Packchem91 said:

---

packgrad said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

packgrad said:

---

tOne thing is for certain, you absolutely can see how people feel about guns, gun owners, and people trained in using guns when they think a school is more dangerous for the children when there is a trained teacher carrying a gun.

I guess they think it would be safer if there was a law banning scary guns, another one banning scary magazines, and another one making it a "hate crime" to kill school children with scary guns and scary magazines.

---

Another thing that is certain......looking at the "shoot up a school" comparison chart for every other modern country in the world absolutely proves without a doubt that it would be safer for kids if people didn't have access to guns.
I know, I know, but those countries don't have an amendment from 250 years ago.

---

Where did the "reasonable" talk go? I thought the communist Democrats said they just wanted "reasonable" gun bans. I'm so shocked they are being deceptive, yet again...as they always are. Just shocked.

Now you are talking like someone on the far Left who wants to repeal the Second Amendment, and completely abolish the right to own guns.

The First Amendment and the rest of the Constitution was written 250 years ago too. Should we just do away with anything that is this old? Just abolish freedom of speech because it is 250 years old too?

Is everything that is "new" better?...like 70 genders, drag queen story time, and letting trans men compete as "women"?

---

He just wants attention. He's proven over and over again he is ignorant on the topic. Look no further than his latest comment on gun sellers. He's now using arguments he said to ignore before just to be contrarian (inner city crime/handguns). His little constitution comment is an obvious troll trying to get attention.

---

gun sellers don't sell ARs? Who knew?

And you still didn't answer my question. YOU injected yourself into the discussion (attention seeker) to mock those who watned more rules/laws thinking it would help the school kids. I don't know if it will or not --- doing nothing hasn't helped.
I asked you a real simple question that would prove those who think gun proliferation is a problem all wrong if you could simply back up your bravado.

---

I replied to Civ when he wanted a debate. He couldn't respond because he had no answer.

You have read the response and still ignore it. It was not rude. It did not insult anyone. It had fact based information with linked unbiased sources.

But yet you keep on with the same ridiculous hyperbole that isn't based in facts. It is based in make believe scenarios that the MSM/DNC spin and people like you lap up. Educate yourself on the topic and maybe people would take you, well, I was going to say serious but that ship sailed.

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

There is one thing that we absolutely no would make schools safer --- if people didn't have guns.
Now, thats not realistic in America in 2022. Nor in 1922. But it would make people safer overall, and this is not arguable, though I'm sure someone will bring up knives or cars or bats.

But we are gun-crazy, and resist to changes to make it difficult for bad / cray people to get guns. Hopefully, we'll colllectively be more concerned now. But what about in a year? Will we still make sure gun sellers are doing the checks, etc? Probably some, and probably some not.

---

The most deadly school violence incident in American history was committed with a homemade bomb. 44 kids died that day.

Gun sellers don't do the checks. The FBI does the checks. https://www.fbi.gov/services/cjis/nics

---

Wasn't Pyrotol taken off the market after the bombing?

statefan91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

There is one thing that we absolutely no would make schools safer --- if people didn't have guns.
Now, thats not realistic in America in 2022. Nor in 1922. But it would make people safer overall, and this is not arguable, though I'm sure someone will bring up knives or cars or bats.

But we are gun-crazy, and resist to changes to make it difficult for bad / cray people to get guns. Hopefully, we'll colllectively be more concerned now. But what about in a year? Will we still make sure gun sellers are doing the checks, etc? Probably some, and probably some not.

---

The most deadly school violence incident in American history was committed with a homemade bomb. 44 kids died that day.

Gun sellers don't do the checks. The FBI does the checks. https://www.fbi.gov/services/cjis/nics

---

Wasn't Pyrotol taken off the market after the bombing?

---

I don't know because I haven't researched it. Homemade bombs haven't gone away. Do you recall all the Democrat activists who firebombed police property during the riots following Floyd's death? Biden just last week dramatically reduced the prison time for two firebombers in NYC. Did you hear about the firebombing of the Women's health facility (Pro life operation) in Oregon a few days ago?

PackFansXL said:

---

statefan91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

Wasn't Pyrotol taken off the market after the bombing?

---

---

---

I don't know because I haven't researched it. Homemade bombs haven't gone away. Do you recall all the Democrat activists who firebombed police property during the riots following Floyd's death? Biden just last week dramatically reduced the prison time for two firebombers in NYC. Did you hear about the firebombing of the Women's health facility (Pro life operation) in Oregon a few days ago?

---

You brought up the bombing, I was just asking for more information about the response to it which you seemed to be knowledgeable about.

I'm not a firebombing expert so no I haven't researched / recalled all of the firebombs you mentioned. Would love more info that you've found on them and the response to the availability of materials

statefan91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

statefan91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

Wasn't Pyrotol taken off the market after the bombing?

---

---

---

I don't know because I haven't researched it. Homemade bombs haven't gone away. Do you recall all the Democrat activists who firebombed police property during the riots following Floyd's death? Biden just last week dramatically reduced the prison time for two firebombers in NYC. Did you hear about the firebombing of the Women's health facility (Pro life operation) in Oregon a few days ago?

---

You brought up the bombing, I was just asking for more information about the response to it which you seemed to be knowledgeable about.

I'm not a firebombing expert so no I haven't researched / recalled all of the firebombs you mentioned. Would love more info that you've found on them and the response to the availability of materials

---

Statefan, I appreciate your sincerity..

I think the most important takeaway is that **** happens and **** will continue to happen. The gun boogyman is really a bad one because it is so divisive. I believe evil will do things regardless of the instrument used.

That's why you see people, like me, pushing us to to have a discussion surrounding "how we go here". Guns have always been here and misguided killings have always been here; however, this pure evil we see is a somewhat new phenomenon.

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

There is one thing that we absolutely no would make schools safer --- if people didn't have guns.
Now, thats not realistic in America in 2022. Nor in 1922. But it would make people safer overall, and this is not arguable, though I'm sure someone will bring up knives or cars or bats.

But we are gun-crazy, and resist to changes to make it difficult for bad / cray people to get guns. Hopefully, we'll colllectively be more concerned now. But what about in a year? Will we still make sure gun sellers are doing the checks, etc? Probably some, and probably some not.

---

The most deadly school violence incident in American history was committed with a homemade bomb. 44 kids died that day.

Gun sellers don't do the checks. The FBI does the checks. https://www.fbi.gov/services/cjis/nics

---

I was referring to the process in general.

caryking said:

---

Chem, lost in the post above is your question. Please post your question and I will try and respond.

---

Already know your answer -- you don't care about other countries (US #1), so the fact we have this unique issue doesn't matter.

PackFansXL said:

---

statefan91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

There is one thing that we absolutely no would make schools safer --- if people didn't have guns.
Now, thats not realistic in America in 2022. Nor in 1922. But it would make people safer overall, and this is not arguable, though I'm sure someone will bring up knives or cars or bats.

But we are gun-crazy, and resist to changes to make it difficult for bad / cray people to get guns. Hopefully, we'll colllectively be more concerned now. But what about in a year? Will we still make sure gun sellers are doing the checks, etc? Probably some, and probably some not.

---

The most deadly school violence incident in American history was committed with a homemade bomb. 44 kids died that day.

Gun sellers don't do the checks. The FBI does the checks. https://www.fbi.gov/services/cjis/nics

---

Wasn't Pyrotol taken off the market after the bombing?

---

I don't know because I haven't researched it. Homemade bombs haven't gone away. Do you recall all the Democrat activists who firebombed police property during the riots following Floyd's death? Biden just last week dramatically reduced the prison time for two firebombers in NYC. Did you hear about the firebombing of the Women's health facility (Pro life operation) in Oregon a few days ago?

---

Look, there is, too everyone's point who says this incessantly, always a way. If someone wants to go to extremes, they can build a bomb (about 6 weeks ago now, at the start of AP exams, my daughter's HS got evacuated one monring, and the kids had to sit outside in the stadium for 4 hours while authorities searched the school, finding nothing). But it is more difficult.

Apparently, getting an AR and loads of ammo is much easier, at least in Uvalde than getting the ingredients for a bomb (or having the mental capacity to then build the bomb w/o blowing your self up).

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Chem, lost in the post above is your question. Please post your question and I will try and respond.

---

Already know your answer -- you don't care about other countries (US #1), so the fact we have this unique issue doesn't matter.

---

There are 300 million+/- legally owned firearms and I would be willing to wager that there is well into the 100's of billions of legally purchased ammunition if not more that is legally owned as well.

If legal gun ownership was the problem don't you think you lefties would know it by now? Think about it.

statefan91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

statefan91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

Wasn't Pyrotol taken off the market after the bombing?

---

---

---

I don't know because I haven't researched it. Homemade bombs haven't gone away. Do you recall all the Democrat activists who firebombed police property during the riots following Floyd's death? Biden just last week dramatically reduced the prison time for two firebombers in NYC. Did you hear about the firebombing of the Women's health facility (Pro life operation) in Oregon a few days ago?

---

You brought up the bombing, I was just asking for more information about the response to it which you seemed to be knowledgeable about.

I'm not a firebombing expert so no I haven't researched / recalled all of the firebombs you mentioned. Would love more info that you've found on them and the response to the availability of materials

---

My knowledge of the school bombing (it occurred 100 years ago) is limited to an NR article that mentioned the death tally.

I'm not a Democrat activist, so don't take my word for how firebombs are made , but in the movies a glass container is filled with gasoline and a rag is stuffed in the mouth of the container to act as a fuse. The point was to show there are plenty of alternatives besides guns that are in use today but apparently the media sources you use aren't talking about them. Maybe that's because these weapons don't match the Democrat narrative or perhaps these weapons have been more successful for destroying property than people.

caryking said:

---

statefan91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

statefan91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

Wasn't Pyrotol taken off the market after the bombing?

---

---

---

I don't know because I haven't researched it. Homemade bombs haven't gone away. Do you recall all the Democrat activists who firebombed police property during the riots following Floyd's death? Biden just last week dramatically reduced the prison time for two firebombers in NYC. Did you hear about the firebombing of the Women's health facility (Pro life operation) in Oregon a few days ago?

---

You brought up the bombing, I was just asking for more information about the response to it which you seemed to be knowledgeable about.

I'm not a firebombing expert so no I haven't researched / recalled all of the firebombs you mentioned. Would love more info that you've found on them and the response to the availability of materials

---

Statefan, I appreciate your sincerity..

I think the most important takeaway is that **** happens and **** will continue to happen. The gun boogyman is really a bad one because it is so divisive. I believe evil will do things regardless of the instrument used.

That's why you see people, like me, pushing us to to have a discussion surrounding "how we go here". Guns have always been here and misguided killings have always been here; however, this pure evil we see is a somewhat new phenomenon.

---

True. But do you think we are unique in having messed up people? Heck, i read here every day over and over that socialism is going to ruin everyone and has contributed to these kids not knwing how to react to adversity. There are large socialist initiatives and leaders in many European countries and Canada.
Do they have this issue of schools getting shot up?

Or I read all the time that violent video games, movies, music influence kids. Do those things stop at our borders? Do the kids growing up in China, India, Europe and Canada avoid all those?

Or parenting issues....now this one, I 100% agree is an issue....but are we unique in the single parent families, etc. I don't really know, but given how much more liberal Eurpoean countries are than US ones, I'd be hard pressed to believe they don't have single parents all over hte place.

Poverty & influence of immigration --- Europe stuggles with this and in some countries has the corresponding hate groups that go along with it....is that leading to these mass shootings in school or grocery stores?

I have no doubt that we are a different people today than we were when our parents (since we are of same age group) were growing up....but that isn't unique to us either. The school shootings are. So is gun proliferation.

What is "gun proliferation?"

The left has been following Castro Jr.'s lead since Covid...

“You can’t use a gun for self-protection in Canada. It’s not a right that you have,” says Trudeau.

Criminals could potentially harm you and your family with ILLEGAL guns, but YOU, law-abiding citizen, do not have the right to defend yourself with a LEGAL gun. pic.twitter.com/Lt4oS24TiU

— Roberto Wakerell-Cruz ✝️ (@Robertopedia) June 10, 2022

BBW12OG said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

packgrad said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

packgrad said:

---

tOne thing is for certain, you absolutely can see how people feel about guns, gun owners, and people trained in using guns when they think a school is more dangerous for the children when there is a trained teacher carrying a gun.

I guess they think it would be safer if there was a law banning scary guns, another one banning scary magazines, and another one making it a "hate crime" to kill school children with scary guns and scary magazines.

---

Another thing that is certain......looking at the "shoot up a school" comparison chart for every other modern country in the world absolutely proves without a doubt that it would be safer for kids if people didn't have access to guns.
I know, I know, but those countries don't have an amendment from 250 years ago.

---

Where did the "reasonable" talk go? I thought the communist Democrats said they just wanted "reasonable" gun bans. I'm so shocked they are being deceptive, yet again...as they always are. Just shocked.

Now you are talking like someone on the far Left who wants to repeal the Second Amendment, and completely abolish the right to own guns.

The First Amendment and the rest of the Constitution was written 250 years ago too. Should we just do away with anything that is this old? Just abolish freedom of speech because it is 250 years old too?

Is everything that is "new" better?...like 70 genders, drag queen story time, and letting trans men compete as "women"?

---

He just wants attention. He's proven over and over again he is ignorant on the topic. Look no further than his latest comment on gun sellers. He's now using arguments he said to ignore before just to be contrarian (inner city crime/handguns). His little constitution comment is an obvious troll trying to get attention.

---

gun sellers don't sell ARs? Who knew?

And you still didn't answer my question. YOU injected yourself into the discussion (attention seeker) to mock those who watned more rules/laws thinking it would help the school kids. I don't know if it will or not --- doing nothing hasn't helped.
I asked you a real simple question that would prove those who think gun proliferation is a problem all wrong if you could simply back up your bravado.

---

I replied to Civ when he wanted a debate. He couldn't respond because he had no answer.

You have read the response and still ignore it. It was not rude. It did not insult anyone. It had fact based information with linked unbiased sources.

But yet you keep on with the same ridiculous hyperbole that isn't based in facts. It is based in make believe scenarios that the MSM/DNC spin and people like you lap up. Educate yourself on the topic and maybe people would take you, well, I was going to say serious but that ship sailed.

---

LOL @ "couldn't respond," like you're in here dropping "Checkmate!" arguments.

I didn't respond because there was nothing to respond to.

You continue pushing the perceived benefits of arming teachers. Great. I agree that (although it's an unfortunate testament to where we are with gun proliferation in this country) better-securing schools including potentially arming staff may have benefits.

My comment was we need a full cost-benefit analysis including examining not just advantages but also costs and risks; who in the US and around the world has taken the step of arming teachers in schools; the results and challenges of those efforts, etc.

Basically I'm saying it's fine to talk about benefits but we need to be candid about (and make sure not to understate, as is typical) risks and costs. On the front end of a decision it's really easy to oversell the benefits and understate costs and risks.

If you're arguing about that point, you're just looking for something to argue about.

Civilized said:

---

BBW12OG said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

packgrad said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

packgrad said:

---

tOne thing is for certain, you absolutely can see how people feel about guns, gun owners, and people trained in using guns when they think a school is more dangerous for the children when there is a trained teacher carrying a gun.

I guess they think it would be safer if there was a law banning scary guns, another one banning scary magazines, and another one making it a "hate crime" to kill school children with scary guns and scary magazines.

---

Another thing that is certain......looking at the "shoot up a school" comparison chart for every other modern country in the world absolutely proves without a doubt that it would be safer for kids if people didn't have access to guns.
I know, I know, but those countries don't have an amendment from 250 years ago.

---

Where did the "reasonable" talk go? I thought the communist Democrats said they just wanted "reasonable" gun bans. I'm so shocked they are being deceptive, yet again...as they always are. Just shocked.

Now you are talking like someone on the far Left who wants to repeal the Second Amendment, and completely abolish the right to own guns.

The First Amendment and the rest of the Constitution was written 250 years ago too. Should we just do away with anything that is this old? Just abolish freedom of speech because it is 250 years old too?

Is everything that is "new" better?...like 70 genders, drag queen story time, and letting trans men compete as "women"?

---

He just wants attention. He's proven over and over again he is ignorant on the topic. Look no further than his latest comment on gun sellers. He's now using arguments he said to ignore before just to be contrarian (inner city crime/handguns). His little constitution comment is an obvious troll trying to get attention.

---

gun sellers don't sell ARs? Who knew?

And you still didn't answer my question. YOU injected yourself into the discussion (attention seeker) to mock those who watned more rules/laws thinking it would help the school kids. I don't know if it will or not --- doing nothing hasn't helped.
I asked you a real simple question that would prove those who think gun proliferation is a problem all wrong if you could simply back up your bravado.

---

I replied to Civ when he wanted a debate. He couldn't respond because he had no answer.

You have read the response and still ignore it. It was not rude. It did not insult anyone. It had fact based information with linked unbiased sources.

But yet you keep on with the same ridiculous hyperbole that isn't based in facts. It is based in make believe scenarios that the MSM/DNC spin and people like you lap up. Educate yourself on the topic and maybe people would take you, well, I was going to say serious but that ship sailed.

---

LOL @ "couldn't respond," like you're in here dropping "Checkmate!" arguments.

I didn't respond because there was nothing to respond to.

You continue pushing the perceived benefits of arming teachers. Great. I agree that (although it's an unfortunate testament to where we are with gun proliferation in this country) better-securing schools including potentially arming staff may have benefits.

My comment was we need a full cost-benefit analysis including examining not just advantages but also costs and risks; who in the US and around the world has taken the step of arming teachers in schools; the results and challenges of those efforts, etc.

Basically I'm saying it's fine to talk about benefits but we need to be candid about (and make sure not to understate, as is typical) risks and costs. On the front end of a decision it's really easy to oversell the benefits and understate costs and risks.

If you're arguing about that point, you're just looking for something to argue about.

---

In typical lefty speak your answer is to let a bunch of liberal left wing academics spend taxpayer money to do "hypothetical research" to determine if an armed faculty member or staff member carrying a gun would help deter a shooter from entering the school. Why not just look at the 7 schools in the United States that already and have been allowing for it?

The data doesn't support your comrade's argument against disarming American citizens does it?

If your side ever used an ounce of common sense you wouldn't need to spend more tax payer money to realize that the answer is "yes, it would cause them to think twice." It may not stop them but at least there would be the potential to neutralize them once they are inside the building.

Wasn't you but one of your comrades posted the comment that "accidental discharge, shootings, etc..." of faculty/staff member's weapons on school grounds. I asked for the link to support that claim. How about you helping them out and post that.

Here's some help getting started. I know your disdain for doing research and trying to support your strawman arguments with your "facts."

https://www.ncsl.org/research/education/school-safety-guns-in-schools.aspx

https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/laws-allowing-armed-staff-in-K12-schools.html

Looks like that's some pretty extensive research there Civ... that good enough for you and the MARXIST PARTY?

https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/laws-allowing-armed-staff-in-K12-schools.html

This article is actually quite good and offers a balanced perspective. There is plenty in there for both sides of the gun debate to discuss relative to school safety.

Thanks for sharing the link. I would like to encourage more of this kind of posting and less of the inflammatory style from you as well as others.

BBW12OG said:

---

Civilized said:

---

BBW12OG said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

packgrad said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

packgrad said:

---

tOne thing is for certain, you absolutely can see how people feel about guns, gun owners, and people trained in using guns when they think a school is more dangerous for the children when there is a trained teacher carrying a gun.

I guess they think it would be safer if there was a law banning scary guns, another one banning scary magazines, and another one making it a "hate crime" to kill school children with scary guns and scary magazines.

---

Another thing that is certain......looking at the "shoot up a school" comparison chart for every other modern country in the world absolutely proves without a doubt that it would be safer for kids if people didn't have access to guns.
I know, I know, but those countries don't have an amendment from 250 years ago.

---

Where did the "reasonable" talk go? I thought the communist Democrats said they just wanted "reasonable" gun bans. I'm so shocked they are being deceptive, yet again...as they always are. Just shocked.

Now you are talking like someone on the far Left who wants to repeal the Second Amendment, and completely abolish the right to own guns.

The First Amendment and the rest of the Constitution was written 250 years ago too. Should we just do away with anything that is this old? Just abolish freedom of speech because it is 250 years old too?

Is everything that is "new" better?...like 70 genders, drag queen story time, and letting trans men compete as "women"?

---

He just wants attention. He's proven over and over again he is ignorant on the topic. Look no further than his latest comment on gun sellers. He's now using arguments he said to ignore before just to be contrarian (inner city crime/handguns). His little constitution comment is an obvious troll trying to get attention.

---

gun sellers don't sell ARs? Who knew?

And you still didn't answer my question. YOU injected yourself into the discussion (attention seeker) to mock those who watned more rules/laws thinking it would help the school kids. I don't know if it will or not --- doing nothing hasn't helped.
I asked you a real simple question that would prove those who think gun proliferation is a problem all wrong if you could simply back up your bravado.

---

I replied to Civ when he wanted a debate. He couldn't respond because he had no answer.

You have read the response and still ignore it. It was not rude. It did not insult anyone. It had fact based information with linked unbiased sources.

But yet you keep on with the same ridiculous hyperbole that isn't based in facts. It is based in make believe scenarios that the MSM/DNC spin and people like you lap up. Educate yourself on the topic and maybe people would take you, well, I was going to say serious but that ship sailed.

---

LOL @ "couldn't respond," like you're in here dropping "Checkmate!" arguments.

I didn't respond because there was nothing to respond to.

You continue pushing the perceived benefits of arming teachers. Great. I agree that (although it's an unfortunate testament to where we are with gun proliferation in this country) better-securing schools including potentially arming staff may have benefits.

My comment was we need a full cost-benefit analysis including examining not just advantages but also costs and risks; who in the US and around the world has taken the step of arming teachers in schools; the results and challenges of those efforts, etc.

Basically I'm saying it's fine to talk about benefits but we need to be candid about (and make sure not to understate, as is typical) risks and costs. On the front end of a decision it's really easy to oversell the benefits and understate costs and risks.

If you're arguing about that point, you're just looking for something to argue about.

---

In typical lefty speak your answer is to let a bunch of liberal left wing academics spend taxpayer money to do "hypothetical research" to determine if an armed faculty member or staff member carrying a gun would help deter a shooter from entering the school. Why not just look at the 7 schools in the United States that already and have been allowing for it?

The data doesn't support your comrade's argument against disarming American citizens does it?

If your side ever used an ounce of common sense you wouldn't need to spend more tax payer money to realize that the answer is "yes, it would cause them to think twice." It may not stop them but at least there would be the potential to neutralize them once they are inside the building.

Wasn't you but one of your comrades posted the comment that "accidental discharge, shootings, etc..." of faculty/staff member's weapons on school grounds. I asked for the link to support that claim. How about you helping them out and post that.

Here's some help getting started. I know your disdain for doing research and trying to support your strawman arguments with your "facts."

https://www.ncsl.org/research/education/school-safety-guns-in-schools.aspx

https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/laws-allowing-armed-staff-in-K12-schools.html

Looks like that's some pretty extensive research there Civ... that good enough for you and the MARXIST PARTY?

---

So you're saying you want to broadly allow and encourage guns in K-12 schools WITHOUT studying the effects, just based on your gut instinct? That obviously wouldn't fly legislatively.

Or you think we should study the effects but you don't trust the gub'mint to do it?

I'm not sure you even read the links you posted. There's no research there.

The NCSL bulletin just lists the states that allow weapons on campus, and under which circumstances.

The Rand summary clearly explains that there are no qualifying studies meeting criteria that assessed the relationship between mass shootings and allowing armed staff in K-12 schools to carry.

PackFansXL said:

---

https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/laws-allowing-armed-staff-in-K12-schools.html

This article is actually quite good and offers a balanced perspective. There is plenty in there for both sides of the gun debate to discuss relative to school safety.

Thanks for sharing the link. I would like to encourage more of this kind of posting and less of the inflammatory style from you as well as others.

---

the majority of the right wing posters here aren't interested in debate or decorum. All they care about is owning the libs, whether they are perceived as such or actually are liberal.

hokiewolf said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/laws-allowing-armed-staff-in-K12-schools.html

This article is actually quite good and offers a balanced perspective. There is plenty in there for both sides of the gun debate to discuss relative to school safety.

Thanks for sharing the link. I would like to encourage more of this kind of posting and less of the inflammatory style from you as well as others.

---

the majority of the right wing posters here aren't interested in debate or decorum. All they care about is owning the libs, whether they are perceived as such or actually are liberal.

---

I might agree that the majority of posts exclude decorum but not posters. We have a couple of posters who produce a large volume of posts that potentially drown out the others. Everyone could do better.

hokiewolf said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/laws-allowing-armed-staff-in-K12-schools.html

This article is actually quite good and offers a balanced perspective. There is plenty in there for both sides of the gun debate to discuss relative to school safety.

Thanks for sharing the link. I would like to encourage more of this kind of posting and less of the inflammatory style from you as well as others.

---

the majority of the right wing posters here aren't interested in debate or decorum. All they care about is owning the libs, whether they are perceived as such or actually are liberal.

---

Here you go Pinocchio....

BBW12OG said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/laws-allowing-armed-staff-in-K12-schools.html

This article is actually quite good and offers a balanced perspective. There is plenty in there for both sides of the gun debate to discuss relative to school safety.

Thanks for sharing the link. I would like to encourage more of this kind of posting and less of the inflammatory style from you as well as others.

---

the majority of the right wing posters here aren't interested in debate or decorum. All they care about is owning the libs, whether they are perceived as such or actually are liberal.

---

Here you go Pinocchio....

---

you're doing a turrible job ignoring me btw

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Chem, lost in the post above is your question. Please post your question and I will try and respond.

---

Already know your answer -- you don't care about other countries (US #1), so the fact we have this unique issue doesn't matter.

---

Chem, funny... I thought you wanted to engage in a conversation. If you are going to perceive how I will respond, then, that's on you. You might be right; however, I may be more willing to listen than you might think.

That doesn't mean I will agree; rather, I will listen. To create a dialogue, one must listen. I'm listening...

Well...pointing out liars and hypocrites brings out the best in me Pinocchio. Now run along.... I'm sure you have some serious work to do.

PackFansXL said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/laws-allowing-armed-staff-in-K12-schools.html

This article is actually quite good and offers a balanced perspective. There is plenty in there for both sides of the gun debate to discuss relative to school safety.

Thanks for sharing the link. I would like to encourage more of this kind of posting and less of the inflammatory style from you as well as others.

---

the majority of the right wing posters here aren't interested in debate or decorum. All they care about is owning the libs, whether they are perceived as such or actually are liberal.

---

I might agree that the majority of posts exclude decorum but not posters. We have a couple of posters who produce a large volume of posts that potentially drown out the others. Everyone could do better.

---

OTOH, we could just let Ralph Wolf and Sam Sheepdog go back on the clock.

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Chem, lost in the post above is your question. Please post your question and I will try and respond.

---

Already know your answer -- you don't care about other countries (US #1), so the fact we have this unique issue doesn't matter.

---

Chem, funny... I thought you wanted to engage in a conversation. If you are going to perceive how I will respond, then, that's on you. You might be right; however, I may be more willing to listen than you might think.

That doesn't mean I will agree; rather, I will listen. To create a dialogue, one must listen. I'm listening...

---

Sorry, I can see why that came across more harshly than intended. I thought I'd added a smiley face emoji to the top, but it doesn't appear to have come thru....it was a take on your comment yesterday when I asked why no other developed countries had the volume of school shootings as us, and you said you didn't care about any others, because it was all about the USA for you. You told me to repost my question and you'd answer....but it was the same exact question, so I was trying to save you the need to respond again.

PackFansXL said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/laws-allowing-armed-staff-in-K12-schools.html

This article is actually quite good and offers a balanced perspective. There is plenty in there for both sides of the gun debate to discuss relative to school safety.

Thanks for sharing the link. I would like to encourage more of this kind of posting and less of the inflammatory style from you as well as others.

---

the majority of the right wing posters here aren't interested in debate or decorum. All they care about is owning the libs, whether they are perceived as such or actually are liberal.

---

I might agree that the majority of posts exclude decorum but not posters. We have a couple of posters who produce a large volume of posts that potentially drown out the others. Everyone could do better.

---

OTOH, we could just let Ralph Wolf and Sam Sheepdog go back on the clock.

---

LOL, was that their names? I was just thinking about those two characters the other day...man, i miss the Loony Tune cartoons -- nothing has come close to that in terms of kids cartoons, well....at least since before my kids were born 27 years ago.

I could see the characters but I couldn't recall their names. That was a funny bit for sure.

ETA: In the bit they did, the characters were just referred to as Ralph and Sam. I added their species to give the younger folks some context to search on in case they may not be on a first name basis with Looney Tunes characters.

Quote:

---

why no other developed countries had the volume of school shootings as us?

---

I think we might be making the murders of school children more appealing to the unstable population by the way we react. There is an immediate understandable emotional reaction followed quickly by polarized political reactions to the event before anyone understands much about what happened. The shooter's name and photo is prominently featured in national news coverage for several days. Everyone who is related to the shooter is interviewed. Friends are interviewed. They may see the event as a way of making themselves notoriously famous. For example, the would be shooter of Judge Kavanaugh told police he viewed the assassination as a way to give his life purpose.

In one of the articles I read about the last few school shootings, the shooter was known to be a student of the Columbine shooting with a fascination about those shooters and their methods. Perhaps we ironically increase the frequency of these types of events when politicians try to use them to pass or block legislation for political gain. Copy cats have several examples to follow now and a well established impact on society to pursue.

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

why no other developed countries had the volume of school shootings as us?

---

I think we might be making the murders of school children more appealing to the unstable population by the way we react. There is an immediate understandable emotional reaction followed quickly by polarized political reactions to the event before anyone understands much about what happened. The shooter's name and photo is prominently featured in national news coverage for several days. Everyone who is related to the shooter is interviewed. Friends are interviewed. They may see the event as a way of making themselves notoriously famous. For example, the would be shooter of Judge Kavanaugh told police he viewed the assassination as a way to give his life purpose.

In one of the articles I read about the last few school shootings, the shooter was known to be a student of the Columbine shooting with a fascination about those shooters and their methods. Perhaps we ironically increase the frequency of these types of events when politicians try to use them to pass or block legislation for political gain. Copy cats have several examples to follow now and a well established impact on society to pursue.

---

Kinda disgusting isn't it, if true. Seems so unlikely to the rational mind, but then, you're referring to people who are detached and rationalizing like most people.
Or who are filled with hatred.

But I'm also not sure our reactions to any kind of major event are any different from most countries with a free press?

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

why no other developed countries had the volume of school shootings as us?

---

I think we might be making the murders of school children more appealing to the unstable population by the way we react. There is an immediate understandable emotional reaction followed quickly by polarized political reactions to the event before anyone understands much about what happened. The shooter's name and photo is prominently featured in national news coverage for several days. Everyone who is related to the shooter is interviewed. Friends are interviewed. They may see the event as a way of making themselves notoriously famous. For example, the would be shooter of Judge Kavanaugh told police he viewed the assassination as a way to give his life purpose.

In one of the articles I read about the last few school shootings, the shooter was known to be a student of the Columbine shooting with a fascination about those shooters and their methods. Perhaps we ironically increase the frequency of these types of events when politicians try to use them to pass or block legislation for political gain. Copy cats have several examples to follow now and a well established impact on society to pursue.

---

This JAMA article: "Presence of Armed School Officials and Fatal and Nonfatal Gunshot Injuries During Mass School Shootings, United States, 1980-2019" presents some interesting data about 133 school shootings in the US:

• Almost 1/4 had armed security present
• Only 16 shooters were 22 or older
• The mean fatalities when armed security was present was actually higher than overall (2.07 vs. 1.34)
• The number of cases involving an assault-style or semi-automatic rifle was low (14 compared to 92 for handguns) but the mean fatalities was much higher (5.36)

The article also notes: "Prior research suggests that many school shooters are actively suicidal, intending to die in the act, so an armed officer may be an incentive rather than a deterrent." (Citing Peterson J, Densley J. The Violence Project database of mass shootings in the United States. https://www.theviolenceproject.org)

Packchem91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

why no other developed countries had the volume of school shootings as us?

---

I think we might be making the murders of school children more appealing to the unstable population by the way we react. There is an immediate understandable emotional reaction followed quickly by polarized political reactions to the event before anyone understands much about what happened. The shooter's name and photo is prominently featured in national news coverage for several days. Everyone who is related to the shooter is interviewed. Friends are interviewed. They may see the event as a way of making themselves notoriously famous. For example, the would be shooter of Judge Kavanaugh told police he viewed the assassination as a way to give his life purpose.

In one of the articles I read about the last few school shootings, the shooter was known to be a student of the Columbine shooting with a fascination about those shooters and their methods. Perhaps we ironically increase the frequency of these types of events when politicians try to use them to pass or block legislation for political gain. Copy cats have several examples to follow now and a well established impact on society to pursue.

---

Kinda disgusting, if true. Seems so unlikely to the rational mind, but then, you're referring to people who are detached and rationalizing like most people.
Or who are filled with hatred.

But I'm also not sure our reactions to any kind of major event are any different from most countries with a free press?

---

If your assertion that guns are uniquely an American issue is true, then the politicization of guns must also be uniquely prevalent here as well. We are also presently experiencing the most polarizing narrative driven press of my lifetime. Truly ugly times that are about to get even worse.

Manny Sanguine said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

why no other developed countries had the volume of school shootings as us?

---

I think we might be making the murders of school children more appealing to the unstable population by the way we react. There is an immediate understandable emotional reaction followed quickly by polarized political reactions to the event before anyone understands much about what happened. The shooter's name and photo is prominently featured in national news coverage for several days. Everyone who is related to the shooter is interviewed. Friends are interviewed. They may see the event as a way of making themselves notoriously famous. For example, the would be shooter of Judge Kavanaugh told police he viewed the assassination as a way to give his life purpose.

In one of the articles I read about the last few school shootings, the shooter was known to be a student of the Columbine shooting with a fascination about those shooters and their methods. Perhaps we ironically increase the frequency of these types of events when politicians try to use them to pass or block legislation for political gain. Copy cats have several examples to follow now and a well established impact on society to pursue.

---

This JAMA article: "Presence of Armed School Officials and Fatal and Nonfatal Gunshot Injuries During Mass School Shootings, United States, 1980-2019" presents some interesting data about 133 school shootings in the US:

• Almost 1/4 had armed security present
• Only 16 shooters were 22 or older
• The mean fatalities when armed security was present was actually higher than overall (2.07 vs. 1.34)
• The number of cases involving an assault-style or semi-automatic rifle was low (14 compared to 92 for handguns) but the mean fatalities was much higher (5.36)

The article also notes: "Prior research suggests that many school shooters are actively suicidal, intending to die in the act, so an armed officer may be an incentive rather than a deterrent." (Citing Peterson J, Densley J. The Violence Project database of mass shootings in the United States. https://www.theviolenceproject.org)

---

Those are interesting stats, Manny. Without reading the link, I wonder how often the armed security presence stood around doing nothing for an hour like that chief in Uvalde. I assume that event counted as armed security present even though they were ineffective.

PackFansXL said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Quote:

---

why no other developed countries had the volume of school shootings as us?

---

I think we might be making the murders of school children more appealing to the unstable population by the way we react. There is an immediate understandable emotional reaction followed quickly by polarized political reactions to the event before anyone understands much about what happened. The shooter's name and photo is prominently featured in national news coverage for several days. Everyone who is related to the shooter is interviewed. Friends are interviewed. They may see the event as a way of making themselves notoriously famous. For example, the would be shooter of Judge Kavanaugh told police he viewed the assassination as a way to give his life purpose.

In one of the articles I read about the last few school shootings, the shooter was known to be a student of the Columbine shooting with a fascination about those shooters and their methods. Perhaps we ironically increase the frequency of these types of events when politicians try to use them to pass or block legislation for political gain. Copy cats have several examples to follow now and a well established impact on society to pursue.

---

This JAMA article: "Presence of Armed School Officials and Fatal and Nonfatal Gunshot Injuries During Mass School Shootings, United States, 1980-2019" presents some interesting data about 133 school shootings in the US:

• Almost 1/4 had armed security present
• Only 16 shooters were 22 or older
• The mean fatalities when armed security was present was actually higher than overall (2.07 vs. 1.34)
• The number of cases involving an assault-style or semi-automatic rifle was low (14 compared to 92 for handguns) but the mean fatalities was much higher (5.36)

The article also notes: "Prior research suggests that many school shooters are actively suicidal, intending to die in the act, so an armed officer may be an incentive rather than a deterrent." (Citing Peterson J, Densley J. The Violence Project database of mass shootings in the United States. https://www.theviolenceproject.org)

---

Those are interesting stats, Manny. Without reading the link, I wonder how often the armed security presence stood around doing nothing for an hour like that chief in Uvalde. I assume that event counted as armed security present even though they were ineffective.

---

Seems like there are at least two relevant questions:

• To what degree does armed security interrupt or circumvent a shooting incident? (What failed to happen Uvalde.)
• To what degree does armed security act as a deterrent to a shooter. (In 23% of the cases in the JAMA study, it was not a deterrent.)

The first question is hard to answer without a more narrative descriptpion of each case.