Seems somebody at the Miami Herald wants you dead
 

...And his name is Leonard Pitts, Jr.

Leonard Pitts

He seems to think it would not be a good idea, in the case of schools coming under attack by crazy murderers as in Columbine or the Amish schoolhouse, to do anything at all to give the school a chance to defend itself until the heavy artillery of SWAT can come up.

It is a sorrowful thing to contemplate arming teachers and staff against assailants and multiple murderers, true. But how much sadder is it to be in a schoolroom -- supposed to be a place of safety, of personal growth -- and obliged to submit to murder to suit the whims of an editorial writer -- who isn't in the same room with you, getting murdered?

Shouldn't we have more options, aimed at actually saving innocent lives, than this?

How often do people come to school armed, wave a gun around, and not end up shooting people?

Or: How often does someone confront unarmed innocents with a gun and it end peacefully?

How do the peaceful ends compare with the violent ones, in terms of frequency?

How many of those would still end peacefully, if it became a standoff or a hostile confrontation?

There should be options, yes; but is escalation the only one?

School shootings are predominately a phenomenon of contemporary America -- they existed previously, and they exist elsewhere, but we have more. Shouldn't we address the root causes (what makes people want to shoot up our schools), rather than the symptoms (them, armed, in a school)?

When an armed crazy shows up, there is no time to consider "escalation." He's done all the escalation there can be, as it's now life and death. There is only time to consider his neutralization. He does not have to survive the neutralization process, period. Dead perp = instant deescalation. Surrendered perp, likewise. And that is what we want.

Address the root causes? There is but one: mental illness. You can't pass a law against insanity; our entire legal theory militates against that.

What's the solution? Arm all teachers? More guns? Only in the US and A...

Armed guards in some of the schools couldn't stop the school killers, they were first to die.

Like Skunks said; root the cause, not the symptoms. More guns will only increase the problems.

This thread title is highly suggestive, Rush Limbaugh, Micheal Moore and Al Gore could learn from UG...

I highly doubt he knows me, let alone has enough against me to want me dead.

I dont buy it. He's stupid, but that doesnt mean he wants me dead. Youre stupid and you dont want me dead, right?

I'm just going down the list of my elementary school teachers imagining each of them packin' heat and bustin' a cap in some perp's ass.

:)

:biggrin:

:lol:
:biglaugha

:lol2:

Yeah, UG, that's a bright idea. Let's trade intermittant school shootings for (IMHO) what will turn out to be much more common teachers shooting students, parents, or other teachers. Instead of "go to the office" it'll be "bang, you're dead". :shotgun:

I was at my field experience elementary school this morning (yes I'm going to school to be a special ed. teacher) thinking about this very issue.. I saw Frank on the news a couple weeks ago. I don't get why we don't have more passive defenses against armed in truders. Not just one entrance thats away from all the classrooms, but having reinforced doors on all the classrooms that swing out into the hall (so you can't kick them in), and replace the glass in the doors' windows with bulletproof glass. So in the event of an armed intruder, the teachers can gather as many kids as they can into their classrooms, and lock the doors creating an instant saferoom for those 30+ kids. If all the chickens are safe inside a cage, the fox can't kill any.

I know its not a solution that will solve all the possible school shooting scenarios, but I think it is a simple way to greatly protect our students against an armed intruder. Having guns in the school will only create an amatuer hour shootout with bullets flying everywhere.

M16's, grenades and tactical nukes in every American classroom! No half measures! After all, its for the children.

I havent seen you around a whole lot lately, where ya been Elspode?

Next on CBS...The Afterschool (38) Special

It IS pretty funny when you imagine your former teachers pulling out a colt and shooting some perp right between the eyes. In third grade, I had an elderly teacher nearing retirement. I don't think her hands would have had the strength to pull the trigger. She would probably have revoked the guy's library privileges - her favorite punishment for us kids.

In 9th grade I had a Latin teacher who was rather plump and nearing 60. I can't imagine her whipping out a Colt, either. The intruder would probably have been given an extra ten pages of Cicero to translate.

Armed teachers are just NOT the answer.

Bullit's idea make more sense.

Going from what I've seen firsthand at my old high school, giving teachers guns is just about the worst thing you can do in this case. People've pulled guns at football games and stuff there before, and more than once some 'gangstaz' have tried to jump the school cop for his gun. They end up hurt and in jail, but a cop's a cop and a teacher's a teacher.

At the school, there was always one and at most two guns at the school, both in possesion of cops, and not little cops either, we're talking serious toughs here. But if the teachers had guns, that's be a scores of guns. And the more guns there are, the more chances for a thug or asshole to get his hands on one. And sooner or later, one will.

Why sneak a gun in when the teachers already have 'em for ya?

Silliest damn thing. I found out I had a life. Whoda thunk it? :D

Just been busy at work and at home. I should be working right now, but I'm horribly unmotivated. Also, it is 82 degrees in my office, but only 45 degrees outside, and I find that wearying.

Hey, look at what UG's saying. When an ARMED CRAZY shows up, trouble. Fine. I buy that.

And his second point: Mental illness as the root cause. I buy that too.

Now, let's check his math. Since he's right that we can't legislatively prohibit crazyness, making a law against being crazy will not help here. I buy that too. I mean, let's face it. We're all capable of being crazy, acting crazy, driven crazy, agreed? So how can we prevent this combustible combination from endangering our children in school? We all carry within us latent crazy, but we are not all armed.

You might go crazy at any minute of the day, but you have to CHOOSE to bring a gun to school. Yes, people, the only controllable factor is the choice to arm yourself at school. You don't want trouble from armed crazies? Don't arm them. Don't do anything to diminish the distance between the arming and and the crazy. Like having many guns in the school. I bet UG really, really does believe this is a good idea. That's why I can't talk to him. There is NO middle ground. No common language. No shared understanding of how the world works to permit communication. Our universes are disjoint. They're not even parallel, since they don't point in the same direction; they're skew. He would say I'm skewed, I say he's skewed, the point is open to discussion. But by arming the teachers, it is our kids who will be skrewed.

My schools are Weapons-Free Zones. It will stay that way.