News Surely this is too far

[Zenith]

Anyway, back on the topic, giving more guns to more people seems to be such a naive way of solving gun crime that I'm left partially speechless.

 

[rynnor]

Anyway, back on the topic, giving more guns to more people seems to be such a naive way of solving gun crime that I'm left partially speechless.

It depends on what you are trying to achieve - the idea is to have an armed defender so that schools are not completely defenceless to random crazies.

 

[rynnor]

Crime and especially mental instability is NOT something exclusive of the poor. Damn man, we've been having lots of campaigns to rid the society of excactly such stigmas

You seem to be filtering what I say through your own expectations of others prejudices.

I never mentioned the poor and I said nothing about stigmas - I am taking an objective view.

People who are in prison or a mental institution cannot simultaneously be employed as teachers.

 

[Zenith]

Jeez Rynnor. You said that teachers are presumably more "stable" than the "average American" (are teachers not among the average American?) and therefore should be armed with guns. I said, no, there's no evidence that mental stability can be determined by level of education or profession. So, what I said, and I say it again, allowing teachers to have gun in or near the classroom only make's sure there is even more guns close a whole bunch of children. I think that's an absolutely idiotic idea.

Plus: No, people who have been institutionalized or been in prison are refused work in schools (most of the time, anyway). However, as we have seen in the recent shootings, the shooters are not only reoffenders. Far from it.

 

[rynnor]

Plus: No, people who have been institutionalized or been in prison are refused work in schools (most of the time, anyway). However, as we have seen in the recent shootings, the shooters are not only reoffenders. Far from it.

We aren't talking about the characteristics of the shooters - they aren't relevant when the question is whether it is a good idea to arm a teacher to defend the class.

You also seem to be struggling with the concept that a sub-set of the population is unlikely to mirror the characteristics of the super set.

As an idea potentially arming teachers may be effective but it will be difficult to analyse since its difficult to measure disasters averted on rare events like a school massacre.

On the plus side it may reassure a lot of parents that something is being done to protect their kids rather than doing nothing.

 

[Zenith]

You seem to dodge every response I post. I was merely answering your quite preposterious statement. But yeah, as you said, it'll be impossible to assert the effectiveness of arming teachers. In other words, we have no idea it'll work, while adding lots of potential guns to the very playground of kids. While I agree we gotta do something, there's a million things to do that doesn't involve bringing more guns in to the picture. For example, a LOT better guncontrol and licening (if they could ensure at least a few reoffending criminals have a harder time getting to guns, it's worth something) and spending a LOT more money for increased mental care (increased availability, for everyone) and an increased effort to rehabilitate criminals. And who knows, even consider the idea to phase out the idea for guns everywhere (A boy must dream).

Sure, those example's are boring long-term solutions. In my opinion, it's a long-term problem. I'm sure lots of things can be done short-term, I'm not sure what, but I'm positive it aint arming teachers.

 

[Thugs - The Original!]

Well I suppose it is better go out in a blaze of glory in one hell of a shoot out than just roll over. Think of all the amazing films that we could be watching in a few years time. Shoot out at the old eh - what they call em in America - anyways something like 'Shoot Out At The Old Comprehensive'. Can't wait as I have exhausted my film selections now.

 

[rynnor]

You seem to dodge every response I post. I was merely answering your quite preposterious statement.

I haven't dodged anything and you still have not given a reason why my analysis of sub-set v super set is wrong.

At this point I'm wondering if you are A. too blinkered and feebly clutching an opinion to save you from the horrors of free thought.

Or B. too stupid to understand the discussion.

Or possibly both.

 

[Zenith]

Your analysis of what excactly? A sample =/ population? Basic stats, thanks, I've done it. You dont make sense though.

You were talking about average american vs teachers. Teachers were presumably more mentally stable than "the average american". The ambiguity notwithstanding, I replied according to the empirical findings done in the States (no, I dont have the link to some of the numerous studies done, give me a while I can drag them up for you) mental instability and the potential to develop mental disorders is relatively evenly spread throughout both academic and socioeconomic factors. In other words, we can't say teachers are more stable than anyone else. Cheers for dragging out the argument dude.

 

[Thugs - The Original!]

Bloody laughable really. Wild west and all that. Check this out:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-21712820

Makes sense to be armed as a teacher maybe:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-21721518

Americans luv their guns and they won't give them up without a fight. The more massacres the more guns are sold - go figure.