I don't know for sure what the nexus is or isn't. I like it when people who offer an assertion back that assertion up with some sort of evidence. I don't think that's a particularly oddball request. Unfortunately, in the gun debate, both sides rely almost entirely on emotional response, and toss concepts like evidence, knowledge, and facts out the window.

"These mass shooters" are NOT all buying this specific class of weapon. As has been repeatedly pointed out, more of these mass shootings (more than 3 times as many incidents since 1982) have been perpetrated with other types of weapons, handguns mostly (by an almost 2/1 ratio). Again, facts, knowledge, evidence.

When you plan to ban something, or blame someone/something, it's on you to back up those opinions with facts.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Haha, I didn't realize I was typing it that way. Thanks for the correction.

---

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.

Another way to look at this. The citizens were allowed to have firearms that were similar to what the military/militia was using at the time.

the tactical rifle craze is newer. and in particular i think it gained a of steam when the kenyan became president. here's an interesting trend note from guns and ammo: "The first is that many people bet heavily on a Hillary Clinton Presidency. That means making as many ARs as the machinery could turn out, and a lot of those ARs are still clogging the arteries of distributor and retailer shelves."

no nexus there between the hate machine and AR sales.

so, do you mind if i start at 2008, and i'll leave nothing out? and i don't know the answer i'll find. i'm just going to go down the list and do a little checking and see where the facts take us. i'll just start with the largest number of deaths and work down, until i'm done with the double digit deaths.

las vegas, 2017, 58 killed, tactical rifle
orlando, 2016, 49 killed, tactical rifle
sandy hook, 2012, 28 killed, tactical rifle
sutherland, tx, 2017, 25 killed, tactical rifle
parkland, 2018, 17 killed, tactical rifle
san bernardino, 2015, 14 killed, tactical rifles + semi auto pistols
fort hood, 2009, 13 killed, semi auto pistol
binghamton, 2006, 13 killed, 3 x semi auto pistols
washtington navy yard, 2009, 12 killed, tactical rifle
aurora, 2012, 12 killed, tactical rifle
kinston, al, 2009, 10 killed, tactical rifle

so, there you go. make of that what you will.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Exactly. Amazing to me that this point get so often overlooked.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Affirmatively arming teachers would be an asinine idea. In addition, I am not claiming arming teachers in any manner is the answer. But, assistant football coach and school counselor Aaron Feis was also a security guard. He shielded students with his body, taking rounds intended for them. Shouldn't he have at least had the option to return fire?

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

I fully concur. Anyone who thinks that arming teachers in schools, whether mandatory or not, would be a good solution for this issue, is a fucking idiot without any critical thinking skills.

Are you a teacher and do you carry a CCW permit?

People often have lots of strong opinions and very little knowledge or experience. That gets old. How about STFU unless you have a valid opinion based on some sort of knowledge or experience... People who have no clue about firearms have the strongest opinions and expect to be taken seriously. Fucking ridiculous.

I think you are lacking some critical thinking skills because you're too blinded.

Arming some teachers (nobody is suggesting arming all teachers) is probably more likely to help than banning "assault rifles" as it could provide some deterrent in some situations. Nobody has proposed a reasonable way to remove the AR's, but even if you could, the homicidal maniacs would switch to handguns, shotguns or other devices. Assuming you are suggesting banning AR's your solution would do nothing to prevent these things from happening.

Remember that many mass shootings end with the shooter killing themselves when they encounter armed resistance. They want to go out on their own terms versus spending life in prison. If one or two armed teachers provided some armed resistance - SOME of the shooters would likely end it themselves.

No and no. But I simply don't believe the fantasy of "good guy with a gun will stop bad guy with a gun." Sure, it's possible, particularly if you have a well-trained individual who happens to be in the right place at the right time. But I think it's unlikely, and probably more likely to cause other problems with collateral damage, or when law enforcement responds. I'd bet money that there are very few teachers who want to be armed.

Well, I think you are wrong.

Both parents are teachers and so is wife. 2/3 would carry if allowed. 2/3 have taken classes and trained regularly. Have 2 little girls in elementary school and even the worst of their teachers would take a bullet for them. How about giving them a chance to fight back, or at the very least create the element of doubt. I would trust every teacher I've come into contact with (keep in mind I grew up around a ton of teachers) to carry a gun, in school. Can't think of one whom I wouldn't trust with such a responsibility.

You know fuck all about the situation yet feel entitled to call others out. My family works in the most obvious soft target(s) in the nation and aren't allowed to do anything except throw soup cans or lacrosse balls if some fucktard decides to become famous.

So what about the increased risk of accident, homocide and suicide in schools.

Because you must know that is the biggest risk of having more guns around.

Again. Arming teachers is stupid. It’s quite possibly the stupidest “solution” to the problem ever.

Thanks Trump!

---

===============
Proud member of the MSF (Maple Syrup Mafia)

Then please explain your superiority. I'll wait.

And please also look up STFU, and the difference between that and FU.

Then you are exactly the person I want carrying a gun to defend my children. It's a shame that you are unwilling to take on such a responsibility.

This is a long thread with a lot of replies so I am not addressing anyone except the OP...

It is fucking crazy to think that the solution to your problems is to arm teachers. Fucking ludicrous. Insane.

Just. Fucking. Crazy.[/quote]

I fully concur. Anyone who thinks that arming teachers in schools, whether mandatory or not, would be a good solution for this issue, is a fucking idiot without any critical thinking skills.[/quote]

I think you are lacking some critical thinking skills because you're too blinded.

Arming some teachers (nobody is suggesting arming all teachers) is probably more likely to help than banning "assault rifles" as it could provide some deterrent in some situations. Nobody has proposed a reasonable way to remove the AR's, but even if you could, the homicidal maniacs would switch to handguns, shotguns or other devices. Assuming you are suggesting banning AR's your solution would do nothing to prevent these things from happening.

Remember that many mass shootings end with the shooter killing themselves when they encounter armed resistance. They want to go out on their own terms versus spending life in prison. If one or two armed teachers provided some armed resistance - SOME of the shooters would likely end it themselves.[/quote]

----------------------

I didn't say anything about the ban. But since you brought it up: yes, SOME maniacs intent on doing damage will continue to find ways to do damage. If it is more difficult for anyone to get what appears to be a weapon that is highly popular among school shooters, the AR-15, then fewer aspiring school shooters will be able to get one. Some of their plans will still "succeed," others will result in fewer deaths, and still others will be stopped completely.

We are the only country with this problem. Every other country has people that are mentally ill. Every other country has glamorized violence in the media. Every other country has violent video games. We have this problem because guns are too easy to get and we have way, way more guns per capita. If you make it harder for people to get the most destructive weapons, there will be fewer of these incidents. I'm not saying these incidents won't occur - but I am saying there will be fewer and they will be less lethal on average.


As to armed teachers - I just think the risks far outweigh the possibility of a successful intervention by the armed teacher. Teachers are there to teach students, not to worry about when the shootout is going to begin. Too many gun owners seems to picture themselves like 007 shooting the bad guys with a perfect shot every time, but even trained police officers can't always do that. Do you want your kids in the middle of the crossfire between the school shooter and the science teacher? It just seems so obvious. I think an armed and trained security guard or police officer at the school would be a better option, but those things cost tax money, and we know how certain political parties feel about paying taxes.....

BTW, why the vague wording on your experience and training? Seems like you may be bending the situation a bit...

----------------

What about the possibility of collateral damage? What makes you think that even a teacher that has a gun and is trained to use it, is able to remain calm and collected, and take out the suspect, without other children or adults getting killed? Yes, it's possible, but to think that is the default result during the chaos of an armed shooter on a rampage in that school - that's plainly ridiculous.

You seem concerned about your family members who are teachers. You should be in favor of strengthened universal background checks, preventing terrorists and the mentally ill from buying guns, and bans on high capacity, military style weaponry. Why aren't you?

Of course teachers shouldn't be expected to run towards danger, that is the job of law enforcement, not the CCW, whether teacher or not.

This is the frustrating part of the debate. You have no idea what CCW is about, what is being taught in the classes, nor the role of the educated and trained CCW person. It is NOT to run towards danger, nor to replace the law enforcement. That is what NOT to do. It is LAST RESORT, when there are NO OTHER OPTIONS.

Heaven forbid my kids are in a school under attack but I absolutely want my kids in a crossfire with the teacher and gunman if the alternative is an uncontested fire in one direction TOWARDS MY KIDS. I don't expect teachers to step into the hall like John Wayne. That is truly ignorant. What I expect is for them to try like hell to escape and if that fails, have something that might possibly give them, and my kids a chance to survive. The coach that died in Florida may have still died but at least he'd have had a chance to do something other than to absorb bullets.

Because it is a fantasy. Simply not realistic to believe that you can keep weapons out of the hands who wish to do people harm. I choose to live in the world as it is rather than the world as I wish it was.

-----------------

What you posted means that it is even LESS likely that an armed teacher is going to encounter the suspect and be able to do something about it. Again, risk vs. reward. Although I'm sure every CCW person would take out the shooter on the first try. /pink