20 Stabbed at Pittsburgh area high school

[TC1987]

Laila, you may not feel like you live in a police state. But when I consider the world I see compared to the one I grew up in. I despair and I feel strongly that the trade offs of my personal liberties for the ILLUSION (not the reality) of safety has come at too high a cost.

...

Not sure where you live, but when I look around at my home town compared to the hometown that I grew up in, I see:
trashy, dishonest, violent, and immoral, and abjectly STUPID! people
the college graduates all left
few jobs and menial jobs for laborers and and no good opportunities for women except teacher or nurse
poverty
drugs and gang activity have literally turned the adjacent town into a little Detroit
some very violent kids who are out of control, and are being recruited by gangs
lower socioeconomic, wife-beating, woman-hating, very oppressive and abusive toward women in general
9 kids out of 10 born to welfare unmarried mom
mom has "boyfriend" but nobody marries, and the "boyfriend" situation is a revolving door
the elderly populace of retirees with good pensions is the one only one that has any education, money, couth, and class

So, yeah, it's a different world out there, in many ways. I don't object to having a little extra protection from law enforcement and government to keep the trashy and violent and useless people off my property and away from my extended family. I can wish in one hand and spit in the other, and hope that sweetness and light will reign. But, yanno, that ain't the way to bet.

 

[TC1987]

I don't understand why we can't have metal detectors and armed guards at schools. Who cares if it's expensive? What is more important than protecting our children?!

They have armed guards & trained military personnel, enhanced security on military bases. Don't think that will help much?

I didn't read all the most recent Fort Hood shooting details, but personnel there were prohibited from carrying. There was nobody right-nearby to shoot that shooter.

 

[ksinger]

These threads are always fun for the blind spots, for what they DON'T say as much as what they do. And having read what I recently read, it is interesting to watch this small discussion follow the blind spot that we have on a national scale. We rant about class size, and mental health services, and gun control, and bullying, but miss any discussion of the some of the most glaring and consistent characteristics of these acts.

There is a 900-lb gorilla in this room, and Michael Kimmel, author of the recently published Angry White Men: American Masculinity At The End Of An Era addresses it in depth in his chapter entitled "Angry White Boys". He points out that before about 1990 most school shootings were done by urban black boys with handguns, one on one for either romantic or respect type reasons, and that those have decreased (in the schools proper at least) due to...increased police presence and metal detectors. After 1990 however, virtually ALL rampage school shooting have been committed by white suburban or rural boys with assault type guns, wanting to prove something and take as many of "them" with them as they can before they suicide. They want to be famous, to show "the world". The white boys have very different motivations it seems.

According to Kimmel, the thing that never gets addressed and is completely missed or glossed over, is that 1), they are all boys, and 2) post 1990, they are overwhelmingly white.

He asks the reader to do a little thought experiment, to imagine every high profile suburban shooting having happened in the inner-city and being commited by poor black girls.

"Can you picture the national debate, the headlines, the hand-wringing? There is no doubt we would be having a national debate about inner-city poor black girls. The entire focus would be on race, class, and gender......yet the obvious fact that virtually all the rampage schools shooters were middle-class white boys barely broke a ripple in the torrent of public discussion."

 

[momhappy]

These threads are always fun for the blind spots, for what they DON'T say as much as what they do. And having read what I recently read, it is interesting to watch this small discussion follow the blind spot that we have on a national scale. We rant about class size, and mental health services, and gun control, and bullying, but miss any discussion of the some of the most glaring and consistent characteristics of these acts.

There is a 900-lb gorilla in this room, and Michael Kimmel, author of the recently published Angry White Men: American Masculinity At The End Of An Era addresses it in depth in his chapter entitled "Angry White Boys". He points out that before about 1990 most school shootings were done by urban black boys with handguns, one on one for either romantic or respect type reasons, and that those have decreased (in the schools proper at least) due to...increased police presence and metal detectors. After 1990 however, virtually ALL rampage school shooting have been committed by white suburban or rural boys with assault type guns, wanting to prove something and take as many of "them" with them as they can before they suicide. They want to be famous, to show "the world". The white boys have very different motivations it seems.

According to Kimmel, the thing that never gets addressed and is completely missed or glossed over, is that 1), they are all boys, and 2) post 1990, they are overwhelmingly white.

He asks the reader to do a little thought experiment, to imagine every high profile suburban shooting having happened in the inner-city and being commited by poor black girls.

"Can you picture the national debate, the headlines, the hand-wringing? There is no doubt we would be having a national debate about inner-city poor black girls. The entire focus would be on race, class, and gender......yet the obvious fact that virtually all the rampage schools shooters were middle-class white boys barely broke a ripple in the torrent of public discussion."

It's one book - in a pile of many that attempt to dissect the issue. I really don't see that as a "900 pound gorilla" in the room - I see it as one variable that deserves further investigation (much like any other variables that are linked to the issue). Also, the media makes darn sure that we know every, little detail about the shooters (which include the fact that many of them are white), so to say that it's barely discussed, is simply not true IMO.

 

[nkarma]

I am thankful that in this case there wasn't a firearm used - the amount of children injured and severity of injuries would have been that much more severe. My thoughts are with all those affected, but sadly these events hardly cause more than a ripple of concern in society these days.

I am thankful that a gun wasn't used too, but my point was that people use all sorts of things to cause harm, but some folks seem to think that the answer lies in gun control (and I disagree).

I don't think that people think that the only answer to violence is gun control. I think gun control is an answer to gun-related violence, which has been occurring in schools for a long time, and has resulted in many deaths in and of itself.

Acts of violence that do not include guns are absolutely an important discussion; I agree with you 100%--but so is gun control. I can't think of anything other than a gun that is 1) easier to obtain and also 2) more effective at hurting a large group of people. A stabbing spree affecting 20 is actually pretty unusual, unlike a shooting spree that more can easily affect 20 people, which is why gun control should be one of many means to prevent violence crimes. The CDC finds that 68% homicides are firearm homicides http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm,,,,, so it seems pretty clear that guns play an extraordinarily large role in violent crime.

What about a bombing? That utilizes no firearms and still harms vast numbers of people. Again, this is not about gun control IMO. Crazy people will always find ways to be crazy. My point is that much of the dialogue should be about crazy people and how we can prevent them from doing these sorts go things in the first place - not ban guns after the fact…..

You missed No 1, Bombs aren't legal and easy to obtain. If we treated guns like bombs, then there would be less gun deaths.

 

[nkarma]

I don't understand why we can't have metal detectors and armed guards at schools. Who cares if it's expensive? What is more important than protecting our children?!

They have armed guards & trained military personnel, enhanced security on military bases. Don't think that will help much?

I didn't read all the most recent Fort Hood shooting details, but personnel there were prohibited from carrying. There was nobody right-nearby to shoot that shooter.

So what if the armed guard at school isn't "right nearby" to stop a shooter. Armed guards and combat evasion training for every kid in school?

 

[momhappy]

I am thankful that in this case there wasn't a firearm used - the amount of children injured and severity of injuries would have been that much more severe. My thoughts are with all those affected, but sadly these events hardly cause more than a ripple of concern in society these days.

I am thankful that a gun wasn't used too, but my point was that people use all sorts of things to cause harm, but some folks seem to think that the answer lies in gun control (and I disagree).

I don't think that people think that the only answer to violence is gun control. I think gun control is an answer to gun-related violence, which has been occurring in schools for a long time, and has resulted in many deaths in and of itself.

Acts of violence that do not include guns are absolutely an important discussion; I agree with you 100%--but so is gun control. I can't think of anything other than a gun that is 1) easier to obtain and also 2) more effective at hurting a large group of people. A stabbing spree affecting 20 is actually pretty unusual, unlike a shooting spree that more can easily affect 20 people, which is why gun control should be one of many means to prevent violence crimes. The CDC finds that 68% homicides are firearm homicides http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm,,,,,,,, so it seems pretty clear that guns play an extraordinarily large role in violent crime.

What about a bombing? That utilizes no firearms and still harms vast numbers of people. Again, this is not about gun control IMO. Crazy people will always find ways to be crazy. My point is that much of the dialogue should be about crazy people and how we can prevent them from doing these sorts go things in the first place - not ban guns after the fact…..

You missed No 1, Bombs aren't legal and easy to obtain. If we treated guns like bombs, then there would be less gun deaths.

I disagree that bombs aren't easy to obtain - they are not that difficult to make.

One of the other things that I am thankful for is that there are responsible citizens with concealed carry permits. I feel safer knowing that some folks around me are trained and ready to protect as needed (and I'm currently going through training myself). I want the ability to successfully & confidently protect my family should the need arise.

 

[Indylady]

I am thankful that in this case there wasn't a firearm used - the amount of children injured and severity of injuries would have been that much more severe. My thoughts are with all those affected, but sadly these events hardly cause more than a ripple of concern in society these days.

I am thankful that a gun wasn't used too, but my point was that people use all sorts of things to cause harm, but some folks seem to think that the answer lies in gun control (and I disagree).

I don't think that people think that the only answer to violence is gun control. I think gun control is an answer to gun-related violence, which has been occurring in schools for a long time, and has resulted in many deaths in and of itself.

Acts of violence that do not include guns are absolutely an important discussion; I agree with you 100%--but so is gun control. I can't think of anything other than a gun that is 1) easier to obtain and also 2) more effective at hurting a large group of people. A stabbing spree affecting 20 is actually pretty unusual, unlike a shooting spree that more can easily affect 20 people, which is why gun control should be one of many means to prevent violence crimes. The CDC finds that 68% homicides are firearm homicides http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm,,,,,,,,, so it seems pretty clear that guns play an extraordinarily large role in violent crime.

What about a bombing? That utilizes no firearms and still harms vast numbers of people. Again, this is not about gun control IMO. Crazy people will always find ways to be crazy. My point is that much of the dialogue should be about crazy people and how we can prevent them from doing these sorts go things in the first place - not ban guns after the fact…..

You missed No 1, Bombs aren't legal and easy to obtain. If we treated guns like bombs, then there would be less gun deaths.

I disagree that bombs aren't easy to obtain - they are not that difficult to make.

One of the other things that I am thankful for is that there are responsible citizens with concealed carry permits. I feel safer knowing that some folks around me are trained and ready to protect as needed (and I'm currently going through training myself). I want the ability to successfully & confidently protect my family should the need arise.

Why are we talking about bombs? I don't understand your point. Why would you ignore gun violence, which accounts for nearly 70% of homicide deaths, to bring up a weapon that is rarely used in comparison?

 

[asscherisme]

I have 2 kids in high school and these events always make me feel scared and sick. Its just so sad and awful and it seems like these events are happening more and more. I read that 2 of the victims were good friends of they guy too. Sooo scary. My kids school has 2 full time police officer, locked doors, high security systems, but no school is safe as we have seen over and over again.

 

[ksinger]

I am thankful that in this case there wasn't a firearm used - the amount of children injured and severity of injuries would have been that much more severe. My thoughts are with all those affected, but sadly these events hardly cause more than a ripple of concern in society these days.

I am thankful that a gun wasn't used too, but my point was that people use all sorts of things to cause harm, but some folks seem to think that the answer lies in gun control (and I disagree).

I don't think that people think that the only answer to violence is gun control. I think gun control is an answer to gun-related violence, which has been occurring in schools for a long time, and has resulted in many deaths in and of itself.

Acts of violence that do not include guns are absolutely an important discussion; I agree with you 100%--but so is gun control. I can't think of anything other than a gun that is 1) easier to obtain and also 2) more effective at hurting a large group of people. A stabbing spree affecting 20 is actually pretty unusual, unlike a shooting spree that more can easily affect 20 people, which is why gun control should be one of many means to prevent violence crimes. The CDC finds that 68% homicides are firearm homicides http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm,,,,,,,,, so it seems pretty clear that guns play an extraordinarily large role in violent crime.

What about a bombing? That utilizes no firearms and still harms vast numbers of people. Again, this is not about gun control IMO. Crazy people will always find ways to be crazy. My point is that much of the dialogue should be about crazy people and how we can prevent them from doing these sorts go things in the first place - not ban guns after the fact…..

You missed No 1, Bombs aren't legal and easy to obtain. If we treated guns like bombs, then there would be less gun deaths.

I disagree that bombs aren't easy to obtain - they are not that difficult to make.

One of the other things that I am thankful for is that there are responsible citizens with concealed carry permits. I feel safer knowing that some folks around me are trained and ready to protect as needed (and I'm currently going through training myself). I want the ability to successfully & confidently protect my family should the need arise.

I'm glad you have a warm fuzzy about your ability. But I would not. The fact that you feel confident that a little training course on gun handling and safety makes you NOT a risk to anyone but the bad guys, tells me you don't really get it.

http://www.today.com/id/41018893/ns/slate_com/t/armed-giffords-hero-nearly-shot-wrong-man/#.U0bKNpJqn_w

 

[momhappy]

I am thankful that in this case there wasn't a firearm used - the amount of children injured and severity of injuries would have been that much more severe. My thoughts are with all those affected, but sadly these events hardly cause more than a ripple of concern in society these days.

I am thankful that a gun wasn't used too, but my point was that people use all sorts of things to cause harm, but some folks seem to think that the answer lies in gun control (and I disagree).

I don't think that people think that the only answer to violence is gun control. I think gun control is an answer to gun-related violence, which has been occurring in schools for a long time, and has resulted in many deaths in and of itself.

Acts of violence that do not include guns are absolutely an important discussion; I agree with you 100%--but so is gun control. I can't think of anything other than a gun that is 1) easier to obtain and also 2) more effective at hurting a large group of people. A stabbing spree affecting 20 is actually pretty unusual, unlike a shooting spree that more can easily affect 20 people, which is why gun control should be one of many means to prevent violence crimes. The CDC finds that 68% homicides are firearm homicides http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm,,,,,,,,,, so it seems pretty clear that guns play an extraordinarily large role in violent crime.

What about a bombing? That utilizes no firearms and still harms vast numbers of people. Again, this is not about gun control IMO. Crazy people will always find ways to be crazy. My point is that much of the dialogue should be about crazy people and how we can prevent them from doing these sorts go things in the first place - not ban guns after the fact…..

You missed No 1, Bombs aren't legal and easy to obtain. If we treated guns like bombs, then there would be less gun deaths.

I disagree that bombs aren't easy to obtain - they are not that difficult to make.

One of the other things that I am thankful for is that there are responsible citizens with concealed carry permits. I feel safer knowing that some folks around me are trained and ready to protect as needed (and I'm currently going through training myself). I want the ability to successfully & confidently protect my family should the need arise.

Why are we talking about bombs? I don't understand your point. Why would you ignore gun violence, which accounts for nearly 70% of homicide deaths, to bring up a weapon that is rarely used in comparison?

Where did I post that I was ignoring gun violence? I most certainly am not. And we're not really talking about bombs - I was lumping it in with random acts of violence.

 

[momhappy]

I am thankful that in this case there wasn't a firearm used - the amount of children injured and severity of injuries would have been that much more severe. My thoughts are with all those affected, but sadly these events hardly cause more than a ripple of concern in society these days.

I am thankful that a gun wasn't used too, but my point was that people use all sorts of things to cause harm, but some folks seem to think that the answer lies in gun control (and I disagree).

I don't think that people think that the only answer to violence is gun control. I think gun control is an answer to gun-related violence, which has been occurring in schools for a long time, and has resulted in many deaths in and of itself.

Acts of violence that do not include guns are absolutely an important discussion; I agree with you 100%--but so is gun control. I can't think of anything other than a gun that is 1) easier to obtain and also 2) more effective at hurting a large group of people. A stabbing spree affecting 20 is actually pretty unusual, unlike a shooting spree that more can easily affect 20 people, which is why gun control should be one of many means to prevent violence crimes. The CDC finds that 68% homicides are firearm homicides http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm,,,,,,,,,, so it seems pretty clear that guns play an extraordinarily large role in violent crime.

What about a bombing? That utilizes no firearms and still harms vast numbers of people. Again, this is not about gun control IMO. Crazy people will always find ways to be crazy. My point is that much of the dialogue should be about crazy people and how we can prevent them from doing these sorts go things in the first place - not ban guns after the fact…..

You missed No 1, Bombs aren't legal and easy to obtain. If we treated guns like bombs, then there would be less gun deaths.

I disagree that bombs aren't easy to obtain - they are not that difficult to make.

One of the other things that I am thankful for is that there are responsible citizens with concealed carry permits. I feel safer knowing that some folks around me are trained and ready to protect as needed (and I'm currently going through training myself). I want the ability to successfully & confidently protect my family should the need arise.

I'm glad you have a warm fuzzy about your ability. But I would not. The fact that you feel confident that a little training course on gun handling and safety makes you NOT a risk to anyone but the bad guys, tells me you don't really get it.

http://www.today.com/id/41018893/ns/slate_com/t/armed-giffords-hero-nearly-shot-wrong-man/#.U0bKNpJqn_w

Huh Where did I say that I was all warm and fuzzy about my abilities? Where did I post that I've had a little course on gun handling and safety? And finally, where did I post that I felt that I was not a risk to anyone but the bad guys? You've made a slew of assumptions about me and you know nothing about me. Normally, I would elaborate, but quite frankly, I don't care to engage in dialogue with you, so you can choose to think what you'd like about me and life goes on.

 

[momhappy]

I have 2 kids in high school and these events always make me feel scared and sick. Its just so sad and awful and it seems like these events are happening more and more. I read that 2 of the victims were good friends of they guy too. Sooo scary. My kids school has 2 full time police officer, locked doors, high security systems, but no school is safe as we have seen over and over again.

I understand exactly how you feel. I have kids in public school and I worry about these things too. After Sandy Hook, home schooling even crossed my mind, but you can't go through life living in fear and as much as we try, we can't protect our kids from everything Many of our schools don't have security guards/police, but all school doors are locked and we have to gain access through a security system at the front entry only.

 

[yssie]

I am thankful that in this case there wasn't a firearm used - the amount of children injured and severity of injuries would have been that much more severe. My thoughts are with all those affected, but sadly these events hardly cause more than a ripple of concern in society these days.

I am thankful that a gun wasn't used too, but my point was that people use all sorts of things to cause harm, but some folks seem to think that the answer lies in gun control (and I disagree).

I don't think that people think that the only answer to violence is gun control. I think gun control is an answer to gun-related violence, which has been occurring in schools for a long time, and has resulted in many deaths in and of itself.

Acts of violence that do not include guns are absolutely an important discussion; I agree with you 100%--but so is gun control. I can't think of anything other than a gun that is 1) easier to obtain and also 2) more effective at hurting a large group of people. A stabbing spree affecting 20 is actually pretty unusual, unlike a shooting spree that more can easily affect 20 people, which is why gun control should be one of many means to prevent violence crimes. The CDC finds that 68% homicides are firearm homicides http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, so it seems pretty clear that guns play an extraordinarily large role in violent crime.

What about a bombing? That utilizes no firearms and still harms vast numbers of people. Again, this is not about gun control IMO. Crazy people will always find ways to be crazy. My point is that much of the dialogue should be about crazy people and how we can prevent them from doing these sorts go things in the first place - not ban guns after the fact…..

You missed No 1, Bombs aren't legal and easy to obtain. If we treated guns like bombs, then there would be less gun deaths.

I disagree that bombs aren't easy to obtain - they are not that difficult to make.

One of the other things that I am thankful for is that there are responsible citizens with concealed carry permits. I feel safer knowing that some folks around me are trained and ready to protect as needed (and I'm currently going through training myself). I want the ability to successfully & confidently protect my family should the need arise.

I'm glad you have a warm fuzzy about your ability. But I would not. The fact that you feel confident that a little training course on gun handling and safety makes you NOT a risk to anyone but the bad guys, tells me you don't really get it.

http://www.today.com/id/41018893/ns/slate_com/t/armed-giffords-hero-nearly-shot-wrong-man/#.U0bKNpJqn_w

Huh Where did I say that I was all warm and fuzzy about my abilities? Where did I post that I've had a little course on gun handling and safety? And finally, where did I post that I felt that I was not a risk to anyone but the bad guys? You've made a slew of assumptions about me and you know nothing about me. Normally, I would elaborate, but quite frankly, I don't care to engage in dialogue with you, so you can choose to think what you'd like about me and life goes on.

I read your post exactly as ksinger did, and I'm glad she responded before I'd finished mine. That people with the attitude your post seems to convey (to me) can walk around armed is (from my perspective) a terrifying prospect.

There is a reason doctors don't prescribe to immediate family... when the average person is personally invested in a situation his objectivity, command of logic, and ability to think rationally are compromised regardless of training. And a mother "protecting her family" is the definition of "personally invested"... either you are indeed above average in terms of command of reason in intensely stressful situations, which a training course will most certainly not unveil, or you will leave your course armed and over-confident and become a(nother) liability to the general public.

I know many people whose lives incorporate guns of various types. Hunters, enthusiasts... those people know guns like we know diamonds. Not one of those people owns/carries strictly to "stay safe". They don't scare me in the least, because they don't view their guns as crutches or safety nets.

 

[momhappy]

^Taking a few hours out of your life on a Saturday for a "gun class" is entirely different than what I was referring to. Like I said before, a lot of assumptions have been made - I have never taken a handgun course and I certainly didn't say that I feel comfortable taking on the world. What I did say was that I have received training for the past several years in an effort to get myself to a level of comfort & expertise that would allow me to offer protection to my family should the need arise, which does not imply that I believe that carrying around a handgun (and the ability to use it efficiently) is a guarantee. For me, it's about getting myself to a level where I feel like an appropriate candidate for CC. It's about awareness, ability, equipment, training, etc. - the responsibility of gun ownership is much more complex than taking a handgun class and/or owning a handgun.

 

[livannie]

I agree that it's smart to learn how to protect yourself. We don't own any guns in our house because my husband doesn't want guns in our house with our 2 kids. But what if we needed to protect ourselves from a break-in? I don't know what we would do.
I grew up with a dad that owned many guns because of his DEA job and I felt safer knowing he could protect us if he had to. My grandparents have told me for a long time that I should learn how to shoot a gun and told me they would give me one of theirs but just the idea scares me.
This world seems so scary sometimes though and I don't believe our gun rights should be taken away. Maybe just psychology tests given first? If someone wants to kill, they are going to find a way. I can't believe the kid stabbed 20 kids before getting stopped though, you would think if someone could just jump on him but I guess that's easy for me to say. Makes me wanna homeschool my kids.

 

[msop04]

Yes, and this is a perfect example of why the issue of random acts of violence deserves so much more than a discussion about gun control…. People use guns, knives, bombs, even air planes to cause harm and yet the main focus has been gun control and/or banning guns. Sadly, It's a crazy world we live in and stories like these are terribly upsetting

You are so right, momhappy. This was my exact thought upon hearing about this... I hope everyone survives. What is wrong with people these days??!!

 

[msop04]

I disagree that bombs aren't easy to obtain - they are not that difficult to make.

One of the other things that I am thankful for is that there are responsible citizens with concealed carry permits. I feel safer knowing that some folks around me are trained and ready to protect as needed (and I'm currently going through training myself). I want the ability to successfully & confidently protect my family should the need arise.

Amen.

 

[TC1987]

So what if the armed guard at school isn't "right nearby" to stop a shooter. Armed guards and combat evasion training for every kid in school?

Lots of veterans are returning from military service and need jobs. Employ them as school guards. I'm okay with that. In the post WWII baby boom era, just about every baby boomer kid had a dad who'd served in the military, knew how to use a gun, probably kept one or more guns in the home. And the towns and cities were a whole lot safer, day and night, than they are now that we all rely on police to settle everything. Out-of-control sociopath dumbazz kids with guns and knives worry me more than an adult male or female armed security guard in a school. Personally, I could not care less what happens to mommies' little loser knife-wielders or shooters. I care only about the victims that they injure or kill. You can't change my mind. Even if that Murrysville nut job was my son, I'd still believe that euthanize is the appropriate thing to do with him. The peaceable and functional and productive and kind and considerate members of society have rights, too, and are MORE IMPORTANT than any misfit out of control sociopath kid.

 

[Gypsy]

So what if the armed guard at school isn't "right nearby" to stop a shooter. Armed guards and combat evasion training for every kid in school?

Lots of veterans are returning from military service and need jobs. Employ them as school guards.

With the high rate of PTSD and the crappy metal health care they get?

Um. HELL NO. I can't think of a worse combination.

 

[Maria D]

Maybe I'm a naive soul living in lala land...but I honestly don't get how/why people are living in fear in their own homes and schools. I work in a public urbanish high school every day and am honestly not worried about getting shot at or stabbed any more than I'm worried that a tornado will come through and kill us all. Yeah, it could happen but it's highly unlikely. The LAST thing I want is for armed guards at school or even worse, armed teachers! Why would anyone expect teachers as an aggregate group to have excellent mental health? We're all ready to snap!

At home I take the usual precautions - um, I keep the doors locked, that's about it. I *never* worry about home invasions! I rarely hear about any and the ones I do hear about in this area seem to involve parties that know each other, usually drug-related. I feel as far removed from it as the invasion of Crimea.

If so many have guns for "protection" why is it that more people are killed each year due to gun accidents than due to the implementation of self-protection? One news item that sticks out in recent memory was of a young widow and mother whose home was broken into by drug addicts looking for her deceased husband's pain-killer supply. She protected herself, quite admirably, by shooting and killing the armed intruder with some kind of gun. That's one protection story compared to just about every day I read about someone, usually a child, killed by accidental gunshot wounds. My guess is we Americans just accept accidents as we do acts of nature.

 

[asscherisme]

I have 2 kids in high school and these events always make me feel scared and sick. Its just so sad and awful and it seems like these events are happening more and more. I read that 2 of the victims were good friends of they guy too. Sooo scary. My kids school has 2 full time police officer, locked doors, high security systems, but no school is safe as we have seen over and over again.

I understand exactly how you feel. I have kids in public school and I worry about these things too. After Sandy Hook, home schooling even crossed my mind, but you can't go through life living in fear and as much as we try, we can't protect our kids from everything Many of our schools don't have security guards/police, but all school doors are locked and we have to gain access through a security system at the front entry only.

In addition to my 2 high school kids I have one in jr high and one in elementary school, so all levels. I have not gone so far as thinking home schooling but I'm very aware of the security areas that lack. All buildings are locked like yours, front entrance only, buzzed in, sign in but there are so many holes in the system. For example, on election days schools are wide open. No metal detectors in the schools. I have talked to enough parents to know that its something wanted in our district and parents are willing to pay too. On the other hand , as a society we don't want to make our kids afraid to go to school and they need to feel safe.

Our school even has lock down drills on how to handle if a shooter comes in. So the knife attack is something unheard of so far. That was a disturbed angry young person and most likely some mental issues.

 

[asscherisme]

So what if the armed guard at school isn't "right nearby" to stop a shooter. Armed guards and combat evasion training for every kid in school?

Lots of veterans are returning from military service and need jobs. Employ them as school guards.

With the high rate of PTSD and the crappy metal health care they get?

Um. HELL NO. I can't think of a worse combination.

amen!

 

[asscherisme]

Maybe I'm a naive soul living in lala land...but I honestly don't get how/why people are living in fear in their own homes and schools. I work in a public urbanish high school every day and am honestly not worried about getting shot at or stabbed any more than I'm worried that a tornado will come through and kill us all. Yeah, it could happen but it's highly unlikely. The LAST thing I want is for armed guards at school or even worse, armed teachers! Why would anyone expect teachers as an aggregate group to have excellent mental health? We're all ready to snap!

At home I take the usual precautions - um, I keep the doors locked, that's about it. I *never* worry about home invasions! I rarely hear about any and the ones I do hear about in this area seem to involve parties that know each other, usually drug-related. I feel as far removed from it as the invasion of Crimea.

If so many have guns for "protection" why is it that more people are killed each year due to gun accidents than due to the implementation of self-protection? One news item that sticks out in recent memory was of a young widow and mother whose home was broken into by drug addicts looking for her deceased husband's pain-killer supply. She protected herself, quite admirably, by shooting and killing the armed intruder with some kind of gun. That's one protection story compared to just about every day I read about someone, usually a child, killed by accidental gunshot wounds. My guess is we Americans just accept accidents as we do acts of nature.

When I was growing up my next door neighbor accidentally shot and killed his brother when they found and were playing with their fathers gun that they found. We were all in elementary school at the time. It has made me anti gun and nothing will change my mind. I think kids and guns don't mix in the home.

 

[ksinger]

I am thankful that in this case there wasn't a firearm used - the amount of children injured and severity of injuries would have been that much more severe. My thoughts are with all those affected, but sadly these events hardly cause more than a ripple of concern in society these days.

I am thankful that a gun wasn't used too, but my point was that people use all sorts of things to cause harm, but some folks seem to think that the answer lies in gun control (and I disagree).

I don't think that people think that the only answer to violence is gun control. I think gun control is an answer to gun-related violence, which has been occurring in schools for a long time, and has resulted in many deaths in and of itself.

Acts of violence that do not include guns are absolutely an important discussion; I agree with you 100%--but so is gun control. I can't think of anything other than a gun that is 1) easier to obtain and also 2) more effective at hurting a large group of people. A stabbing spree affecting 20 is actually pretty unusual, unlike a shooting spree that more can easily affect 20 people, which is why gun control should be one of many means to prevent violence crimes. The CDC finds that 68% homicides are firearm homicides http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, so it seems pretty clear that guns play an extraordinarily large role in violent crime.

What about a bombing? That utilizes no firearms and still harms vast numbers of people. Again, this is not about gun control IMO. Crazy people will always find ways to be crazy. My point is that much of the dialogue should be about crazy people and how we can prevent them from doing these sorts go things in the first place - not ban guns after the fact…..

You missed No 1, Bombs aren't legal and easy to obtain. If we treated guns like bombs, then there would be less gun deaths.

I disagree that bombs aren't easy to obtain - they are not that difficult to make.

One of the other things that I am thankful for is that there are responsible citizens with concealed carry permits. I feel safer knowing that some folks around me are trained and ready to protect as needed (and I'm currently going through training myself). I want the ability to successfully & confidently protect my family should the need arise.

I'm glad you have a warm fuzzy about your ability. But I would not. The fact that you feel confident that a little training course on gun handling and safety makes you NOT a risk to anyone but the bad guys, tells me you don't really get it.

http://www.today.com/id/41018893/ns/slate_com/t/armed-giffords-hero-nearly-shot-wrong-man/#.U0bKNpJqn_w

Huh Where did I say that I was all warm and fuzzy about my abilities? Where did I post that I've had a little course on gun handling and safety? And finally, where did I post that I felt that I was not a risk to anyone but the bad guys? You've made a slew of assumptions about me and you know nothing about me. Normally, I would elaborate, but quite frankly, I don't care to engage in dialogue with you, so you can choose to think what you'd like about me and life goes on.

I read your post exactly as ksinger did, and I'm glad she responded before I'd finished mine. That people with the attitude your post seems to convey (to me) can walk around armed is (from my perspective) a terrifying prospect.

There is a reason doctors don't prescribe to immediate family... when the average person is personally invested in a situation his objectivity, command of logic, and ability to think rationally are compromised regardless of training. And a mother "protecting her family" is the definition of "personally invested"... either you are indeed above average in terms of command of reason in intensely stressful situations, which a training course will most certainly not unveil, or you will leave your course armed and over-confident and become a(nother) liability to the general public.

I know many people whose lives incorporate guns of various types. Hunters, enthusiasts... those people know guns like we know diamonds. Not one of those people owns/carries strictly to "stay safe". They don't scare me in the least, because they don't view their guns as crutches or safety nets.

Yes. That. My husband worked in the gun business for 15 years and is now a teacher in a sometimes tough inner-city school, and he refuses to carry, for a lot of really good reasons, not the least of which is the way it seeps into your mind and distorts the lens through which you see every situation. It should and it must, if you are going to carry, but it also adds a gun into the mix in every situation you encounter. He said he does not want to be in that mental place again, it's exhausting, and dark. In fact, if he had not finally lost what I considered his unhealthy fascination with guns I would not be married to him today. If a man whose waking a sleeping revolved around guns as his once did, who WAS highly trained and safe and very experienced with weapons refuses now to carry a gun because he admits that you can get WAY too close to shooting someone simply because that gun is on your person, then I AM going to question why someone with less focus and less experience feels like they should.

For myself, I was once young and impressionable and wanting to please, so I'm also comfortable around firearms (although I would need loads of refresher at this point, I haven't done any shooting in ages) - if it blows a projectile out one end, I've probably shot it, and at one point I had oodles of hours at the range (and out in farm fields), but even then I would not have dreamed of carrying either. For one, I don't have that level of fear. For another, I could seriously see making a wrong choice and doing what the guy in the article I linked nearly did - kill an innocent - when Gabrielle Giffords was shot. I could not live with that, even if in the pursuit of protecting a loved one.

So yes, just like those who want to carry a gun in public are assuming that every person they encounter is a potential threat and that there are enough situations that might warrant carrying that gun, I'm going to assume that a large percentage of the people who obtain said concealed carry permit are NOT properly trained enough to be carrying around the public. An assumption born out by my own experiences with weapons handling and more recently, by the observations of a friend of mine, who grudgingly went to the state CC required classes his wife insisted they go to. (She got a bug in her ear about it after her PASTOR told his flock they should be armed) So he went to keep the peace at home, and his observations as a recently retired army lt. colonel, (read: highly trained) was that the class was a joke, and that about 20 of the people in the class were scary as hell. They both got CC permits which are good for 5 YEARS, but she doesn't even OWN A GUN. At the time, he made her take additional training not required by the state, but the point is, it's NOT REQUIRED. So maybe my assumptions are off and unfair, but my knowledge of how a CC permit in my state requires pretty much only that you be upright and breathing, and the fact that I spent too long around the hard-core gun culture - in gun shops, ranges, and endless gun shows, means that I'm probably not going to assume anything else.

As an aside, since I do have such a long history with the gun show world, I will say that the whole tenor of the gun shows has changed dramatically. Thirty plus years ago they were only a bit scary - just the occasional sleepy John Birch booth or somesuch, and the split of goods was about 80% sporting and collector, and 20% paranoid. Nowadays (yes, I've gone to several in the last few years) that mix has reversed, with black rambo-esque military-type weapons front and center when you walk in the door and almost no decent collector or sporting stuff, and a TON of anti-government literature and talk. The tone has changed. A LOT. They used to be places to see neat old guns, now they are full of people lined up to stock up on their guns before 'bama sends jackbooted thugs into their homes to take them all away, (eavesdropping while in the line to get in is interesting to say the least) and are just kind of scary and depressing.

Oh, and just to hammer it home once more how easy it is to shoot the wrong guy even when supposedly highly trained....just this morning I read,a HIGHLY TRAINED COP made the wrong call and shot the VICTIM.
http://www.thewire.com/national/2014/04/los-angeles-county-sheriffs-department-accidentally-killed-someone/360508/

 

[ksinger]

Maybe I'm a naive soul living in lala land...but I honestly don't get how/why people are living in fear in their own homes and schools. I work in a public urbanish high school every day and am honestly not worried about getting shot at or stabbed any more than I'm worried that a tornado will come through and kill us all. Yeah, it could happen but it's highly unlikely. The LAST thing I want is for armed guards at school or even worse, armed teachers! Why would anyone expect teachers as an aggregate group to have excellent mental health? We're all ready to snap!

At home I take the usual precautions - um, I keep the doors locked, that's about it. I *never* worry about home invasions! I rarely hear about any and the ones I do hear about in this area seem to involve parties that know each other, usually drug-related. I feel as far removed from it as the invasion of Crimea.

If so many have guns for "protection" why is it that more people are killed each year due to gun accidents than due to the implementation of self-protection? One news item that sticks out in recent memory was of a young widow and mother whose home was broken into by drug addicts looking for her deceased husband's pain-killer supply. She protected herself, quite admirably, by shooting and killing the armed intruder with some kind of gun. That's one protection story compared to just about every day I read about someone, usually a child, killed by accidental gunshot wounds. My guess is we Americans just accept accidents as we do acts of nature.

Well, we really ARE worried about a tornado coming through and killing us all, but then consider where I live.

And you say that tongue in cheek, but seriously, teacher as an aggregate don't really have the mental make-up to carry, and most of them don't WANT to. My husband shudders at the thought. I remember when the buzz to arm teachers hit the airwaves, my husband's comment on that, I found amusing. He was responding to the topic in a forum he frequents. He said given his experience in both gun culture and education, that was the stupidest idea since abstinence only.

 

[momhappy]

Maybe I'm a naive soul living in lala land...but I honestly don't get how/why people are living in fear in their own homes and schools. I work in a public urbanish high school every day and am honestly not worried about getting shot at or stabbed any more than I'm worried that a tornado will come through and kill us all. Yeah, it could happen but it's highly unlikely. The LAST thing I want is for armed guards at school or even worse, armed teachers! Why would anyone expect teachers as an aggregate group to have excellent mental health? We're all ready to snap!

At home I take the usual precautions - um, I keep the doors locked, that's about it. I *never* worry about home invasions! I rarely hear about any and the ones I do hear about in this area seem to involve parties that know each other, usually drug-related. I feel as far removed from it as the invasion of Crimea.

If so many have guns for "protection" why is it that more people are killed each year due to gun accidents than due to the implementation of self-protection? One news item that sticks out in recent memory was of a young widow and mother whose home was broken into by drug addicts looking for her deceased husband's pain-killer supply. She protected herself, quite admirably, by shooting and killing the armed intruder with some kind of gun. That's one protection story compared to just about every day I read about someone, usually a child, killed by accidental gunshot wounds. My guess is we Americans just accept accidents as we do acts of nature.

For every piece of news involving an accidental shooting, I can find one involving a gun (being used by a responsible citizen) to save a life (or in some cases, many lives). You can pick and choose what you want to read. I don't deny that there are disadvantages associated with the owning and/or handling of guns, but when used properly, they can save lives too. I don't discredit the fact that guns can and do cause harm (either intentionally or unintentionally), but I do believe in our right to bear arms. I don't really think that you are a naive soul living in lala land either. Statistically-speaking, you're not likely to get shot or stabbed, but those things do happen (and in some cases, they can happen whether you are protected or not). I wouldn't say that I live in fear, but I live my life with an awareness that bad guys are out there and for some of them, their main purpose in left is simply to cause harm to others.

 

[packrat]

Some of the training my husband has had has made him come home green around the gills about what has happened in the world in schools. The investigations they have going on, into groups and individuals that are under surveillance, the plans they've *stopped*, that the average person has no awareness of. We are being protected from things and we don't realize it. He knows what humans are capable of, and what they will do, when people are of the mindset that nothing will ever happen to them.

 

[Dancing Fire]

[quote="momhappy|1397138751|

One of the other things that I am thankful for is that there are responsible citizens with concealed carry permits. I feel safer knowing that some folks around me are trained and ready to protect as needed (and I'm currently going through training myself). I want the ability to successfully & confidently protect my family should the need arise.[/quote]


good for you momhappy!.. seem like some of us forgot about the 2nd amendment...

 

[Maria D]

Well, we really ARE worried about a tornado coming through and killing us all, but then consider where I live.

And you say that tongue in cheek, but seriously, teacher as an aggregate don't really have the mental make-up to carry, and most of them don't WANT to. My husband shudders at the thought. I remember when the buzz to arm teachers hit the airwaves, my husband's comment on that, I found amusing. He was responding to the topic in a forum he frequents. He said given his experience in both gun culture and education, that was the stupidest idea since abstinence only.

Ksinger, I was precisely thinking of you as I wrote about tornado threats! Also, that young woman who defended herself and her baby was from Oklahoma. Oklahomans are amazingly tough and resilient.

Momhappy, we could very well be reading the articles that interest us and come away with different takes on the situation. However, a study done by an organization that uses facts, not anecdotes, concludes “guns are rarely used to kill criminals or stop crimes.”
http://www.vpc.org/studies/justifiable.pdf

Imagine if more people died in the process of making buildings earthquake proof than died in earthquakes. Or more children died/were injured from the implementation of carseats than were saved by them. As I see it, that's what having guns in the home for self-protection is analogous to.

I honestly think we, as a society, accept that gun accidents will happen in the same way society used to accept that driving while intoxicated accidents would happen. If twenty children are killed or injured in separate gun accidents next month (and they most certainly will) we accept that as the price to pay for "freedom" and the second amendment.