WE: After school shooting in Connecticut, Piers Morgan blasts America’s ‘gun madness’

[twa]

Duckus, don't most Austin area schools already have school cops?
I know AISD does
most also hire extras on a contract basis from the regular police/sheriffs dept ect

[Painkiller]

http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/i...dXBjSvG-X3.jpg

Hey man, you want "common sense" gun laws?

I want "common sense" cultural and social change. All these those things and countless others play a part in what is happening with our country.

[alexey]

I want to protect the kids and all, but spending millions on guns in schools while cutting education and paying peanuts to teachers does not sound like a smart way to allocate resources.

[twa]

what teacher earns peanuts?

[FletchLives]

No room for redemption in your world eh?
You want to ignore 260,000 lives lost because you've already written all of them off as "needin' killin'". That's BS. You approach solutions like the GOP does, eliminate actual options from consideration BEFORE the discussion even begins.

Yet is ok to dismiss over 6,000,000 unarmed Jews rounded up and exterminated not so very long ago in Europe?

And for those that don't know or care about history, take a look at current assault and rape statistics in the very countries the gun controllers wish to emulate. At least Americans have a chance to defend themselves. If you choose to be one of the sheep relying on the rest of us for your safety, that's up to you. But don't hand over our rights because of your fears.

[PeterMP]

Well, if you want to be proactive than these are the choices you have to make. I work for an agency that places cops in schools. I don't know of a single incident in my long career where anything like what you have described has happened. As to your question, are you even sure over time if you will decrease the number of kids killed by guns in an elementary school year....I'm much more confident this will work than banning new sales of assault rifles. Absolutely. In a country that already has 300 million plus guns, you need a practical, realistic, and attainable solution. I have presented one. Now, are people willing to pay that price to make it happen? How serious are we about protecting the kids?

I'm curious what you put the death rate for kids in an elementary school dying in cases where they could be saved by a guard is over the next 30 years and how determined that.

Because I do a good bit of work with statistics and probabilities, and I don't know how I'd even start to put a number on that. Honestly, I'd be interested in what your method was.

On the other hand, I'll bet you that somebody associated with your work has insurance in case the events I described with respect to a guard happen. It might not be your employer, the school district, or the guard, but I'll bet if you start asking around somebody has insurance in case of an "accidental" injury/death caused by the guards gun.

Which means an insurance companies have sat down specifically and said what is the chance of this type of event happening, what is the cost to us likely to be, and how much do we need to charge to make money.

I'll bet nobody has insurance to specifically cover a crazy person walking into and shooting up an elementary school.

If you can't be honest about what you actually know there's no reason to even have this conversation.

---------- Post added December-23rd-2012 at 06:49 AM ----------

And for those that don't know or care about history, take a look at current assault and rape statistics in the very countries the gun controllers wish to emulate. At least Americans have a chance to defend themselves. If you choose to be one of the sheep relying on the rest of us for your safety, that's up to you. But don't hand over our rights because of your fears.

When I look at the rape stats, we're pretty high and above countries like England, France, Germany, Canada, and Japan.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_st...ape_Statistics

I asked before in this thread, if any rifle that is not a single action rifle that requires a physical act more than pulling the trigger (e.g.p pump or bolt action) between each shot is illegal and hand guns are limited holding 6 bullets at a time, does anybody know of a case of self-defense that is likely to have changed?

[Painkiller]

If you can't be honest about what you actually know there's no reason to even have this conversation.

Why is it necessary for me to have working knowledge of every single facet of something? You seem hell bent on discrediting the idea, probably because it's not in line with your thinking. Ok, I'm sure we'd probably have to have insurance, but I do know that pensions and health benefits costs would not have to be provided. These positions could be developed to be part time positions, which do not require these benefits. To be honest, statistics, and probablities are not my area of expertise no, but I tell you what. I'm willing to work with you, who obviously know much more about that facet than I do. I write the policy and procedures manual and the job description, and you deal with sorting out the financial side of things.

What makes more sense? Bringing all of our individual talents and skills to bear on a realistic and attainable goal, or chasing some fantasy where we wish all guns off to never never land.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Yet is ok to dismiss over 6,000,000 unarmed Jews rounded up and exterminated not so very long ago in Europe?

And it's official Godwin's Law strikes again.

We all get the myth you're selling...gun bans equal Nazi Germany.....except that they don't.

[Painkiller]

And it's official Godwin's Law strikes again.

We all get the myth you're selling...gun bans equal Nazi Germany.....except that they don't.

6,000,000 Jews WERE killed by the Nazis. These 6,000,000 Jews either did not own a gun to begin with, or were disarmed. This is historical fact, and perfect evidence of the "worst case scenario." AND In a conversation about gun control, human rights , and mass murder it is a very legitimate topic to bring up. People are kidding themselves if they don't believe anything like that could not be possible here.

Take a look at what happens to many cities and geographical areas after a large enough natural disaster hits. Chaos, large scale burglary and robbery, property destruction, ineffective law enforcement. Every man for himself.

[Burgold]

And it's official Godwin's Law strikes again.

We all get the myth you're selling...gun bans equal Nazi Germany.....except that they don't.

I say this with a slight spirit of cynicism...

On that good Friday before Christmas all through the nation,
people were thinking of good will and salvation,
Well, all except a mouse called the National Rifle Association.

While on this day, Jesus may want your swords tucked away,
and suggest that this would be a time to fish and to pray,
Some worship instead revolvers and the AK,
a gun in every classroom shouts the good ole NRA

And is this the Yule message that Christ would send out,
is the timing a little suspiscious to me there is no doubt,
for while some preach love others just shout.

Is the Christmas spirit one of peace arm and arm.
Or that of a militia warning harm without charm.

And what is that hung in the stocking?
Is that a rifle that Santa's been rocking.
If he comes to your chimney the NRA will be cocking.
with a gun in the hand no door needs locking.

Warning this was stream of consciousness rhyming,
don't beat me up on the rhythm or timing,
but if you do hear the hour bell chiming...
or the sound of hooves on shingles clacking...
it's not reindeer, but boogeyman attacking...
Happy greetings from the NRA and a militia to all and your schools in lock down.

[Koolblue13]

That was just awesome Burg. Great work as usual.

[Painkiller]

Yeah, nice work Burg. Very witty. If we put that much effort into finding solutions to our problems, maybe we could actually...you know....accomplish something?


(and I say that with a smile on my face brother. )

[MartinC]

Yet is ok to dismiss over 6,000,000 unarmed Jews rounded up and exterminated not so very long ago in Europe? .

You have got to be kidding. Are you seriouly suggesting that firstly if individual Jews in Europe had been armed it would have stopped the Holocaust (you can look up the Warsaw Uprising to see what happened when Jews did arm themselves and resist) and then secondly drawing ANY comparison with Nazi Germany and modern USA.

This problem needs careful thought, long term planning and a willingness to seriously enage with the issues on all sides. Comments like the one above suggest this is some way away.

[PeterMP]

Why is it necessary for me to have working knowledge of every single facet of something? You seem hell bent on discrediting the idea, probably because it's not in line with your thinking. Ok, I'm sure we'd probably have to have insurance, but I do know that pensions and health benefits costs would not have to be provided. These positions could be developed to be part time positions, which do not require these benefits. To be honest, statistics, and probablities are not my area of expertise no, but I tell you what. I'm willing to work with you, who obviously know much more about that facet than I do. I write the policy and procedures manual and the job description, and you deal with sorting out the financial side of things.

What makes more sense? Bringing all of our individual talents and skills to bear on a realistic and attainable goal, or chasing some fantasy where we wish all guns off to never never land.

My post doesn't have anything to do with cost. I'll gladly accept your $75,000 per a school per a year and tell you still don't know if your plan will save lives.

Let me try again:

There is some probability that an elementary school kid will be killed in a manner that would have been prevented by having an armed guard (e.g. a shooter will come into the school and because of the actions of the armed guard fewer kids will be killed). I have no idea what that value is, but let's call it x.

There is then some probability that the gun of a guard will cause the death of an innocent kid (either the gun will be discharged accidently, the guard will intentionally/accidentally shot the person, or somebody else will gain control of the guards gun and shoot somebody). I have no idea what that value is, but let's call it y.

Now, I do think that some people have some idea of what y is (e.g. insurance companies). I seriously doubt that anybody can tell you what x is with any degree of certainty.

However, you've told me you are "absolutely" confident that your approach will save lives, which means your absolutely confident that y > x.

My question to you is what value are you using for x and how did you come up with that value.

You've accused me of being biased against your idea and trying to discredit. MadMike accused me of only having an emotional response to this idea.

I'll tell you that your (and MadMike's) plan is an emotional response (we need to do something to protect the kids w/o actually being sure it'll do any good) and based on the information that I know and that has been presented in this thread, there is no reason to believe that your approach will save lives.

More to the point, irregardless (whether I'm doing it because its not in line with my way of thinking or its completely illogical and an emotional over reaction), you should be able to support your argument if you are going to stand by it.

So what is your evidence that y > x? How do you know that y < x or x = y?

Or are you supporting a position based on your already present biases w/o knowing if it'll really help?

[Jumbo]

Here ya go, Burg---Merry Christmas