• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

NRA's solution to Sandy Hook massacre: "armed guards" in every school

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hahahahaha, holy shit. Yeah dude, if you start murdering people cause the government said that you can't have one of your items anymore, you're fucking mentally ill. It's not fucking hard to understand.

Where are you coming up with these cartoon like scenarios? Defending yourself when someone comes to take something away from you that was a right and then all of a sudden turned off like a lightswitch is murdering?
 
Hahahahaha, holy shit. Yeah dude, if you start murdering people cause the government said that you can't have one of your items anymore, you're fucking mentally ill. It's not fucking hard to understand.

True but if you refuse to give up (not killing people) something you see as one of your basic freedoms, are you still mentally ill?

Not that it matters really because the government is never going to fully appeal the second amendment.
 
Hahahahaha, holy shit. Yeah dude, if you start murdering people cause the government said that you can't have one of your items anymore, you're fucking mentally ill. It's not fucking hard to understand.

Why even delve this far deep into a hypothetical that's not happening?
 
People hunt with the .223?
I have no direct experience with this cartridge, but from my understanding it's a NATO 556 analog.
Is that true?
Because if so, it's a TERRIBLE choice for hunting.
It's not practical, it breaks in the body and it's range and penetration power highly increase the chance of hunting accidents.

Now we need to get into bullet design and whatnot. :) Disclaimer: I do not hunt so if I am wrong please correct me. .223/5.56 is a good hunting round because it kills animals quickly. At very high velocities and when unstabilied it can fragment, and when designed to fragment it obviously will do so. This is not necessarily a bad thing for hunting as long as the would channel leaves enough meat to harvest. As for over penetration, the fragmentation helps prevent that by reducing the mass of each piece and therefore its energy.

Banning a particular round is not very practical becuase someone will just tweak the design a bit and then you have a new unbanned round the same as the old one. Bannings bay bullet diameter are easier to make comrehensive, but a .22lr (a very low powered round) and a 5.56mm have basically the same diameter bullet, just different cases and poweder loads.

a 5.56NATO is not some massive powerhouse of a round, many soldiers and policymakers think it is too weak and a more powerful round should be issued.

Edit: Got so busy with my reply I missed your addition.

I base it almost exclusively on the ammo it uses (I singled it out because that was the type of weapons we happened to be discussing, I don't think it's the end all be all question of gun control).

Ah. I think it is important to remember that AR15 rifles use regular ammunition that is the same specifiaction asmany bolt action hunting rifles.
 
Well McGuinty wants to implement a $10 million locked door policy and more cameras on all schools even though the massacre didn't happen in Canada, so we aren't immune from the crazies spilling over from the south and knee jerk reactions.

Oh no, cameras and locked doors! Won't someone please think of the children?!

:P
 
I've said this elsewhere to people, but here's how I see this as an educator:

As this tragedy fades into our national memory, kids won't see armed guards as protectors from outside forces. They'll see people walking around in the halls with guns and think "those people are here to make sure I don't leave and that I behave". You can't teach a kid who feels like they're in a prison. Environment is a huge factor in education, and this doesn't promote the correct mindset a kid needs to be in to maximize their learning.
 
Where are you coming up with these cartoon like scenarios? Defending yourself when someone comes to take something away from you that was a right and then all of a sudden turned off like a lightswitch is murdering?

Are you being serious here? You wouldn't classify killing someone that's taking your gun away as murder? What in fuck?!
 
I don't want my guns taken away because they are my primary hobby. I like to wage war on soda cans and pieces of paper from long distances, not defend myself from Uncle Sam.

AR15s are extremely fun rifles because they are very customizable. I can outfit one to fit me like a glove. With a standard rifle I can maybe extend the stock and change some of the functional components, but I don't have a lot of options as far as ergonomics go.
 
I don't want my guns taken away because they are my primary hobby. I like to wage war on soda cans and pieces of paper from long distances, not defend myself from Uncle Sam.

AR15s are extremely fun rifles because they are very customizable. I can outfit one to fit me like a glove. With a standard rifle I can maybe extend the stock and change some of the functional components, but I don't have a lot of options as far as ergonomics go.

lol!
 
Where are you coming up with these cartoon like scenarios? Defending yourself when someone comes to take something away from you that was a right and then all of a sudden turned off like a lightswitch is murdering?

Yeah, it's murder.

You are not defending, you are violently resisting.
 
I've said this elsewhere to people, but here's how I see this as an educator:

As this tragedy fades into our national memory, kids won't see armed guards as protectors from outside forces. They'll see people walking around in the halls with guns and think "those people are here to make sure I don't leave and that I behave". You can't teach a kid who feels like they're in a prison. Environment is a huge factor in education, and this doesn't promote the correct mindset a kid needs to be in to maximize their learning.

In elementary school certainly I agree with you. I had no problem with a police officer at my high school, however. I think at that age people understand better why he would be there.
 
Are you being serious here? You wouldn't classify killing someone that's taking your gun away as murder? What in fuck?!

In the very specific (and unrealistic) scenario I painted, yes.

As Mammoth said, why even delve that deep into something that isn't going to happen?

BTW, I'm not advocating "do nothing" concerning guns and gun control, but damn, swinging the pendulum all the way in the other direction is a crazy and short-sighted over reaction to an issue as multi-faceted as this one.
 
Given the designs of many schools, like ones with open layouts, locking schools down isn't even physically practical in many places, let alone fiscally. These suggestions of turning schools into fortresses with guards are just expensive band-aids taking even more money away from actual education while addressing none of the underlying issues behind these mass shootings.

Okay, so what are the underlying issues and how do you solve them?

I don't see any way this problem is solved in the short term. Changing our gun culture will be at a snail's pace. Perhaps high capacity magazines and assault rifles will be banned, but that will not solve the problem, because handguns will surely continue to be legal.

The most immediate solution is to put a cop at every school and tighten security. Continue to work on gun control laws, sure, but keep the kids safe in the process.
 
Are you being serious here? You wouldn't classify killing someone that's taking your gun away as murder? What in fuck?!

yea esp if there is a law making certain guns illegal. If a cop ever comes by to take someones weed away, it's okay to shoot them now!
 
Where are you coming up with these cartoon like scenarios? Defending yourself when someone comes to take something away from you that was a right and then all of a sudden turned off like a lightswitch is murdering?
Because it was being talked about, and because there's a lot of mentally ill gun nuts.

True but if you refuse to give up (not killing people) something you see as one of your basic freedoms, are you still mentally ill?

Not that it matters really because the government is never going to fully appeal the second amendment.
No to the first part, true on the second part.

Why even delve this far deep into a hypothetical that's not happening?

Because it was being discussed in the thread, and because there are a lot of mentally ill gun nuts.
 
In the very specific (and unrealistic) scenario I painted, yes.

As Mammoth said, why even delve that deep into something that isn't going to happen?

BTW, I'm not advocating "do nothing" concerning guns and gun control, but damn, swinging the pendulum all the way in the other direction is a crazy and short-sighted over reaction to an issue as multi-faceted as this one.

You don't kill someone who is trying to take away your gun. You should comply at the time and then take diplomatic avenues to try to get your weapons back if that is what you desire. Murder is murder.
 
In elementary school certainly I agree with you. I had no problem with a police officer at my high school, however. I think at that age people understand better why he would be there.

I'm actually looking at this from a high school perspective. Even if the kids understand why they're there, it's not going to make them feel safer, it's going to make them feel fearful.

Also high school kids value the freedom that comes along with high school. To have armed guards patrol while the kids walk between classes is going to hinder that.

The school I work at has a security team, made up of mostly former police officers. They don't have any weapons. They wear casual windbreakers in the school colors to identify them. They do a lot of work making the kids feel comfortable with them and not to think of them like a guard, but rather someone looking out for their welfare. They're very relaxed and casual and often chat with the kids about sports and that kind of thing and always greet kids that walk by them.

It's hard to do that with a deadly weapon at your side.
 
The most immediate solution is to put a cop at every school and tighten security. Continue to work on gun control laws, sure, but keep the kids safe in the process.

There are towns that don't have police forces at all (they only have county sherrif's departments). There's no money for putting a cop in every school. There's barely enough money to teach kids to begin with.
 
So murdering dozens in the matter of minutes "can be done with any other type of weapon" But defending your home and property can only be done with a gun?

Got it.
 
Isn't that the main problem here...people are advocating taking away a right that has been around since the inception of our country. Wouldn't you be pissed off if the government took away a right you cared about? If you tried to do something about it, that would make you mentally ill?
If the government said your semi-automatic weapon was now illegal and you could only use single-shot weapons and you wanted to KILL people because of it, you may not be mentally ill, but you're definitely a piece of shit.
 
There are towns that don't have police forces at all (they only have county sherrif's departments). There's no money for putting a cop in every school. There's barely enough money to teach kids to begin with.

There's barely enough money for cops period. The town I grew up in doesn't have one. We loan one every other day from the county. So if someone breaks into your house, calling the cops on the wrong day would take upwards of 40 minutes to get help.
 
I'm actually looking at this from a high school perspective. Even if the kids understand why they're there, it's not going to make them feel safer, it's going to make them feel fearful.

Also high school kids value the freedom that comes along with high school. To have armed guards patrol while the kids walk between classes is going to hinder that.

The school I work at has a security team, made up of mostly former police officers. They don't have any weapons. They wear casual windbreakers in the school colors to identify them. They do a lot of work making the kids feel comfortable with them and not to think of them like a guard, but rather someone looking out for their welfare. They're very relaxed and casual and often chat with the kids about sports and that kind of thing and always greet kids that walk by them.

It's hard to do that with a deadly weapon at your side.

Oh okay, well I see where you are coming from. The officer at my school stayed out of the way (he had an office somewhere in the administrative section of the building). Us students didn't really notice him. But maybe it had an effect on other students that I just wasn't aware of. I am not sure if he even carried a gun honestly.

The situation that your school is in is probably the better one. Maybe not one that could be replicated in other places though.
 
Has this happened yet at schools who do have armed guards?

You put them at every school some stupid shit is bound to happen. Anyway the whole idea stinks of turning schools into something even more similar to prisons. Shit was bad enough when I was going to highschool post Columbine, now there is fencing everywhere, punishments for not having your ID on you 24/7 and a whole litany of other shit done before you can just sit down and learn, the whole reason they came to school in the first place.
 
Funny that the organization that says guns are needed by its citizens to protect against government tyranny literally is asking for a "police state" in our schools.
 
Please tell me you meant sociopaths or that's a joke that's flown right over my head. People with depression are no more ticking time bombs of crime than anyone else.

It was sarcasm, yeah. The NRA calling for a national database of mentally ill people would (I assume) include depressed people, which would be completely stupid.
 
why are there so many gun crimes to begin with?
because there are too many US made guns produced and in circulation!!!!
LOL
Fewer guns would reduce gun violence, not more.

But but you must protect yourself!!!! yeah but where did those guns come from in the first place?

Those guns don't come from Russia or North Korea, those guns are made right here!!!!

Ban non-hunting guns from civilians all entirely and just keep them for cops and troops.
 
Say guns where made illegal tomorrow, what exactly would happen?

I assume the government would send out armed patrols to every house in America asking people to give up their guns. Some would comply, some would refuse, and some would rise up in armed revolt. I could see a lot of places (in rural areas mostly) in open revolt from the government.
 
how would this really help? what happens when one of these guards goes off the nut one day?

What happens if the attacker just shoots the cop/guard first and then takes his guns and ammo, too?

What happens if a cop does this? How is this any different than a police officer going berserk and shooting up his precinct or a school?

Are trained guards more susceptible to mental health issues than other armed figures in society?
 
I've said this elsewhere to people, but here's how I see this as an educator:

As this tragedy fades into our national memory, kids won't see armed guards as protectors from outside forces. They'll see people walking around in the halls with guns and think "those people are here to make sure I don't leave and that I behave". You can't teach a kid who feels like they're in a prison. Environment is a huge factor in education, and this doesn't promote the correct mindset a kid needs to be in to maximize their learning.
I agree.

I don't want my guns taken away because they are my primary hobby. I like to wage war on soda cans and pieces of paper from long distances, not defend myself from Uncle Sam.

AR15s are extremely fun rifles because they are very customizable. I can outfit one to fit me like a glove. With a standard rifle I can maybe extend the stock and change some of the functional components, but I don't have a lot of options as far as ergonomics go.
This argument holds no meaning for me. I don't care about your hobby. I care about whether people live or die.
 
Saw this at gawker lol...


Hey NRA, lets talk math. Huddle over here. Bring those fiscal conservatives with you too, they'll love this. As of 2010 the Institute of Education Sciences lists 98,817 public schools in the United States. That doesn't include the 33,366 private schools and the 6,742 postsecondary institutions, but we'll leave those two out.

Okay, moving on.

So now lets talk about hiring a police officer for each of those schools, that's what you want right? Looking at specific job postings shows ranges in salaries (some are paid hourly but the end monetary compensation is about the same) between $34,400 to $45,600 a year. Now the annual salary of a police officer typically averages out across the nation at $55,620 a year, but obviously this case is different. I've seen salaries as low as $30,000 and as high as $80,000. Experience and area dictate this of course. For the sake of making the best argument, lets go at the bottom, $30,000.

Simple math: $30,000 x 98,817 = $2,964,510,000. Just for kicks, based on the average salary across the nation of $53,540 (different source). $53,540 x 98,817 = $5,290,662,180. That's per year.

Yup, still want to keep those low tax rates huh?
 
Where are you coming up with these cartoon like scenarios? Defending yourself when someone comes to take something away from you that was a right and then all of a sudden turned off like a lightswitch is murdering?

Well.... Yes?

Are you really arguing that it is acceptable to murder someone who is trying to take your guns? And not "some random thief in the night" someone; someone who is taking your gun legally because of some duly passed hypothetical law or constitutional amendment and who is not personally responsible for taking your gun but is acting only a representative of the government?
 
Ban non-hunting guns from civilians all entirely and just keep them for cops and troops.

Sounds good to me. Although I think civilians should be able to go to firing ranges and use other guns, if those guns were locked up at the firing ranges and not allowed to leave.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom