Should teachers in the US be armed?
- Thread starter jameen
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Ok, I will ignore the direct name calling.
I consider it offensive if you reply with propaganda, without even bother reading the propaganda itself or the source.
It is offensive that you cannot give to this more than 1 minute.
I gave you concrete reasons why Wikipedia is a more reliable source of information:
1) Widely read (by people with multiple opinions)
2) Has precise (and explicitly stated) rules for producing articles
3) Articles are produced by a multitude of authors that have to come to a consensus.
4) Among the other rules, every fact reported has a reference to the precise source of information.
5) Funding is transparent.
I do not think CPRC fulfills any of the above. On top of that, I gave you a concrete example
of one of their "data analysis" choices that made their analysis not suitable for our discussion.
You did not object to that.
Finally, as for the solution: while you might want to label me, I do not have one.
I think this is a dramatic problem. There are many people proposing for different
ideas. I am open minded towards nearly all of them, and trying to gather reliable
information.
However, this much I know: we should start having discussion based on facts and reliable information.
Information found online should be double checked for sources, for the methodology used, and
the rhetoric should be systematically scraped off the facts.
What change did Obama make that Trump reversed? I have heard nothing of any HIPPA changes that would have improved the NICS system.
I'm not saying he didn't, I just would like to know specifically what law Obama changed. It might actually move him into the category of "well, he did ONE thing right" in my mind...
And, if he did, and Trump changed it, it would move Trump down a notch in my mind, as well.... just to be clear.
I'm not saying he didn't, I just would like to know specifically what law Obama changed. It might actually move him into the category of "well, he did ONE thing right" in my mind...
And, if he did, and Trump changed it, it would move Trump down a notch in my mind, as well.... just to be clear.
S
Why are all these young people using violence to voice their feelings? And why are they targeting schools?
I think growing up today is even worse than back in the 70s and 80s. The kids are supposed to get well educated, being popular and have a billion friends, make a fortune, and visit old gramps in the process. And just to rub it in, the other kids are posting staged details from their "glamorous" lives on social media around the clock.
We're creating losers so fast that not even Henry Ford could make an assembly line manufacturing losers that effectively.
I have been listening to many of these people. Two things are on repeat everytime. Envy and failure. Two emotions that can destroy societies in a heartbeat. But of course, most people don't freak out because they are envious. The problem with the shooters also is a lack of the ability to be controlling their urge to destroy. They are like toddlers in a way, throwing a tantrum when they're not getting what they want.
Why schools?
Because that's where the people that insulted them are...and basically...the only world they know...and that's where they wanna rise to fame...
Stricter gun legislation will probably not be of any help.
I think growing up today is even worse than back in the 70s and 80s. The kids are supposed to get well educated, being popular and have a billion friends, make a fortune, and visit old gramps in the process. And just to rub it in, the other kids are posting staged details from their "glamorous" lives on social media around the clock.
We're creating losers so fast that not even Henry Ford could make an assembly line manufacturing losers that effectively.
I have been listening to many of these people. Two things are on repeat everytime. Envy and failure. Two emotions that can destroy societies in a heartbeat. But of course, most people don't freak out because they are envious. The problem with the shooters also is a lack of the ability to be controlling their urge to destroy. They are like toddlers in a way, throwing a tantrum when they're not getting what they want.
Why schools?
Because that's where the people that insulted them are...and basically...the only world they know...and that's where they wanna rise to fame...
Stricter gun legislation will probably not be of any help.
Last edited by a moderator:
I do not envy this and any future generations, if any. Look to where the education is leading most.....do not blame the parents, though some have a guilt, it is not just the parents.
Television, movies, distorted new reporting in the written media, lying politicians, lying so-called religious leaders and more are greatly contributing to the charcter inhalation of youth today.
Do not say the government is based on some brand of Christianity in the US, because it is not and never has been+
No government formed by mankind does God's will not one, so get off your high horses you who think God is running any country and get back to a true democracy that allows for freedom of worship. In this manner only will the fake churches diminish and the read grow.
Television, movies, distorted new reporting in the written media, lying politicians, lying so-called religious leaders and more are greatly contributing to the charcter inhalation of youth today.
Do not say the government is based on some brand of Christianity in the US, because it is not and never has been+
No government formed by mankind does God's will not one, so get off your high horses you who think God is running any country and get back to a true democracy that allows for freedom of worship. In this manner only will the fake churches diminish and the read grow.
I agree, with one exception.
IF we could figure out a law, or process to prevent mentally unbalanced (for whatever reason) people from being able to acquire a firearm, without penalizing the millions of responsible gun owners, I'd vote for that law in a heartbeat.
putting more and more ineffective laws in place will not accomplish this.
I did notice that two Rep's have introduced a bill that bans outright the making, selling, trading, POSSESSION of an "assault rifle". ..... without any definition of what an "assault rifle" is.
The usual "requirements" are: a detachable magazine, and semi-automatic function. They usually want to include shotguns that are semi-automatic, and manage usually to get some semi-auto pistols added to the list.
IF we could figure out a law, or process to prevent mentally unbalanced (for whatever reason) people from being able to acquire a firearm, without penalizing the millions of responsible gun owners, I'd vote for that law in a heartbeat.
putting more and more ineffective laws in place will not accomplish this.
I did notice that two Rep's have introduced a bill that bans outright the making, selling, trading, POSSESSION of an "assault rifle". ..... without any definition of what an "assault rifle" is.
The usual "requirements" are: a detachable magazine, and semi-automatic function. They usually want to include shotguns that are semi-automatic, and manage usually to get some semi-auto pistols added to the list.
When a nation refers to any legislation designed to help all of the people , especially the helpless, as not caring for the welfare of all calling the actions of love communist or socialist, then perhaps we will be able to go back to the United States of yor, with all civil righs of course............
Until then, the convenience of labeling all help in the fields of health, education and well-bing as being leftist and not of love will prevail with the mighty and wealthy obtaining more and more while the very class upon which they depend will disapper, that being their conumer base. Talk about stealing from your own pocket......
Until then, the convenience of labeling all help in the fields of health, education and well-bing as being leftist and not of love will prevail with the mighty and wealthy obtaining more and more while the very class upon which they depend will disapper, that being their conumer base. Talk about stealing from your own pocket......
Yes I do, Criminals will always possess weapons, they have no regard for law and authority.
If you unarm the teachers and students they have no defence against criminals and psychopaths who go in shooting up the school.
Guns and bombs are not the most dangerous weapons on earth. The Human Brain is.
A gun on a shelf or in a locker is harmless, until someone decides to pick it up and use it.
A bomb is also harmless until someone decides to use it.
It takes a person to design and develop a weapon, it takes a person to build a weapon and a person to use a weapon.
besides it's only a weapon if it's used as a weapon. It's not a weapon if your hunting for your dinner is it? (before thedays of processed food)
It's not a weapon if your on a range shooting targets is it? it only becomes a weapon if your using it to harm another person or destroying private property.
See the real danger is when someone makes the descision to use a weapon against someone else.
If people feared God's judgement and believed in not killing or shedding innocent blood, then you wouldn't have to worry about school shootings. Perhaps the issue with Americans isn't the fact they call them Selves Christians but the fact they don't live the life they profess to have.
If you unarm the teachers and students they have no defence against criminals and psychopaths who go in shooting up the school.
Guns and bombs are not the most dangerous weapons on earth. The Human Brain is.
A gun on a shelf or in a locker is harmless, until someone decides to pick it up and use it.
A bomb is also harmless until someone decides to use it.
It takes a person to design and develop a weapon, it takes a person to build a weapon and a person to use a weapon.
besides it's only a weapon if it's used as a weapon. It's not a weapon if your hunting for your dinner is it? (before thedays of processed food)
It's not a weapon if your on a range shooting targets is it? it only becomes a weapon if your using it to harm another person or destroying private property.
See the real danger is when someone makes the descision to use a weapon against someone else.
If people feared God's judgement and believed in not killing or shedding innocent blood, then you wouldn't have to worry about school shootings. Perhaps the issue with Americans isn't the fact they call them Selves Christians but the fact they don't live the life they profess to have.
I would agree, only because "all" includes criminals and mentally ill people that ought not to have access to guns.
Let's say that there are 2 countries fighting a war against one another where one country has nuclear weapons and the other doesn't. The country without nuclear weapons would be at the mercy of the country that had the nukes in hopes they aren't blown to smithereens with those nukes. Now then, lets say both countries have access to nuclear weapons. While nuclear weapons destroy whole countries, the country that now acquires nuclear weapons are theoretically safer against the other country in what we call "mutual assured destruction."
I understand the difficulty in accepting "the world is safer with more nukes." The truth is, the world would be better of if man never invented nukes... but, we haven't built a flux capacitor yet, so we can't go back into time and undo what has already been done. Thus, nukes are a reality. I am in favor of preventing certain countries from getting their hands on nukes due to mental illness... like North Korea... lol... However, imagine if North Korea was the only country with nukes... not very safe.
I am not saying guns are the equivalent of nuclear weapons. What I'm comparing is the principle that there is a certain level of "mutual assured destruction" when people have and use guns to protect themselves from other people with guns that may want to take away your liberty/property. I don't see criminals handing over their legal and/or illegal weapons any time soon, so why wouldn't it be safer to be armed?
