Mass shootings

[GMDino]

Just got back from the school board meeting for our district.  We are in a rural area and we've had a couple "threats" but no guns in the school or on the school grounds.

My wife and I were very happy with the moves that have been made, the ideas that were discussed and the items coming up:  Added metal detectors, increased security, armed security, better track of locked doors even in the after school hours when activities are going on, etc.

One thing NOT brought up was arming teachers.

After the meeting two of the older teachers were talking.  One is a hunter the other never fired a gun in his life.  Both said if they offered they would have no problem with the trained, experienced teachers carrying though.

Overall a good meeting with input from the security, school board, teachers and parents.  We all agreed that this isn't a single answer problem and that a spectrum of answers will be required.

[*bfine32*]

(02-28-2018, 11:39 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I was hoping you'd elaborate on the gun free zone statement rather than trying to prove that my pretty openly facetious comment wasn't sincere.

I didn't know more elaboration was required than: It's as effective as folks are willingly to follow the regulations. 

Of course you comment was openly facetious; that's why I suggested (facetiously) that POTUS was doing more than that, but it seems folks are hell bent on disagreeing with anything he suggests because.......

[*bfine32*]

(02-28-2018, 11:40 PM)GMDino Wrote: Just got back from the school board meeting for our district.  We are in a rural area and we've had a couple "threats" but no guns in the school or on the school grounds.

My wife and I were very happy with the moves that have been made, the ideas that were discussed and the items coming up:  Added metal detectors, increased security, armed security, better track of locked doors even in the after school hours when activities are going on, etc.

One thing NOT brought up was arming teachers.

After the meeting two of the older teachers were talking.  One is a hunter the other never fired a gun in his life.  Both said if they offered they would have no problem with the trained, experienced teachers carrying though.

Overall a good meeting with input from the security, school board, teachers and parents.  We all agreed that this isn't a single answer problem and that a spectrum of answers will be required.

And the issue I have is that the things suggested at your meeting are more intrusive than allowing trained educators that wish to conceal carry to do so. Who wants to come to school walking through metal detectors and armed security? But kudos to your district for looking for solutions. 

[BengalHawk62]

Another article but this one is an opinion piece that sheds light on the heart of the issue from my prospective.



http://www.post-gazette.com/opinion/Op-Ed/2012/12/23/I-am-Adam-Lanza-s-mother-My-son-threatens-to-kill-me-I-ve-tried-everything-everything-is-not-enough/stories/201212230224

[fredtoast]

(02-28-2018, 11:48 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Who wants to come to school walking through metal detectors and armed security?

People who ant to feel safe.

No one likes going through security at an airport, but there is no way I am getting on an airplane without every passenger doing it.

[GMDino]

(02-28-2018, 11:48 PM)bfine32 Wrote: And the issue I have is that the things suggested at your meeting are more intrusive than allowing trained educators that wish to conceal carry to do so. Who wants to come to school walking through metal detectors and armed security? But kudos to your district for looking for solutions. 

Everyone did.

I suppose the students don't want to.  It takes longer.

The head of security said they are working on speeding all that up too.  He also mentioned that since the random bag checks their incidents of tobacco or any other items that are illegal have gone down to zero.

So the students are aware they are being watched and their behavior has improved.

[*bfine32*]

(02-28-2018, 11:52 PM)fredtoast Wrote: People who ant to feel safe.

No one likes going through security at an airport, but there is no way I am getting on an airplane without every passenger doing it.

Not sure we can compare going to school with flying on an airplane, but I guess we can try. 

We may need that Benton dude to tell us if you're following or not. 

[StLucieBengal]

All this talk of securing schools, which is valid.

Isn’t it safer and cheaper to just go virtual classrooms? At least in these larger cities.

[fredtoast]

(02-28-2018, 11:55 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Not sure we can compare going to school with flying on an airplane, but I guess we can try.

Okay, how about a courthouse and a school.

Or is that also too difficult for you to grasp?

[BmorePat87]

(02-28-2018, 11:46 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I didn't know more elaboration was required than: It's as effective as folks are willingly to follow the regulations. 

Of course you comment was openly facetious; that's why I suggested (facetiously) that POTUS was doing more than that, but it seems folks are hell bent on disagreeing with anything he suggests because.......

So we can say that all laws "don't work" if one person break it?

Because that's the logic I didn't follow. 

[fredtoast]

(02-28-2018, 11:55 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Isn’t it safer and cheaper to just go virtual classrooms?  At least in these larger cities.

Virtual classrooms are impossible for families where both parents work during the day.

[BmorePat87]

(02-28-2018, 11:53 PM)GMDino Wrote: Everyone did.

I suppose the students don't want to.  It takes longer.

The head of security said they are working on speeding all that up too.  He also mentioned that since the random bag checks their incidents of tobacco or any other items that are illegal have gone down to zero.

So the students are aware they are being watched and their behavior has improved.

One of the admins from DC at Trump's listening sessions mentioned how they greet every student during the metal detector process. "How are you today?" "How are you feeling?" "Everything good this morning?" and people who seem off or express that they're not having a good day chat with a counselor or other similar support professional. 

Said they can solve/prevent a lot of issues this way. It's expensive and takes time, but it's better for learning than armed teachers IF you had to choose between the two. Personally, I'm not in favor of metal detectors, but I like the check in process.

[StLucieBengal]

(03-01-2018, 12:02 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Virtual classrooms are impossible for families where both parents work during the day.

Why? Seems like the ideal working environment .

[BengalHawk62]

(02-28-2018, 11:55 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: All this talk of securing schools, which is valid.

Isn’t it safer and cheaper to just go virtual classrooms? At least in these larger cities.

What if you don’t have the internet at home?

[*bfine32*]

(03-01-2018, 12:01 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: So we can say that all laws "don't work" if one person break it?

Because that's the logic I didn't follow. 

Maybe you don't follow because you cannot (or choose not to) comprehend what I am writing. I said the example provided shows it does not work. If it worked in this example then how did he have a gun on campus?  

[StLucieBengal]

(03-01-2018, 12:08 AM)BengalHawk62 Wrote: What if you don’t have the internet at home?

Then I guess you go to the library or coffee shop. Plenty of options out there.

Obviously this may not work for some of the rural locations but the point is to get the high population areas dispersed.

A bulk of children could be fine with their safety. A school shooter would have to go door to door.

[BmorePat87]

(02-28-2018, 11:55 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: All this talk of securing schools, which is valid.  

 Isn’t it safer and cheaper to just go virtual classrooms?  At least in these larger cities.

It's safer. I don't know if it's cheaper, but it's certainly not as effective. A lack of meaningful oversight of students and the restrictions of virtual classrooms would hinder many students, though some students could be effective in this setting. 

I imagine it would cost more to send legally required support services to each of these kids houses and deliver food to each house too. We also lose the safety net component of school. 

[fredtoast]

(03-01-2018, 12:06 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Why?   Seems like the ideal working environment .

Sorry, but I don't understand.

I thought that by "virtual classroom" you meant kids staying at home to get their lessons.

What do you mean by "ideal working environment"?

[BmorePat87]

(03-01-2018, 12:10 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Maybe you don't follow because you cannot (or choose not to) comprehend what I am writing. I said the example provided shows it does not work. If it worked in this example then how did he have a gun on campus?  

No, I understood, which is why I am saying that this logic suggests that ALL laws do not work since at least one person violates every law.



So now that you've pointed out that a microscopic percentage of the population is willing to break a law, what do we do with this? Do we just stop making laws or what? 

[*bfine32*]

(03-01-2018, 12:16 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: No, I understood, which is why I am saying that this logic suggests that ALL laws do not work since at least one person violates every law.



So now that you've pointed out that a microscopic percentage of the population is willing to break a law, what do we do with this? Do we just stop making laws or what? 

I said laws are as effective as folks are willing to follow them; I assume you're still not following. That law did not work in the situation and the point trying to be made that this example supports that trained educators should not be allowed to conceal carry actually proved exactly the opposite. The "gun free zone" law did not work in this situation.

Not sure if you will get it after this explanation or not, but I'm done explaining it; folks can just read it.