Current Events > Those claiming lawmakers are doing nothing to prevent gun violence in schools

(+) Yeah! (+)

They are doing something, its just not what you'd probably like. But you cannot say they are doing nothing.

Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act would do away with school gun free zones and allow citizens with concealed carry permits to do so in any state of the Union regardless of the state the permit was issued in. Would this have prevented what happened today if it were already law? I don't know. But claiming the government is doing nothing is objectively false.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/38?q=%7B"search"%3A%5B"concealed+carry+reciprocity+act"%5D%7D

Thatuser posted...

They are doing something, its just not what you'd probably like. But you cannot say they are doing nothing.

Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act would do away with school gun free zones and allow citizens with concealed carry permits to do so in any state of the Union regardless of the state the permit was issued in. Would this have prevented what happened today if it were already law? I don't know. But claiming the government is doing nothing is objectively false.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/38?q=%7B"search"%3A%5B"concealed+carry+reciprocity+act"%5D%7D

It's probably the only effective thing next to banning them entirely. But I ask you, would you rather live in a world where everyone is armed, or no one is?

gbpxl posted...

Thatuser posted...

They are doing something, its just not what you'd probably like. But you cannot say they are doing nothing.

Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act would do away with school gun free zones and allow citizens with concealed carry permits to do so in any state of the Union regardless of the state the permit was issued in. Would this have prevented what happened today if it were already law? I don't know. But claiming the government is doing nothing is objectively false.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/38?q=%7B"search"%3A%5B"concealed+carry+reciprocity+act"%5D%7D

It's probably the only effective thing next to banning them entirely. But I ask you, would you rather live in a world where everyone is armed, or no one is?

I would like to live in a world where no one is armed, but that usually ends up with the wrong people being armed. It's more of a "safe than sorry" deal.

EnterTheTekken posted...

gbpxl posted...

Thatuser posted...

They are doing something, its just not what you'd probably like. But you cannot say they are doing nothing.

Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act would do away with school gun free zones and allow citizens with concealed carry permits to do so in any state of the Union regardless of the state the permit was issued in. Would this have prevented what happened today if it were already law? I don't know. But claiming the government is doing nothing is objectively false.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/38?q=%7B"search"%3A%5B"concealed+carry+reciprocity+act"%5D%7D

It's probably the only effective thing next to banning them entirely. But I ask you, would you rather live in a world where everyone is armed, or no one is?

I would like to live in a world where no one is armed, but that usually ends up with the wrong people being armed. It's more of a "safe than sorry" deal.

You can't put the genie back in the bottle. At least level the playing field.

our overlords at the NRA will keep us safe
---

Fin_Dawg_004 posted...

our overlords at the NRA will keep us safe

Safe? This is part of the problem in my opinion. Nobody is ever safe entirely. People die, naturally or otherwise. Its literally the only guarantee in life.

EnterTheTekken posted...

gbpxl posted...

Thatuser posted...

They are doing something, its just not what you'd probably like. But you cannot say they are doing nothing.

Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act would do away with school gun free zones and allow citizens with concealed carry permits to do so in any state of the Union regardless of the state the permit was issued in. Would this have prevented what happened today if it were already law? I don't know. But claiming the government is doing nothing is objectively false.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/38?q=%7B"search"%3A%5B"concealed+carry+reciprocity+act"%5D%7D

It's probably the only effective thing next to banning them entirely. But I ask you, would you rather live in a world where everyone is armed, or no one is?

I would like to live in a world where no one is armed, but that usually ends up with the wrong people being armed. It's more of a "safe than sorry" deal.

How would the bad guys get guns if they're illegal? Wouldn't a complete ban allow the ATF to conduct sting operations on any potential buyers?

Everybody having a gun is just going to lead every possible confrontation possibly immediately becoming fatal. It would cut down on trust alot, as anybody would get extra unnerved over every outburst.

Edit: This isn't going to be a miracle solution that people are hoping for. As people are prone to error, and there likely will be some missed shots into a crowd, wrong person, etc. Might not help at all honestly.

gbpxl posted...

EnterTheTekken posted...

gbpxl posted...

Thatuser posted...

They are doing something, its just not what you'd probably like. But you cannot say they are doing nothing.

Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act would do away with school gun free zones and allow citizens with concealed carry permits to do so in any state of the Union regardless of the state the permit was issued in. Would this have prevented what happened today if it were already law? I don't know. But claiming the government is doing nothing is objectively false.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/38?q=%7B"search"%3A%5B"concealed+carry+reciprocity+act"%5D%7D

It's probably the only effective thing next to banning them entirely. But I ask you, would you rather live in a world where everyone is armed, or no one is?

I would like to live in a world where no one is armed, but that usually ends up with the wrong people being armed. It's more of a "safe than sorry" deal.

How would the bad guys get guns if they're illegal? Wouldn't a complete ban allow the ATF to conduct sting operations on any potential buyers?

You can't uninvent something by making it illegal. The knowledge to make them isn't some closely guarded secret held only by big manufacturers. If there's a market, there will be production.

The man who killed a police commander in Chicago yesterday had an illegal 30 round magazine as well as a defaced, illegal gun.

Putting responsibility on the law makers takes responsibility away from terrible parents and mentally ill people.
---

Thatuser posted...

gbpxl posted...

EnterTheTekken posted...

gbpxl posted...

Thatuser posted...

They are doing something, its just not what you'd probably like. But you cannot say they are doing nothing.

Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act would do away with school gun free zones and allow citizens with concealed carry permits to do so in any state of the Union regardless of the state the permit was issued in. Would this have prevented what happened today if it were already law? I don't know. But claiming the government is doing nothing is objectively false.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/38?q=%7B"search"%3A%5B"concealed+carry+reciprocity+act"%5D%7D

It's probably the only effective thing next to banning them entirely. But I ask you, would you rather live in a world where everyone is armed, or no one is?

I would like to live in a world where no one is armed, but that usually ends up with the wrong people being armed. It's more of a "safe than sorry" deal.

How would the bad guys get guns if they're illegal? Wouldn't a complete ban allow the ATF to conduct sting operations on any potential buyers?

You can't uninvent something by making it illegal. The knowledge to make them isn't some closely guarded secret held only by big manufacturers. If there's a market, there will be production.

The man who killed a police commander in Chicago yesterday had an illegal 30 round magazine as well as a defaced, illegal gun.

the gun was likely purchased in a Republican state with loose gun laws

Verdekal posted...

Putting responsibility on the law makers takes responsibility away from terrible parents and mentally ill people.

Responsibility needs to be put on lawmakers because they are responsible for keeping people safe.

gbpxl posted...

Thatuser posted...

gbpxl posted...

EnterTheTekken posted...

gbpxl posted...

Thatuser posted...

They are doing something, its just not what you'd probably like. But you cannot say they are doing nothing.

Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act would do away with school gun free zones and allow citizens with concealed carry permits to do so in any state of the Union regardless of the state the permit was issued in. Would this have prevented what happened today if it were already law? I don't know. But claiming the government is doing nothing is objectively false.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/38?q=%7B"search"%3A%5B"concealed+carry+reciprocity+act"%5D%7D

It's probably the only effective thing next to banning them entirely. But I ask you, would you rather live in a world where everyone is armed, or no one is?

I would like to live in a world where no one is armed, but that usually ends up with the wrong people being armed. It's more of a "safe than sorry" deal.

How would the bad guys get guns if they're illegal? Wouldn't a complete ban allow the ATF to conduct sting operations on any potential buyers?

You can't uninvent something by making it illegal. The knowledge to make them isn't some closely guarded secret held only by big manufacturers. If there's a market, there will be production.

The man who killed a police commander in Chicago yesterday had an illegal 30 round magazine as well as a defaced, illegal gun.

the gun was likely purchased in a Republican state with loose gun laws

Proof? Either way removing a serial number on a weapon is a crime.

Do you support high school students being able to carry guns in school?
---

Oklahoma schools go on 4-day weeks so teachers can work at Walmart on Mondays to make rent

https://boingboing.net/2018/02/07/this-is-not-ok.html

Isn't that nice? So after the teachers work at Walmart to barely make rent, they're expected to return to class packing heat to prevent the next mass shooting tragedy. This is the future Republicans want.
---

Anteaterking posted...

Do you support high school students being able to carry guns in school?

Do they meet the legal requirements? No. They're minors.

Turtlemayor333 posted...

Oklahoma schools go on 4-day weeks so teachers can work at Walmart on Mondays to make rent

https://boingboing.net/2018/02/07/this-is-not-ok.html

Isn't that nice? So after the teachers work at Walmart to barely make rent, they're expected to return to class packing heat to prevent the next mass shooting tragedy. This is the future Republicans want.

I'm not saying people have to do anything. Ifvthey choose to carry for their protection, that should be their prerogative.

As far as the financial disparity, they are free to seek another profession.

Only the federal government having guns is scary
---

tote_all posted...

TC: You can't say the government isn't doing anything to put out this fire. You see here, they are pouring gasoline on it. You may not like it. Is it gonna help? I don't know, but saying they aren't doing anything is objectively false.

I disagree with your assessment. I support the Act and hope it passes.

ah yes. armed teachers. fantastic.
---

E32005 posted...

ah yes. armed teachers. fantastic.

Teachers are citizens, many citizens are armed having met the legal requirements of their state with the interest of being able to protect themselves. Would you make this statement about your real estate agent or attorney?

Thatuser posted...

E32005 posted...

ah yes. armed teachers. fantastic.

Teachers are citizens, many citizens are armed having met the legal requirements of their state with the interest of being able to protect themselves. Would you make this statement about your real estate agent or attorney?

if you think adequately handling a firearm and dealing with a life or death 'active shooter' situation are the same thing, its no wonder you don't understand.
---

EnterTheTekken posted...

gbpxl posted...

Thatuser posted...

They are doing something, its just not what you'd probably like. But you cannot say they are doing nothing.

Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act would do away with school gun free zones and allow citizens with concealed carry permits to do so in any state of the Union regardless of the state the permit was issued in. Would this have prevented what happened today if it were already law? I don't know. But claiming the government is doing nothing is objectively false.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/38?q=%7B"search"%3A%5B"concealed+carry+reciprocity+act"%5D%7D

It's probably the only effective thing next to banning them entirely. But I ask you, would you rather live in a world where everyone is armed, or no one is?

I would like to live in a world where no one is armed, but that usually ends up with the wrong people being armed. It's more of a "safe than sorry" deal.

The "wrong people being armed" are the people who are going to be armed regardless, ie, gang bangers, drug runners and the mafia. At least in the US, they don't make it a habit of shooting police in broad daylight or massacring classmates.
---

tote_all posted...

I didn't want to get in on this because I am not familiar with how you get a permit to carry a concealed weapon in the USA, but since you brought it up, do you receive any training or are tested in any way to see if you could handle an active shooter?

no. you can be certified for your handling, knowledge, and care of a firearm. Short of going to a private tactical school, you won't learn to handle that situation.

Honestly, the only people with the experience and years of training to do so are the police/swat and military.
---

Federal government employees and military go through active shooter training on a fairly regular basis, but we're taught to fight back as a last resort. Personal firearms are not permitted on base and definitely not in work centers.

Not every state allows concealed carry and some don't even allow open carry (at least without permits), either.
---

tote_all posted...

E32005 posted...

if you think adequately handling a firearm and dealing with a life or death 'active shooter' situation are the same thing, its no wonder you don't understand.

I didn't want to get in on this because I am not familiar with how you get a permit to carry a concealed weapon in the USA, but since you brought it up, do you receive any training or are tested in any way to see if you could handle an active shooter?

Also haven't most studies shown that untrained civilians handle these situations terribly and most end up shooting other innocent, unarmed civilians in the process?

You go through a class which takes several hours and submit fingerprints, SSN, firearms class certification, passport style photo and about $100 not including the $100 for the class and fingerprints. Then you're still forced to undergo a background check everytime you find something you like at the gun store, granted some states let license holders bypass the Brady bill because even its stupid concept doesn't make sense to people that already own a couple handguns.

And the instructors will tell you to practice your form and aim every day.
---

E32005 posted...

if you think adequately handling a firearm and dealing with a life or death 'active shooter' situation are the same thing, its no wonder you don't understand.

People shouldn't own or carry a weapon unless they are prepared to use them in exactly this scenario. Until you're in it you don't know how things will play out. I'd rather have a chance of stopping them then hiding defenseless.

tote_all posted...

Is there a change in laws being proposed so real estate agents or attorneys can shoot their students?

I infer you assume because a lawful citizen happens to be a teacher and carry a gun they will ultimately kill their students. Is that the point you're trying to make? My point is that teachers, like other professionals, are legal adults that can carry firearms if they meet the legal requirements to do so. So why not in their place of business? Again, you assume they'll kill their students just because they happen to be there.

Hexenherz posted...

Federal government employees and military go through active shooter training on a fairly regular basis, but we're taught to fight back as a last resort. Personal firearms are not permitted on base and definitely not in work centers.

Not every state allows concealed carry and some don't even allow open carry (at least without permits), either.

I would think today's situation would be considered last resort as defenseless people were shot.

In my state, you are supposed to, by law, escape if at all possible, before using your gun in self defense. However, defense of others and their ability, or inability, to escape is also considered. Shooting this guy would've been ok under the law here.

Thatuser posted...

People shouldn't own or carry a weapon unless they are prepared to use them in exactly this scenario.

that may be, but its simply not the truth.
---

tote_all posted...

We are talking in the setting of a school shooting. School shooters are often students or former students. So, in this scenario, teachers are literally supposed to shoot their students. Literally.

At that point they are criminals seeking to cause you or others bodily harm. Its kill or be killed at that point. Or let them harm others due to inaction.

E32005 posted...

Thatuser posted...

People shouldn't own or carry a weapon unless they are prepared to use them in exactly this scenario.

that may be, but its simply not the truth.

I can only speak for myself.

Thatuser posted...

Do they meet the legal requirements? No. They're minors.

I can't speak to this specific shooting, as they haven't released enough details yet, but I don't see how just allowing for the handful of adults at a school to carry a weapon substantially changes the scenario. There have been school shootings in schools with armed guards. Now you have the small % of teachers who want to carry guns, an even smaller % of which are going to go hunt down the shooter. And honestly, when I was in high school, some of the teachers who advocated most for being able to be armed in response to events like this were also the teachers who we thought were most likely to shoot up the school themselves.

Also, I don't see this bill as being more than tangentially related to school shootings. Do you think people would have been saying "How could this happen?" less if only 10 people died and the shooter was taken down by a faculty member?
---

tote_all posted...

Thatuser posted...

I can only speak for myself.

tote_all posted...

Even if statistics say you'll shoot innocent kids in this scenario?

I didn't know this was an issue of humility. If anything, your topic's been enlightening, TC.

I'm not saying teachers should be given a gun and go through training as a mandatory part of their employment. Should they be interested in doing so, it should be an option. You make a lot of assumptions on peoples motivations and how they'll react. Not everyone is a panicky idiot who will cause collateral damage. What if said teacher had military training? What if they're just a level headed person with good intentions? You paint teachers as saintly individuals with no capacity to harm a fly, like their passion for teaching immediately makes them am invalid in this situation. I think that's insulting to them.

Anteaterking posted...

Thatuser posted...

Do they meet the legal requirements? No. They're minors.

I can't speak to this specific shooting, as they haven't released enough details yet, but I don't see how just allowing for the handful of adults at a school to carry a weapon substantially changes the scenario. There have been school shootings in schools with armed guards. Now you have the small % of teachers who want to carry guns, an even smaller % of which are going to go hunt down the shooter. And honestly, when I was in high school, some of the teachers who advocated most for being able to be armed in response to events like this were also the teachers who we thought were most likely to shoot up the school themselves.

Also, I don't see this bill as being more than tangentially related to school shootings. Do you think people would have been saying "How could this happen?" less if only 10 people died and the shooter was taken down by a faculty member?

Maybe the person would think twice knowing there was even a chance staff would return fire?

Thatuser posted...

They are doing something, its just not what you'd probably like. But you cannot say they are doing nothing.

Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act would do away with school gun free zones and allow citizens with concealed carry permits to do so in any state of the Union regardless of the state the permit was issued in. Would this have prevented what happened today if it were already law? I don't know. But claiming the government is doing nothing is objectively false.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/38?q=%7B"search"%3A%5B"concealed+carry+reciprocity+act"%5D%7D

Yes this would totally prevent school shootings.

(that was sarcasm)
---

billcom6 posted...

Thatuser posted...

They are doing something, its just not what you'd probably like. But you cannot say they are doing nothing.

Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act would do away with school gun free zones and allow citizens with concealed carry permits to do so in any state of the Union regardless of the state the permit was issued in. Would this have prevented what happened today if it were already law? I don't know. But claiming the government is doing nothing is objectively false.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/38?q=%7B"search"%3A%5B"concealed+carry+reciprocity+act"%5D%7D

Yes this would totally prevent school shootings.

(that was sarcasm)

Possibly, yes. Maybe the shooter would think twice. Maybe the casualties would be lower if he was stopped sooner.

Just put a cop in the school. Job done.
---

r4X0r posted...

Just put a cop in the school. Job done.

that cop would have stopped a guy with an AR-15 from killing anyone once he started opening fire? is that cop superman?
---

Fin_Dawg_004 posted...

r4X0r posted...

Just put a cop in the school. Job done.

that cop would have stopped a guy with an AR-15 from killing anyone once he started opening fire? is that cop superman?

Superman? Taking a well aimed shot doesn't require superpowers. Besides, a school with a cop car parked out front isn't going to have a mass shooting take place anyway because mass shooters are cowards and tend to operate almost exclusively in gun free zones.
---

r4X0r posted...

Just put a cop in the school. Job done.

The School Liaison Officer was in the gym with third and fourth graders where he was sitting on a bench. According to a release, a third grader sitting next to the officer "reached over and placed his finger into the officers gun holster and pressed the trigger of the officers gun causing it to discharge through the bottom of the holster."

The bullet struck the floor and no one was injured. The officer was unaware of the child touching his gun until the weapon discharged.

According to the release, "the holster was a department approved level 3 security holster, with trigger guard, that typically cannot be touched or fired in the holster, but the childs small finger was able to reach inside."

http://www.fox9.com/news/maplewood-pd-child-reaches-through-officers-gun-holster-pulls-trigger
---