Florida School Shooting

[Jedidiah]

I was actually being somewhat conservative. There are several sources for the number. The highest is here. Another is here (and excludes suicides). There are others, but I have a feeling they are all going to be "wrong" for one reason or another, so I think I'll stop at two.

You do have a tendency to question the honesty of people who disagree with you, Jedidiah. It is possible to disagree with you without being a dishonest person.

What I see as dishonest is the bare number with no info on who, where, when, why. Are the vast majority of these murders simply murders? Or are they involved with crime and gang shootings, etc. I never accused you of lying but of giving slanted info.

[carpedm9587]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]26548[/ATTACH]

I have to admit, this had me thinking for a bit. Then I realized that our local school has a sign that this is a "gun free zone," and we also have a member of the local constabulary at the school for the entirety of the school day. That is true of all of our local schools. What we won't permit is parents, visitors, and kids walking onto the school grounds with guns. We also won't permit faculty and staff to walk around with a gun on their hip, or anywhere else on their person.

A trained law enforcement professional is one thing. Filling our schools with guns to prevent gun violence is...bizarre at best.

[carpedm9587]

What I see as dishonest is the bare number with no info on who, where, when, why. Are the vast majority of these murders simply murders? Or are they involved with crime and gang shootings, etc. I never accused you of lying but of giving slanted info.

"Dishonest" and "lying" are pretty much the same thing. I also did not break out the numbers because the break out does not truly matter to me. When that many people are being harmed on the business end of a gun, we have an epidemic on our hands. To claim that the solution to the epidemic is to pump MORE of the tool at the heart of the epidemic into the culture just amazes (and saddens) me. But perhaps we are reaching a point where the tide is turning. The fact is, most of us Americans want our gun laws tightened up, more attention paid and resources committed to background checks, and other reasonable efforts made to reduce the carnage.

What is TRULY disengenous, is to paint all of that with "take our guns" and claims that the 2nd Amendment is apparently the only amendment that should be unconstrained. The minority and a powerful lobby/industry have been getting their way for too long. It's long past time to reverse the tide. To the kids in Parkland, I say: good on you! Sometimes, it's the kids that teach the adults.

[Cow Poke]

A trained law enforcement professional is one thing. Filling our schools with guns to prevent gun violence is...bizarre at best.

You seem to have a tendency to overshoot the runway a bit -- who is proposing "filling our schools with guns"?

[Sparko]

You're quite quick to accuse other people of "dishonesty", when there's totally zero indication that they are being dishonest or reason to think they are. I've noticed this tendency on your part and it makes me wonder what it is with you that makes you see it everywhere.

A quick search of the internet suggests to me that the number of people killed by guns in America is approximately 100 per day depending on exactly what year is checked, so the figure given seems about right.

If you wanted to quibble with it, I would note that the majority of those hundred are suicides, and only about one third of them are homicides. Of course, preventing suicide is a perfectly rational reason to enact some gun control (my country tightened gun control laws to try to reduce the rate of rural suicides), because when it comes to suicide, guns are more lethal than other methods (meaning the victim has a lower chance of failing at the suicide and receiving subsequent psychological help) and also a method that tends to be more spur-of-the-moment (if the gun is on hand then it doesn't take much time or physical motion from the decision to the act, whereas other methods require more time and effort). However, usually the gun control debate in the US does focus on gun homicides, and that number appears to be in the 24-40 per day kind of range.

Well according to this site:
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s..._2011-2015.xls

Total murder victims by firearms in 2015 was 9,616
That works out to 26.34 murders per day, not 100.

[seer]

A trained law enforcement professional is one thing. Filling our schools with guns to prevent gun violence is...bizarre at best.

No one is speaking of filling anything, but having some well trained school personal would not be a bad idea. Though I would rather see law enforcement myself...

[Darth Executor]

I have to admit, this had me thinking for a bit. Then I realized that our local school has a sign that this is a "gun free zone," and we also have a member of the local constabulary at the school for the entirety of the school day. That is true of all of our local schools. What we won't permit is parents, visitors, and kids walking onto the school grounds with guns. We also won't permit faculty and staff to walk around with a gun on their hip, or anywhere else on their person.

A trained law enforcement professional is one thing. Filling our schools with guns to prevent gun violence is...bizarre at best.

How exactly do you stop them from walking on school property with guns?

[Cow Poke]

How exactly do you stop them from walking on school property with guns?

You don't - you just launch a new wave of gun control hysteria when they do.

[Darth Executor]

You don't - you just launch a new wave of gun control hysteria when they do.

I can understand why the policy is in place. If it's not then people might start bringing guns and cause all sorts of trouble, accidents, etc. even if they're not planning to show up to school. I'm just curious as to how the policy is enforced. Who confronts a student/parent who brings a gun to school?

[Cow Poke]

I can understand why the policy is in place. If it's not then people might start bringing guns and cause all sorts of trouble, accidents, etc. even if they're not planning to show up to school.

Agreed! But the fact is, it has failed a number of times.

I'm just curious as to how the policy is enforced. Who confronts a student/parent who brings a gun to school?

In most cases, it doesn't appear there's really a plan for that. But when I go visit my grandchildren, the only door I can access is the main door, and you have to stop by the office and show picture ID, and give the proper name of the student you're visiting.

[carpedm9587]

You seem to have a tendency to overshoot the runway a bit -- who is proposing "filling our schools with guns"?

The proposal has been made, several times, that teachers and school staff be trained and armed. IMO, that's "filling our schools with guns."

[Cow Poke]

The proposal has been made, several times, that teachers and school staff be trained and armed. IMO, that's "filling our schools with guns."

That makes the goofy assumption that ALL or a significant portion of the teachers and staff be armed --- I haven't seen that proposed. Anything to support your wild conclusion?

[carpedm9587]

That makes the goofy assumption that ALL or a significant portion of the teachers and staff be armed --- I haven't seen that proposed. Anything to support your wild conclusion?

You're right - "filling our schools" is hyperbole. IMO, ANY arming of school staff/teachers is a bad idea, unless the staff is a hired/trained security guard. Adding more guns to the situation, in the hands of employees who's primary function is not related to security, is inherently a bad idea. A good idea would be to beef up funding to the local police force to provide for a member of the local police at the school during school hours. It would also have the benefit of forging some bonds between the police and the kids.

[Cow Poke]

You're right - "filling our schools" is hyperbole.

Yeah, you don't normally go to such exaggerated rhetoric, I think.

IMO, ANY arming of school staff/teachers is a bad idea, unless the staff is a hired/trained security guard.

Ummm.... in the law enforcement community, a "security guard" is not generally well respected. A stigma, perhaps, in that a "security guard" is thought to be a "cop wannabe".

Adding more guns to the situation, in the hands of employees who's primary function is not related to security, is inherently a bad idea.

In your opinion, of course, and from your very prejudiced viewpoint.

A good idea would be to beef up funding to the local police force to provide for a member of the local police at the school during school hours. It would also have the benefit of forging some bonds between the police and the kids.

As has been stated, some of the schools (most of them around me I'm aware of) do have "SRO" personnel - School Resource Officers - who are not only armed and in uniformed, but are trained to interact with the kids, cultivate relationships, and develop 'intel' on potential problems. One of my church members is just such an officer, having served for years as a Sheriff's Deputy.

[carpedm9587]

Yeah, you don't normally go to such exaggerated rhetoric, I think.

Ummm.... in the law enforcement community, a "security guard" is not generally well respected. A stigma, perhaps, in that a "security guard" is thought to be a "cop wannabe".

That's a hiring problem. Many off-duty police take side jobs like this, or take jobs like this after they've retired from the force. Many former military personnel are also availabble for hire. Hire a poorly trained rent-a-cop, and you get a poorly-trained rent-a-cop.

In your opinion, of course, and from your very prejudiced viewpoint.

I usually speak from my opinion. I have found speaking from other people's opinion merely confuses them. As for "very prejudiced," my experience is that anyone who voices a position about putting in place reasonable gun safeguards in a forum such as this one will automatically be labeled "very prejudiced," and objecting to that label is an exercise in futility. Think what you will..

As has been stated, some of the schools (most of them around me I'm aware of) do have "SRO" personnel - School Resource Officers - who are not only armed and in uniformed, but are trained to interact with the kids, cultivate relationships, and develop 'intel' on potential problems. One of my church members is just such an officer, having served for years as a Sheriff's Deputy.

Yes - it's a good solution. It provides a trained person on premises, a link to the local police, adds personnel (and flexibility) to the force, all-in-all a win-win.