Alleged shooter at Texas high school spared people he liked, court document says

There is no reason a qualified responsible adult who wishes to carry a concealed weapon on school grounds should be prohibited from doing so.

 

So that rule would apply to 18 yr. old seniors in HS? When you add guns to any situation the odds are bad things are going to happen.

 

It's a ridiculous argument to think teachers would wig out and shoot the students. Not that it couldn't happen, but have you ever heard of that happening? All the teachers could go into class tomorrow and blow all the students away. Denying them permission to carry a gun would not stop them. Denying one teacher permission to carry would not stop him. I'll bet you think 'no gun zone' signs work.

 

In recent school shooting teachers did more than teach

They blocked bullets with their bodies to protect the kids

Thats commendable but also rather stupid when a gun in their hand could have ened the attack for everyone

 

You know Mac....if that thought let's you sleep at night you can go with it but I find it odd that you commend teachers and then call them stupid when there is no evidence that your fictional scenario would work the way you think. Those aren't real bullets on TV and movies. When I looked into being a Nassau County cop in the '70's the average gun fight distance for police was 4 feet. That's fine for a handgun but even then not many hit the mark.

 

I honestly don't know what you're talking about but I'll give it a shot.
How do you balance "It's a ridiculous argument" with "Not that it couldn't happen". Did I ever hear of it happening? No, because teachers don't carry guns. See.....the 'no gun zone' signs work.

 

If teenagers can kill innocent people in public schools why cant innocent people kill the teenage killer?

 

Do you think denying them permission to carry is what's preventing them form shooting up the class?
Let me see, a teacher flips his cork and decides to waste everyone in his class and the only thing preventing him from doing that is he doesn't have permission. He's bat loon crazy and lack of permission to carry is what's preventing him from shooting everyone?
He's about to murder 30 kids, a capital crime, but he wouldn't dare disobey a employee handbook stipulation that he can't carry a gun? That might go on his permanent record and spoil his career. Ridiculous is the perfect word for your argument.
We found someone who thinks no gun zone signs work.
If they worked there wouldn't be any school shootings.

 

Yep, that's exactly what I think. It's apparent that what I say will be taken to the most extreme context with nothing to explain how you ended in this fantasy scene.
Brilliant.

 

Not that it is a bad idea, rather why it would not work. Something not working, and something being a bad idea, are two entirely different standards.

It was yourself presenting the argument that students assault teachers as things are currently as a reason for trying to explain why concealed carry by educators would be a bad idea. That reasoning is that these apparently violent, uncontrollable students will simply steal firearms from educators and utilize them in the commission of school shootings, despite it being impossible to determine which educators would and would not be carrying a firearm.

Meaning that the students and educators were on their own when it came to their own defense and survival.

That is highly debatable in and of itself. The individual responsible for the Aurora theater shooting specifically sought out a movie theater that advertised the fact that it prohibited legal firearms possession on its premises. Despite there being several other theaters that were closer by that could be selected, and showing the same movie at the time, it was this particular theater that was picked.

 

Are eighteen year old individuals legally able to purchase, own, and carry handguns in the united states?

And yet history has proven that this is simply not the case. In the united states there are more firearms owned than ever before at any other point in history, and yet the FBI reports that violence of all types are at near-historic lows.

 

At last count there were eighteen states in the united states where it is legal for educators to carry a concealed firearm at learning facilities. If such were indeed a problem, there would be ample, demonstrable evidence of such by now.

https://www.inverse.com/article/41606-which-states-allow-teachers-to-carry-guns

Simply because such facts are not known to yourself, does not mean that they do not exist.

 

I think the equation of Bad idea = Not working is pretty safe

No, not at all.....I said students COULD overpower a teacher and get their weapon.

Again no. I'm talking about violent, disturbed students like Columbine that plan things out. The student of the thread was something different.

Yes, like we all are......every day.

I don't know what the other theater policies are so I don't know if what you say is true but again, we're talking about school shooting here not the crazies like Aurora and Las Vegas (explain THAT gun free zone to me).

 

And yet school shooting go up

 

And how long have they done that and I believe they have to have school permission. How many do? Your FACT is partly true.

 

The poll found that 69 percent of American adults supported strong or moderate regulations or restrictions for firearms, down from 75 percent in late March, when the first poll was conducted following the Valentine's Day shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland. The new poll numbers are virtually unchanged from pre-Parkland levels.

The latest poll was conducted before the May 18 shooting in Texas, at Santa Fe High School near Houston, that killed 10 people.

So little changed as result of the Florida shooting. I doubt the Texas shooting will change this either.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/gun-control-support-fades-three-months-florida-massacre-100640149.html

 

The FBI may have reported that violence has gone down to the levels of the 1950's perhaps. There is no reliable data before say 1940. So the FBI made no comments on US violence rates historically.

I doubt data exists on mass shootings for very long, that is I don't think it was collected.

 

Why Trump? All of the weapons used were legal here in Australia.

 

Sure, but the concept of burden only goes so far and is very subjective. Is it, for example, a burden in forming militias to create stricter background checks? I doubt there’s background check much stricter than the one used for entertaining into the military and receiving a gun that way, so why should it be assumed stricter background checks would create an undue burden on our ability to form militias (assuming that’s the only gun control measure in place)? Besides, do we really want militias comprised of felony criminals and the mentally disturbed?

Furthermore, I’m not a big fan of gun control measures such as reducing magazine capacities, but even with regards to those such gun control policies, I’m not sure that I see how they create an undue burden on our ability to form a militia.

 

Engaging in a life of crime is certainly a bad decision to make. Yet many do so because of how lucrative it can be to them. As far as they are concerned, it works even though it is a bad idea.

Something being a bad idea does not mean that it does not work.

Which is still not a legitimate reason for prohibiting the legal concealed carry of firearms by educators at facilities of learning.

The difference is, however, that those outside of schools are actually armed and able to defend themselves if need be. The same cannot be said for those inside the school.

Because those who would make the conscious decision to commit a school shooting, and murder their fellow classmates, are the most psychologically healthy and sound minds that can be found, correct? These individuals would not be considered as being crazy?

 

Such individuals are already allowed to hold public office and have authority over the public. What is the difference?