As I have said I'm no big on guns in general, but I really like this idea. I think its realistic, affordable, and it also provides a viable career venue for vetrans. In a lot of the knee jerking people are doing, I think this is a thoughtful idea that adresses the core issue of protecting schools. Kudos shenanigans.
I cut it out because I honestly don't consider it relevant. It isn't about "mandatory safety classes." You can give someone all the safety classes you want; if they're psychologically unfit for the role, it won't help. It is about the actual people who would apply for such a distinction. A large proportion of Americans are attracted to guns for all the wrong reasons. These people are not the entirety of the gun owning population, but they exist, in large number. And some of them are teachers. And they will be first in line to be the sanctioned Cliff Eastwood of the school.
I think that is a fantastic idea. The problem with arming teachers, as others have pointed out, is the lack of training. And let's be honest, a few weekend classes are not enough. If some lunatic breaks in and starts shooting, I think the last thing anybody would want is a half dozen rookie gun users spraying bullets in the bad guy's general vicinity. It seems like these school shooters are trying to cause the most damage possible with as little risk to themselves as possible (up until they, you know, kill themselves). If schools all had a couple state troopers patrolling the halls, I think it would make them much less desirable targets. That is not to say that gun control and mental health shouldn't still be addressed, but I feel like what the Pennsylvania school district did is the fastest way to address this specific problem of school shootings.
I get why it bothers you, especially if you are not into guns, my wife and I had the same conversation last night. People who like guns like AR-15s, it is a fun gun to shoot and you can do some cool stuff with them, they look cool and everyone wants one and I am speaking from a perspective of someone who lives in AZ where guns are everywhere, most people I know who have guns have one or some version of one. Bushmaster is not the only manufacturer of them, there are a large number of companies who crank them out. Everyone who was considering buying one pulled the trigger (yeah I said that) in the last few days because there will be a price increase and possibly a ban, they do not equate the gun with the person or the horrific needless slaughter of kids last week, the thinking is that if they don't get something they want now the will never get it and as an owner of undisclosed number of said offending weapon I have mixed feelings.
To those pointing out how these mass shootings are rare, and no amount of control could stop a determined psychopath, I agree, mostly because stats and logic (could always make a bomb if they wanted to) back that up. Not to take anything away from the attrocity of 20 children being slaughtered in 10 minutes, but something like 2,000+ American children die from guns each year (almost 100 of them are preschoolers, by the way). Meanwhile, most other Western countries don't reach 100 gun deaths in total. But it's an intractable problem, clearly. But ok, I get it. Being so scared of your countrymen means you need the "freedom" to arm yourself like you live in a third world country dictatorship, and are more or less cool with the downside of 30 or so gun deaths per day. Fair enough. Not that that's settled, I've really go to ask, what the fuck is so enthralling about guns? Hunting, I get. Home protection, I get. But how often do you guys go to the shooting range (and why the fuck would you even want to carry in public)? I know many of you think I'm some dirty hippy that's scared of guns, but I'm actually from Canada's equivalent to your redneck south. Having visited the actual South, I can say our version is very much Canadianized, but my point is I had multiple guns in my house from the time I was born until I moved out. I spent large chunks of most summers until I was 16 on the farm my dad grew up on, shooting my uncle's newest gun. And each trip I'd look forward to it, and have a fair bit of fun...for like 15 minutes, until I wanted to something less monotonous, like build a fort, play with the dogs, ride a quad, look at clouds or fucking jerk off or something. This post actually reminded me that I have fired guns as an adult, at a shooting range a couple years ago, and holy fuck what a waste of time and money (I'm sure your ranges are cheaper, but still). I mean, yeah, the first couple shots made me feel like a man or whatever, and then I kept trying to to hit the bullseye for a bit, until I did, and then...I got thirsty and wanted to talk to girls, so I went to a bar. How someone could actively want to do this more than once a year at most makes me think they're doing so in part with the hopes of someday having to use it on someone. I think it's in Fates Worse Than Death that Vonnegut recalls a story about how he showed proficiency at shooting when he was in the army, and how other solidiers were really impressed with him. He thought the adulation was highly misguided, since he considered firing a gun just slightly more challenging than flicking a lighter, and neither deserved praise. I thought that was a good way of putting it.
I haven't yet read beyond this VG post in the thread, so forgive me if I'm repeating what someone else says. Isn't the point of a deterrant to be a VISIBLE deterrant? If I owned a gun (never gonna happen) for the purposes of home protection, my motiviation would not be to shoot any would-be intruder; I would hope to never confront that situation. Instead, I have a security system at my house (with a sticker on the front and back doors advertising it) and two dogs - one large, one yappy. Between the dogs and the security system, I think it announces to any intruder that there are easier targets to pick from. Maybe it's the Canadian in me, but if I was a burglar and I had to pick between a silent dark house and a house with the lights on and dogs barking and security stickers on the entrances, I'd pick the former, not thinking that maybe someone with a semi-automatic weapon was hidden inside.
That is true, but I think VG's point is that whereas a "Hey, guns in here!" would mean "Go rob the guys next door," the mere possibility of a gun must be applied to any house, since any house might have a gun. It's a positive externality for those who don't own guns. And the same applies re: muggings. That being said, it isn't clear to me that burglars actually act this way, since they are more likely to target a house under the presumption of being empty rather than unarmed. And in the case of muggings, actual people carrying in urban environments are relatively rare, so I doubt it's a serious factor.
See again, like I had to go over with Superfantastic. Try putting yourself in other peoples shoes. Most of the people in here arguing for heavy legislation seem to be coming from the angle that guns sole function is to deal out death in the most efficient means possible. I never disagreed that guns are designed for killing but as a person raised as a gun enthusiast, whose been taught safety and respect for guns, I don't see that as their sole intended purpose. The fact that criminals and lunatics use them for terrifying things doesn't make "guns are inherently bad" as the first go to thought in my mind. Having only used them for enjoyable activities that have enriched my life my views on the are quite the opposite. Panic buying in the face of prohibition is nothing new. Fuck, how many people bought pallets of Four Loko just to stock away or turn a profit on later? Another misguided prohibition based mostly on fear and emotional backlashes, but hey it was Four Loko not something say as cherished as Whiskey. For a lot of gun owners, like myself, they are cherished items. My most prized gun is an Ar15 SPI my dad bought in the seventies which I inherited. It's not the nicest gun I have nor the most useful in certain applications but like some fathers might pass down a baseball glove or bat, I cherish as a family heirloom and a connection with a family member I don't have with me anymore. I know this is a common thread with many many gun enthusiast. When I see people buying it up in droves, sure there are a lot of people getting JUST because there will be a prohibition, but mainly I see it as people hoping to extend the rights they've enjoyed most of their lives that are now in jeopardy. With some of the ideas for legislation being proposed I might not have the right to pass this gun on to my children. Being on what as seen as the negative side of one of these cultural debates is really fucking eye opening. It lets me know how other people in other debates might feel when their hard fought and cherished values are attacked. It gives me a little perspective of what say pro choice women go through in the face of decades of opposition. Being attacked from every angle, having to battle new misguided legislation at every turn, being belittled and misrepresented almost entirely. Just a little perspective for you.
I only go to the range to practice my aim, drawing my weapon from my holster etc. Other than that, it can be kind of boring and monotonous. But so is driving in traffic but that doesn't mean that I don't enjoy taking my hot rod out for a fun drive. I can't explain either one, but doing a long, smokey burnout gets my juices flowing the same as taking out a car hood. It's something that I can't explain, but the smell of gun oil, spent cartridges, race gas, tire smoke, the sound of different caliber guns going off, the sound of an unmuffled high compression engine all give me a rush. I know I've ventured off topic a little but just trying to explain a common man's interest in guns
To address your first paragraph, I am emphatic about increasing gun safety education for kids. I think there are WAY TOO MANY preventable deaths involving children and guns and wholeheartedly believe we can address some of that issue by making gun safety classes more accessable and promoting them. Not to make them proficient with guns or train the next militia, but to recognize what is safe, what isn't, and instill some respect towards guns (which I have a hunch may help curb gun violence later in life). Also, you are drawing comparisons between nations of highly varying populations and backgrounds again. Second, different people are into different activities. Some people like cars, and I like building and shooting guns. If you think shooting is easy, make the target smaller or check out competitions. I am lucky to see a range once every month or two in winter, but shoot in matches and practice at least every other weekend from April to September and then hunt as much as I can in autumn months. It may be boring to you but it's a lot of fun to me, and damn near theraputic when I sit down and put a few hundred rounds through my target rifles (designed and built for shooting paper).
You know, you continue to parrot this. If you honestly think that gun deaths are as well accounted for in central and south america as they are in the United States, I really don't know what to tell you.
Even countries that have become more urbanized (Brazil has advanced significantly, and my home country of Peru is light years ahead of where it was in the 80s), the fact is that corruption still runs rampant and there are small pockets of terrorist resistance. The Shining Path, despite what reports would have you believe, is still stronger than what people believe. But even without terrorist (or freedom fighter depending on your perspective) activity, the corruption makes impossible for any kind of data on gun deaths to be accurate.
I just...there are no words. 2,000 children die from guns, and your take away is not the sheer number/ridiculously easy access, but safety classes, as if people don't know squeezing a trigger makes a hole. (If you happened to click on my link, page 9, only 5% of child gun deaths were accidental/unknown. Safety classes don't prevent homicides, but guns sure make them easier to commit). Haha, so now you're arguing that your gun death rate isn't so bad, because it's close to that of countries who don't even report theirs properly? This, in your mind, is a good thing? EDIT: So these other countires don't report theirs as accurately -- what's your point? Are the American numbers accurate or not? I tend to believe the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, but maybe I'm not paranoid enough.
I never said classes is the ONE solution. Obviously it isn't. But that 5% is still a LOT of preventable death. Also, generally speaking from my experience, most people don't have any clue how to safely handle firearms! You're making a very unsafe assumption there. Also, I'd like to know if Lanza's mother kept her guns in a safe (like she should have).
Regarding this, I'm not sure it matters. The kid was 20 and apparently went shooting with his mother somewhat frequently. I'm sure he knew where the key was or what the combo was.
This is one thing Im hearing on gun boards that people are willing to tolerate instead of outright assault weapons bans. A law requiring safe and secure locations in your house. I think there should be some sort of allowance for self defense weapons you might keep in your room. Maybe a gun lock required on that but I don't think the pro gun side has much capital right now to fight this like they used to.
I had a conversation with my fiance about this, but how do you regulate or enforce the mandatory use of safes in someone's home? What's stopping someone from buying a small lockbox for their bedside drawer when they purchase the gun from turning around and selling it to someone else online? I agree that guns need to be properly secured, I'm just not sure that any law could ensure that would happen.
It's already illegal not reporting a stolen weapon. I guess they could implement stronger penalties on people that do not have their guns properly stored if the gun is stolen and used in a violent crime. Slippery slope and unfair on some levels. Just an idea.