School Shooting in Connecticut

Off Topic
541

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
If a teacher wants to kill the kids all they need to do is Jim Jones the cool aide or any one of a hundred different ways, especially if they are motivated and willing themselves to commit suicide to do it. They certainly don’t need a gun to wreak havoc. If a teacher “goes crazy” the kids are pretty much fucked. So, serious question, what’s is your point Debra? [/quote]

My point is pretty obvious. If you arm teachers one of them might shoot your kid.

[/quote]

If you don’t arm them (and see my posts on previous pages stating I’m not in favor of “arming” anyone, just not prohibiting) they still might kill your kid with a bat or poison them. If you put someone in trust over your kids and they want to hurt them, they will. So I still don’t see your point.

542

^^Another thought: My sister-in-law is in the process of adopting a boy who suffers from fetal alcohol syndrome, among some other issues. I don’t know a lot about the condition other than this boy in particular is violent and strong. I cringe at the thought of some teacher, possibly careless, having a gun that he might get his hands on. He is a good boy–but he has developmental problems and gets angry and frustrated. And there are many of him. He’s not insane by the way. This kid already managed to mace his whole family with bear spray when it was carelessly left within his reach.

543

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
If a teacher wants to kill the kids all they need to do is Jim Jones the cool aide or any one of a hundred different ways, especially if they are motivated and willing themselves to commit suicide to do it. They certainly don’t need a gun to wreak havoc. If a teacher “goes crazy” the kids are pretty much fucked. So, serious question, what’s is your point Debra? [/quote]

My point is pretty obvious. If you arm teachers one of them might shoot your kid.

[/quote]

If you don’t arm them (and see my posts on previous pages stating I’m not in favor of “arming” anyone, just not prohibiting) they still might kill your kid with a bat or poison them. If you put someone in trust over your kids and they want to hurt them, they will. So I still don’t see your point. [/quote]

You’re assuming that all killing is pre-meditated. It isn’t.

544

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:
. . . . without sending our worst off to wars periodically they are left to fester.

[/quote]

Wow, so that’s what you think of soldiers, airmen, sailors, and marines who volunteer to defend our country?

Stay classy.

This shooter, btw, would never have passed the initial psych test and would have been drummed out in about a week.

[/quote]

Criminy. That is soooo not what I was getting at.
[/quote]

I am so supporting what you were not getting at.

How much honor should we bestow on the last man dying for a fading empire?

What about the second to last?

Third?

Fivehundredthwentyfifth?

Jajajaja… medalsglorydeedsaofhonor…

Cannon fodder…[/quote]

See I saw that we were about to be in agreement and I thought that wasn’t any fun :wink:

545

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
If a teacher wants to kill the kids all they need to do is Jim Jones the cool aide or any one of a hundred different ways, especially if they are motivated and willing themselves to commit suicide to do it. They certainly don’t need a gun to wreak havoc. If a teacher “goes crazy” the kids are pretty much fucked. So, serious question, what’s is your point Debra? [/quote]

My point is pretty obvious. If you arm teachers one of them might shoot your kid.

[/quote]

If you don’t arm them (and see my posts on previous pages stating I’m not in favor of “arming” anyone, just not prohibiting) they still might kill your kid with a bat or poison them. If you put someone in trust over your kids and they want to hurt them, they will. So I still don’t see your point. [/quote]

You’re assuming that all killing is pre-meditated. It isn’t.
[/quote]

I’d agree accidents are a valid concern and so is theft. I’m not sure if its an overriding concern but I agree it would also be horrible if a kid got shot by a teacher accidentally, although not nearly has horrible as what just happened.

Do you think the risk of accidents and such is greater than the risk of invasion by an outsider like what just happened?

I personally don’t think there are any simple and risk-free solutions.

546

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
If a teacher wants to kill the kids all they need to do is Jim Jones the cool aide or any one of a hundred different ways, especially if they are motivated and willing themselves to commit suicide to do it. They certainly don’t need a gun to wreak havoc. If a teacher “goes crazy” the kids are pretty much fucked. So, serious question, what’s is your point Debra? [/quote]

My point is pretty obvious. If you arm teachers one of them might shoot your kid.

[/quote]

If you don’t arm them (and see my posts on previous pages stating I’m not in favor of “arming” anyone, just not prohibiting) they still might kill your kid with a bat or poison them. If you put someone in trust over your kids and they want to hurt them, they will. So I still don’t see your point. [/quote]

You’re assuming that all killing is pre-meditated. It isn’t.
[/quote]

I’d agree accidents are a valid concern and so is theft. I’m not sure if its an overriding concern but I agree it would also be horrible if a kid got shot by a teacher accidentally, although not nearly has horrible as what just happened.

Do you think the risk of accidents and such is greater than the risk of invasion by an outsider like what just happened?

I personally don’t think there are any simple and risk-free solutions.

[/quote]

I completely agree there aren’t any simple and risk-free solutions.

I feel it’s riskier to put guns in classrooms. I think if you ran the numbers taking into consideration the instability of individual teachers, instability of individual kids, the incompetence of some, the sheer number of classrooms and put that next to the number of classrooms that have been shot up, the odd setters would still be favouring no guns in the classroom.

I think it sucks to put it in terms of numbers but if you’re talking about a drastic policy (which this would be IMO) you have to look at it that way and actually effectively mitigate the risk rather than just react. In the end I don’t think it hurts any less to lose a child if it’s accidental or due to circumstances that were not as measurably horrific as what this monster did.

547

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
If a teacher wants to kill the kids all they need to do is Jim Jones the cool aide or any one of a hundred different ways, especially if they are motivated and willing themselves to commit suicide to do it. They certainly don’t need a gun to wreak havoc. If a teacher “goes crazy” the kids are pretty much fucked. So, serious question, what’s is your point Debra? [/quote]

My point is pretty obvious. If you arm teachers one of them might shoot your kid.

[/quote]

If you don’t arm them (and see my posts on previous pages stating I’m not in favor of “arming” anyone, just not prohibiting) they still might kill your kid with a bat or poison them. If you put someone in trust over your kids and they want to hurt them, they will. So I still don’t see your point. [/quote]

You’re assuming that all killing is pre-meditated. It isn’t.
[/quote]

I’d agree accidents are a valid concern and so is theft. I’m not sure if its an overriding concern but I agree it would also be horrible if a kid got shot by a teacher accidentally, although not nearly has horrible as what just happened.

Do you think the risk of accidents and such is greater than the risk of invasion by an outsider like what just happened?

I personally don’t think there are any simple and risk-free solutions.

[/quote]

I completely agree there aren’t any simple and risk-free solutions.

I feel it’s riskier to put guns in classrooms. I think if you ran the numbers taking into consideration the instability of individual teachers, instability of individual kids, the incompetence of some, the sheer number of classrooms and put that next to the number of classrooms that have been shot up, the odd setters would still be favouring no guns in the classroom.

I think it sucks to put it in terms of numbers but if you’re talking about a drastic policy (which this would be IMO) you have to look at it that way and actually effectively mitigate the risk rather than just react. In the end I don’t think it hurts any less to lose a child if it’s accidental or due to circumstances that were not as measurably horrific as what this monster did.[/quote]

I agree with the way you are thinking about this in terms of risk assessment, even if I might disagree with your conclusion. And, for the record, I didn’t mean to imply that an accidental death would not be horrible, only that if a gun goes off accidentally it would likely only be one bullet with a random trajectory, not hundreds of bullets flying that are specifically aimed at students resulting in multiple casualties.

548

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
If a teacher wants to kill the kids all they need to do is Jim Jones the cool aide or any one of a hundred different ways, especially if they are motivated and willing themselves to commit suicide to do it. They certainly don’t need a gun to wreak havoc. If a teacher “goes crazy” the kids are pretty much fucked. So, serious question, what’s is your point Debra? [/quote]

My point is pretty obvious. If you arm teachers one of them might shoot your kid.

[/quote]

If you don’t arm them (and see my posts on previous pages stating I’m not in favor of “arming” anyone, just not prohibiting) they still might kill your kid with a bat or poison them. If you put someone in trust over your kids and they want to hurt them, they will. So I still don’t see your point. [/quote]

You’re assuming that all killing is pre-meditated. It isn’t.
[/quote]

I’d agree accidents are a valid concern and so is theft. I’m not sure if its an overriding concern but I agree it would also be horrible if a kid got shot by a teacher accidentally, although not nearly has horrible as what just happened.

Do you think the risk of accidents and such is greater than the risk of invasion by an outsider like what just happened?

I personally don’t think there are any simple and risk-free solutions.

[/quote]

I completely agree there aren’t any simple and risk-free solutions.

I feel it’s riskier to put guns in classrooms. I think if you ran the numbers taking into consideration the instability of individual teachers, instability of individual kids, the incompetence of some, the sheer number of classrooms and put that next to the number of classrooms that have been shot up, the odd setters would still be favouring no guns in the classroom.

I think it sucks to put it in terms of numbers but if you’re talking about a drastic policy (which this would be IMO) you have to look at it that way and actually effectively mitigate the risk rather than just react. In the end I don’t think it hurts any less to lose a child if it’s accidental or due to circumstances that were not as measurably horrific as what this monster did.[/quote]

I agree with the way you are thinking about this in terms of risk assessment, even if I might disagree with your conclusion. And, for the record, I didn’t mean to imply that an accidental death would not be horrible, only that if a gun goes off accidentally it would likely only be one bullet with a random trajectory, not hundreds of bullets flying that are specifically aimed at students resulting in multiple casualties.

[/quote]

Oh I know you didn’t mean that. It was more a general statement. I just know a lot of people are feeling really helpless and would prefer to feel in control and I think having a good guy there to take him out would make a whole lot of people feel in control.

This really is a lose-lose situation.

549

I see a school as a place somewhat similar to a prison. You don’t have guards carrying guns in the prison because the guards could have that weapon taken away by them from one of the prisoners. Same thing could happen with an off-kilter or just generally violent student. That’s why I think something like police grade mace and other non-lethal deterrents would be better for a school setting.

550

[quote]debraD wrote:
^^Another thought: My sister-in-law is in the process of adopting a boy who suffers from fetal alcohol syndrome, among some other issues. I don’t know a lot about the condition other than this boy in particular is violent and strong. I cringe at the thought of some teacher, possibly careless, having a gun that he might get his hands on. He is a good boy–but he has developmental problems and gets angry and frustrated. And there are many of him. He’s not insane by the way. This kid already managed to mace his whole family with bear spray when it was carelessly left within his reach.[/quote]

It sounds like you’re just irrationally afraid of guns.

A strong, violent kid could kill someone with a compass or a pair of scissors.

And no one is talking about ONE teacher being armed.

There are checks and balances.

One person with a gun is not balanced. Four or five? You betcha.

*edited “compass”

551

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:
^^Another thought: My sister-in-law is in the process of adopting a boy who suffers from fetal alcohol syndrome, among some other issues. I don’t know a lot about the condition other than this boy in particular is violent and strong. I cringe at the thought of some teacher, possibly careless, having a gun that he might get his hands on. He is a good boy–but he has developmental problems and gets angry and frustrated. And there are many of him. He’s not insane by the way. This kid already managed to mace his whole family with bear spray when it was carelessly left within his reach.[/quote]

It sounds like you’re just irrationally afraid of guns.

A strong, violent kid could kill someone with a compass or a pair of scissors.

And no one is talking about ONE teacher being armed.

There are checks and balances.

One person with a gun is not balanced. Four or five? You betcha.

*edited “compass”[/quote]

I already made that point, conveniently ignored.

552

I see all these posts on here about teachers having guns etc and I’m completely baffled. Having completed all grades 1-12 and 4 years of college looking back there might be…MIGHT BE about 6 teachers that I can think of, out of all the teachers I’ve come across, that I would trust with a gun.

I’m not sure arming teachers is the answer. Id like to start with better security systems and a resource officer at every school first.

553

[quote]Phoenix44e wrote:
I see all these posts on here about teachers having guns etc and I’m completely baffled. Having completed all grades 1-12 and 4 years of college looking back there might be…MIGHT BE about 6 teachers that I can think of, out of all the teachers I’ve come across, that I would trust with a gun.

I’m not sure arming teachers is the answer. Id like to start with better security systems and a resource officer at every school first. [/quote]

Thank You! I am not insane! err I am not the only sane one! :wink:

btw, my highschool has a stretch of hallway that was riddled with bullets from a shooter years before I ever went there that killed some and injured many. Not that that is to say anything other than I don’t feel like this is something I was ever immune to and have had an awareness of since being a kid. I still wouldn’t want my shop teacher packing.

I think Fletch made great points there.

554

[quote]StevenF wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:
^^Another thought: My sister-in-law is in the process of adopting a boy who suffers from fetal alcohol syndrome, among some other issues. I don’t know a lot about the condition other than this boy in particular is violent and strong. I cringe at the thought of some teacher, possibly careless, having a gun that he might get his hands on. He is a good boy–but he has developmental problems and gets angry and frustrated. And there are many of him. He’s not insane by the way. This kid already managed to mace his whole family with bear spray when it was carelessly left within his reach.[/quote]

It sounds like you’re just irrationally afraid of guns.

A strong, violent kid could kill someone with a compass or a pair of scissors.

And no one is talking about ONE teacher being armed.

There are checks and balances.

One person with a gun is not balanced. Four or five? You betcha.

*edited “compass”[/quote]

I already made that point, conveniently ignored.
[/quote]

Bah, I’m arguing with a bunch of you at once.

at any rate, the risk is the same but the impact is hugely different. The scenarios are not the same.

As for being irrational–you haven’t met the kid :PP Actually seriously though I could just as easily argue that y’all are irrationally afraid of shooters. There are rational arguments all around but a whole lot of emotion around them.

555

[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:
Letter written by one of the children who died during the lockdown.

May the innocent souls rest in peace and condolences to the parents.

As for that fucker, I hope he rots in hell.[/quote]

Evidently he and others like him are in hell, only it’s here on earth. That’s why they act out such horrific displays because they see no possible form of help.

558

Haven’t read any of this thread but I’m sure it has devolved into a pointless debate about gun control…

My heart is broken for those poor families in Connecticut. Such a horrible thing to happen.

559

[quote]gregron wrote:
Haven’t read any of this thread but I’m sure it has devolved into a pointless debate about gun control…

My heart is broken for those poor families in Connecticut. Such a horrible thing to happen.[/quote]

You might be surprised.

And I would argue that such a debate is anything but pointless.

560

Fuck giving teachers guns.

As much as teachers hated their jobs and life in general i doubt any of them would use it anyway.

Well maybe theyd use it to draw attention to the room so the killer could come and end their misery.

Of all the teachers i had from middle school through high school…i cant really think of a single one i would want with a gun.

Looking back…we had teachers who

Were only there to fuckand suck
Drug addicts and alcoholics
Immature and thought they WERE students still…
people who couldnt sleep enough at home
overly shy
Racist
Self hating racists
old as all fuck
Not all there and thought they were oprah.