A "common sense" proposal that will piss off both sides

It seems like it wasn't that long ago that we had this exact same discussion on this forum after the last school mass shooting.
Far too many politicians are beholding to the NRA.
It's so disheartening to see the same thing happening over and over again because so many believe that the only solution is to keep doing nothing because they might be inconvenienced by a law.
I guess it doesn't matter how many children get killed in the name of keeping your access to assault weapons.
Doing nothing is not the solution.

View attachment 223929
It is not just the NRA (whom for the record I view as a train wreck). There are plenty of other organizations and politicians who push for lax/zero enforcement of current laws - especially in urban areas. If you think only one side or one organization is the problem then you choose to remain ignorant to the full nature of the problem.
 
Because as much as we want to call it compromise, the only thing being compromised is the degree of rights that are lost.
Then you didn’t actually read my post - increased 2A freedoms proposed included nationwide carry, federal preemption of additional state restrictions, dramatic shrinking of NFA limitations.

Disagreeing is welcomed. Being so closed minded/reactive that one can’t even read and accurately characterize a post is just disappointing.
 
I once suggested to a teacher that maybe teachers should have a gun in the classroom. She asked me what I thought the odds were that she could use that gun to protect her students compared to the odds of an out-of-control student getting his hands on that gun and shooting up the class. I hadn't thought of that.

Right after this latest shooting I was listening to someone talking about gun control. He basically said that if gun control advocates had branded their cause as "gun safety" rather than "gun control" most of the laws they have proposed would already be in affect with the blessing of the NRA. Everyone is in favor of safety, but nobody wants to be controlled. I think he might be right.
 
Then you didn’t actually read my post - increased 2A freedoms proposed included nationwide carry, federal preemption of additional state restrictions, dramatic shrinking of NFA limitations.

Disagreeing is welcomed. Being so closed minded/reactive that one can’t even read and accurately characterize a post is just disappointing.
I just can’t see any of the proposed changes stopping what has happened.

Am I saying I’m against legal changes. No.

It’s just not a change that will have an immediate fix to the problem.

We know the majority of these places get targeted because they are easy.

Make them harder….

And please use the security systems grants already paid for at the schools….
 
There have been numerous suggestions for an armed security guard being in school buildings. That made me curious enough to run some numbers.

There are a little more than 130k school buildings for k-12 in the US. If the pay and benefits for each guard is 75k the annual cost is 9.75 billion dollars each year. The total cost would have to also include the expense of ongoing training.

Since Columbine there has been 169 people killed in mass shootings in schools. There have been 14 mass shootings in schools since that time. A mass shooting defined as 4 or more deaths. Lets include Columbine and make it 15 shootings in call it 23 years. That is .65 mass killings in schools per year. The draw odds for each school building to have a mass killing each year is one in 200k, give or take. So, on average, each school building must wait for 200k years for their mass shooting.

So every guard in every building is in essence waiting for Godot.

If we assume that these armed guards entirely stop mass shootings, the cost is $15 billion dollars for every mass shooting prevented, if the risk is the same going forward.

Some might think that is preferable to other possible solutions. I don't

And you can allow teachers to carry for $0.
 
I just can’t see any of the proposed changes stopping what has happened.

Am I saying I’m against legal changes. No.

It’s just not a change that will have an immediate fix to the problem.

We know the majority of these places get targeted because they are easy.

Make them harder….

And please use the security systems grants already paid for at the schools….
This thread was not meant to be limited to the 1% problem of school security - frankly it is performative security theater that occupies 90% of the discussion on 1% of the problem.
 
I’m guessing the door thing was directed at me.

They all open from the inside as normal.

And most schools installed the keypads outside of each door so that first responders could enter a code to gain access….

So in essence….it’s no different than any of the commercial buildings you go into now with fire doors on all sides that open as normal from the inside….

Wow….that must be a completely stupid idea🤣

Actually….on the gun thing…you could buy a Tommy gun through the sears a long time ago without a back ground check. Do a little more digging on your history before you start acting a 🤡

Weapons that took detachable high capacity magazines go back way further.

It wasn't directed at you, but if the shoe fits.

Smokeless gun powder does not go back 150 years. The fouling from the burnt black powder would have made any rifle comparable to an AR irrelevant. It would have gummed up with the first magazine.

You might check your gun history. Short barreled shotguns, no matter their action were outlawed by the Federal government. Most would agree an AR is as lethal as a 14 inch barrel break open action shotgun.
 
This thread was not meant to be limited to the 1% problem of school security - frankly it is performative security theater that occupies 90% of the discussion on 1% of the problem.
While I hadn’t intended to hijack a thread, I think the number one threat to the 2A today is bad legislation as a knee jerk reaction the shooting in Uvalde. While it may not have been your focus, I think it’s relevant.
 
It wasn't directed at you, but if the shoe fits.

Smokeless gun powder does not go back 150 years. The fouling from the burnt black powder would have made any rifle comparable to an AR irrelevant. It would have gummed up with the first magazine.

You might check your gun history. Short barreled shotguns, no matter their action were outlawed by the Federal government. Most would agree an AR is as lethal as a 14 inch barrel break open action shotgun.
Are you making this up as you go?
 
And you can allow teachers to carry for $0.

As in most things, you get what you pay for.

If teachers wanted to be Law Enforcement officer, they would have gone a different direction.

I will once again use the Buffalo shooting as an example. They had an armed security guard in the store. He was a retired police officer. His training was very likely beyond what a volunteer security teacher would have. He confronted the shooter. He tried to take the killer out. He failed because the killer had body armor and far greater firepower.
 
Are you making this up as you go?

No, look it up. Smokeless powder was not invented until somewhere in the 1880's. Its near universal was use not immediate.

Short barreled shotguns were made illegal without a permit in the 1930's. You can look that up also.
 
As in most things, you get what you pay for.

If teachers wanted to be Law Enforcement officer, they would have gone a different direction.

I will once again use the Buffalo shooting as an example. They had an armed security guard in the store. He was a retired police officer. His training was very likely beyond what a volunteer security teacher would have. He confronted the shooter. He tried to take the killer out. He failed because the killer had body armor and far greater firepower.

 
No, look it up. Smokeless powder was not invented until somewhere in the 1880's. Its near universal was use not immediate.

Short barreled shotguns were made illegal without a permit in the 1930's. You can look that up also.
Dig a little deeper in your google foo and you’ll find black powder machine guns, Gatling guns, mag fed guns and so on….

And then go a little forward….you’ll see plenty of early smokeless semi auto rifles and carbines with high cap mags.

And dig a little more and you’ll find hardware store catalogues where you could order a belt fed machine gun, sub guns and so on…..

And all the way until 1968 you could mail order all the guns you wanted without a background check…..

Trying to compare a short barreled shotgun to an AR15 just shows a complete lack of knowledge on this subject.

I literally tried to inject some actual factual data in this conversation from my time in LE which had plenty of dealings with school security.

🤡
 
As in most things, you get what you pay for.

If teachers wanted to be Law Enforcement officer, they would have gone a different direction.

I will once again use the Buffalo shooting as an example. They had an armed security guard in the store. He was a retired police officer. His training was very likely beyond what a volunteer security teacher would have. He confronted the shooter. He tried to take the killer out. He failed because the killer had body armor and far greater firepower.
Interesting angle. So if a teacher wants to train and carry, they are now law enforcement? Curious how many school employees at past incidents wish they were armed.
As far as security guard, what's your point? He should of had a rifle? Or because he didn't end threat, no other armed person can in the future. Feel free to clarify.
 
Last edited:
School security is a reasonable and related area of discussion, but the volume of recent posts dramatically outweigh it’s proportion of the OP topic. I understand that a school shooting in the news is coincident with this thread, but if I was looking for 150 posts on this mathematically tiny part of the problem I would have started a thread on it.

I suggest if folks want to go down the rabbit hole of locked school doors, odds of teacher effectiveness in an active shooting situation, and viability of black powder ARs as they relate to school security that a new thread be started so it can get the fully devoted 15 pages all its own.
 
This thread was not meant to be limited to the 1% problem of school security - frankly it is performative security theater that occupies 90% of the discussion on 1% of the problem.
I often hear "why can't they come to an agreement ?" ( referring to the men and women in Wash. D.C. ) and your thread is an example of "why"

Plus, in their (congress ) situation they are "also" looking for ways to please their constituents, lobbyist, contributors, and political career.

But, having said that, I for one am glad you started the thread, and not just for the theatre. Some good thoughts and ideas have been shared.
 
Gastro Gnome - Eat Better Wherever

Forum statistics

Threads
114,050
Messages
2,042,366
Members
36,442
Latest member
Grendelhunter98
Back
Top