Login or register
Login or register
Stay logged in
Log in/Sign up using Facebook.
Log in/Sign up using Gmail/Google+.
CREATE A NEW ACCOUNT
Email is optional and is used for password recovery purposes.
Disable ads temporarily
Remaining character count: 4000
[ + ]
Image or Video File:
Shortcuts: "C" opens comments. "R" refreshes comments.
Record voice message?
Click to start recording.
Enter Captcha Code:
Scroll to comment?
Back to the content '(untitled)'
- Train and hire armed guards in schools and public events
- Make more of an effort to ensure that anyone wishing to carry a firearm is trained, certified and mentally as capable as any law enforcement officer
- Get rid of "gun free zones" that are clearly the target for shootings
- Put more focus into correction and rehabilitation in the prison/law enforcement system rather than a focus on money (bail, fines...) and trying to put a stop to repeat offenders.
- Post signs (legit or not) stating that rather than a facility be gun free, it states that the owner/employees are armed
- Make it required that anyone wishing to own a firearm and purchasing by ANY means must have a license to own one by not only issuing a background check, but a mental health check as well. This means that purchasing from a gun show or private owner without said license is illegal.
- Require teachers to be certified in first aid
The list can go on in ways to drastically reduce the number of shooting in schools or other places and facilities as well as the number of deaths. We cannot prevent gun related crime...firearms are as widely available as heroin, cocaine and meth. How will banning firearms keep people from obtaining them? This isn't about guns, it's about politics, social issues and the result of a ****** up system.
i mean, putting armed guards sounds like a good idea in theory, but think of it in practice, a cop arrives at the scene and sees a guard shooting at the real bad guy, and that guard is being shot at by another guard due to panic in the situation (and don't tell me that wont happen, human beings react very differently to bullets flying by their head than during training courses) the cops don't know who to shoot and cant exactly walk up to them to ask whats going on, the cops either have to delay and figure out who the bad guy is, during that time bullets are flying and more people are getting hurt, or they have to shoot innocent people to try to quickly contain the situation
i just feel like adding anything short of actual police squads would be counterproductive more often than not
There's no way to eliminate the possibility of things going wrong. The closest thing we have to best dealing with any form of violence are trained police officers. They make mistakes the same as anyone else, but are at least trained (or should be) to handle high stress situations, know how to act and react and more than anything, stop a threat without any harm being done. I didn't exactly mean "guards" as in your average security guard with a gun...I was referring to officers taking the role of a guard and making sure things are in order rather than just patrolling for petty things. I understand your point, but the way I see things is this:
- Without any form of armed and periodically trained person(s) as most, if not all schools are (or were, before things started going downhill), how can a shooting be resolved or ended? The average person has no knowledge on how to handle these situations...teachers and personnel included.
- With some sort of armed and trained person(s) there is an option of resolving or ending a conflict the same as any other conflict taken care of professionally on a daily basis.
My theory is this. If the average joe can become a police officer, armed, able and trusted to handle situations like this, why have a problem with citizens of equal qualifications be trained and licensed the same way to carry a handgun and do the same. Law enforcement is limited, takes time to respond, have little knowledge of the situation...etc. If armed officers are stationed in schools alone, they have the knowledge and resources to handle a threat until backup arrives. It may be hard to get used to, but having one option is better than none.
As long as they're uniformed, carry badges and all that I think it's a good idea. My high school had an officer on duty every day but they (especially big campuses) should probably have more. One in the front office, one for every set of entrances that are unlocked and accessible.
well my schools have a couple cops working at them. i live in alaska and we dont have a ton of crime and we have almost too many cops. but we could hire people as armed guards. give them an easily identifiable uniform. with an easily identifiable logo on the side. standardize it across the country. give the jobs to veterans. make them pass an extensive psychological and background check. create another job to routinely check on them
that wont stop people shooting people
you can get pissed off, plan to murder someone, use guns for drug deals
as long as you can get a gun there will be gun crime
although they should make a single bullet cost like $4000
if anybody got shot you know they deserved it
heres the thing. gun crime will never go away for one specific reason. mexico. now i dont mean to sound racist but right now mexico isnt the safest country. i mean juarez is literally across the river from us. i know people from el paso who said theyd see gun fire at night across the river. in europe most anti gun countries dont have the same problem because they are surrounded by anti gun countries, we dont exactly have that luxary. even if you ban them here theres an easy route to get them back in the country directly through the south. bullets wouldnt be much different
honestly it was a joke
I got no idea how to stop gun crime
hell I live in UK. Guns are totally illegal, police don't have them yet there is still gun crime
Guns are not totally illegal in the UK, civilian ownership still exists.
yeah but it's insanely hard to get one
Just gonna point out that columbine wasn't intended to be a shooting but a bombing. If the bombs hadn't failed then there's a good chance no one in that school would have survived. If someone really wants to kill innocent people then they are probably gonna find a way to do it.
If we actually cared for our mentally ill then maybe this **** wouldn't happen as often
You can't eliminate gun crime, that's what this is about. It will always be possible, so why not hire people to prevent it when it does happen...the same we do for everything else.
And the police don't? Wearing a badge and uniform make you no different than without. If we can trust law enforcement officers with handguns to solve our problems, why can't we trust someone out of uniform with the same training? If you carry a firearm, you have an obligation to protect not only yourself, but those around you in case of an emergency. Why would someone armed, certified and trained as well as any law enforcement officer be a problem?
Yet again, like I said...there will always be gun crime, even if all firearms of ANY type are completely and utterly banned for any and all uses.
Ammunition will still be obtainable, just as firearms are to those willing to take the risk of obtaining something illegally. This only makes it a barrier for the other half of the firearm debate...the good people we trust to save our asses if something does happen.
Back to the content '(untitled)'