"Renaissance Thinking About the Issues of Our Day"
Who will protect us from the volunteer armed guards? also: never forget the strong connection between "unexplainable" massacres, suicides, etc. and the SSRI's. This will get virtually no press, as it offends the god-almighty drug companies. oddly, they stand to benefit from the killings, as people call for more "mental health-care". (translation: more drugs)
Halfonts: Your argument doesn't hold water, sorry. a) I own a number of guns, each one of them registered. b) I have a conceiled carry permit (call it a "license"). c) I purchased each of my guns legally, retail, and paid tax on each. d) I own two vehicles and multiple guns. It would probably be easier for an unauthorized person to steal and use one of my vehicles in an illegal or irresponsible act than to gain access to one of my guns. Of course, I am a law abiding and conscientious gun owner and take gun ownership seriously, just like 99.9 percent of the gun owning public (I'll negotiate that number, but I won't reduce it by much). Face it, guns have been demonized as symbols of death and destruction in the hands of paranoids or maniacs in a way that automobiles never could or will be, even though the carniage wrought by automobiles in the hands of drunk drivers, inattentive elderly people and reckless teens exceeds by many times over the damage done by guns. It's an emotional issue that has reached the level of hysteria in this country. It clouds reason, as demonstrated by your logic. Please understand, I'm not attacking you personally. I just tire of these "pseudo logical" arguments. As someone here suggested "we don't need to ban guns, just the ammo". How about, "we don't need to ban cars, just the fuel, as that would surely stop needless traffic deaths". I fully respect your right to ban firearms in your own home. Please respect my right to have mine.
"Blaming the gun is like blaming the car in a fatal accident and not bothering to find out if the driver was fit to drive."
No one is blaming the car (or gun) itself. However, we do register, license, tax, monitor, lock and restrict access to cars by young, untrained or incompetent people. Irresponsible individuals do not purchase multiple race-cars by mail-order and proceed to use them irresponsibly, puting the public at risk. The analogy works only if carried to it's logical conclusion.
You know, Thom (assuming you're reading this),
I am hugely disappointed in your so called "polls". I'll tell you right up front that I disagree with having armed guards in schools (even the cops now on patrol) as a solution. I'll tell you that I am a gun owner and feel the 2nd Amendment should be interpreted literally as the right of a law abiding citizen to bear arms. And finally, I'll tell you that I view the NRA as a lobby for arms manufacturers and don't support them materially. But these "polls" you post are laughable. Give me a yes or no answer on this Thom; "are you still beating your wife?" If the answer choice does not support the intent of the question, in this case "should armed guards be used in schools (yes or no), but instead provides only one answer ( NO! We shouldn't be telling kids that guns are a solution and NO! There was an armed guard at Columbine) then your so called "poll" is meaningless and reduces a harangue in front of a crowd that in this case likely supports your "NO" premise. It's OK to editorialize, but please don't insult the intelligence of your readers by calling these things "polls". Thank you.
Rarely is the question asked as to why someone would kill so many people and often times themselves, the last few mass murders were done by young males in their twenties, with a history of mental illness. Were they given psychotic drugs as children to make them sit still in their seats, killing their spirit and sense of empathy? Were they then given some other psychotic drug as adolescences? And then another as young adults? How does the brain develop while being marinated in psychotic drugs? There are millions and millions of guns owned by millions of people without incident. Blaming the gun is like blaming the car in a fatal accident and not bothering to find out if the driver was fit to drive. Guns are tools made to kill. If we can’t ban guns then ban the ammunition. Tommy Chong spent 18 months in federal prison for illegally making glass bongs. Make the ammunition illegal to make, and let people keep their guns.
A worse solution to a bad problem. Are these people insane? Are they lacking gray matter in their brains? Are we being taken back to the Wild, Wild West? From day one I indicated the solution is the Australian Plan from the 90's.
.Absolutely not. In any profession, workplace, group of people, there are all sorts of personalities. Seeking out that many people to be "armed guards" would inevitably produce a good number whose judgment would be questionable. Add a gun to the mix and you have created a danger.
Horrible idea, we have to live in an armed camp to protect ourselves from one another? Insane!
BTW Thom, Very enlightening today on the origins of the second ammendment. Thanks for taking the time to explain it
no one points out the obvious that a gun cannot prevent a gun crime. For even if a person knows 100% that a bad guy intends to murder someone and for the sake of argument this bad guy realy intends to commit murder you as a gun wielding citizen can stop the crime with ur weapon. for he is a legal citizen as you till he commits the crime (in this case threat with a deadly weapon or worse) and if you try and stop him befor hand the crime is now on our "good guy". So please someone tell me how more guns are supposed to create a safer enviroment? Why is it that every time we bring up gun control the NRA runs right to the edge of the cliff and start screaming "everyone look there pushing us off see we cant go any farther" and yet us gun control people havent moved but some how media takes there side?
Especially not Joe Arpaio's band of racists, many of whom have criminal records.
of corse not.! if so then people like occupy wall street should have been able to defend theirselves from the attacking (military style )police forces who came down on them while INNOCENTLY, protesting and standing up for their rights.! there are soooo many good reasons for NOT allowing guns in the schools and giving our children the ok for retaliation violence.let's not play into the hands of the so called major majority gun slinging redneck ways of the very far past.
We have security guards in CA since the stockton incident in the 90's where the killer used an AK-47. In our high school the law enforcement officer walks the halls. His high school diploma and job earns him more then the teachers in the class teaching with a post graduate degree. The cost comes out of the education budget. Tell me what is right about that arrangement? What we need is a new profession of teacher that is trained in law enforcement. They become our first responders on campus. Their education service comes out of education budget. The law enforcement service comes out of the law enforcement budget. A dual profession. Become a teacher cop.. President Obama gave a speech asking for jobs for all of those returning from the military in law enforcement. I say to them to go back to college and get a teaching certificate. Then get training in law enforcement. Become a teacher cop.
First, thinking that a guard with a pistol (after many weeks of boring duty) can resist an armed attacker with an attack-plan and assault weapons is a grossly over-simplified "good-guys" vs "bad-guys" fantasy.
The problem is that the gun-crowd (there are way-many in the US) - like the T-baggers of 2012, actually believe their dilusional fantasies. It doesn't pass the most basic critique.
I seriously doubt that volunteers would have the level of training that police & the military are known for. I think it's a bad idea.