| |
batya
Making the WWW better, one post at a time.
PeaNut 59,094
December 2002
Posts: 31,850
Layouts: 24
Loc: up on my high horse
 |  Posted: 12/22/2012 11:45:38 PM
Are we to put armed gunmen in every public place and in every business? Because you do remember that these mass murders aren't at just schools but in theaters, churches, & private businesses.
if they need it. Do you think there should be an armed officer at a bank?
Who exactly is paying for all these police officers to be at these public places? At banks, the bank incurs the cost of the security. So are you implying that now schools have to foot the bill for this? Or are you saying the govt does? B/c if we use police officers, your taxes are going to go up. OR it will come from somewhere else. Where? Military budget? Property taxes so that education suffers and instead of taking care of the cause we put a band aid on the effect? Everyone has a remedy without looking at the practical ramifications of that remedy.
I've seen a lot of people say, just put guards and police in the schools, etc. OK. So tell me where is this in the school budget? Or is it the govt's budget? Who is paying? These are BIG questions. And they still don't solve the problem. |
OK. Newbie. This is how it works. If your post consists of 80% sanity, 10% stupidity and 10% all kinds of crazy, we immediately focus on the 20% b/c it discredits the 80%.
| |
|
|
ihearth
PeaNut
PeaNut 478,872
August 2010
Posts: 238
Layouts: 0
Loc: Where they love me.
 | Posted: 12/22/2012 11:56:32 PM
Who exactly is paying for all these police officers to be at these public places? At banks, the bank incurs the cost of the security. So are you implying that now schools have to foot the bill for this?
I can't speak for other places, but here in Florida, the city police department is providing the police officers at our schools. So this is coming out of our taxes. The School resource officer spends his 8-hour workday at the school. They've had a SRO at our schools the entire time my kids have been in school. | |
|
leftturnonly
Will trade mosquitoes for cookies.
PeaNut 416,788
March 2009
Posts: 19,593
Layouts: 0
Loc: Living in Kim's Perfect World, again.
 | Posted: 12/23/2012 12:44:47 AM
I'm waiting to read the counters to Sylvia's excellent article, which was full of specific historical facts.
Batya?
|
If PC is the way to get to Heaven, I'm going straight to Hell.
| |
|
|
gar
Whoopea!
PeaNut 172,235
October 2004
Posts: 12,506
Layouts: 0
Loc: England UK
 | Posted: 12/23/2012 3:15:23 AM
what would you do if you were approached by an assailant who had a weapon of any kind? How would you react? What would you do to distract the assailant? How would you get away? This setting can be walking down the street, in a grocery store, in a restaurant, in a school. I am really interested on what others would do if they were in this circumstance.
Bear in mind that in the UK the chances of an assailant having a gun are so low as to not be a concern, it's far more likely to be a knife.
I take all sensible precautions to keep myself safe initially. I can carry a pepper spray if I do have to walk somewhere that makes me nervous (which very rarely happens).
In a public situation it's often happened that the men around have overpowered a criminal. Someone with a knife has to get very close to someone to slash or stab them so there's more time to get away or fight back or, if they do make contact, for the person to be wounded rather than killed. Also, to put it bluntly, you could shoot 10 people in the time it takes to stab one.
If I'm going to be raped, then it'll probably happen unless I can kick them in the googlies or poke them in the eye hard enough to get a few seconds to run. Someone would have to get close enough to grab me and in that situation I doubt I would be able to reach for my gun and fire in anything like a effective way anyway so having a gun wouldn't make me feel any safer.
|
"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."
Stephen Roberts
| |
|
|
dottyscrapper
PeaAddict
PeaNut 311,985
April 2007
Posts: 1,082
Layouts: 0
Loc: UK
 | Posted: 12/23/2012 7:51:18 AM
I don't know how official the statistics at THIS website are, but it sure makes you go "hmmmmmmmmmmmmm."
Not very official I wouldn't think bearing in mind that the article got it wrong about the English School boys being on anti depressant at the time they were prosecuted and found not guilty by a jury of 12 men and women in 45 minutes.
Same as in the blog article that was posted earlier - wrong again. The UK is not the highest in the league for violent crime. It's been proved that the UK data is not collected in the same way as many other countries in the definition of violent crime. We define violent crime in this country on far less of what other countries would class as violent crime. So it's comparing apples to oranges really. The data would only be correct if all countries had the same definition to the level of the violence committed.The UK classes all violence against a person in their data of violent crime irrespective of the level.
So you have to ask the question - what exactly is the definition of a violent crime ?
I would also ditto what Gar said in her post. I feel exactly the same. I feel far safer in walking the streets of Britain as it is at the moment than I would ever be if I knew the person sitting next to me on, say the underground for instance, or someone passing me in the street and knowing that person could possibly be carrying a gun.
As for having armed guard at schools. The very thought of it would horrify me. I value the freedom that my children enjoy in living out their life without having the constant fear they would have otherwise, in the belief that they were not safe and needed protection to carry out their everyday lives and enjoy their innocent childhood.
We teach our children to be vigilant, street wise and careful but we do not in-still in them the belief that every Tom, Dick or Harry is a threat to them. Doing so would teach them that EVERYONE is a threat to them and that is simply not true and could potentially be psychologically damaging to children and young people to have to live with this fear.
Rather than using your Police Officers to protect your schools, might it not be better to use those same Policemen to tackle the crimes being committed in the first place? Far better use of resources IMO.
Less crime = less fear = less of a need for guns or any other weapon as protection !
| |
|
scrappower
Allons-y Alonso
PeaNut 174,150
October 2004
Posts: 13,022
Layouts: 0
| |
lynlam
Don'tcha wish your girlfriend had spurs like mine?
PeaNut 46,248
August 2002
Posts: 6,379
Layouts: 41
Loc: Ohio
| Posted: 12/23/2012 8:50:36 AM
Lynlam I am actually not that far left on many issues. Really. Some yes, but I am quite moderate and even to the right on a few, like the prolife......but the difference is that I don't try to legislate my personal beliefs. I am not looking for a debate on that, but just putting it out there.
Well you and I are far more alike than I think we ever imagined. 
I do not try to legislate my "beliefs" unless those beliefs align with the constitutional rights that we all have.
I may passionately engage in a pro-life debate, but I don't think you can find anywhere that I ever said that abortion SHOULD be made illegal. I WISH it could, but I don't believe it should be made illegal by a FEDERAL mandate. I can get behind laws like requiring a woman to have a sonogram before an abortion, because it adds one more layer of protection for the life of the fetus and for the health of the woman. And the right to life is the most basic right of all, so I can justify those laws, to a point. I can also, however, argue against them too. It is never a black and white issue.
Lynlam I do respect your passion for the subject.
Thank you. This hits so close to home, because our livelihood depends on the firearm industry. I know many many many good people in this industry. So many that would be harmed greatly if a full on ban was instituted. Businesses would close, thousands of people would lose their jobs.
A friend who is in medical care was working last week when, in beginning to assess a patient she said the woman laughed, said "oops guess I better take this off" and set a handgun of some type on the counter. My friend hates guns and was shaken by the encounter - and by the lax attitude of the carrier like "oops forgot I had that." My impression was the the carrier in this case came off a bit of a flake - and my friend was put in an uncomfortable position of having to work at the counter with a gun she wanted to be nowhere near.
And that makes me sad...but I understand. Before I met DH, I had never been around guns. I would have been terrified too. But now I understand that a gun can not hurt you. A gun laying on a table can not hurt you. There is no reason to be afraid at all. We have to address this issue, IMO.
I don't want to take constitutional rights away, but if, as lynlam says, 99.8% of the people will not use their weapons for nefarious purposes, and mapchic says that there are 200 million guns, that means that the .8% of guns that are in the possession of people who shouldn't own a weapon, then there are 400,000 dangerous weapons situations in our country.
Doesn't it make sense to take the high-powered semi-automatic weapons out of the equation, the guns that can kill 26 people in three minutes and fire off an additional 100 rounds during those three minutes?
"high powered semi auto weapons" are used in less than 2% of all gun crimes. By your reasoning, we SHOULD be banning all handguns, and leaving "assault" weapons alone because statistically it is handguns that cause the most deaths.
Let me share something that my DH posted on his FB page. It gives another perspective:
the single most used competition rifle in the US is the AR-15. Each year thousands of responsible gun owners, shooters, and serious riflemen and their children go to Camp Perry OH.
Camp Perry is a National Guard base where the National Rifle and Pistol Matches are held, it has been a continuous affair from 1906 until now. It is supported by the CMP a government chartered non profit to teach marksmanship to youth. The Rifles involved are classified as service rifles, the type used by the military, modified to be semi automatic only, not automatic.
The AR is favored for its ease of handling and light weight and recoil, all of which make it the perfect platform to introduce younger shooters to the sport of competitive marksmanship.
Did you know that Rifle shooting is one of the only sports where men and women compete on a level playing field in college and international competition? There is no womens class and mens class, its all one class, many young ladies get to go to college on scholarships to get a good education they could otherwise not afford, just because they can shoot a rifle well.
The CMP was actually started under Teddy Roosevelt (not one of my favorite presidents, FTR) because he saw that our citizenry was becoming less and less armed, and that disturbed him. He believed that every citizen should be familiar with guns at the least, and proficient with them preferably. Despite the fact that he ushered in the Progressive/tyrannical era that would culminate in todays anti-gun, anti-constitution crowd, Teddy believed as our founders did, that an armed citizenry was essential to the protection of our rights and freedoms.
|
 
"We demand entire freedom of action and then expect the government in some miraculous way to save us from the consequences of our own acts... Self-government means self-reliance." Calvin Coolidge
Lynlam, the second-tier Pea, paid (except it appears she is not) political shill. | |
|
|
Mrs_Tyler
Sorting Laundry
PeaNut 197,836
March 2005
Posts: 24,083
Layouts: 246
Loc: Enjoying the humid continental climate zone.
| Posted: 12/23/2012 10:25:52 AM
Batya, our officer is provided by the city police department. It's a coveted position by the officers and they are on 5-year rotations. I'm fine with my property taxes paying to have an officer in each of our secondary schools full time and will advocate to extend this to all of our elementary schools in wake of the Sandy Hook tragedy. As I said before, it not only serves as a "protective" element, but the officers get to know the kids in our community and the kids form a positive relationship with law enforcement from an early age. That serves a more preventative function in our community. The kids who are more "at risk" are already known by our officers and they can invest time working with them in a more positive and helpful environment before they grow up to break laws. | |
|
dottyscrapper
PeaAddict
PeaNut 311,985
April 2007
Posts: 1,082
Layouts: 0
Loc: UK
| Posted: 12/23/2012 10:54:06 AM
it not only serves as a "protective" element, but the officers get to know the kids in our community and the kids form a positive relationship with law enforcement from an early age. That serves a more preventative function in our community. The kids who are more "at risk" are already known by our officers and they can invest time working with them in a more positive and helpful environment before they grow up to break laws.
We have this. The local community police who the children are very familiar with as they cover the area where they live,visit schools on a regular basis to give drug/ substance awareness courses ( age appropriate),road safety in walking to and from school/crossing the road etc as well as safety instructions if the older ones are are using the roads to ride their bikes.
They also attend concerts/ presentations as a guest to share in the children's achievements etc. Some in the more deprived areas take the role of a sports instructor at youth clubs/ referee a football match etc. The role they play in these situation is as a friend and an advisor in the children's eyes rather than a necessary protector. They're not based on a school site though, they call as they are patrolling the community.
The community police do similar with the elderly people in the area they cover. They visit to check if they have any problems, advice on home security etc.
| |
|
Katybee
PeaFixture
PeaNut 379,678
June 2008
Posts: 3,321
Layouts: 11
Loc: Enjoying the summer sun!
| Posted: 12/23/2012 11:26:13 AM
We have a gun readily available to us in our bedroom. Our kids can't get to it, but I trust my kids if I did wish to keep it on my nightstand. They have been taught from birth about guns. They are both good shots with both .22 pistols and rifles. They know absolutely not to touch a gun without their father present. But we keep it out of their reach anyway because of other kids that may come and go in our home. No other kids are even allowed in our room period, and they know this. At this point they are not allowed to have friends over when we aren't home. And the majority of gun owners that I know - and that's a lot- are just as responsible especially if they have kids. It should freak no one out at all, what others do in their own homes, in their own bedrooms, with their own private property.
We grew up with firearms in our home. My dad was an avid hunter and sportsman. He taught my brothers how to use guns and gun safety and all of that. I'm sure he felt as confident as you that nothing bad would ever happen.
One night, my parents and I were out in the next-door neighbor's yard having a BBQ. My older btother, who was 12 at the time, got out my dad's gun (which was put away, but not locked up--because my dad was confident that my brother would never touch a gun without him present) and accidently fired it. The bullet missed my younger brother (who was 8) by just a few feet. The bullet went through the living room wall into the back of the stove in the kitchen. You could see the outline of the bullet right next to the burner controls...a constant reminder of just how lucky my family was.
My older brother had to go to therapy for a LONG time he was so shaken up. He still has nightmares today that he killed my younger brother.
So I know you THINK you've got it all under control...but kids are unpredictable...I will pray that nothing bad ever happens to your family. |
|
|
scrappinbetty
Kindness & Compassion - Free to Give, So Valuable
PeaNut 61,111
January 2003
Posts: 13,520
Layouts: 18
Loc: Texas y'all
| Posted: 12/23/2012 11:50:10 AM
I greatly appreciate the post by sylvia71. But then, I am willing to read opposing viewpoints and to learn as much as possible before making up my mind about something, especially something as serious as this issue. Unfortunately, IMHO there are very few people in this country willing to do the work to educate themselves about issues, and most only listen to the opinions of those who think exactly like they do. This is why our country has become so divided. We need to educate ourselves so the government and the media can't just shove their agendas down our throats.
This gun issue is not a simple problem and simple solutions won't work.
Prohibition does not work. This was proven when our country outlawed alcohol. All that did was help to create an effective, well-organized system of crime (bootlegging, crime families/gangs, etc.).
I am not pro-gun or anti-gun. Americans have a constitutional right to bear arms, and until that changes, I am not going to tell gun owners they can't own a weapon. But, that does not mean I am pro-gun. If that right were up for debate and to be potentially changed, I would want to learn as much as possible so I could vote on it as an educated citizen. I believe most Americans won't take the time to learn the pros and cns of this change, they will simply vote with "their side." Again, this is very sad.
As for there being armed personnel in schools, I can't say I am against it, but I think, again, it's not a simple solution to a complex issue. Given that teachers in CT were willing to die to protect their students, I do believe that they would have been willing to shoot the shooter had they been able to have a weapon. But, we'll never know if that would have been the case.
Again, this is not a simple issue. It will require a lot more than a knee-jerk reaction at a time when we are all emotionally raw from this horrific incident. I hope our politicians take the time to think things through rather than just "doing something." |
|
|
scrappower
Allons-y Alonso
PeaNut 174,150
October 2004
Posts: 13,022
Layouts: 0
| Posted: 12/23/2012 11:53:27 AM
But then, I am willing to read opposing viewpoints and to learn as much as possible before making up my mind about something, especially something as serious as this issue
Just need to say since it seems some are missing my follow up post. I did go back and read that long blog post. It didn't change my mind, but I did read it. |
 
Blessed Be! | |
|
|
batya
Making the WWW better, one post at a time.
PeaNut 59,094
December 2002
Posts: 31,850
Layouts: 24
Loc: up on my high horse
| Posted: 12/23/2012 11:54:06 AM
I'm waiting to read the counters to Sylvia's excellent article, which was full of specific historical facts.
Batya?
After last week and the calls for me to reevaluate my posting style and the upset with which I ended up after engaging so much on these posts, I decide not to be so heavily involved on the gun control threads, if you have noticed.
I'd rather put my energy into advocacy offline and have been searching for ways to better educate myself on guns, usage, control options and advocacy opportunities.
I just wanted to raise the point that the calls for more police cost money which no one raised. Not everyone wants their taxes to go up or to be rebudgeted for this when it does not appear to be the solution. |
OK. Newbie. This is how it works. If your post consists of 80% sanity, 10% stupidity and 10% all kinds of crazy, we immediately focus on the 20% b/c it discredits the 80%.
| |
|
|
look4angel
StuckOnPeas
PeaNut 49,444
September 2002
Posts: 2,745
Layouts: 181
Loc: Tn
| Posted: 12/23/2012 12:14:07 PM
I guess I don't understand the argument that we should let the criminals have guns and focus on disarming law abiding citizens. I don't think it's a topic for a different thread... on some level I think that is the topic of this thread. As a law abiding supporter of gun rights I don't agree with the position that I should be punished for other people's crimes.
The problem with this quote and all the other quotes on here talking about "responsible gun owners", is that we are supposed to believe that all gun owners are supposedly "responsible", UNTIL their gun, is used to kill someone, then it's too late.
Whether it's because they suddenly had a jealous fit, and killed their boyfriend/girlfriend, they became mentally unbalanced, their son or daughter "found" their unlocked gun and shot a playmate, or used it in their new gang initiation, or they became desperate and used the gun in a robbery, etc.. etc.. until then we are expected to believe that ALL gun owners are responsible, which they are not.
So if it takes new laws to force people to become responsible gun owners, or they lose their guns or go to jail because they were not responsible with their weapon, then so be it. I can live with that, what I can't live with is the current situation which is to bury my head in the sand and pretend that guns and their owners are not responsible for 1000's of deaths a year, (almost 9000 deaths in 2011 alone) plus many more injuries. |
|
|
leftturnonly
Will trade mosquitoes for cookies.
PeaNut 416,788
March 2009
Posts: 19,593
Layouts: 0
Loc: Living in Kim's Perfect World, again.
| Posted: 12/23/2012 12:18:03 PM
I'd rather put my energy into advocacy offline and have been searching for ways to better educate myself on guns, usage, control options and advocacy opportunities.
I just wanted to raise the point that the calls for more police cost money which no one raised. Not everyone wants their taxes to go up or to be rebudgeted for this when it does not appear to be the solution.
I understand keeping it off the board.
I am interested in reading something that is an honest counter to all of the points in that article.
There are a lot more police, actual public law enforcement personnel, already stationed at schools than I knew. There must already be some established method to pay them.
I don't know about other places, but most of our schools here have either been entirely rebuilt from the ground up, or heavily modified. I didn't know why they were undergoing such change until these threads. I know that there is some police presence, but I do not know the specifics. The cost of this additional security must be tied in with all of the other updates, but I do not know specifics.
It is an excellent question, and one I wondered about too. That was one of the most interesting points of the article. On-site school personnel that were inclined to voluntarily take on the training to help defend the students is not an ongoing additional cost to the taxpayers.
I read the links Nightowl included about Columbine. The police/SWAT response was fantastic, but it was a lifetime away for so many.
If we could get rid of the terrible gang violence and drop the immediate threat so many live under, that would be a wonderful start to making life safer here. But the constant death toll in these places isn't even background noise on the national debate, usually.
The call for tighter border security *is* a call to do something about the violence here.
|
If PC is the way to get to Heaven, I'm going straight to Hell.
| |
|
|
desertpea
StuckOnPeas
PeaNut 359,474
January 2008
Posts: 2,272
Layouts: 41
Loc: Moving!
 | Posted: 12/23/2012 12:45:13 PM
You quickly realize ten rounds sucks when you take a wound ballistics class like I have and go over case after case after case after case of enraged, drug addled, prison hardened, perpetrators who soaked up five, seven, nine, even fifteen bullets and still walked under their own power to the ambulance.
SO. TRUE. NOT. EVEN. FUNNY!
sylvia, thank you for posting that article. | |
|
WillowJane
Running the Marathon, Not the Sprint
PeaNut 110,589
October 2003
Posts: 6,593
Layouts: 8
Loc: Texas
 | Posted: 12/23/2012 12:51:32 PM
HERE is a paper written by Gary Kleck in 1991 that provides a nice research perspective on guns and gun control. His policy conclusion:
Gun control is a very minor, though not entirely irrelevant, part of the solution to the violence problem, just as guns are of only very minor significance as a cause of the problem. The U.S. has more violence than other nations for reasons unrelated to its extraordinarily high gun ownership. Fixating on guns seems to be, for many people, a fetish which allows them to ignore the more intransigent causes of American violence, including its dying cities, inequality, deteriorating family structure, and the all- pervasive economic and social consequences of a history of slavery and racism. And just as gun control serves this purpose for liberals, equally useless "get tough" proposals, like longer prison terms, mandatory sentencing, and more use of the death penalty serve the purpose for conservatives. All parties to the crime debate would do well to give more concentrated attention to more difficult, but far more relevant, issues like how to generate more good-paying jobs for the underclass which is at the heart of the violence problem.
|
|
|
Mrs_Tyler
Sorting Laundry
PeaNut 197,836
March 2005
Posts: 24,083
Layouts: 246
Loc: Enjoying the humid continental climate zone.
| Posted: 12/23/2012 12:55:16 PM
I just wanted to raise the point that the calls for more police cost money which no one raised. Not everyone wants their taxes to go up or to be rebudgeted for this when it does not appear to be the solution.
But if it saves lives and invests in our community's safety, is it not worth it? All the demands for more strict gun control will also cost money at the local, state, and federal levels. We have some pretty crazy priorities in this nation. We make demands of the government to provide for our every whim and our tax dollars already are funneled into programs that are not outrightly the role of our government. But police protection IS one of the main roles of government and this seems to be a logical reaction to our issue- get police officers into our school buildings as both a preventative element in forming relationships with our children and families in the community and as a protective force should, heaven forbid, someone enters the building with the intention to harm others. | |
|
look4angel
StuckOnPeas
PeaNut 49,444
September 2002
Posts: 2,745
Layouts: 181
Loc: Tn
| Posted: 12/23/2012 1:30:59 PM
All parties to the crime debate would do well to give more concentrated attention to more difficult, but far more relevant, issues like how to generate more good-paying jobs for the underclass which is at the heart of the violence problem.
More jobs is not going to stop a jealous boyfriend from killing his girlfriend. |
|
|
Mrs_Tyler
Sorting Laundry
PeaNut 197,836
March 2005
Posts: 24,083
Layouts: 246
Loc: Enjoying the humid continental climate zone.
| Posted: 12/23/2012 1:39:10 PM
More jobs is not going to stop a jealous boyfriend from killing his girlfriend.
Neither will making guns illegal or placing tighter restrictions on gun ownership. When will we get it through our heads that, no matter what, we will never be able to legislate morality or get rid of all evil from this world? | |
|
look4angel
StuckOnPeas
PeaNut 49,444
September 2002
Posts: 2,745
Layouts: 181
Loc: Tn
| Posted: 12/23/2012 1:40:51 PM
But if it saves lives and invests in our community's safety, is it not worth it? All the demands for more strict gun control will also cost money at the local, state, and federal levels. We have some pretty crazy priorities in this nation. We make demands of the government to provide for our every whim and our tax dollars already are funneled into programs that are not outrightly the role of our government. But police protection IS one of the main roles of government and this seems to be a logical reaction to our issue- get police officers into our school buildings as both a preventative element in forming relationships with our children and families in the community and as a protective force should, heaven forbid, someone enters the building with the intention to harm others.
This is so outrageous it's not even funny. Our local school just laid off 5 teachers from one school alone, and 4 police officers,+ a full time dispatcher, just so they could meet their "conservative" budget constraints, so apparently the local "conservative" officials forgot all about education, our children, and police protection when it suits their purpose, then suddenly remember it when their precious guns might be in jeopardy.
Let's talk about all the millions of dollars that was funneled into voter fraud, when there wasn't as much voter fraud as there were deaths caused by guns in this year alone. Talk about waste! |
|
|
look4angel
StuckOnPeas
PeaNut 49,444
September 2002
Posts: 2,745
Layouts: 181
Loc: Tn
| Posted: 12/23/2012 1:46:02 PM
More jobs is not going to stop a jealous boyfriend from killing his girlfriend.
Neither will making guns illegal or placing tighter restrictions on gun ownership. When will we get it through our heads that, no matter what, we will never be able to legislate morality or get rid of all evil from this world?
I was simply address the fact that someone doesn't have a job, is not the only reason people shoot each other. |
|
|
ihearth
PeaNut
PeaNut 478,872
August 2010
Posts: 238
Layouts: 0
Loc: Where they love me.
| Posted: 12/23/2012 1:51:54 PM
We have some pretty crazy priorities in this nation.
ITA. What makes no sense to me is that there are guards in banks protecting money, but not schools. Without thinking, I walked into a bank wearing a hat and sunglasses, and the guard IMMEDIATELY was in front of me asking that I remove them. It's so important to protect $$$$ but not our children? They have panic buttons at the bank, but do they have them in schools? | |
|
scrappinbetty
Kindness & Compassion - Free to Give, So Valuable
PeaNut 61,111
January 2003
Posts: 13,520
Layouts: 18
Loc: Texas y'all
| Posted: 12/23/2012 2:10:56 PM
HERE is a paper written by Gary Kleck in 1991 that provides a nice research perspective on guns and gun control. His policy conclusion:
Gun control is a very minor, though not entirely irrelevant, part of the solution to the violence problem, just as guns are of only very minor significance as a cause of the problem. The U.S. has more violence than other nations for reasons unrelated to its extraordinarily high gun ownership. Fixating on guns seems to be, for many people, a fetish which allows them to ignore the more intransigent causes of American violence, including its dying cities, inequality, deteriorating family structure, and the all- pervasive economic and social consequences of a history of slavery and racism. And just as gun control serves this purpose for liberals, equally useless "get tough" proposals, like longer prison terms, mandatory sentencing, and more use of the death penalty serve the purpose for conservatives. All parties to the crime debate would do well to give more concentrated attention to more difficult, but far more relevant, issues like how to generate more good-paying jobs for the underclass which is at the heart of the violence problem.
I find it interesting that no one has brought up the amount of violence in our society, violence in movies, violence on TV, violence in games, etc. And before anyone brings up how violent our cartoons were in the 60s and 70s, I am referring to real violence, violence that pits people against people, in a manner that is so realistic.
My DH and I were out of the country for 2.5 years and we were shocked at how violent TV and movies had become in that time. One of our kids (age 30) is a serious gamer and he has made us aware of some of the games that are out now. I believe that being constantly exposed to this type of thing desensitizes us to it. Kids grow up playing games and watching movies that are filled with violence, and the games "reward" them for committing acts of violence (even if just onscreen).
At what point does the line between this "imaginary world," which is getting more and more real everyday (as a result of the technological advances being made), and the real world become so fine that it's indistinguishable? I believe that has already happened.
I have no kids in school at this point in my life, but I would be happy to pay (through my taxes) for protection within my local schools if it meant lives were saved, and with a bonus that kids grew up respecting law enforcement. Another bonus is that law enforcement is trained to spot kids "on the edge" and could likely refocus these kids toward better behavior, etc.
Do I think most people would be willing to pay for this type of police protection? No. As a nation we (citizens) are self-centered and we tend to not want to spend money on things that we believe don't directly benefit us. Services cost money and we need to fund them to benefit from them. What, we have no money for this? Perhaps we don't need to fund things like lifetime pensions for people who serve in office for only 4 years.
Again, I am not pro-gun ownership, but I do feel that taking away everyone's guns is not the solution. That only means that only the criminals will own them. How safe do you think we'll be when the bad element of society knows none of us can protect ourselves? There will always be evil people, people who are simply a "little off," and those who, as a result of genetics or life circumstances, commit crimes. We cannot regulate people's morality...and we can't fix this issue that has so many moving parts by mandating a simple solution. |
|
|
look4angel
StuckOnPeas
PeaNut 49,444
September 2002
Posts: 2,745
Layouts: 181
Loc: Tn
| Posted: 12/23/2012 2:19:54 PM
There will always be evil people, people who are simply a "little off," and those who, as a result of genetics or life circumstances, commit crimes. We cannot regulate people's morality...and we can't fix this issue that has so many moving parts by mandating a simple solution.
and yet neither can we ignore it by doing nothing....which is obviously not working either... |
|
|
Nightowl scrapper
Intl Assoc of Epic Length Posters - USA Chapter
PeaNut 103,889
August 2003
Posts: 24,823
Layouts: 0
Loc: Colorado
| Posted: 12/23/2012 3:23:14 PM
find it interesting that no one has brought up the amount of violence in our society, violence in movies, violence on TV, violence in games, etc. And before anyone brings up how violent our cartoons were in the 60s and 70s, I am referring to real violence, violence that pits people against people, in a manner that is so realistic.
Well, the Wayne Lapierre of the NRA mentioned it as a contributing factor the violence in society, but because of who he is, many people will completely ignore and scoff at that.
It's been touched on here on the board in the last week, but if someone is a gamer or their kid really loves gaming, the suggestion is also scoffed at. Because, you know, gaming only screws up people who are already 'off'. At least that seems to be the general consensus by people unwilling to consider this as a factor. |
"Until you put a thought into words, clearly and precisely, it is not a thought at all. It is a kind of fog rolling around inside the skull."
| |
|
|
Mrs_Tyler
Sorting Laundry
PeaNut 197,836
March 2005
Posts: 24,083
Layouts: 246
Loc: Enjoying the humid continental climate zone.
| Posted: 12/23/2012 3:42:52 PM
I can't understand what an armed guard in every school would do.
Then you haven't been reading what many of us have shared regarding the armed police officers that are currently in many of our schools and how they serve a greater purpose than simply "gun slinger". | |
|
mirabelleswalker
My president has 6-pack abs.
PeaNut 175,521
November 2004
Posts: 10,954
Layouts: 14
Loc: Here today, gone to Morocco.
| Posted: 12/23/2012 3:47:36 PM
An article that examines video game usage and violence in ten countries and shows no correlation.
|
|
|
Mrs_Tyler
Sorting Laundry
PeaNut 197,836
March 2005
Posts: 24,083
Layouts: 246
Loc: Enjoying the humid continental climate zone.
| Posted: 12/23/2012 3:51:49 PM
This is so outrageous it's not even funny. Our local school just laid off 5 teachers from one school alone, and 4 police officers,+ a full time dispatcher, just so they could meet their "conservative" budget constraints, so apparently the local "conservative" officials forgot all about education, our children, and police protection when it suits their purpose, then suddenly remember it when their precious guns might be in jeopardy.
It's not really outrageous that I suggest our communities get our priorities in line. Teachers and officers are things our tax dollars SHOULD be paying for. I can list a whole lot more wasteful spending than merely trying to prevent voter fraud (which does happen far more frequently than a school getting shot up). It isn't outrageous to propose our tax dollars actually go towards something that is supposed to be provided by a government (you know, things like establishing justice, ensuring domestic tranquility) while we turn and take a good hard look at some of the pork projects and many of the non-essential social programs we think the government owes us but are truly non sustainable and just wind up maintaining irresponsibility on the part of both citizens and the government condoning the spending. | |
|
Mrs_Tyler
Sorting Laundry
PeaNut 197,836
March 2005
Posts: 24,083
Layouts: 246
Loc: Enjoying the humid continental climate zone.
| Posted: 12/23/2012 3:54:05 PM
Many of the same video games are available for people to play around the world. Most are made in Japan. I'm not saying there aren't violent video games that can mess with kids' perception of death and violence, but it isn't just an American video game issue. | |
|
Me GOP
Movin On Pea
PeaNut 29,902
February 2002
Posts: 19,290
Layouts: 16
 | Posted: 12/23/2012 3:56:58 PM
I'm still interested in those on both sides commenting on standardizing CCW laws as a start.
The reason I ask, is MO is a fairly conservative state with urban and rural areas which apparently have more strict CCW laws than say Florida.
|
|
|
mirabelleswalker
My president has 6-pack abs.
PeaNut 175,521
November 2004
Posts: 10,954
Layouts: 14
Loc: Here today, gone to Morocco.
| Posted: 12/23/2012 3:59:22 PM
It isn't outrageous to propose our tax dollars actually go towards something that is supposed to be provided by a government (you know, things like establishing justice, ensuring domestic tranquility) while we turn and take a good hard look at some of the pork projects and many of the non-essential social programs we think the government owes us but are truly non sustainable and just wind up maintaining irresponsibility on the part of both citizens and the government condoning the spending.
For many people, gun control would ensure domestic tranquility.
The way I see it, this IS a pork project. The legislators in the pocket of the NRA support this proposal to put an armed guard in every school and what happens? The government has to buy an arm for each of those guards.
I am appalled at the willingness on the part of people on the right to increase spending by billions of dollars because of one school shooting, rather than to try to eliminate the causes of the problem. |
|
|
Me GOP
Movin On Pea
PeaNut 29,902
February 2002
Posts: 19,290
Layouts: 16
| Posted: 12/23/2012 4:12:38 PM
For many people, gun control would ensure domestic tranquility.
-------
Enforcing gun control will also cost billions.
Personally, mandated arming of schools is not an answer, but any enacted laws will cost be it government or private sector. That is reality. |
|
|
Me GOP
Movin On Pea
PeaNut 29,902
February 2002
Posts: 19,290
Layouts: 16
| Posted: 12/23/2012 4:17:52 PM
And, to add, here is the national narrative as we face a fiscal cliff where an entire country is facing a 2 percent pay cut.
ETA. This is not to dismiss the gun issue. But there are very pressing issues that will go into effect January 1. |
|
|
mirabelleswalker
My president has 6-pack abs.
PeaNut 175,521
November 2004
Posts: 10,954
Layouts: 14
Loc: Here today, gone to Morocco.
| Posted: 12/23/2012 4:26:06 PM
And, to add, here is the national narrative as we face a fiscal cliff where an entire country is facing a 2 percent pay cut.
ETA. This is not to dismiss the gun issue. But there are very pressing issues that will go into effect January 1.
I agree--and I just want to add that we should consider the source of this armed guard proposal. It's not the government. It's not a legislator. It's a lobbyist. |
|
|
Me GOP
Movin On Pea
PeaNut 29,902
February 2002
Posts: 19,290
Layouts: 16
| Posted: 12/23/2012 4:30:11 PM
I agree--and I just want to add that we should consider the source of this armed guard proposal. It's not the government. It's not a legislator. It's a lobbyist.
-----
Agreed.
|
|
|
Mrs_Tyler
Sorting Laundry
PeaNut 197,836
March 2005
Posts: 24,083
Layouts: 246
Loc: Enjoying the humid continental climate zone.
| Posted: 12/23/2012 4:42:30 PM
For many people, gun control would ensure domestic tranquility.
The way I see it, this IS a pork project. The legislators in the pocket of the NRA support this proposal to put an armed guard in every school and what happens? The government has to buy an arm for each of those guards.
I am appalled at the willingness on the part of people on the right to increase spending by billions of dollars because of one school shooting, rather than to try to eliminate the causes of the problem.
It wouldn't ensure domestic tranquility if the only people who have access to guns are the criminals who obtained them illegally. Think of the backlash in the crime world there was when we had prohibition- we thought getting rid of alcohol would address the source of all kinds of societal problems. It didn't work.
Many of our communities have put armed officers in our public schools long before the NRA "lobbied" for it. Some communities have decided its worth the investment to have community police stationed in all parts of our community. Like I said, there's more to it than just an armored "guard". It's another trustworthy adult kids get to know and can go to for help in a safe environment. Being on a first-name basis with an officer in your community is worth a whole lot more in preventing future criminal behaviors.
You will never "eliminate the cause of the problem" simply by having more gun control (and if you have read my earlier posts, I'm not opposing sensible gun control at all and I live in a state with strict gun registration laws and conceal and carry permits that are very conservative and I'm okay with that.). I think adding armed police officers (not just armed "security"- it should be a part of the community law enforcement) to our schools can address one part of the cause. But the true cause of violence in all forms is evil and hatred and we will never be able to completely rid society of that. | |
|
Me GOP
Movin On Pea
PeaNut 29,902
February 2002
Posts: 19,290
Layouts: 16
| Posted: 12/23/2012 4:50:46 PM
But the true cause of violence in all forms is evil and hatred and we will never be able to completely rid society of that
----
I completely disagree.
Desperate people do desperate things.
ETA. I agree that the government will never be able to completely rid desperation.
Eta. Being more kind, in general, is on all of us. |
|
|
mirabelleswalker
My president has 6-pack abs.
PeaNut 175,521
November 2004
Posts: 10,954
Layouts: 14
Loc: Here today, gone to Morocco.
| Posted: 12/23/2012 4:57:38 PM
I think adding armed police officers ( not just armed "security"- it should be a part of the immunity law enforcement) to our schools can address one part of the cause. But the true cause of violence in all forms is evil and hatred and we will never be able to completely rid society of that.
I do not think there should be guns in schools. I don't care who is carrying them--whether a volunteer, a guard or a police officer.
Isn't it interesting that other developed countries don't seem to have this problem? Yes, evil is everywhere, and yet the number of gun crimes in this country is off the charts compared to these other countries. Do we have a higher percentage of evil, hateful people per capita?
No. We just have more guns. |
|
|
Me GOP
Movin On Pea
PeaNut 29,902
February 2002
Posts: 19,290
Layouts: 16
| Posted: 12/23/2012 5:07:27 PM
In fairness, other developed countries typically shown in comparison, have been in existence far longer than the US. To ignore our relative youth and formation, doesn't serve to address the issue in my mind.
Learn from yes, but to compare apples to apples just doesn't apply.
|
|
|
maddiesmum
PeaNut
PeaNut 574,034
December 2012
Posts: 366
Layouts: 0
| Posted: 12/23/2012 5:09:51 PM
if they need it. Do you think there should be an armed officer at a bank?
There aren't. | |
|
mirabelleswalker
My president has 6-pack abs.
PeaNut 175,521
November 2004
Posts: 10,954
Layouts: 14
Loc: Here today, gone to Morocco.
| Posted: 12/23/2012 5:12:26 PM
Depending on how you look at it, Australia is roughly the same age or 200 years younger, and was founded as a penal colony.
We all know what happened there after a mass shooting occurred. |
|
|
Mrs_Tyler
Sorting Laundry
PeaNut 197,836
March 2005
Posts: 24,083
Layouts: 246
Loc: Enjoying the humid continental climate zone.
| Posted: 12/23/2012 5:17:03 PM
I do not think there should be guns in schools. I don't care who is carrying them--whether a volunteer, a guard or a police officer.
Well I disagree. I teach in a building with an armed police officer on staff. I see far more benefits to having him in our building and I appreciate our city police having a full time officer assigned to our secondary buildings. I think it should also be integrated to our elementary buildings. Currently they have an officer shared between 2-3 sites. As it has been stated numerous times, the gun itself isn't the key- it's nice that he carries one in case, heaven forbid, he needs to use it to protect our students, but it's the man in uniform there each day involved in our daily school functions, getting to know the kids and families, and being a law enforcing presence that has formed my opinion on this matter. | |
|
Me GOP
Movin On Pea
PeaNut 29,902
February 2002
Posts: 19,290
Layouts: 16
| Posted: 12/23/2012 5:17:53 PM
Depending on how you look at it, Australia is roughly the same age or 200 years younger, and was founded as a penal colony.
We all know what happened there after a mass shooting occurred.
----
True, but does Australia have the level of cultural diversity or immigration issues we have based on history? |
|
|
Mrs_Tyler
Sorting Laundry
PeaNut 197,836
March 2005
Posts: 24,083
Layouts: 246
Loc: Enjoying the humid continental climate zone.
| Posted: 12/23/2012 5:19:31 PM
if they need it. Do you think there should be an armed officer at a bank?
-----
There aren't.
There are some banks with armed security and some without. But all banks have their money delivered in armored vehicles and all banks have panic buttons to immediately alert local authorities. | |
|
WannaPea
No Peas for you ! Come back one year!
PeaNut 151,172
June 2004
Posts: 26,850
Layouts: 175
Loc: In my PJ's
| Posted: 12/23/2012 5:21:52 PM
In fairness, other developed countries typically shown in comparison, have been in existence far longer than the US. To ignore our relative youth and formation, doesn't serve to address the issue in my mind.
Learn from yes, but to compare apples to apples just doesn't apply.
There are many of us for whom this reasoning is wearing thin. Other countries have access to all the music, video games and violent movie content we do. Now, it's because we're younger than them? I don't get it.
We have a violent, vicious, gun problem here. People who live here know it. People who don't live here know it. We cannot continue to point our fingers at the rest of the world, telling them how they're doing it all wrong, when we have this horrendous skeleton in our own closet.
It's interesting to note how many conservatives had steam coming out of their ears over Benghazi, but losing thousands upon thousands of our own people to gun violence is met with......well, I can't believe what it's met with.
I'd like to see the NRA's influence out of our government and I'd like to see them come out of the republican's back pockets. Maybe we could actually turn the tide on this mess. |
Cop's wife - Mom to one
"The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." ~ Delos B. McKown
     | |
|
|
Mrs_Tyler
Sorting Laundry
PeaNut 197,836
March 2005
Posts: 24,083
Layouts: 246
Loc: Enjoying the humid continental climate zone.
| Posted: 12/23/2012 5:26:14 PM
No. We just have more guns.
Do you think the secret service men who guard politicians and their families shouldn't be armed? Are their lives more valuable than our children's lives? | |
|
Me GOP
Movin On Pea
PeaNut 29,902
February 2002
Posts: 19,290
Layouts: 16
| Posted: 12/23/2012 5:28:35 PM
My point is, the US answer for legislation, should look towards what other countries have done successfully, but the answer will have to take in the differences of culture and history. |
|
|
mirabelleswalker
My president has 6-pack abs.
PeaNut 175,521
November 2004
Posts: 10,954
Layouts: 14
Loc: Here today, gone to Morocco.
| Posted: 12/23/2012 5:31:30 PM
Do you think the secret service men who guard politicians and their families shouldn't be armed? Are their lives more valuable than our children's lives?
You are really grasping at straws.
|
|
|
WannaPea
No Peas for you ! Come back one year!
PeaNut 151,172
June 2004
Posts: 26,850
Layouts: 175
Loc: In my PJ's
| Posted: 12/23/2012 5:39:32 PM
Do you think the secret service men who guard politicians and their families shouldn't be armed? Are their lives more valuable than our children's lives?
Who exactly said service men who guard politicians and their families shouldn't be armed? |
Cop's wife - Mom to one
"The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." ~ Delos B. McKown
| |
|
|
