment... is a government powerful enough to take everything you have when it decides to take things other than legal guns from law-abiding citizens.

What recourse will there be when all legal citizens are defenseless... criminals are not disarmed, because they have never been at any time in human history, and an un-checked government with more power than ever, decides that they want to take something that you value away from you?

Who are you going to call to defend your rights to what you hold dear , then?

Talk to J ews who remember Hitler . Talk to Armenians, Talk to Ukrainians about Crimea. Talk to eastern Europeans who remember the Soviet Bloc and Stalin . Ask people who know what goes on in China, politically, or who remember Mao Tse Tung, or Pol Pot how it goes for defenseless populations subjugated to powerful, micromanaging, or even murderous governments and criminals.

Oh, BTW, in defenseless societies... the powerful criminals become powerful political leaders. Invariably.

shop-teacher > OPPOsaurus WRX 01/24/2020 at 13:04

0

*sigh*

A few years ago they changed the doors to my shop , and put in ones with BIGGER windows ... to somehow make us safer. T he old ones had tiny windows, and what little glass was in them  was chicken wire glass. Now they’re half window, no chicken wire. Oh, and the old doors had dead bolts. New ones? Nope.

DipodomysDeserti > OPPOsaurus WRX 01/24/2020 at 13:06

0

And if you look at some of most horrific school shootings, none of those measures would have helped much.

I worked at a school where terrorism was the primary concern. They got DHS money to install bullet proof windows on the school. Didn’t reinforce the walls at all, so anyone who knows what their doing wouldn’t have an issue. Then a brand new window cracked because they weren’t framed right...

Building contractors for schools are rolling in it.

I have family member who owns an architectural firm. The superintendent of a very large school district was at every Christmas party. Dude’s made a fortune building for schools. This in a state wi th some of the worst school funding in the nation.

BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. > davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com 01/24/2020 at 13:17

2

Institutions cannot correct personal problems, and that expectation has been leading us astray for decades and centuries. You can’t say “They need to do this, those others need to do that... someone else needs to be responsible for everything.” It is pragmatically impossible.

Since when has any government bureaucracy actually truly helped and cared about you? I am not talking about maybe dispensing a government service to you... I am talking about caring and actively helping you, or anyone else.

Mental health Services are something, but that is still either business, or bureaucracy. that is not PERSONAL, it is functional.

True interpersonal CARING is not their primary function, they can’t do it, they aren’t equipped or available to do that. Even Nurses and Doctors... they have a JOB to do, and only part of it is caring, and they go home to their families when they are done for the day. They are amazing people in many cases, but can’t possibly have the bandwidth to give EVERYONE everything they need.

Frankly it is your function and responsibility, as much as it is every person’s responsibility to the people around them, myself included.

It used to be family, but those are more broken than ever, and in some ways less defended as a fundamental social structure to be held up.

It used to be friends, but now there is reportedly a “loneliness epidemic” and ‘ friends’ are text entries on a screen.

It used to be work colleagues, but I don’t know of any work places that aren’t stressed-out places of frustration and friction, and often tend to destroy people’s sense of purpose and worth.

Destroy people’s sense of self worth, replace it with empty self-esteem rhetoric based on wishful thinking and superficial junk, destroy the interpersonal support structures... and this is just the beginning of the social decay that results.

WRXforScience > OPPOsaurus WRX 01/24/2020 at 13:17

1

Sandy Hook had double security doors, and nearly all the shooters went door to door. Once the shooting starts, you’re too late to do much. It’d be like mandating that cars call 911 for you to stop car crashes.

The designs aren’t based on data or science and many could actually make buildings less safe.

For example: limiting the number of entry points (doors). Fewer doors make the building less safe in case of a fire and if a shooter were to pull the fire alarm before he started he’d have a choke point.

Curved hallways would make it more difficult to spot a shooter and could increase the time it takes to make it to safety.

You could take the extra cost of the buildings and spend the money on more teachers or councilors which could be as or more effective at stopping a shooter with the side benefit of making the school better all the time.

BigBlock440 > OPPOsaurus WRX 01/24/2020 at 13:17

0

We shouldn’t have to, but people are shitty, and we can’t trust them not to be shitty anymore

BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. > Milky 01/24/2020 at 13:26

0

No one I know who has a gun, and that is many people... I live in the rural m idwest...

...no one has ever killed anyone. I only recall ever hearing about one close call in a group hunting circumstance probably 35 years ago .

The statisitics for intentional firearm homicide, especially with multiple victims, is much lower than the media narrative would suggest.

Baseball bats probably kill more people than semi-automatic rifles.

Milky > BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. 01/24/2020 at 13:50

0

“ Probably” isn’t a source.

Three-quarters of all U.S. murders in 2017 – 14,542 out of 19,510 – involved a firearm. About half (51%) of all suicides that year – 23,854 out of 47,173 – involved a gun. 

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/08/16/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/

facw > BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. 01/24/2020 at 13:53

1

Prohibition greatly shrunk the market for alcohol. It created other problems, but the black market was tiny compared to the legal market.

Criminals will also be disarmed if they can’t get access to new weapons. And your AR-15 will do nothing to stop the government.

More to the point you don’t need to ban guns! There are a whole lot rules that would make it much harder for criminals and others who shouldn’t have guns to own them that we aren’t doing because it would impose a minor burden on law-abiding gun owners.

And the slippery slope argument is absurd. Those societies you mentioned had guns. The bad guys won because there were more of them not because no one could resist them. Also in the first world, we have the most guns, and we are the ones being led by a powerful criminal and  most corruption in the developed world. I don’t see the gun owners stopping it, they are cheering it on.

BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. > Milky 01/24/2020 at 14:25

0

https://www.statista.com/statistics/195325/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-weapon-used/

Notice that I didn’t say guns, I said semi-automatic rifles, which is borne out by the statistics.

More deaths by blunt instruments, like baseball bats than rifles specifically. It was a counter-point being made to dispel the focus on so-called “assault rifles”.

The handgun statistic is higher.

That still doesn’t classify between what type of handgun... semi-automatic, double-action or single action revolver, single or double shot breach-load,.. not all handguns have magazines, let alone high-capacity ones.

handguns, being easiest to conceal, are also easiest to steal without being noticed, and those stats say absolutely NOTHING about whether the guns used were legally owned, or stolen.

BaconSandwich is tasty. > Tekamul 01/24/2020 at 14:28

1

My wife and kids (5, 3, and 1 years old) were at a local family center (attached to a school). They had a practice lockdown. No one told them when it was over.

This kind of thing wasn't ever a concern when we were kids. 

BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. > facw 01/24/2020 at 14:37

0

Of course the black market was smaller than the legal market.

The black market during prohibition was HUGE compared to the black market before hand, and gave rise to a moonshine runners, and the beginning of NASCAR. It wasn’t exactly a blip of a couple people making a few bottles of illegal hooch

Criminals have never been disarmed. Never in human history. The weapons may change, but they have NEVER been unarmed to exert their power over other people, and defend themselves from other criminals. Disarming everyone else just makes crime easier and more common.

Ask a law-abiding gun owner who happens to be a female victim of sexual assault if they want to give up their defensive weapon.

There are already a lot of rules that restrict gun ownership almost to the point of a tacit ban, New York City, Chicago, Detroit, Los Angeles, and San Francisco all have gun regulations beyond even state and federal laws.

Yet urban violent crime FAR, FAR, FAR exceeds violent crime in rural, and even most sub-urban areas, and a significant amount of urban violent crime using firearms, are illegal firearms in the hands of criminals committing crimes that are themselves also illegal, and some of that organized crime and gang activity.

Where is the news narrative citing the much higher incidence of gang-associated gun crime than rural gun owners who have a lower than average incidence of gun-related violence, and a VERY high correlation with legal gun purchasing and ownership, and permitting.

Gun laws don’t make criminals stop being criminals, they only make things difficult for the people who are already responsible law-abiding citizens... and laws of any kind are extremely difficult to repeal once in place.

Milky > BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. 01/24/2020 at 14:40

0

I noticed what you said, seems kind of irrelevant when 2A supporters / NRA won’t let any gun legislation pass. Look at how much of that list guns ...

Just today you wrote many a paragraph about how society has a problem, yea mate, its guns.  

Milky > BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. 01/24/2020 at 14:47

1

This is a very tired argument. Chicago criminals go to the next county over or Gary Indiana to buy their guns, there are so many facts that your are out right ignoring.

BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. > Milky 01/24/2020 at 14:49

0

Yeah... and my computer and my pen are at fault for mis-spellings, and my 20-oz claw hammer is at fault for my thumb being hurt when I build things out of wood.

A poor craftsman blames the tools, and that doesn’t change when turning the topic to crime.

Weapons don’t create criminals. Criminals obtain weapons, almost always illegally. Power disparity between criminals and defenseless law-abiding citizens has NEVER been a good situation for law and order.

You keep blaming the mis-diagnosed symptom, rather than understanding the disease... and nothing will ever get healed.

You didn’t absorb any of what I wrote about what the core of the problem is, because by vilifying gun owners because “ guns= bad”, That shows that you have no intention of gaining greater understanding of people with a differing opinion, a differing circumstance, or what actually goes on behind the trigger of a gun in a criminal’s hand, vs. behind the trigger of a legal gun in a citizen’s hand.  

I cannot responsibly support the force of law being brought to bear by such an ignorant point of view that doesn’t and refuses to understand the difference.

BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. > Milky 01/24/2020 at 15:06

0

What about the fact that it is still illegal to buy a gun if you are a convicted criminal. Innocent until PROVEN guilty, once proven guilty... not legal to own a gun.

What about the fact that transporting firearms across a state border to be used in the commission of a crime probably makes that a federal crime.

Selling guns to a criminal from a different state is almost certainly a federal crime.

Certain types of firearms are already restricted by type , and exceeding those restrictions is illegal.

Brandishing a gun is illegal.

Threatening someone with a gun is illegal.

Using a gun in the commission of another crime, even if the gun is unloaded, and the trigger is never pulled, aggravates the crime being committed, and may actually be another charge.

possessing a gun you don’t own, without the owner’s permission, is illegal.

Assaulting someone, with or without a gun... illegal.

Taking someone’s life away from them, except for defending yourself from them taking yours first, is illegal, whether negligent homicide, whether pre-meditated or not… it is all ILLEGAL.

Talking about an intent to do any of this stuff, is conspiracy to commit a crime... and ALREADY ILLEGAL.

Exactly what is legal now that by making a new law to make it illegal, will stop someone who is already breaking laws?

What facts aren’t already covered by the laws that already exist, that people are already breaking, that a new law would somehow be a line too far that they wouldn’t also cross with just as much disregard?

It isn’t a matter of legal language not being specific or broad enough , it is a matter of criminal mentality to flout the laws in the first place.... and the law exists to prosecute the crime, not build some sort of ideological fence that only restricts the people who abide by the law.

Milky > BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. 01/24/2020 at 15:07

0

Your computer doesnt kill people but your hammer might, it will just take longer, not be as effective on someone a few feet from you and not kill as many.

Incase you want a reminder:

Also, I was a gun owner, many of my friends and family still are .

facw > BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. 01/24/2020 at 15:08

0

Disarming everyone else just makes crime easier and more common. 

This is objectively wrong. Crime rates are almost invariably lower where gun ownership is lower. This only big exception is Switzerland which has high rates of ownership due to their military practices, but also tighter control (and most of those are long guns, which are responsible for only a small percentage of gun crime in the US).

Urban guns are imported from places with shitty gun control. If fucking Indiana and Missouri weren’t happy to sell to anyone with a pulse, Chicago would have way lower gun violence. New York City, surrounded by states with strong gun control has a murder rate per 100k people of around 3.3 (that’s lower than 30 states, including all of the gun-loving south, despite the obvious pressures that make violence more likely in cities).

Gun laws absolutely make it harder for criminals to get guns. There’s no reason not have universal background checks, there’s no reason to allow people to purchase unlimited quantities of guns to resell, etc. Criminals might not pay attention to those laws (though strict penalties for being armed illegally may be a deterrent ), but most gun sellers aren’t going to risk jail just to skirt reasonable restrictions and make a little extra.

Milky > BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. 01/24/2020 at 15:18

0

Good guy or bad guy, when you both have guns death comes easier.

every stat shows that.  

BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. > Milky 01/24/2020 at 15:34

0

Again, you badly mis-understand.

So many more people would have died in that church without an armed defense team. Other churches have had that... South Carolina comes to mind.

Death among parishoners would have been much easier and far more widespread without an armed defense.

Everything from Ft. Hood to Columbine and Sandy Hook show that an un-resisted active multiple murderer kills more victims.

Gun free zones are the barrel that criminals can shoot fish in... and you are the fish.

If the texas example was the norm, rather than the exception, fewer people would walk into that situation. It would be a deterrent if they knew their chances were slim to none to achieve their goal, or survive.

Do you oppose armed police, armed security personnel, and other security measures that put a gun between a likely target and the possibility of a violent criminal? Is that good disarmament, too?

Let me guess... you also oppose national security policy, and want to do away with Mutually-Assured Destruction, in favor of unilateral disarmament and de-militarization, right?

Scaled down to an interpersonal scale, that is the same as restricting legal gun-ownership, and disarming the law-abiding citizenry. Willful disarmament in the face of an armed adversary.

Yamamoto said that he feared waking a sleeping giant, and that if Japan had tried to invade the US during WWII, they would have found a rifle behind every blade of grass.

That is a deterrent. A deterrent en masse against a foreign government, or a domestic tyrant, and on an individual basis, an armed person deters some crime from ever happening, can defend against what does happen.

A disarmed populace is no deterrent from invasion, tyranny, or violent crime.

Read history, full of the powerful and armed oppressing those who are less powerful and defenseless. Pretty much ALL of history.

BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. > facw 01/24/2020 at 15:48

0

Severe g un restrictions of course make it harder to get guns.

They do NOTHING about making criminals not want to commit a crime.

The also disproportionately make it harder, and more likely that a law abiding citizen will NOT have a gun to defend themselves...

because difficulty is not impossibility, and a criminal would be more motivated to circumvent difficult circumstances to still get the weapon they feel they need, than John Q. Public who doesn’t want to go to that trouble..

It disarms the law-abiding more prevalently than the criminal, and criminals can still use many other things as weapons, even if guns aren’t as available.

Look at knife crime in London, where guns are banned. Gun crime may be down, but violent crime with other weapons is not.

Add sexual assault, rape, assault in general, theft, destruction of property, and other criminal behavior... just because it isn’t involving a gun, doesn’t mean that there is less crime when the general population is more defenseless.

Milky > BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. 01/24/2020 at 15:54

0

Dood, back up for 2 seconds and realize that other (1st world) countries aren’t shooting each other in churches and schools. Its a US problem.

If you’re answer is do nothing, you are okay with that.  

BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. > Milky 01/24/2020 at 16:08

0

There are MANY attacks in other countries, they aren’t covered with a narrative like US media, and aren’t carried by US media most of the time. ... Norway had a school attack by a man with a knife. Immigrant populations have shut down and burned sections of Paris. Stockholm has huge issues with increasing crime….

violence is in no way isolated to the US... and violence uses whatever weapon comes to hand, in the developed or developing world.

And at no point did I say that doing nothing was the option.

The government has already done what you suggest, it is ineffective, and all you want is MORE of it, because it is EASIER for you to say “Government needs to do more” than to say that people need to be responsible for themselves, their own defense, and their good treatment of the people around them that might help communities, and thus societies be less prone to violence, regardless of the weaponry.

How about YOU do something. Treat someone as a friend, rather than a political adversary or enemy because they disagree with you, and asking for the force of law to be brought to bear against that.

If you want to encourage people to disarm, because you believe it... make your case to them. Get them to agree with you. but lets give the new legislation a rest, since all the mountains of legislation we already have is well down the road of diminishing returns.

Be the ideal you portray, and let others make their choice, instead of having government deprive everyone of a choice.

Milky > BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. 01/24/2020 at 16:14

0

Norway had a school attack by a man with a knife

Meanwhile in the US :