Let's say that there are 2 countries fighting a war against one another where one country has nuclear weapons and the other doesn't. The country without nuclear weapons would be at the mercy of the country that had the nukes in hopes they aren't blown to smithereens with those nukes. Now then, lets say both countries have access to nuclear weapons. While nuclear weapons destroy whole countries, the country that now acquires nuclear weapons are theoretically safer against the other country in what we call "mutual assured destruction."
I understand the difficulty in accepting "the world is safer with more nukes." The truth is, the world would be better of if man never invented nukes... but, we haven't built a flux capacitor yet, so we can't go back into time and undo what has already been done. Thus, nukes are a reality. I am in favor of preventing certain countries from getting their hands on nukes due to mental illness... like North Korea... lol... However, imagine if North Korea was the only country with nukes... not very safe.
I am not saying guns are the equivalent of nuclear weapons. What I'm comparing is the principle that there is a certain level of "mutual assured destruction" when people have and use guns to protect themselves from other people with guns that may want to take away your liberty/property. I don't see criminals handing over their legal and/or illegal weapons any time soon, so why wouldn't it be safer to be armed?
Last edited:
I don't think anybody is against "proper" gun control. It's the definition of that term that causes the conflict.
It would be like letting a bunch of guys decide what is the "proper" number of pairs of shoes a woman could own... LOTS of different ideas of what is "proper".
Personally, I don't think it's necessary or "proper" to race cars. Look at all the fuel wasted, the danger to drivers and spectators, the money wasted by all the spectators....
So, who gets to decide the definition of "proper" control? Keeping in mind that the Constitution says that the right to KEEP and BEAR arms shall not be INFRINGED.
What is the definition of "infringement"? Your definition and mine would likely be different.
It's not quite as easy as it seems.
It would be like letting a bunch of guys decide what is the "proper" number of pairs of shoes a woman could own... LOTS of different ideas of what is "proper".
Personally, I don't think it's necessary or "proper" to race cars. Look at all the fuel wasted, the danger to drivers and spectators, the money wasted by all the spectators....
So, who gets to decide the definition of "proper" control? Keeping in mind that the Constitution says that the right to KEEP and BEAR arms shall not be INFRINGED.
What is the definition of "infringement"? Your definition and mine would likely be different.
It's not quite as easy as it seems.
What change did Obama make that Trump reversed? I have heard nothing of any HIPPA changes that would have improved the NICS system.
I'm not saying he didn't, I just would like to know specifically what law Obama changed. It might actually move him into the category of "well, he did ONE thing right" in my mind... And, if he did, and Trump changed it, it would move Trump down a notch in my mind, as well.... just to be clear.
I'm not saying he didn't, I just would like to know specifically what law Obama changed. It might actually move him into the category of "well, he did ONE thing right" in my mind...
And, if he did, and Trump changed it, it would move Trump down a notch in my mind, as well.... just to be clear.
That's quite sad honestly. Maybe I was missing something about that executive order, but it sounded like a legitimate order.
I hope Trump doesn't let pride get in the way from doing the best thing... undo his undoing of the order (just write another order). He can tailor it however he wishes, provided it allows the same HIPAA change.
I hope Trump doesn't let pride get in the way from doing the best thing... undo his undoing of the order (just write another order). He can tailor it however he wishes, provided it allows the same HIPAA change.
I am not against putting well trained professional guards at school entrance. I am not sure it will have a huge positive impact
(as the last shooting has shown, guards are not always heroes), but with sufficiently careful planning and training, I do not expect it to have too negative impact either.
On the other end, incentivize teachers or other school personnel that is not specifically trained to carry weapons,
can have a huge negative impact. I am not saying it will, but for sure it can. A huge number of guns related deaths and injuries are actually accidents. I do not want guns to e around in a school were they can cause unintentional accidents.
See for instance this article
https://content.csbs.utah.edu/~rhuef/courses/Notes5321-6321/trauma_article.pdf
(as the last shooting has shown, guards are not always heroes), but with sufficiently careful planning and training, I do not expect it to have too negative impact either.
On the other end, incentivize teachers or other school personnel that is not specifically trained to carry weapons,
can have a huge negative impact. I am not saying it will, but for sure it can. A huge number of guns related deaths and injuries are actually accidents. I do not want guns to e around in a school were they can cause unintentional accidents.
See for instance this article
https://content.csbs.utah.edu/~rhuef/courses/Notes5321-6321/trauma_article.pdf
I actually mirror your thoughts on this. There is definitely more positive results from more trained security at schools than allowing teachers to carry. I'm hopeful it's a huge positive impact (with the addition of metal detectors and HIPAA change)... but even if more police/metal detectors/HIPAA change just gave students peace of mind, it would be worth it for me. I know peace of mind won't stop a bullet, but what else can we do?
Last edited: