• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

another school shooting

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Even the best teachers I've had, I could tell were annoyed by some students.

With how much a nusiance some students are.. I wouldn't be surprised if teachers "lost it" and started shooting.
 
Let’s take Trump’s idea of arming 20% of the teachers, that’s 700,000 guns. I’m sure the NRA and their handlers would love that purchase. Now, they’re trained, etc. Does anyone think that the kids won’t know who’s armed and who isn’t? Do you think that “info” won’t make its way out of school?
 
The ONLY logical answer is to arm everyone. Oh and that applies to every other country. That means the leaders as well and with all that is available to them. We can sort this issue out really quick. It's truly the 'safest' bet.

Who exactly would survive this scenario?

Well shoot that would make relations with NK and Iran a lot easier. Good idea!
 
What's this under 21 ban gonna do? It is the over fifty that has the most overwhelming kill ratio. Two old men and over a hundred-fifty dead.
 
So he is over 21, and it was a handgun.

Also arguably the most infamous school shooter, Virginia tech, was over 21, and also armed with a handgun.

Why the laser focus on AR-15 and the age of 21 then?

Is the only real solution here just no more guns?

Well what happens when a police officer discharges his weapon in a school? ABSOLUTELY no more guns?

What happens when there is a military base shooting - no we really mean it, no more guns.

HOLY SHIT that's a lot of strawman there buddy!

Now we know who to blame when all the horses starve...
 
Let’s take Trump’s idea of arming 20% of the teachers, that’s 700,000 guns. I’m sure the NRA and their handlers would love that purchase. Now, they’re trained, etc. Does anyone think that the kids won’t know who’s armed and who isn’t? Do you think that “info” won’t make its way out of school?
There's 14.5 million to 16 million concealed carry license holders. They already have guns. Most of those teachers, administrators and staff have training, they just need the authorization and additional training.
 
he was a teacher, that's the entire point here.



no one has said that adults can't kill people with handguns.



because the AR-15 is far more deadly than all other guns. as for the age issue, no one can justify a kid being able to buy a weapon that can kill before being able to buy a lottery ticket or alcohol.



no one is suggesting that, so why are you?



where are you getting such silly ideas? when a cop shoots an innocent person, no one suggests that all cops should have their guns taken away.



schools have nothing to do with military bases.

now, do you have any actual valid points to make about assault weapons and arming teachers?

But you are perfectly okay with an 18 year old defending your freedom with that rifle?

So you prefer a narrow focus on somewhere around 50-100 deaths per year of the AR-15 as opposed to the broad focus of 10,000+ per year as a result of handguns? Why do you need feel good legislation that doesn't make us any safer?
 
But you are perfectly okay with an 18 year old defending your freedom with that rifle?

So you prefer a narrow focus on somewhere around 50-100 deaths per year of the AR-15 as opposed to the broad focus of 10,000+ per year as a result of handguns? Why do you need feel good legislation that doesn't make us any safer?

I never said i was perfectly ok with anything, so don't put words in my mouth. As for your stats, they're BS, and you know it. there are far more handguns out there than assault rifles.
 
So he is over 21, and it was a handgun.

Also arguably the most infamous school shooter, Virginia tech, was over 21, and also armed with a handgun.

Why the laser focus on AR-15 and the age of 21 then?

Is the only real solution here just no more guns?

Well what happens when a police officer discharges his weapon in a school? ABSOLUTELY no more guns?

What happens when there is a military base shooting - no we really mean it, no more guns.
he was a teacher, that's the entire point here.

no one has said that adults can't kill people with handguns.

because the AR-15 is far more deadly than all other guns. as for the age issue, no one can justify a kid being able to buy a weapon that can kill before being able to buy a lottery ticket or alcohol.

no one is suggesting that, so why are you?

where are you getting such silly ideas? when a cop shoots an innocent person, no one suggests that all cops should have their guns taken away.

schools have nothing to do with military bases.

now, do you have any actual valid points to make about assault weapons and arming teachers?

Just raising my hand to say that I am suggesting we need to ban all guns. They are a net-negative for society. I'd be fine with them entrusted to tactical police teams and the military. Everyone else, regular cops included, can live without.

Just imagine what that would do for police interactions.
 
But you are perfectly okay with an 18 year old defending your freedom with that rifle?

So you prefer a narrow focus on somewhere around 50-100 deaths per year of the AR-15 as opposed to the broad focus of 10,000+ per year as a result of handguns? Why do you need feel good legislation that doesn't make us any safer?

You either ban semi-automatic handguns outright or severely restrict access to them as well. I guess the main problem US authorities would face is there are so many firearms in circulation how would you get rid of them all?

www.news.com.au/national/australians-surrender-26000-firearms-as-part-of-the-national-gun-amnesty/news-story/7a935e5675ad868c009de1332052f179
 
Yeah. If this gun was legally owned, this is where the gun debate needs to start.

https://www.ajc.com/news/crime--law...ter-shot-fired-school/Yszy9v7Z9Vy86bTp9ygdWJ/
The longtime radio voice of Dalton High School football and basketball, who is facing charges after he fired at least one shot inside a classroom Wednesday, once tried to confess to having someone killed, police said.

The confession was one of two previous incidents involving Randal Davidson and local police.

Dalton police could not verify any of the information Davidson said on March 21, 2016, about having two friends kill someone on his behalf. Police ultimately took him to Hamilton Medical Center because he was having suicidal thoughts, according to a police report. The school was made aware of the incident, police said.

Then, in an incident in January 2017, Davidson disappeared from the high school campus after saying he didn’t feel well and leaving early. He was found hours later sitting on a curb about a mile away, unable or unwilling to respond to police, according to the report. He was again taken to the hospital and no further action was taken by officers.
 
Without diving into better stats, off the top of my head I know the Brown's Chicken Massacre was 7 people with a revolver, is that more or less the sweet spot for you on a relatively acceptable level of deaths? When has a revolver ever saved anybody's life? Why is 7 okay?
It isn't but you are using an almost one off vs the worst mass school killing in history.
 
I never said i was perfectly ok with anything, so don't put words in my mouth. As for your stats, they're BS, and you know it. there are far more handguns out there than assault rifles.

Killing rate per amount of gun in circulation is pretty similar. We are focusing on an extremely small problem.

zA32bBk.png
 
Just raising my hand to say that I am suggesting we need to ban all guns. They are a net-negative for society. I'd be fine with them entrusted to tactical police teams and the military. Everyone else, regular cops included, can live without.

Just imagine what that would do for police interactions.

Thank you. That sentiment is something that I find logically consistent, so I am appreciative of your response.
 
You either ban semi-automatic handguns outright or severely restrict access to them as well. I guess the main problem US authorities would face is there are so many firearms in circulation how would you get rid of them all?

www.news.com.au/national/australians-surrender-26000-firearms-as-part-of-the-national-gun-amnesty/news-story/7a935e5675ad868c009de1332052f179

I think people who have owned the same guns for decades are less likely to be a threat. Even Stephen Paddock, a long-time gun owner, purchased a ton of weapons in the year leading up to his attack. If restriction of access to certain firearms is an effective strategy, then it will pay dividends very quickly even if there is no effort to reclaim any newly banned firearms.
 
Back
Top