Would it be too morbid to start a betting pool on whether these see their first use stopping a shooting; or settling a few personal or workplace scores?
That’s really cool, i was hoping to hear from people in the forum that did have experience with shooting while in school. I don’t own a gun, nor did i grow up around them, but the handful of times i have done so was with a veteran friend of mine who is very particular about gun safety and i always really enjoyed target practice. Proper gun safety and handling should not be mystified.
They’ve been trained!
We don’t need your logic and fuzzy feelings here! Guns solve everything! The NRA says so!
To some people, that is scarier than guns.
[quote=“Mister44, post:20, topic:77253, full:true”]
Well, while I agree that having something increases the risk that something will go wrong from zero, the still overall risk is extremely low.
Kids die or get injured every year from playing on the playground or sports. I would guess more so than from trained SROs. [/quote]
My point is that the number of kids that will die from SRO’s could be zero, as opposed to “not very many.” It’s an unnecessary risk that, sooner or later, will cause preventable harm.
Our cultural morality is pretty FUBAR’d if we can think of school guards with assault rifles as a “feel good” tactic.
Guns should inspire respect, admiration, even pride in skill, but they’re not “safe.” Their presence means death for someone or something. That shouldn’t be a good feeling!
[quote=“Daedalus, post:24, topic:77253”]
Guns should inspire respect, admiration, even pride in skill, but they’re not “safe.” Their presence means death for someone or something. That shouldn’t be a good feeling![/quote]
This hits it on the nail. I don’t mind if security for other places decides they need weapons, but it seems wholly inappropriate in a school setting especially if you bring in assault rifles.
So basically, BB editors don’t read their own blog. Fantastic.
While that is a valid point, one could counter that an armed SRO could possibly prevent deaths in the future. IMHO both are unlikely to happen, but both could possibly happen.
I don’t think this has anything to do with morality, it has to do with what makes one feel safe. But then again, what makes one feel safe vs what actually keeps them safe are two different things.
Humans in general are horrible at risk assessment. Remember the Ebola panic last year? People freaking out over Ebola, but didn’t get a flu shot, even though the flu was MUCH more likely to kill them.
Eh, again the risk seems over stated. As I said, kids get hurt on the play ground and playing sports. Deaths even occur. Should we get rid of those things because eventually a kid will get injured and die?
At risk of being pedantic, these are not Assault Rifles. But yeah, bizarrely inappropriate for the situation.
What could possibly go wrong with this?
I think they’ve been missing a lot of stuff since the last redesign. Could this be a sign that the redesign didn’t do anything for readability?
You know what would be cool. Some sort of feature that allows one to flip through old posts for duplicates. I know this sounds like science fiction to some of you, but hear me out.
What if we had a program something that could “slither” through all the posts and catalog the key words used. I’d call it an Internet Snake. So the Snake slithers through a site and makes a data base of the topics, links, key words etc.
Then the poster, or even another user, could send the snake on a Quest to look for specific information. We could use a cool icon like either an open tome or possibly a wizard looking dude or maybe even a princess! Click the Quest button, enter in the words for the topic you are looking for, and then the software sends the Snake out to gather and return the requested information.
An Internet Quest Tool!
I use the /blog/page/1 link - and even then it some times seems like a post mysteriously pops up that wasn’t there before.
The Bushmaster is not an assault rifle. Obvious errors like this make me wonder what else in the article is false.
But did they allocate any funds for Rifle and Marksmanship training? Tools are only useful if your trained and practice using them often. It’s foolish to buy more gun and think that it will fix the problem of being out gunned. Many of the Police Departments in my area require an officer to supply their own long-gun and prove competency before they can use it on patrol.
The original article mentioned that officers would be provided with 20 hours of training on the new weapons.
Nothing more dangerous than books…
You left out “easy access to guns,” which is the primary difference between the U.S. and all the countries that don’t have regular school shootings. Contrary to rumor the United States hardly has a monopoly on mental health issues, poor family life, negative social conditioning etc.
True, but my thought process is: If you can’t change the easy access to guns, the solution is not more guns but address why the violence is happening.
That’s nothing. Our school district in South-West Florida spent over $6 million on artificial turf at the height of the recession in 2008.