BREAKING: Shooting reported at Great Mills High School in Maryland - Sensationalist Headlines

Nothing is better than something bad.

Isn't the cliche "something is better that nothing'?

Not when "something" makes things worse.

I think what we need is better resource officers, not armed teachers. This is an example of a proper response. Parkland is an example of a poor response. Obviously, preventing these shootings from the onset should be the primary focus, but if someone makes it into the school with a gun, they should have the properly trained and prepares police officers to deal with it, not teachers. In Texas our school districts have their own police force. Their cruisers will say something like "ISD Police" and their jurisdiction is situations involving the districts students, faculty, and property. They got their own SWAT and detective officers. They do everything from responding to shootings to being officer friendly hall monitor, to serving traffic tickets to speeders to investigating student related criminal threats. It's an entire police department whose primary focus is the safety of the school, regardless of severity. Perhaps more places should consider that, Rather than having a few local Sheriff deputies being assigned to the school.

Just curious, but who pays for that? Does it come out of the school district budget or the Sheriff's? I can't imagine many schools being able to afford such a thing on their own.

I've always been skeptical of the idea of letting staff carry firearms on campus. Texas handles it pretty well, but when I was in high school, only one of our 3 SROs was carrying a gun and he was in and out a lot. I don't know if that's changed since.

I think we should have both, but not force teachers to carry. Only give them the option once they have undergone the proper training and what not. But again, only if they choose to.

IIRC that's what Florida did. They allow teachers to opt-in to having a gun on school premises, but with heavy requirements such as a huge background check, as well as something like 100 hours of gun safety training.

Why do you think making ill informed, seat-of-the-pants decisions is better than waiting until you can actually come up with a good solution? Does this line of reasoning for you apply to everything or just guns because you hate gun owners and don't think we deserve the same kind of fair treatment by the legal system?

Once again putting words in mouths. Didn't even bring up bans. Tbh I'm more in support of what was posted on the first page: mandatory training etc. What gets me is the intense victim complex so many gun owners have that make them want to say things like you just said "because you hate gun owners" is a ridiculous argument, get off it

I believe it's budgeted for by the school district, which I believe comes from the city/local funding. Obviously this means it won't be financially viable for many districts, but I haven't seen a place here that doesn't at least have a small police station of their own. School funding is tough as it is so it's a delicate balance but I think it's something that is effective as a proactive measure and even preventative measure. As a schools own police will probably be more concerned with keeping a dangerous student at Bay once they identify it as was done years in advance for the Parkland shooter. And again, their scope goes beyond stopping shooters. Sadly, I think the schools that would benefit the most from it are the least likely to afford it.

https://i.gyazo.com/c5adbfc9acde6d983ccd1d4160d61142.png How exactly am I putting words in your mouth?

Me disliking what you said and it pissing me off has nothing to do with my opinion of gun owners. Just your opinion, and maybe you

That's not my post.

So.. How exactly is mandatory firearms training gonna stop me from shooting up a school?

Regardless of where you stand on the gun control debate, I feel more resource officers is a safe bet to stop further tragedies. I know it's a common phrase to use words like "soft-target" but the coward who brings a gun to school shouldn't be able to walk in with zero resistance. Multiple trained personnel with firearms will make him think twice once he finds out that he's going to get shot at too. Hiring a few more officers wouldn't hurt anyone if it comes with the idea that they will be dedicated to protecting kids at school, as that's now the unfortunate reality we live in.

Grendiac is the most patient, and thoughtful gun poster I've ever seen on the internet, he offers strong arguments and would happily talk to you about the details of any element of the discussion. You however, all I've ever seen you do is be mean, rude, and snarky to him and dis-regard everything he says because he said it, as it would appear. Maybe if you acted in better faith, a real discussion could take place?

Ours all had least a taser, iirc. The bigger district down the road where my uncle and cousin are officers carry guns iirc.

It's a pretty damn specific rating, though. It's not ambiguous like "cookie". Rating asshole is pretty clear about his opinion of the post.

i don't think there's really room for misinterpretation in this instance

No it's based partially on the rating (the meaning of which is pretty clear) and mostly on my past interactions with SIRIUS in which he's been banned multiple times for insulting people he disagrees with.

No, there's a lot of history one can easily check in regards to Sirius and his history arguing this subject with Grendiac.

AllI have seen is strawman, evasion, and self victimization. I agree I've been too blunt and snarky though

Grendiac hasn't done that in this, or any other discussion. If you truly believe so, can you quote those specific instances?

Although it was towards the wrong person, my point still stands. Me rating an opinion as something has nothing to do with my opinion of gun owners.

The irony is that you're the one setting up strawmen and being evasive.

I don't get why you beat around the bush dude. You clearly don't like people who want to own guns, or argue that owning guns isn't wrong. No amount of argumentation on the subject has shifted you an iota in the several years you and I have had casual interactions in these types of threads. That's fine, but be honest about your dislike of the arguments. People argue against gun bans, and gun registrations because of historical precedent. You've ignored every avenue of that argument, making discussion about how we got to where we are essentially impossible.

SIRIUS posted: I won't start a conversation about pricing my opinion on a specific poster in a thread. I think we should get back to the topic

I have no dislike for project who own guns, just people who put their gun ownership advice all else. Dislike of arguments? Sure. But not gun owners

Having more resource officers sounds like a good temp fix while we drill down to the root causes of these issues. Allowing teachers to carry is alright too imo but I think it would be less effective than a specifically- and consistently-trained force that can devote their attention to the task at hand. I'd also not want it to be the only step we take. We need public school reform, mental health reform, proper enforcement of gun law, etc. Otherwise we're still creating mass shooters, only difference being they'll shoot something else up, I imagine.