How Can We Keep Our Schools Safe?

I don’t think anyone doesn’t want to protect our schools better. The issue at hand is obviously gun control.

It’s is totally unfair to tell the 2A advocates that they want children to die or that they don’t want our kids to be safer. Anyone who does deserves to be ignored.

Going back to the beginning of this topic, many were discussing why these things happen to arrive at a solution. No matter how you slice it, everyone is going to have an opinion on why these things happen and what to do about it.

Our biggest concern should be our children’s safety. Next is our freedom.

I’ll stop there without inputting a stance on the issue.

Nobody is saying not to put armed security at a secure entrance, except those asking how to keep the kids safe, who don’t want to hear it… instead they are hollering, we are not arming teachers, we want all black guns turned in !!! Flights have random air marshalls, cockpit doors were reinforced, people remove shoes, everybody is metal detected and no liquids over x amount of ounces etc etc etc… yet when clear backpacks were suggested, the Hogg kid said, your not infringing on my right to privacy…? When we go to a Gopher football game, the wife could not have anything bigger than a small handpurse, unless she uses a clear bag, she uses a clear bag now. All the suggested things to make a school airport like, are shouted down and replaced with “turn in the guns”… meh.

biggill wrote:

1. The issue at hand is obviously gun control.

2. Our biggest concern should be our children’s safety. Next is our freedom.

I would like to respectively disagree on these two topics, and I am not saying that I do not care about these kids safety.

1. The issue cannot be solely gun control, if someone wants to get a gun they will get one, even with the strictest rules on guns. I think we need to focus our attention on preventing people from going crazy first. Also I am a high school student and would LOVE to see eligible teachers have a choice to carry a gun.

2. At what point does this get out of hand? according to this logic you should separate every one into little rooms and lock them in there for good, provided they get their necessity’s to live. This keeps everyone safe, but then people have almost no freedom. Sadly no one lives in a utopia and no one ever will.

WELL ASK Chicago HOW THOSE STRICT GUN CONTROL LAWS are working??????

rojigs wrote:

I would like to respectively disagree on these two topics, and I am not saying that I do not care about these kids safety.

1. The issue cannot be solely gun control, if someone wants to get a gun they will get one, even with the strictest rules on guns. I think we need to focus our attention on preventing people from going crazy first. Also I am a high school student and would LOVE to see eligible teachers have a choice to carry a gun.

2. At what point does this get out of hand? according to this logic you should separate every one into little rooms and lock them in there for good, provided they get their necessity’s to live. This keeps everyone safe, but then people have almost no freedom. Sadly no one lives in a utopia and no one ever will.

Let me clairify by saying I wasn’t making any specific point for against any action. I was simply trying to corral the conversation because I think a few of us agree and don’t even know it.

I agree with you. Believe me.

I was simply pointing out the issue that is at the top of everyone’s agenda. The media, march for our lives, NRA, lefties, righties, etc… It’s what the liberals want and what the conservatives are afraid of.

The worst part of all of this is the ridiculous amount of misinformation out there. Watch the CNN 2A video I posted. Entertaining to say the least.

rojigs wrote:

1. The issue cannot be solely gun control, if someone wants to get a gun they will get one, even with the strictest rules on guns. I think we need to focus our attention on preventing people from going crazy first. Also I am a high school student and would LOVE to see eligible teachers have a choice to carry a gun.

Yep, just like a baggie of pot, or crack or meth.

But then there’s this…”Also I am a high school student and would LOVE to see eligible teachers have a choice to carry a gun.”

As I posted earlier…to dismiss all of our younger generation as having no relevance in our society going forward?

I still have faith in the next youth generation. Despite of all the one’s currently marching around as a collective, there are many more intelligent sensible one’s that already know that it is not all about themselves and dedicate their aspirations behind the spotlight. They just don’t get noticed, but they certainly exist!

glenn57 wrote:

WELL ASK Chicago HOW THOSE STRICT GUN CONTROL LAWS are working??????

Well…yeah, like prohibition?

There’s a lot more going on though with the Chicago deal…long story, out of time.

lindyrig79 wrote:

Do you guys even realize how bat sh/t crazy some of you sound? Rambling about murders and stabbings…….of course evil exists. It has since the beginning of time. What does that have to do with protecting our schools better…. nothing. NOTHING!

After 9/11 we protected our airports and planes better. It’s time to do the same for schools.

They think the government will knock on their door and take their black guns.

eyeguy507 wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>lindyrig79 wrote:</div>
Do you guys even realize how bat sh/t crazy some of you sound? Rambling about murders and stabbings…….of course evil exists. It has since the beginning of time. What does that have to do with protecting our schools better…. nothing. NOTHING!

After 9/11 we protected our airports and planes better. It’s time to do the same for schools.

They think the government will knock on their door and take their black guns.

History proves it has happened many times in the past. It’s fine with me for people to think how ever they want, but the thinking above is the same mistake many populations have made in history.
Luckily for the USA there are enough of us that understand that.

eyeguy507 wrote:

They think the government will knock on their door and take their black guns.

Some of the most powerful countries in the world have done it.

I fixed it….They think the government “WANTS” to knock on their door and take their black guns… are you that naive to think they don’t ? How many Full Autos do you have ? This person pictured below, is exactly who wants your guns… ALL OF THEM, including pellet.

Attachments:

1. 

   libtardus.jpg
   

cougareye wrote:

Compromise…..as an avid hunter and gun owner, this is where I believe we need to go. Real compromise too, I’d gladly give up the rights to AR’s, high capacity clips, and bump stocks to be able to own my guns and continue to use them responsibly. But more importantly to show this generation we’re on their side. Otherwise we’ll get brushed aside and run over.

ET

“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

big_g wrote:

The narrative of getting rid of “Military style rifles” are exactly what the 2nd Amendment is about… a free people, capable of defending themselves against a tyrannical force, including our own government. It’s not so people can go hunting.

This was true at the time, but I’m sorry, John Q. Public is not capable of defending themselves against a tyrannical force in 2018. If a military force was deployed to stomp out the ‘free people’ or some crap, it would be a short fight. The gap in weaponry available to the government/military versus the public today has widened exponentially since the constitution was signed, it’s not even close to a valid argument anymore.

big_g wrote:

Nobody is saying not to put armed security at a secure entrance, except those asking how to keep the kids safe, who don’t want to hear it… instead they are hollering, we are not arming teachers, we want all black guns turned in !!! Flights have random air marshalls, cockpit doors were reinforced, people remove shoes, everybody is metal detected and no liquids over x amount of ounces etc etc etc… yet when clear backpacks were suggested, the Hogg kid said, your not infringing on my right to privacy…? When we go to a Gopher football game, the wife could not have anything bigger than a small handpurse, unless she uses a clear bag, she uses a clear bag now. All the suggested things to make a school airport like, are shouted down and replaced with “turn in the guns”… meh.

I agree more security at schools makes sense, I’d like to hear a good plan for that though. This isn’t argumentative, has anyone thought about trying to put checkpoints or something in the school entrance? Can you imagine if someone walked into an airport checkpoint fully armed? There would be more casualties if everyone is lined up waiting to get through metal detectors or something. Does the shooting just happen outside of the school instead of inside it in that situation? I’m just not sure that accomplishes much, besides grouping more students together in a small space…

philtickelson wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>big_g wrote:</div>
The narrative of getting rid of “Military style rifles” are exactly what the 2nd Amendment is about… a free people, capable of defending themselves against a tyrannical force, including our own government. It’s not so people can go hunting.

This was true at the time, but I’m sorry, John Q. Public is not capable of defending themselves against a tyrannical force in 2018. If a military force was deployed to stomp out the ‘free people’ or some crap, it would be a short fight. The gap in weaponry available to the government/military versus the public today has widened exponentially since the constitution was signed, it’s not even close to a valid argument anymore.

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>big_g wrote:</div>
Nobody is saying not to put armed security at a secure entrance, except those asking how to keep the kids safe, who don’t want to hear it… instead they are hollering, we are not arming teachers, we want all black guns turned in !!! Flights have random air marshalls, cockpit doors were reinforced, people remove shoes, everybody is metal detected and no liquids over x amount of ounces etc etc etc… yet when clear backpacks were suggested, the Hogg kid said, your not infringing on my right to privacy…? When we go to a Gopher football game, the wife could not have anything bigger than a small handpurse, unless she uses a clear bag, she uses a clear bag now. All the suggested things to make a school airport like, are shouted down and replaced with “turn in the guns”… meh.

I agree more security at schools makes sense, I’d like to hear a good plan for that though. This isn’t argumentative, has anyone thought about trying to put checkpoints or something in the school entrance? Can you imagine if someone walked into an airport checkpoint fully armed? There would be more casualties if everyone is lined up waiting to get through metal detectors or something. Does the shooting just happen outside of the school instead of inside it in that situation? I’m just not sure that accomplishes much, besides grouping more students together in a small space…

Phil, while you don’t feel like it’s necessary to protect yourself with AR style weapons, please don’t try and take away my rights to protect myself and my family.

philtickelson wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>big_g wrote:</div>
The narrative of getting rid of “Military style rifles” are exactly what the 2nd Amendment is about… a free people, capable of defending themselves against a tyrannical force, including our own government. It’s not so people can go hunting.

This was true at the time, but I’m sorry, John Q. Public is not capable of defending themselves against a tyrannical force in 2018. If a military force was deployed to stomp out the ‘free people’ or some crap, it would be a short fight. The gap in weaponry available to the government/military versus the public today has widened exponentially since the constitution was signed, it’s not even close to a valid argument anymore.

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>big_g wrote:</div>
Nobody is saying not to put armed security at a secure entrance, except those asking how to keep the kids safe, who don’t want to hear it… instead they are hollering, we are not arming teachers, we want all black guns turned in !!! Flights have random air marshalls, cockpit doors were reinforced, people remove shoes, everybody is metal detected and no liquids over x amount of ounces etc etc etc… yet when clear backpacks were suggested, the Hogg kid said, your not infringing on my right to privacy…? When we go to a Gopher football game, the wife could not have anything bigger than a small handpurse, unless she uses a clear bag, she uses a clear bag now. All the suggested things to make a school airport like, are shouted down and replaced with “turn in the guns”… meh.

I agree more security at schools makes sense, I’d like to hear a good plan for that though. This isn’t argumentative, has anyone thought about trying to put checkpoints or something in the school entrance? Can you imagine if someone walked into an airport checkpoint fully armed? There would be more casualties if everyone is lined up waiting to get through metal detectors or something. Does the shooting just happen outside of the school instead of inside it in that situation? I’m just not sure that accomplishes much, besides grouping more students together in a small space…

Wrong.

The Taliban might disagree with you, they held on for over 10 years and they are a small force compared to the American gun owners…. you can give up but you why think you can save the white flag for others?

As for security- a show of force in public places will prevent it from happening in the first place. Active shooters run when they get shot at by those evil gun concealing right wingers.

TripleA wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>philtickelson wrote:</div>

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>big_g wrote:</div>
The narrative of getting rid of “Military style rifles” are exactly what the 2nd Amendment is about… a free people, capable of defending themselves against a tyrannical force, including our own government. It’s not so people can go hunting.

This was true at the time, but I’m sorry, John Q. Public is not capable of defending themselves against a tyrannical force in 2018. If a military force was deployed to stomp out the ‘free people’ or some crap, it would be a short fight. The gap in weaponry available to the government/military versus the public today has widened exponentially since the constitution was signed, it’s not even close to a valid argument anymore.

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>big_g wrote:</div>
Nobody is saying not to put armed security at a secure entrance, except those asking how to keep the kids safe, who don’t want to hear it… instead they are hollering, we are not arming teachers, we want all black guns turned in !!! Flights have random air marshalls, cockpit doors were reinforced, people remove shoes, everybody is metal detected and no liquids over x amount of ounces etc etc etc… yet when clear backpacks were suggested, the Hogg kid said, your not infringing on my right to privacy…? When we go to a Gopher football game, the wife could not have anything bigger than a small handpurse, unless she uses a clear bag, she uses a clear bag now. All the suggested things to make a school airport like, are shouted down and replaced with “turn in the guns”… meh.

I agree more security at schools makes sense, I’d like to hear a good plan for that though. This isn’t argumentative, has anyone thought about trying to put checkpoints or something in the school entrance? Can you imagine if someone walked into an airport checkpoint fully armed? There would be more casualties if everyone is lined up waiting to get through metal detectors or something. Does the shooting just happen outside of the school instead of inside it in that situation? I’m just not sure that accomplishes much, besides grouping more students together in a small space…

Wrong.

The Taliban might disagree with you, they held on for over 10 years and they are a small force compared to the American gun owners…. you can give up but you why think you can save the white flag for others?

Wrong.

How many Nukes do you and your neighbors own? How much nerve gas is in your bunker? Any guess as to what happens when you bring an AR to a Nuke fight? All of these arguments are made with the assumption that this tyrannical government wouldn’t use nuclear weapons which is just that, an assumption. You can argue effectively as to the likelihood or even the logic of blowing up your own nation but you cant argue against the fact that if someone in power wants to they destroy every major city in the U.S. they could do so in just a few hours without a single AR shot going off from a civilian. Does having the ability to own an assault rifle give you a better chance? The answer is maybe depending on what the government choses to do. Does it level the playing field? Nothing can do that.

How many members of the military would just blindly follow such an order?
Not many I think….This is not 1932…..
Nukes?….Really?

Mudshark wrote:

Nukes?….Really?

We are describing a tyrannical government that has already chosen to turn against its own civilians in this fictional scenario of needing guns right? I don’t understand why so many would assume this force is comfortable opening fire on its own civilians but they suddenly stop short of using weapons of mass destruction. Isn’t that what so-called tyrannical governments do? Its kinda like having your cake and eating it to to argue that you need guns to protect yourself in case the well established government goes insane and turns against you but they would never be so morally corrupted as to use these weapons they have that could end the fight almost immediately. Before you go bashing me as someone saying take the guns away, read between the lines. Im challenging the argument not the right to own guns. I am ok with the 2nd amendment I just don’t think the reasoning of defense against government holds water any longer

rojigs wrote:

Also I am a high school student and would LOVE to see eligible teachers have a choice to carry a gun.

Not many people knew, but in MN they can and a couple already do.

https://www.google.com/amp/minnesota.cbslocal.com/2018/03/14/minn-teachers-can-carry-guns/amp/

once again, nobody is taking away the guns that we own. If they do then I will gladly eat crow. This is 2018 not 1787. I guess I’m not too worried about the feds showing up at my door and asking for my handguns. Maybe if they deem you as a threat to society, then they come get your guns, but that is a big if. They didn’t do anything about all the red flags on the Cruz kid so why would I assume they would follow through on this?

Luckily they don’t dredge the ‘sippi deep enough to bring in the battleships or we would really be screwed….

crappie55369 wrote:

Before you go bashing me

I’m in no way bashing you crappie……..I’m just saying the scenario you’re describing is not gonna happen in the modern day………

crappie55369 wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Mudshark wrote:</div>
Nukes?….Really?

We are describing a tyrannical government that has already chosen to turn against its own civilians in this fictional scenario of needing guns right? I don’t understand why so many would assume this force is comfortable opening fire on its own civilians but they suddenly stop short of using weapons of mass destruction. Isn’t that what so-called tyrannical governments do? Its kinda like having your cake and eating it to to argue that you need guns to protect yourself in case the well established government goes insane and turns against you but they would never be so morally corrupted as to use these weapons they have that could end the fight almost immediately. Before you go bashing me as someone saying take the guns away, read between the lines. Im challenging the argument not the right to own guns. I am ok with the 2nd amendment I just don’t think the reasoning of defense against government holds water any longer

No Crappie, you see this tyrannical government situation we conjure in our head will first decide to turn on it’s citizens, then it will decide to do so in a fashion that gives those citizens a chance to fight back.

They won’t send drones, helicopters, fighter jets, they will definitely go by foot in a way that allows the millions of people with guns a chance to fight back!

“Should we send in the helicopters and drones sir?”

“Nah, they’ll be expecting that, leave the heavy weaponry at home, let’s go by foot in broad daylight with small arms, they’ll never see it coming.”

This isn’t an argument to take guns away, it’s just me saying that if you’re hoping to convince people to abide by the 2nd amendment, “In case the military/government turn on us!” is a pretty lame argument, come up with a better one.

I hunt solely with black powder so the “30 round clip argument” will not win me over. I do however believe in our 2nd amendment. I also believe we have enough laws and hoops to jump thru if those doing the required checks did their job as one instead of having every state require something different. Come together and have a uniform policy and then enforce it. Figure out what schools need to be secure and then fund it from a federal level with all schools getting identical up-grades to become secure.

Legal gun owners with no mental issues are not the ones doing the mass shooting. Legal hunters and target shooters are not doing these shootings either. Stop and ask how many of these school shootings are at the hands of sane adults as opposed to kids who have issues. Kids doing the shootings in schools and yet we are seeing kids demanding that guns should be taken out of society….nothing more than not being able to see the forest for the trees.

This country needs to seriously get back on line with mental health help and not the kind of help that comes with a prescription or open treatment. The country needs a registry for mental health people who are receiving medications and for those who have drug and/or alcohol addictions as well since those too are mental health issues.

Before anything gets done, the media needs a muzzle put on it so all this propaganda against law abiding gun owners can be put in check. I’ve said it before…. first amend the 1st amendment to require only verifiable facts be related by any and all media and that all of their sources become public information. If the media HAD to comment only on facts all of this would be behind us.

I think those that made comments about bullying and prescription meds being major issues that need to be addressed are closest to the source. By prescription meds I mean both the effects of the drugs but also the mentality of treating illness using drugs rather than through real treatment. I honestly worry for my kids entering high school, especially being of mixed race.

crappie55369 wrote:

I think those that made comments about bullying and prescription meds being major issues that need to be addressed are closest to the source. By prescription meds I mean both the effects of the drugs but also the mentality of treating illness using drugs rather than through real treatment. I honestly worry for my kids entering high school, especially being of mixed race.

Now don’t start posting logical stuff all of a sudden… I have been saying from the very first question, how do we make our schools safer… by addressing the symptoms, not reacting to the unwanted results.

Hitler disarmed a whole lot of people in the 1940’s… and FWIW, a tyrannical government is not rolling into your town with tanks, they slowly pick away at your freedoms… (see weapons bans, forced health care, taxes upon taxes, etc. etc. etc. Aw just give a little…and they will stop… riiiiiiiiight. There is more corruption than you know in this country and not necessarily in DC, lots of puppets there though.

philtickelson wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>crappie55369 wrote:</div>

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Mudshark wrote:</div>
Nukes?….Really?

We are describing a tyrannical government that has already chosen to turn against its own civilians in this fictional scenario of needing guns right? I don’t understand why so many would assume this force is comfortable opening fire on its own civilians but they suddenly stop short of using weapons of mass destruction. Isn’t that what so-called tyrannical governments do? Its kinda like having your cake and eating it to to argue that you need guns to protect yourself in case the well established government goes insane and turns against you but they would never be so morally corrupted as to use these weapons they have that could end the fight almost immediately. Before you go bashing me as someone saying take the guns away, read between the lines. Im challenging the argument not the right to own guns. I am ok with the 2nd amendment I just don’t think the reasoning of defense against government holds water any longer

No Crappie, you see this tyrannical government situation we conjure in our head will first decide to turn on it’s citizens, then it will decide to do so in a fashion that gives those citizens a chance to fight back.

They won’t send drones, helicopters, fighter jets, they will definitely go by foot in a way that allows the millions of people with guns a chance to fight back!

“Should we send in the helicopters and drones sir?”

“Nah, they’ll be expecting that, leave the heavy weaponry at home, let’s go by foot in broad daylight with small arms, they’ll never see it coming.”

This isn’t an argument to take guns away, it’s just me saying that if you’re hoping to convince people to abide by the 2nd amendment, “In case the military/government turn on us!” is a pretty lame argument, come up with a better one.

As I disagree but don’t feel like arguing hypotheticals you should just explain where you stand on the 2nd amendmant. The interpretation is the same, wether or not it would make a difference really doesn’t matter in any way.

You are for it.

Or

You are against it.

Simple question.

The reason it was written is clear and not up for negotiation. Wether you agree or disagree is your personal standing, but when you want a certain gun to be taken, and would surrender before you even consider defending yourself I already know your answer won’t be as simple as the question.

big_g wrote:

Hitler disarmed a whole lot of people in the 1940’s… and FWIW, a tyrannical government is not rolling into your town with tanks, they slowly pick away at your freedoms… (see weapons bans, forced health care, taxes upon taxes, etc. etc. etc. Aw just give a little…and they will stop… riiiiiiiiight. There is more corruption than you know in this country and not necessarily in DC, lots of puppets there though.

Attachments:

1. 

   FB_IMG_1522086238238.jpg
   

gizmoguy wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>big_g wrote:</div>
Hitler disarmed a whole lot of people in the 1940’s… and FWIW, a tyrannical government is not rolling into your town with tanks, they slowly pick away at your freedoms… (see weapons bans, forced health care, taxes upon taxes, etc. etc. etc. Aw just give a little…and they will stop… riiiiiiiiight. There is more corruption than you know in this country and not necessarily in DC, lots of puppets there though.

Sums it up perfectly. BUT, they always have a “reason” to change laws. (Remember laws ONLY effect law-abiding citizens.)

I am calling for school shootings to be illigal. This would work better than making certain guns illigal to own clearly as it will fix the main issue at hand and not fret on the outdoorsman and patriots.

x2 I wish more people born after 1970 or so would learn history. (I know, I know, that there are people that learn history that were born after 1970. I’m just making a point of how our school systems have been failing.)

I’m also getting sick of the argument that the constitution was written at the time of muskets and wasn’t meant for today. That is just an ignorant statement. This school shooting incident is all political and using children in the process. Look at Vietnam, Afghanistan and others. Did we win with Nukes and Tanks? Would a US Government win against the 300 million guns in the hands of true American’s? The answer is hell no.

In war, you acquire the weapons of your conquests. In short order, the true Americans would have the means to kick the crap out of the liberal fascists. (and yes, Fascism is far left just like socialism/Communism) This is the reason for the 2nd amendment. it is the ONLY amendment that states Shall not be infringed.