Protect Our Kids Act

Post Reply
PAL
Posts: 1304
Joined: Tue May 25, 2021 1:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Protect Our Kids Act

Post by PAL »

Pearl Cherrington
User avatar
mister_coffee
Posts: 1388
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 pm
Location: Winthrop, WA
Contact:

Re: Protect Our Kids Act

Post by mister_coffee »

Rideback wrote: Tue Jun 14, 2022 10:51 am About arming teachers. Yesterday Ohio's gov signed a new Bill into law that will arm teachers after only 24 hours training.
Which is much less than 1/20th of the hours that police officers in the US get.

Somebody needs to explain this chart to me and how we got here:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56834733

Image
:arrow: David Bonn :idea:
Rideback
Posts: 1778
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: Protect Our Kids Act

Post by Rideback »

About arming teachers. Yesterday Ohio's gov signed a new Bill into law that will arm teachers after only 24 hours training.
PAL
Posts: 1304
Joined: Tue May 25, 2021 1:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Protect Our Kids Act

Post by PAL »

I guess teachers are suppposed to go through an intensive type of training course in a short amount of time. And they should be paid alot to go through that course. And then refresher courses throughout the year in their already busy schedules. Paid alot of bucks.
Then teachers should demand, demand, much higher pay, if they are expected to be the defenders and put their life on the line.
I don't think I answered your questions David, but I think the teacher should be allowed to wear the gun on a shoulder holster and then also maybe hide a small type gun in a boot.
That oughta do it.
Pearl Cherrington
User avatar
mister_coffee
Posts: 1388
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 pm
Location: Winthrop, WA
Contact:

Re: Protect Our Kids Act

Post by mister_coffee »

My thesis is that any lock can be defeated by the clever and determined. So having your weapon in a locked case or with a trigger lock in that context is not adequate security because too many uncontrolled people are around the case.

Ken, you seem to be making your arguments from a best-case scenario. I don't deny that in an ideal scenario an armed teacher might make a big difference and save many lives. It is just that you need to look at all of the possibilities and weigh them. As you no doubt know, emergencies are inevitably all screwed up and very few things go perfectly right during one. So I think it reasonable to look at both likely cases and the worst case before judging whether arming teachers or other third parties at a school could do more good than harm.

My questions about arming teachers, that nobody has answered to my satisfaction, are:

1. Do armed teachers become merely the first targets of a mass shooter?
2. How would teachers secure their weapons day in, and day out? Note that if you argue for trigger locks or suchlike you merely make problem #1 more problematic.
3. How do you train teachers adequately to be effective in the complex, chaotic, and confusing situation that would present itself when there was a mass shooter at their school? Note that it is unlikely that teachers would be better trained than law enforcement officers, who make horrible mistakes in kill or be killed situations all the time.
:arrow: David Bonn :idea:
Rideback
Posts: 1778
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: Protect Our Kids Act

Post by Rideback »

You wrote: 'Bad guys always get a one up as to when and where, that’s why we MUST immediately get rid of “gun free zones”! That is a red beacon to these weirdos, I want them to be more scared that anyone might pull a gun and shoot them! Why don’t any of these Dirtbags ever shoot up a gun show? Or why haven’t they ever shot up a courthouse? Because they KNOW guns are there!'

I posted that there were documented 26 shootings at courhouses, you didn't mention mass shootings, get your story straight or better yet stop fabricating your arguments.

The best reason not to arm teachers and ask them to shoot is the simple answer that teachers give, 'NO'. 95% of teachers and their unions are against the idea. https://www.learningforjustice.org/maga ... s-dont-mix
dorankj
Posts: 838
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Protect Our Kids Act

Post by dorankj »

And you’re saying a student is going to do this? I think you’ve watched too many movies! That’s a weird concern.
User avatar
mister_coffee
Posts: 1388
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 pm
Location: Winthrop, WA
Contact:

Re: Protect Our Kids Act

Post by mister_coffee »

dorankj wrote: Mon Jun 13, 2022 7:45 am Well, think about it for a minute. Isn’t the procedure locked down in the classroom with shades pulled over windows and kids away from lines of fire at doors and windows? So if the WILLING and reasonably trained educator has retrieved their weapon and the bad guy starts trying to get in, shoot him! Pretty similar to how we all train our families for home invasions.

If there is a large enough box on or attached to the teachers desk with a secure thumbprint scanner, there’s no lock to cut with bolt cutters and it’s so prominently located that no-one has any private time to mess with it. That’s kind of my point, quit pretending guns are evil and hiding being armed, make it clear this school is defended. Everyone feels safer when they believe any threat can and will be stopped immediately.
You don't cut the lock with bolt cutters, you cut off the finger.
:arrow: David Bonn :idea:
dorankj
Posts: 838
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Protect Our Kids Act

Post by dorankj »

Well, think about it for a minute. Isn’t the procedure locked down in the classroom with shades pulled over windows and kids away from lines of fire at doors and windows? So if the WILLING and reasonably trained educator has retrieved their weapon and the bad guy starts trying to get in, shoot him! Pretty similar to how we all train our families for home invasions.

If there is a large enough box on or attached to the teachers desk with a secure thumbprint scanner, there’s no lock to cut with bolt cutters and it’s so prominently located that no-one has any private time to mess with it. That’s kind of my point, quit pretending guns are evil and hiding being armed, make it clear this school is defended. Everyone feels safer when they believe any threat can and will be stopped immediately.
User avatar
mister_coffee
Posts: 1388
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 pm
Location: Winthrop, WA
Contact:

Re: Protect Our Kids Act

Post by mister_coffee »

Again, please convince me that a non-psychotic person (which most teachers are) with minimal training can go from teaching Algebra or about the Albigensian Crusade to full-on combat mode quickly enough to even keep themselves alive in an active shooter situation, especially when they are in a roomful of panicking kids.

Very funny about trigger locks and fingerprint locks. Bluntly those are all sad jokes. Most of them are sold with disclaimers that they are not to be used with a loaded weapon. And there are lots of ways of varying sophistication for defeating any lock and fingerprint locks in particular. If you dig around on youtube there are good examples of how to do so.

And any fingerprint lock can be beaten by bolt cutters.
:arrow: David Bonn :idea:
dorankj
Posts: 838
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Protect Our Kids Act

Post by dorankj »

I thought we were talking mass shootings (4+) and ones that we’re collectively outraged about? I don’t recall these 26 making much headlines. You’re still distracting over fairly minor details rather than engage the broader points.
Rideback
Posts: 1778
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: Protect Our Kids Act

Post by Rideback »

So you make a baseless claim, I look it up and find that indeed you are wrong but somehow you think you're right?
Next time back up your claims because no one can base an argument on a false premise.
dorankj
Posts: 838
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Protect Our Kids Act

Post by dorankj »

That’s all you got? Vague numbers and more political attacks, you’re really pointless to argue with. You seem to have no ability to think beyond your political team/agenda.
Rideback
Posts: 1778
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: Protect Our Kids Act

Post by Rideback »

Google search turns up 26 courthouse shootings in the past 20 years.

Gun free zones include courthouses and federal buildings. It's impossible to tell how many shootings occur inside gun free zones because the Rep members of Congress blocked funding for CDC research on the issue.
dorankj
Posts: 838
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Protect Our Kids Act

Post by dorankj »

So many problems with your ‘arguments’ and so little time!

The “side market” doesn’t give a rip about age or anything else so weather they would allow a credit card or Venmo or bad checks, whatever. Determined evil will find a way!

Really! A suit from nordy’s is your best argument? I don’t think you know much about today’s prices (thanks Biden!) or how many probably pretty good adults (18 yo) have far more money and buy all kinds of stuff. Should a ‘kid’ really be able to buy a 750hp charger? (And that you CAN constitutionally restrict)

Over and over concerned staff confronted these POSs with NOTHING, maybe we should consider a tool that at least has equal power for these brave, honorable people who are instantly on scene?

Bad guys always get a one up as to when and where, that’s why we MUST immediately get rid of “gun free zones”! That is a red beacon to these weirdos, I want them to be more scared that anyone might pull a gun and shoot them! Why don’t any of these Dirtbags ever shoot up a gun show? Or why haven’t they ever shot up a courthouse? Because they KNOW guns are there!

Gun storage is quite simple today, a bio-metric scanner with a finger-print ID will work great, but that gun will be loaded, no trigger lock and will have as big a magazine and barrel the user wants! No more ridiculous rules that only law-abiding follow.

Your move.
User avatar
mister_coffee
Posts: 1388
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 pm
Location: Winthrop, WA
Contact:

Re: Protect Our Kids Act

Post by mister_coffee »

I do know that you can't buy heroin with a credit card, nor any other illegal drug. And I'm pretty sure any side market for firearms wouldn't be okay with a teenager buying two AR-15s and a bunch of ammo with somebody else's credit card, if only because the odds of them actually getting paid would be so poor.

So the kid in Uvalde got his weapons for nothing because he obviously did not intend to pay anyone back for the weapons he purchased with a credit card. I can't imagine that an illegal market would have given him a better deal.

I would dearly love to know how in blazes anyone at the gun store thought it was a good idea to allow a large credit card purchase like that from a teenager. And I am pretty certain that if an 18-year-old went to Nordstroms and tried to buy a $3000 suit on somebody else's credit card they would likely end up in jail.

As for arming "willing staff". Four problems. The first is that to use a firearm effectively in a kill-or-be-killed situation is a high-skill task and requires many hours of practice and training. I'm deeply skeptical that somebody with a full-time job that didn't involve that task could find the time for adequate training. I'm also painfully aware that the vast majority of firearm owners wildly overestimate their weapon skills. Another problem is that the bad guy gets to shoot first and choose the time and place of his attack. So all he has to do is make sure he takes out the teachers who are armed in the first minutes before they can get their warface on. The third problem is that you are giving a pretty dicey problem to law enforcement when or if they finally arrive. Remember that they will likely have imperfect information and won't be able to immediately tell the good guys from the bad guys, and they won't have much time to make a determination. So if the good guys aren't shot by the bad guy they might well be shot by the police. A fourth problem is that I am deeply skeptical that a teacher or other non-combat specialist could keep his (or her) weapon safe and under their positive control day-in, day-out, year-in, year-out. All they'd have to do is slip up once and that creepy mentally disturbed kid has a gun in a classroom...
:arrow: David Bonn :idea:
dorankj
Posts: 838
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Protect Our Kids Act

Post by dorankj »

Why didn’t any illegality work for drugs? Do you really think the legal route is an easier way to purchase? I don’t think you’ve actually bought many guns recently.

Why wouldn’t arming willing staff at a school (principals, teachers and staff) stop these killers faster thereby reducing death? There is a direct correlation between the time it takes to get a good guy with a gun on scene and the end of the killing (you’re correct usually suicide when confronted). By simple physics, wouldn’t someone on site get there faster than officers on duty elsewhere? Isn’t that why we fund SROs?

I agree with your final statement…….except when it comes to constitutionally protected rights! Those require a far higher hurdle to in any way violate (kinda why they are ‘rights’)
User avatar
mister_coffee
Posts: 1388
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 pm
Location: Winthrop, WA
Contact:

Re: Protect Our Kids Act

Post by mister_coffee »

dorankj wrote: Sun Jun 12, 2022 3:00 pm She’s stating criminals don’t follow laws!
Logically if criminals always disobeyed laws it would be incredibly easy to catch them and stop them before they did serious harm.

Criminals are, on the average, not only disposed to not obey laws (which is kind of by definition) but they are also typically lazy and don't always think things through. So a lot of them will try to purchase a firearm through a legal channel where a background check is required even if they don't qualify, because it would almost always be less effort and less expensive than purchasing a firearm on the gray or black market.

Also, if you can just slow down the process of purchasing a firearm you can give a seriously upset and disturbed person some time to calm down and perhaps reconsider what they are planning to do. Introducing a bit of friction into the system could literally save lives. Also, for a lot of people doing things like Uvalde it is obvious that it really is just an elaborate way to commit suicide and go out in a blaze of glory, as it were. So just giving them some time to calm the heck down would reduce the number of people who actually go through with crazy crap like shooting up a classroom.

The fact that a lot of these mass shootings are really suicides is one more reason that arming teachers or having "good guys with guns" won't stop them. If they don't intend to survive why should they care if they are put down by a fifth grade teacher or a cop?

Also, even if a particular measure is only partially effective that doesn't mean it isn't worth doing. If there was some measure that would produce even a twenty percent drop in school shootings I'd be all in on it.
:arrow: David Bonn :idea:
dorankj
Posts: 838
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Protect Our Kids Act

Post by dorankj »

She’s stating criminals don’t follow laws! But dis-arming good people with guns will only make it worse. I too desperately want a repeal of “gun free zones” immediately, that was the stupidest idea ever.
Rideback
Posts: 1778
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: Protect Our Kids Act

Post by Rideback »

What more do you want me to respond to? Red Flag laws? I don't see any lawsuits about them that would back her up on being unconstitutional.
There's already been more than enough back and forth about more guns being a solution. Unless she carries an AR15 around with her and has a crystal ball to know when she's going to get shot at her statement falls flat.

Red Flag laws are exactly what will help stop the nuts from getting weapons:
https://www.politifact.com/article/2022 ... -and-do-t/
dorankj
Posts: 838
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Protect Our Kids Act

Post by dorankj »

That’s all you got from her? Pretty sad!
Rideback
Posts: 1778
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
Contact:

Re: Protect Our Kids Act

Post by Rideback »

Her testimony was compelling. Unfortunately her premise that the same people who ask for more gun control are the same ones who call for defunding the police misrepresents what's in place now and what better gun laws can accomplish.

'Defund the police' was a meme taken on by George Floyd's murder protesters. The bumper sticker plea lacked context and was flat out wrong. As Colorado has been demonstrating in a new program there they are trying out first responders to domestic disputes and other calls with a team of mental health professionals. The results were astonishingly good. When we have a state like Texas that ranks dead last in funding for mental health and yet has some of the most lax gun control laws in the US, something is going to break and in Uvalde it did. The premise of the 'defund the police' was to do what Colorado is trying out, to stop over using the police by asking them to be domestic violence psychiatrists when instead funding should be in place to use mental health teams instead. We put too much on the police and ask them to clean up messes that shouldn't be in their role, we should look to them instead as a last resort. But to get to that point funding for mental health, unfettered access to guns and ammo and accountability have to be put on the table.

Now that the Senate has announced a framework for new policies, with at least 10 Rep's on board, it's time to 'do something' as the Uvalde survivors say.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests