No. Having more guns doesn't solve the gun problem.
Sure why not, while we're at it let's post the National guard at government offices. How about institute metal dectectors in every building and have security checkpoints at borders of towns and states? I've got a better one, why not stick an RFID+GPS tracker chip in everyone so ID is obselete and the government can keep an eye on us 24/7?<br />
Your questions is a clear example of why Americans care only for freedoms they like while ignoring and trampling on other freedoms. Like the right to enjoy life, the right to not be shot at school, and the right to shoot guns in a safe, recreational manner.<br />
The problem is not that schools don't have an armed guard, the problem is that guns are too easily available to the mentally ill and criminally minded. No other country has this problem, it's not video games, it's not movies, it's not rock and roll, and it's not satan. It's Us. We kill children, women, men, the elderly. Every gun requires someone to pull the trigger, Guns don't kill people, the bullet a person put into the gun kills people.<br />
The first step is regulating who can purchase guns, the next is regulating the guns themselves, the third and final step is Draconian penalties for gun violence. If We refuse to stop killing one another we can at least make Murder natural life rather than a thirty to life sentence....
You fail reading comprehension forever...I'm an anarchist, and probably one of the most moderate voices on these boards. Which is hilarious...Anyway, I'm an american, the issue is not just the guns, it's the culture of violence the US thrives on.So while there would be less gun violence there would be just as much violent crime. Laws against rape haven't stopped any of the thousands in jail have they? So clearly it's not just guns and it's not just a ton of "lone rapists". My point is that many many good ideas backfire insanely. the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Just look at the Patriot act, it completely violates the fourth amendment, but if it helps catch terrorists the idiot hawks on terror will crucify anyone who suggests repealing it. Don't let your grief and anger overide your common sense. Guns are not evil, People are.
Innocents always end up in the crossfire. However this was not crossfire this was a targeted killing. We need to seriously change who is able to get handguns and firearms, how they store the weapons, and have to register the weapons. That way if they "get stolen" and end up used in a crime we'll know where they came from. The problem with banning guns is the only way to make sure this never happens again is to ransack people's houses and destroy every gun you find. That would be terrifying and an apalling violation of our rights. Until firearms are treated with the seriousness we give explosives, tragedies like these will continue to happen.
Yes--along with razor wire fencing, sniper towers that provide 360 coverage of the property, metal detectors at the doors, regular searches of student and faculty lockers, school uniforms (think pocketless jump suits) that students must change into before entering the building proper, and TSA-style body scanners to make sure nothing was transferred from outside the building to inside.<br />
What? You say that sounds ludicrous? Extreme? Hmm. Interesting.<br />
Where do you want to draw the line, then? Which steps above are too extreme?<br />
I believe that any teacher that wants to should be allowed to carry at school. Forget the extra armed guards. They would be an unnecessary expense.
And when a student gets shot by accident what happens then?
Why do you focus on the negative? Millions of people carry firearms everyday without "accidentally" shooting someone. Why do you think it would happen if a teacher who has a concealed carry license will have an "accident" and shoot a student?
In many of the middle and high schools here, there have been armed security guards for some time. Having them in the elementary schools as well, would not be that strange, considering, although it's sad that it should be necessary.
No. But, since science has proven the common thread in all psychopaths and serial killers, and folks that go postal on society have abnormal frontal lobes; I think a brain scan should be required on people instead of drug tests.
Many schools have officers on campus. They not only train employees on how to handle situations but also provide the school with someone who is keeping an eye out for potential problems. Having them there serves as a deterent to some extent.
I would say armed guards would be an overreaction to an isolated incident.
I have great empathy for all those involved in the horrible tragedy in Connecticut. I thought you were just "wondering what other people thought"? So I shared.
armed kids should not get into schools and if armed guards are in schools there should be a detailed explanation given to children and any trauma should be taken as a serious priority. the guards should all be introduced to the kids and should be qualified to deal on the level of understanding of children. i guess what im trying to say is if something is done, anything, do it with consideration and care and do it instead of talking about it. i feel these situations should have been taken care of a long time ago. how many times. what has been done???????
**** no. Then parents would say "my kid has to protect themselves against those guards. One of them might snap one day."
i say yes...at the entrance area...
No. Teachers should be trained in fire arm use and they should all go to school each wearing one of those chest holsters packing heat. <br />
Save money on guards and might make trouble making kids think twice about dissing the teacher.
Have you ever been a teacher ? MORE kids would end up dead, not fewer. And I'm only being slightly facetious. Seriously, I taught briefly, and neither I nor any of the teachers I've known, including my mother, sister, etc, would've wanted to teach under those circumstances. Another consideration: there have been reports of a few teachers behaving "inappropriately" with children in districts around the state. Imagine if a kid didn't feel he could complain or refuse because that teacher was armed.
Well then thats where teacher selection and review comes into the picture. Teachers should go through a very stringent selection and be monitored now. even without a gun.
There are armed kids. Why not?