America's Gun Violence

Halifax2TheMax

My point was that they're not wearing sidearms if they have contact with children as part of their "regular" job.Seems the "ready" access isn't there.Why the hostility? 80 hours of training, followed by 10 hours of classroom, a psychological exam, all costs paid by the "marshal", expenses not required to be reimbursed by the local school commission or governing body in the school distract. Why not just a locked gun cabinet with an arsenal in every classroom?

PJPOWER

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

d)  Any written regulations adopted for purposes of Subsection (c) must provide that a school marshal may carry a concealed handgun as described by Subsection (c), except that if the primary duty of the school marshal involves regular, direct contact with students, the marshal may not carry a concealed handgun but may possess a handgun on the physical premises of a school in a locked and secured safe within the marshal's immediate reach when conducting the marshal's primary duty. The written regulations must also require that a handgun carried by or within access of a school marshal may be loaded only with frangible ammunition designed to disintegrate on impact for maximum safety and minimal danger to others.

What’s your point?  That you think they should keep them in a readily accessible vault?  I think the point was that the carrying teachers must go through specific trainings to be able to do so...?

What good does a gun do in a vault?  If I am teaching math and want to blow someone away I need to be locked and loaded at all times.

Idiotic,quick release vaults are readily available.  May take one or two more SECONDS to access.  Still faster than a law enforcement response.  You are truly adding NOTHING to this conversation.

PJPOWER

Halifax2TheMax said:

My point was that they're not wearing sidearms if they have contact with children as part of their "regular" job.Seems the "ready" access isn't there.Why the hostility? 80 hours of training, followed by 10 hours of classroom, a psychological exam, all costs paid by the "marshal", expenses not required to be reimbursed by the local school commission or governing body in the school distract. Why not just a locked gun cabinet with an arsenal in every classroom?

Quick access safes are readily available.  This has been discussed a few times here.  Round and round we go...

mcgruff10

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

d)  Any written regulations adopted for purposes of Subsection (c) must provide that a school marshal may carry a concealed handgun as described by Subsection (c), except that if the primary duty of the school marshal involves regular, direct contact with students, the marshal may not carry a concealed handgun but may possess a handgun on the physical premises of a school in a locked and secured safe within the marshal's immediate reach when conducting the marshal's primary duty. The written regulations must also require that a handgun carried by or within access of a school marshal may be loaded only with frangible ammunition designed to disintegrate on impact for maximum safety and minimal danger to others.

What’s your point?  That you think they should keep them in a readily accessible vault?  I think the point was that the carrying teachers must go through specific trainings to be able to do so...?

What good does a gun do in a vault?  If I am teaching math and want to blow someone away I need to be locked and loaded at all times.

Accessible locks/safes that can be opened in seconds are readily available. 

tbergs

PJPOWER said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

d)  Any written regulations adopted for purposes of Subsection (c) must provide that a school marshal may carry a concealed handgun as described by Subsection (c), except that if the primary duty of the school marshal involves regular, direct contact with students, the marshal may not carry a concealed handgun but may possess a handgun on the physical premises of a school in a locked and secured safe within the marshal's immediate reach when conducting the marshal's primary duty. The written regulations must also require that a handgun carried by or within access of a school marshal may be loaded only with frangible ammunition designed to disintegrate on impact for maximum safety and minimal danger to others.

What’s your point?  That you think they should keep them in a readily accessible vault?  I think the point was that the carrying teachers must go through specific trainings to be able to do so...?

I'll bite. Law Enforcement train monthly or more and go through a much more rigorous process, but still make mistakes so why does an initial 2 week academy seem like some great solution with a refresher every 2 years? I'm also curious about the mental health evaluation and what that entails compared to a psychological exam.

mcgruff10

tbergs said:

PJPOWER said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

d)  Any written regulations adopted for purposes of Subsection (c) must provide that a school marshal may carry a concealed handgun as described by Subsection (c), except that if the primary duty of the school marshal involves regular, direct contact with students, the marshal may not carry a concealed handgun but may possess a handgun on the physical premises of a school in a locked and secured safe within the marshal's immediate reach when conducting the marshal's primary duty. The written regulations must also require that a handgun carried by or within access of a school marshal may be loaded only with frangible ammunition designed to disintegrate on impact for maximum safety and minimal danger to others.

What’s your point?  That you think they should keep them in a readily accessible vault?  I think the point was that the carrying teachers must go through specific trainings to be able to do so...?

I'll bite. Law Enforcement train monthly or more and go through a much more rigorous process, but still make mistakes so why does an initial 2 week academy seem like some great solution with a refresher every 2 years? I'm also curious about the mental health evaluation and what that entails compared to a psychological exam.

couldn't the metal health evaluation and psychological exam be the same exact one as cops go through?
as a teacher I have to do 20 hours of continuing ed  every year, maybe they could do the same with firearm training/certs.

my2hands

America openly debating arming teachers

LOL

If I was 18 I would be the fuck out of this shithole 

PJPOWER

tbergs said:

PJPOWER said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

d)  Any written regulations adopted for purposes of Subsection (c) must provide that a school marshal may carry a concealed handgun as described by Subsection (c), except that if the primary duty of the school marshal involves regular, direct contact with students, the marshal may not carry a concealed handgun but may possess a handgun on the physical premises of a school in a locked and secured safe within the marshal's immediate reach when conducting the marshal's primary duty. The written regulations must also require that a handgun carried by or within access of a school marshal may be loaded only with frangible ammunition designed to disintegrate on impact for maximum safety and minimal danger to others.

What’s your point?  That you think they should keep them in a readily accessible vault?  I think the point was that the carrying teachers must go through specific trainings to be able to do so...?

I'll bite. Law Enforcement train monthly or more and go through a much more rigorous process, but still make mistakes so why does an initial 2 week academy seem like some great solution with a refresher every 2 years? I'm also curious about the mental health evaluation and what that entails compared to a psychological exam.

I would say that law enforcement are regularly met with multiple threats and the odds of them making a mistake here or there are greater.  With teachers, you are training for a specific threat.  And the odds are really pretty slim that they would actually need to use their firearm (much like the odds of a fire).  I have no idea what the psych evaluation entails, but would probably follow the DSM IV standards for evaluating any kind of potential mental disorders.  I think the most important factor is that they actually train WITH law enforcement.  Practice and training are the only way of minimizing odds of an accident.  
Regardless, I feel that the marginal odds of an accident taking place by a well trained person are better than allowing the possibility of someone coming in and shooting the place up unchallenged.

tbergs

mcgruff10 said:

tbergs said:

PJPOWER said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

d)  Any written regulations adopted for purposes of Subsection (c) must provide that a school marshal may carry a concealed handgun as described by Subsection (c), except that if the primary duty of the school marshal involves regular, direct contact with students, the marshal may not carry a concealed handgun but may possess a handgun on the physical premises of a school in a locked and secured safe within the marshal's immediate reach when conducting the marshal's primary duty. The written regulations must also require that a handgun carried by or within access of a school marshal may be loaded only with frangible ammunition designed to disintegrate on impact for maximum safety and minimal danger to others.

What’s your point?  That you think they should keep them in a readily accessible vault?  I think the point was that the carrying teachers must go through specific trainings to be able to do so...?

I'll bite. Law Enforcement train monthly or more and go through a much more rigorous process, but still make mistakes so why does an initial 2 week academy seem like some great solution with a refresher every 2 years? I'm also curious about the mental health evaluation and what that entails compared to a psychological exam.

couldn't the metal health evaluation and psychological exam be the same exact one as cops go through?
as a teacher I have to do 20 hours of continuing ed  every year, maybe they could do the same with firearm training/certs.

I hope that's what they mean, but then it should say that. Two different things to me. 

unsung

tbergs said:

rgambs said:

unsung said:

rgambs said:

unsung said:

my2hands said:

unsung said:

tbergs said:

Hey unsung, here's one I'm surprised you haven't been ragging on. Student is providing fake information about scripted questions from CNN.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/02/22/shooting_survivor_colton_haab_cnn_gave_me_scripted_question_after_denying_question_about_armed_guards.html

So now we are back to not caring what the kids say?

Make up your minds.

You have no credibility here. Nobody gives a shit what you have to say. 

And yet you keep responding...

Yeah cool, I can go away and you can stand in a circle in your groups that just nod their heads in agreement.

Trust me, I prefer a good discussion, let me know if you ever are up for it.

We all have the same goals here, I hope to protect life, well at least this stage of life anyway.  We just have different ways of wanting to get those results.

Ha!  What a joke, you run from every debate you've ever started with a snide comment or bad Photoshop job.
You don't respond to any questions and you don't provide rebuttals, David Hogg would shred you to pieces on any topic.

Would he be able to film prior to the incident? I hear he has a track record for doing so.  Hopefully he will remember his lines.

Which flat earth blog or white supremacy forum did you hear that in?

A pretty good local brewery. Not sure how good they are at spinning alt right conspiracies, but at least you can discuss it over a frothy brew

I'm in, you buying?

mrussel1

mcgruff10 said:

tbergs said:

PJPOWER said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

d)  Any written regulations adopted for purposes of Subsection (c) must provide that a school marshal may carry a concealed handgun as described by Subsection (c), except that if the primary duty of the school marshal involves regular, direct contact with students, the marshal may not carry a concealed handgun but may possess a handgun on the physical premises of a school in a locked and secured safe within the marshal's immediate reach when conducting the marshal's primary duty. The written regulations must also require that a handgun carried by or within access of a school marshal may be loaded only with frangible ammunition designed to disintegrate on impact for maximum safety and minimal danger to others.

What’s your point?  That you think they should keep them in a readily accessible vault?  I think the point was that the carrying teachers must go through specific trainings to be able to do so...?

I'll bite. Law Enforcement train monthly or more and go through a much more rigorous process, but still make mistakes so why does an initial 2 week academy seem like some great solution with a refresher every 2 years? I'm also curious about the mental health evaluation and what that entails compared to a psychological exam.

couldn't the metal health evaluation and psychological exam be the same exact one as cops go through?
as a teacher I have to do 20 hours of continuing ed  every year, maybe they could do the same with firearm training/certs.

So now efficacy at teaching isn't even enough.  They have to be first responder tactical units.  

PJPOWER

mrussel1 said:

mcgruff10 said:

tbergs said:

PJPOWER said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

d)  Any written regulations adopted for purposes of Subsection (c) must provide that a school marshal may carry a concealed handgun as described by Subsection (c), except that if the primary duty of the school marshal involves regular, direct contact with students, the marshal may not carry a concealed handgun but may possess a handgun on the physical premises of a school in a locked and secured safe within the marshal's immediate reach when conducting the marshal's primary duty. The written regulations must also require that a handgun carried by or within access of a school marshal may be loaded only with frangible ammunition designed to disintegrate on impact for maximum safety and minimal danger to others.

What’s your point?  That you think they should keep them in a readily accessible vault?  I think the point was that the carrying teachers must go through specific trainings to be able to do so...?

I'll bite. Law Enforcement train monthly or more and go through a much more rigorous process, but still make mistakes so why does an initial 2 week academy seem like some great solution with a refresher every 2 years? I'm also curious about the mental health evaluation and what that entails compared to a psychological exam.

couldn't the metal health evaluation and psychological exam be the same exact one as cops go through?
as a teacher I have to do 20 hours of continuing ed  every year, maybe they could do the same with firearm training/certs.

So now efficacy at teaching isn't even enough.  They have to be first responder tactical units.  

OMG, once again...VOLUNTEERS!  They do not “have” to be anything but teachers...but if they choose to be...

unsung

Halifax2TheMax said:

How many were attributed to "assault weapons"?

In 2011, the Chicago Police department issued a report,  in it 511 (iirc) people were murdered the past year.  ONE was found to be done by (any rifle).  

1 out of 511.  

These are not the problem you all make them out to be.

mrussel1

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

mcgruff10 said:

tbergs said:

PJPOWER said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

d)  Any written regulations adopted for purposes of Subsection (c) must provide that a school marshal may carry a concealed handgun as described by Subsection (c), except that if the primary duty of the school marshal involves regular, direct contact with students, the marshal may not carry a concealed handgun but may possess a handgun on the physical premises of a school in a locked and secured safe within the marshal's immediate reach when conducting the marshal's primary duty. The written regulations must also require that a handgun carried by or within access of a school marshal may be loaded only with frangible ammunition designed to disintegrate on impact for maximum safety and minimal danger to others.

What’s your point?  That you think they should keep them in a readily accessible vault?  I think the point was that the carrying teachers must go through specific trainings to be able to do so...?

I'll bite. Law Enforcement train monthly or more and go through a much more rigorous process, but still make mistakes so why does an initial 2 week academy seem like some great solution with a refresher every 2 years? I'm also curious about the mental health evaluation and what that entails compared to a psychological exam.

couldn't the metal health evaluation and psychological exam be the same exact one as cops go through?
as a teacher I have to do 20 hours of continuing ed  every year, maybe they could do the same with firearm training/certs.

So now efficacy at teaching isn't even enough.  They have to be first responder tactical units.  

OMG, once again...VOLUNTEERS!  They do not “have” to be anything but teachers...but if they choose to be...

Sorry, where did that come from?  Trump today was talking about arming school officials.  Did we move to volunteers?

unsung

tbergs said:

tempo_n_groove said:

dignin said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Gern Blansten said:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/what-i-saw-treating-the-victims-from-parkland-should-change-the-debate-on-guns/553937/

As I opened the CT scan last week to read the next case, I was baffled. The history simply read “gunshot wound.” I have been a radiologist in one of the busiest trauma centers in the nation for 13 years, and have diagnosed thousands of handgun injuries to the brain, lung, liver, spleen, bowel, and other vital organs. I thought that I knew all that I needed to know about gunshot wounds, but the specific pattern of injury on my computer screen was one that I had seen only once before.

In a typical handgun injury that I diagnose almost daily, a bullet leaves a laceration through an organ like the liver. To a radiologist, it appears as a linear, thin, grey bullet track through the organ. There may be bleeding and some bullet fragments.

I was looking at a CT scan of one of the victims of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, who had been brought to the trauma center during my call shift. The organ looked like an overripe melon smashed by a sledgehammer, with extensive bleeding. How could a gunshot wound have caused this much damage?

The deadliest bullet in the world is a .22 bullet.  When you see it up close it doesn't look like much but it's a killer.  Most people don't know or don't really care. 

Add .003 to that bullet and you have the .223 bullet.  The same bullet that is used in an AR-15.  Now everyone seems to care.

I don't understand your point and don't know what it has to do with the article. Can you explain?

tbergs said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Gern Blansten said:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/what-i-saw-treating-the-victims-from-parkland-should-change-the-debate-on-guns/553937/

As I opened the CT scan last week to read the next case, I was baffled. The history simply read “gunshot wound.” I have been a radiologist in one of the busiest trauma centers in the nation for 13 years, and have diagnosed thousands of handgun injuries to the brain, lung, liver, spleen, bowel, and other vital organs. I thought that I knew all that I needed to know about gunshot wounds, but the specific pattern of injury on my computer screen was one that I had seen only once before.

In a typical handgun injury that I diagnose almost daily, a bullet leaves a laceration through an organ like the liver. To a radiologist, it appears as a linear, thin, grey bullet track through the organ. There may be bleeding and some bullet fragments.

I was looking at a CT scan of one of the victims of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, who had been brought to the trauma center during my call shift. The organ looked like an overripe melon smashed by a sledgehammer, with extensive bleeding. How could a gunshot wound have caused this much damage?

The deadliest bullet in the world is a .22 bullet.  When you see it up close it doesn't look like much but it's a killer.  Most people don't know or don't really care. 

Add .003 to that bullet and you have the .223 bullet.  The same bullet that is used in an AR-15.  Now everyone seems to care.

You're missing the point. Do you think semi-auto rifles such as the AR15 should be owned by the public? Yes, a .22 handgun or long gun is deadly, but the argument here is for the gun and its magazine capacity. If an assault rifle fired .22 rounds it would still be something that should be banned. No one is saying stop selling .223 rounds.

Pointing out that a little .22 rifle can inflect a lot of damage too, 22 rifles can carry high capacity rounds also.  That was my point.

And yes you should be able to own an AR-15.  I'd make it more stringent to get though.

Did you read the article? No one here has argued that any type of bullet is more dangerous than another. All bullets can kill, but the gun they fire from makes a difference in how fast and efficiently they can kill. Do you agree or disagree with that?

I had a .22 pistol and rifle as a kid. One of the first things my dad taught me about was how far those .22 rounds travel and the risk a stray can pose if not aimed with the background in mind. I know not everyone here has a history of handling guns, but that doesn't make their point invalid.

A .22 is not a powerful round, in fact one of the least amount of force.

What it does have is fps, and can go a very far way.

CM189191

unsung said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

How many were attributed to "assault weapons"?

In 2011, the Chicago Police department issued a report,  in it 511 (iirc) people were murdered the past year.  ONE was found to be done by (any rifle).  

1 out of 511.  

These are not the problem you all make them out to be.

you've convinced me - ban all the guns!

unsung

You actually don't have a problem with guns, you just have a problem with who has them.

mcgruff10

mrussel1 said:

mcgruff10 said:

tbergs said:

PJPOWER said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

d)  Any written regulations adopted for purposes of Subsection (c) must provide that a school marshal may carry a concealed handgun as described by Subsection (c), except that if the primary duty of the school marshal involves regular, direct contact with students, the marshal may not carry a concealed handgun but may possess a handgun on the physical premises of a school in a locked and secured safe within the marshal's immediate reach when conducting the marshal's primary duty. The written regulations must also require that a handgun carried by or within access of a school marshal may be loaded only with frangible ammunition designed to disintegrate on impact for maximum safety and minimal danger to others.

What’s your point?  That you think they should keep them in a readily accessible vault?  I think the point was that the carrying teachers must go through specific trainings to be able to do so...?

I'll bite. Law Enforcement train monthly or more and go through a much more rigorous process, but still make mistakes so why does an initial 2 week academy seem like some great solution with a refresher every 2 years? I'm also curious about the mental health evaluation and what that entails compared to a psychological exam.

couldn't the metal health evaluation and psychological exam be the same exact one as cops go through?
as a teacher I have to do 20 hours of continuing ed  every year, maybe they could do the same with firearm training/certs.

So now efficacy at teaching isn't even enough.  They have to be first responder tactical units.  

I teach and I don’t think it is a big deal.  I m efficient in teaching and also have to be knowledable in cpr, crisis management response planning (lock down drills, evacuations etc) And epi pen provider to numerous students. Teachers were many hats already. And has pjpower said, it is voluntary. 

PJPOWER

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

mcgruff10 said:

tbergs said:

PJPOWER said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

d)  Any written regulations adopted for purposes of Subsection (c) must provide that a school marshal may carry a concealed handgun as described by Subsection (c), except that if the primary duty of the school marshal involves regular, direct contact with students, the marshal may not carry a concealed handgun but may possess a handgun on the physical premises of a school in a locked and secured safe within the marshal's immediate reach when conducting the marshal's primary duty. The written regulations must also require that a handgun carried by or within access of a school marshal may be loaded only with frangible ammunition designed to disintegrate on impact for maximum safety and minimal danger to others.

What’s your point?  That you think they should keep them in a readily accessible vault?  I think the point was that the carrying teachers must go through specific trainings to be able to do so...?

I'll bite. Law Enforcement train monthly or more and go through a much more rigorous process, but still make mistakes so why does an initial 2 week academy seem like some great solution with a refresher every 2 years? I'm also curious about the mental health evaluation and what that entails compared to a psychological exam.

couldn't the metal health evaluation and psychological exam be the same exact one as cops go through?
as a teacher I have to do 20 hours of continuing ed  every year, maybe they could do the same with firearm training/certs.

So now efficacy at teaching isn't even enough.  They have to be first responder tactical units.  

OMG, once again...VOLUNTEERS!  They do not “have” to be anything but teachers...but if they choose to be...

Sorry, where did that come from?  Trump today was talking about arming school officials.  Did we move to volunteers?

I don’t give two shits what Trump said about it.  In TX, no one is forcing anyone to do anything.  The only armed people are volunteers...and my stance is that they should be just that.  

Halifax2TheMax

unsung said:

You actually don't have a problem with guns, you just have a problem with who has them.

Would you submit to a psychological exam to purchase and own a firearm? Renewable on an annual basis?