Or to protect the teachers from themselves.
Because you think that people who gun down schools are thinking rationally?
This isnāt a bank robbery where people case out the joint and work out the number of armed guards. This is the extremely rare psycho with access to guns who wants to kill people, including himself.
As this accident shows, having elementary school teachers carrying guns increases the chance that a kid will get shot, it doesnāt decreases it.
That sounds terrifying. I wonder how all those bad guys are able to acquire so many fearsome weapons.
alternate explanationā¦
Just Google the phrase āpolice officer accidentally dischargesā and see what you get. Cops are trained professionals. The first time Iāve ever heard of anyone shooting himself in a toilet, it was a cop. We regard soldiers as trained professionals, yet most of us know one who has witnessed or been involved in a shooting accident. Maybe you personally donāt know one, but that doesnāt make it true. And telling me that having a gun in a school increases the likelihood of a child getting shot is the same as saying having food in a school increases the choking hazard. (Here comes the complaint that Iām comparing choking to getting shot, Iām speaking figuratively, or typing, Iām sorry Iām wrong on the internet). And Iām sorry I was wrong. Everybody knows that having someone armed in a school is not a deterrent.
It only exists in their paranoid, fear-soaked fantasies. Iām a small-ish white female whoās gone downtown Detroit alone a number of times, even at night (yes, on purpose), and I have never, not once, felt like I needed a gun to protect myself. If thatās not the ābad placeā in the minds of these fools, then I donāt think any such place actually exists.
Ya, quite a few hits ā try āPolice officer accidentally firesā and the hits go up by an order of magnitudeā¦
This recent gem bubbled to the top when I switched to a ānewsā search:
HPD officerās gun reportedly goes off inside bathroom stall - Hawaii News - Honolulu Star-Advertiser
No way that a trained professional would do what that teacher didā¦
Television station KHON-2 reported that the gun went off inside the bathroom stall of a popular store.An employee of the store told the station that the bullet went through the wall of the officerās stall, appeared to ricochet off a door frame, and ended up in the wall of an adjacent stall.
Jesus, that quote. Itāsā¦ itās fucking crazy. Iām trying to break it down to look for something reasonable in there, but every bit of it is either nuts by itself, or itās insane because the solution being presented to the particular problem is āmore guns.ā
Says the person protected by the powers of Resting Bitch Face
Has any school shooter chosen a target according to its convenience value yet? Iāll admit that I skimmed a bit; but of the incidents on the list some sort of motive dictating the specific school chosen was nearly universal (Iām not sure if there were enough other schools around during the Enoch Brown School Massacre for that to be a choice or not; and the motives of the Amish school shooter are pretty murky, so that one isnāt clear).
Your knowledge of carry stats might make you prioritize teachers during room clearing operations; but it appears to be overwhelmingly the case that school shooters shoot up schools they have personal connections to (either they attend, work at, or are gunning for somebody who does) and that the expectations of survival on the shooterās part are quite low (for the spree killers, less so for the single-victim and accidental shootings that happen to occur on campuses). Many shoot themselves, and police tactics havenāt involved āencircle and negotiateā for well over a decade at this point, since the expectation is that the shooter will keep shooting until engaged.
If you were just looking to kill a bunch of people, doesnāt matter who, for some reason, your knowledge of the carry rates might factor in to your choice; but it simply doesnāt seem to be the case that school shooters work that way.
But itās the cost-benefit balance between likelihood/impact of problem vs. solution that matters here, not simple one-dimensional numbers:
original scenario:
problem: being shot by a crazed gunman
solution: arm all the teachers (and donāt tighten gun regulations)
balancing: the danger of crazed gunman attacking any particular school is pretty rare, and the solution wonāt do much to change that. Plus an additional danger of accidental shooting increases significantly. soo, danger on top of danger without much payoff.
Your scenario:
problem: starvation / malnutrition
solution: food
do I need to do this one?
Plus, those teachers are still concealed carrying wherever they go after school, the grocery store, the movies, etcā¦ and following the āsave the childrenā logic, parents, volunteers, coaches, uncles and aunts would also be encouraged to carry. So wherever adults-with-children-in-their-lives might congregate, on purpose or by accident*, the carry ratio has also increased, meaning schools would (statistically) float back toward their previous position.
*and donāt be fooled, theyāre everywhere
Man, youāve got a good memory.
Certain things āstickā ā rarely useful things.
Personās name? never sticks, but I will remember, forever, the story about their 2nd cousin (oh, thatās lima beanās cousin ā WTF is his name?).
Sometimes my faith in Darwin is let downā¦
You ever heard the term āSaturday night specialā? Iām sure thatās what she could afford on a teacherās budget.
Basically itās mayo+ketchup+pickle juice/other spices of choice.
Just adding this to the discussion.
(Fair warning: NSFW graphic images. The site is called ānegligent dischargeā)
Though itās a rather versatile word, I canāt imagine a website with ādischargeā in the title that would be SFWā¦
Iāll have you know that I HAD forgotten that Iād seen that movie.