- Jan 21, 2012
- 521
- 6
- 81
Talk statistics to the parents of the kids dead. I'm sure they will listen your argument about money....
Talk statistics to the parents of the kids dead. I'm sure they will listen your argument about money....
Neither are you. First, a petition is worthless. Second, even if someone were to think about taking action based on that petition, the idea itself is worthless and would just cost money and solve nothing.
On a scale of one to ten, this is pegged at worthless
When you (or those like you) feel inclined to come up with some knee jerk reaction to some event based on emotional response, step back for a bit and take a rational look at the actual statistics and whether any proposed solutions survive a basic cost/benefit analysis.
I have acted. I taught my children to respect others, and the difference between right and wrong. I was also involved in the cub scouts where I imparted the same information to the boy's in my troop.
What have you done, other than clicking on link? Tell me about the hours you've spent as a volunteer actually taking direct action.
3 ring binders and pencils and watches and keys, Belts, Zippers and the metal eyelets in shoes could set off metal detectors. It might be cheaper to give every family Internet service and a computer and shut all the schools down.
That's a pretty standard (and completely wrong) argument. Obviously the parents of those kids are going to have a more emotional response to this. As a society though, we have to go beyond an emotional response and use good reasoning to determine our actions (including legislation or regulation). If you're strictly going to go by the logic that anything that saves a life is a good idea, then all cars should be banned, as should pools, trampolines etc etc. In fact, you might just want to ban life, just to be safe
- Jan 21, 2012
- 521
- 6
- 81
That's a pretty standard (and completely wrong) argument. Obviously the parents of those kids are going to have a more emotional response to this. As a society though, we have to go beyond an emotional response and use good reasoning to determine our actions (including legislation or regulation). If you're strictly going to go by the logic that anything that saves a life is a good idea, then all cars should be banned, as should pools, trampolines etc etc. In fact, you might just want to ban life, just to be safe
How's the legislation and regulation coming? I agree in a perfect world that would be the way.
Newell Steamer
Diamond Member
- Jan 27, 2014
- 6,894
- 8
- 0
It is relevant to some of you blood thirty maggots,.. just the other day, Spatial Aware wanted this.
Please point out where I said anything about money. Perhaps your terrible reasoning\reading skills are why you think mandatory metal detectors would be a good thing.
If this is really about saving lives - why are you not campaigning against stairs, pool, cars etc? These are all things far more dangerous than schools so wouldn't your efforts be better focused there? Those could be your kids that get hurt by stairs, pools, cars! Why don't you care about them?
I think there should be a petition that calls for a complete freeze on any law/policy changes within 2 months of a tragedy.
Emotion is what allowed .gov to shove the Patriot Act down our throats, and now we are stuck with it forever.
OP is one of those simpletons that calls for the culling of every shark they can catch after a shark attack.
Emotion is what allowed .gov to shove the Patriot Act down our throats, and now we are stuck with it forever.
OP is one of those simpletons that calls for the culling of every shark they can catch after a shark attack.
- Jan 21, 2012
- 521
- 6
- 81
So I ask all of you who are so whole hearted against this. What freedoms is adding an extra layer of protection in our schools taking away? Aside money what does this effect. And please don't post off the wall not on topic troll posts.
it's making kids feel less safe and more paranoid, when all statistics suggest that schools are safer than they've been in a generation.
schools were far more dangerous when I was in grammar school in the early 90's and we did just fine without metal detectors... why would I want to make my kids feel like they live in a police state when violence rates are already declining without such draconian measures?
- Jan 21, 2012
- 521
- 6
- 81
Show me these statistics? I'm asking honestly. If I told my son his school was having these put in to reduce the chance of some crazy person harming him or his or his sister or there teachers/friends, he would say why not. And I have asked him what he thought. The real world is dangerous, in the real world these attacks are happening more and more.
already posted, but --
http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/youthviolence/stats_at-a_glance/index.html
violence rates peaked in the early 90's and have been steadily declining ever since.
across the board, violence rates have been in decline for a generation... what we're seeing today isn't so much more violence as more awareness. 20 years ago, when I was in grammar school, a story like the stabbings out in PA may have never been reported on outside of local news. today, everyone around the world is instantly informed over the internet any time there's any violence anywhere.
compare these two charts...
#1: people's perception of crime rates:
#2: actual crime rates:
Last edited:
Why only limit this to freedoms? You are missing an important component: Effectiveness. Have you ever worked at a school that had metal detectors? My wife and I have and they saw no decline in school violence after installing them. They did see an increase in tardiness and confrontations with school security guards though.
There are plenty of cases where metal detectors did not prevent a school shooting\attack. Besides - did significantly more invasive security scanning stop the TSA shooting in LAX?
speaking of the TSA... much like the long security lines could make an attractive terrorist target (seriously, it boggles my mind that we haven't seen a suicide bombing while we've got the TSA herding thousands of people into a confined area), I'd imagine forcing all the students to congregate in one long line could magnify the damage a determined student could do in a Columbine-esque scenario.
metal detectors won't do much good if their only aim is to open fire on the long line of kids waiting to pass through security.
OP is a perfect example of the kind of folks who want to do something just do "do something" after some big media event, without even considering whether the measures would be effective or make sense.
Schools today are safer than they've been in generations, but don't let facts get in the way of a good knee jerk emotional response to a single event
Schools today are safer than they've been in generations, but don't let facts get in the way of a good knee jerk emotional response to a single event
Olikan
Platinum Member
- Sep 23, 2011
- 2,023
- 275
- 126
dude, it's just a door...
btw... i am against it too, it's retard and don't solve the problem
MagnusTheBrewer
IN MEMORIAM
- Jun 19, 2004
- 24,122
- 1,594
- 126
MrPickins
Diamond Member
- May 24, 2003
- 9,125
- 792
- 126
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_emotion
This.
It wastes time and adds expense, all while making the students less safe.
If you want to kill a large number of people with a gun, you couldn't ask for a better formation than a bunched up queue.
werepossum
Elite Member
- Jul 10, 2006
- 29,873
- 463
- 126
You guys are far too cynical. I for one am certainly going to sign his petition.
I mean, how else are our kids supposed to find buried treasure?
I mean, how else are our kids supposed to find buried treasure?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter