[petejh]

That may or may not be true.

And even if it was completely true, it doesn't address the issue for at least another generation. In which time...

[teestub]

I'm not sure where having armed guards at every gathering place would fit in with the whole land of free/home of brave stuff.

Wasn't there a police or rentacop present at one of the recent school shootings who proved entirely ineffectual (the frequency of the shootings makes it depressingly difficult to remember the details of each one)? How many guards would you actually need to cover a school with thousands of pupils, one per class? 

State schools in the US seem to be in a similar state or worse than those in the UK in terms of funding; maybe Trump could raise taxes and give more money to schools, but stipulate that it can only be used to buy guns and ammo and not teaching supplies.

[petejh]

You could debate the details to the nth degree. I'm simply commenting that the principle of having armed guards seems to me at least to have some merit in the short-term, and doesn't necessarily have to be a sign of anything other than a rational proposal to help mitigate against a nasty problem.
Certainly a more effective immediate preventative measure than 'teach the next generation not to want to own guns' (although that would be good too).
Various other immediate solutions to preventing gun massacres exist too, not just 'arm everyone'.

[Oldmanmatt]

Unfortunately, the gun cat is well and truely out of the bag, the room, the building and, probably, the post code.

The only people who would comply with any future control order or amnesty, will be those least likely to need such.

So, guarding likely targets is the best option in the worst circumstances. To do anything else is delusional.

In the specific case of the Pitsburgh incident, there seems little likelihood that an armed guard would have made much difference. Note the injured, trained and armed men; who arrived in full knowledge of an armed incident.
Defence requires depth, unavailable to that scenario without a ridiculous imposition.

Now, imo, given the perfect shit storm of a heavily armed population (where the greater the mental instability, the better armed, elements of this population will be) and the sheer size of that population; having an Orange Baboon slinging shit and stirring their rage, smacks of some real “end times” crap.

[andy popp]

There were armed officers at both the Parkland and Pulse Nightclub shootings, as there are at almost all mass shootings, and it made zero difference. Its even harder to think of a situation in which an armed member of the public stopped a mass shooting (the man who killed 26 at a church in Texas last year was chased and killed by a member of the public but that occurred after the killing had stopped and he'd left the church).

I do send a child to a public school in the US and I sure as hell don't want an armed presence there (let along, god forbid, armed teachers, as one school district very near us has just permitted). They had an active shooter drill a couple of weeks ago - the whole thing is fucking insane.

[Teaboy]

author=petejh to

Sorry to disrupt the 'burn the witch-athon' here but..

I think you've missed the point. The reason he is being called out is not because this is a bad idea but because it's a fucking shitty and callous response to a shooting. It's because after these shootings it's always too soon to talk about gun control but never too soon to talk about putting more guns on the street. It's like going to an assault victim and saying it's your own fault for going there dressed like that.

[andy popp]

 

[petejh]

author=petejh to

Sorry to disrupt the 'burn the witch-athon' here but..

I think you've missed the point. The reason he is being called out is not because this is a bad idea but because it's a fucking shitty and callous response to a shooting. ...

..

Trump might be crass and a lot of other more dangerous things...

I didn't miss that point.

[petejh]

I do send a child to a public school in the US and I sure as hell don't want an armed presence there (let along, god forbid, armed teachers, as one school district very near us has just permitted). They had an active shooter drill a couple of weeks ago - the whole thing is fucking insane.

It might well seem/be insane. But that's the country you've chosen to go and live in and this latest outrage isn't anything new for the US. There's a long history of gun massacres by armed civilians there.

[andy popp]

I do send a child to a public school in the US and I sure as hell don't want an armed presence there (let along, god forbid, armed teachers, as one school district very near us has just permitted). They had an active shooter drill a couple of weeks ago - the whole thing is fucking insane.

It might well seem/be insane. But that's the country you've chosen to go and live in and this latest outrage isn't anything new for the US. There's a long history of gun massacres by armed civilians there.

Yes, I was quite aware of that. However, I don't believe that also means I simply have to accept the status quo, let alone the considerable deterioration that would be represented by having armed guards in every place of worship and learning. The child in question is my stepdaughter and has always lived and been schooled in the US.

[petejh]

Nobody mentioned accepting the status quo. Actually the status quo would be to carry on as before.

You said 'they had an active shooter drill' in the school and commented that the whole thing is 'fucking insane'. It might not be how anyone would like things to be but I think that's sensible; like doing hurricane drills is sensible.

[andy popp]

Active shooter drills/training are primarily a money making venture by "security consultants" (e.g. ex-cops) that school districts feel compelled to purchase. There's little or no proof of their efficacy.

My insane comment refers to the overall situation in which an advanced, wealthy nation in which the rule of law largely prevails thinks it utterly normal for its citizens to be murdered en masse on a regular basis, for places of worship and learning to need armed guards, for children just a few years old to regularly receive training on what to do if someone tries to murder them and their classmates in school using a perfectly legal gun (to give a few examples).

[tomtom]

Nobody mentioned accepting the status quo. Actually the status quo would be to carry on as before.

You said 'they had an active shooter drill' in the school and commented that the whole thing is 'fucking insane'. It might not be how anyone would like things to be but I think that's sensible; like doing hurricane drills is sensible.

Yes but you can’t stop hurricanes with legislation...

[petejh]

Active shooter drills/training are primarily a money making venture by "security consultants" (e.g. ex-cops) that school districts feel compelled to purchase. There's little or no proof of their efficacy.

That's beside the point though isn't it. The principle of having drills for emergencies is generally a good principle. That it might have been used by evil capitalists for profit motive doesn't alter drills being worthwhile - even if they only reduce anxiety and make people feel like they're 'doing something' it could be argued is a worthwhile outcome.

[petejh]

Nobody mentioned accepting the status quo. Actually the status quo would be to carry on as before.

You said 'they had an active shooter drill' in the school and commented that the whole thing is 'fucking insane'. It might not be how anyone would like things to be but I think that's sensible; like doing hurricane drills is sensible.

Yes but you can’t stop hurricanes with legislation...

Great line!

[andy popp]

Pretty much the one thing they do achieve is to increase anxiety.

ps. apologies, I expanded my last comment when you and TT were writing.

[teestub]

There's little or no proof of their efficacy.

doesn't alter drills being worthwhile - even if they only reduce anxiety and make people feel like they're 'doing something' it could be argued is a worthwhile outcome.

Sound like you would have enjoyed hiding under tables during Cold War nuclear drills!

[Oldmanmatt]

It is insane.

Andy is right to be distressed and exasperated.

But Pete is right too.

It’s actually too late. Any attempt to remove these weapons from circulation would be met with extreme violence.
I’m an absolute believer in gun control. I don’t even believe anyone “needs” any projectile weapon, outside of a range, least of all for “sport” (aka hunting).
This is not a problem of Trump’s creation, he’s just exploiting the situation for his own political ends; because he’s a psychopath.

No amount of moral “correctness” will disarm the lunatics. No hand wringing will stop a school shooter. No change in the law now, will remove those guns from the hands of the nut jobs.

On the other hand, it might, over time, have an impact. It has to be worth a try.

In the meantime, active shooter drills and armed guards are the only feasible course of action.

[petejh]

I'm unconvinced by your arguments against drills for emergencies.

Agree with you on some level that it's 'insane for a wealthy advanced country etc etc'. It isn't however insane to try to mitigate against said insanity. Including attempts to stop at source (legislation) but also to defend against (guns). 
To turn it around - it's because it's utterly normal for citizens to be murdered en masse on a regular basis, that places of worship and learning could be said to need armed guards. Since when have humans been totally sane?

[andy popp]

One final comment (as this has gone off topic) is that my other objection to armed guards, drills etc. (beyond the fact there's no evidence they work and may very often be counterproductive) is that they further entrench the normalization of gun violence as an ineradicable and acceptable feature of the culture.

[petejh]

Sound like you would have enjoyed hiding under tables during Cold War nuclear drills!

We used to be taught, in the case of a small tactical nuclear weapon detonating in our vicinity, to lie face down in whatever small depression in the ground I could find and tuck my arms under me so they wouldn't be ripped off by the blast wave.. and then to brush ourselves off of the falling radioactive dust with tree branches... oh yeah everything is fine 

[teestub]

As long as it felt like you were ‘doing something’ 

[Oldmanmatt]

Sound like you would have enjoyed hiding under tables during Cold War nuclear drills!

We used to be taught, in the case of a small tactical nuclear weapon detonating in our vicinity, to lie face down in whatever small depression in the ground I could find and tuck my arms under me so they wouldn't be ripped off by the blast wave.. and then to brush ourselves off of the falling radioactive dust with tree branches... oh yeah everything is fine 

Remember Combo pens?

Nine seconds to get suit and mask on and jab it in your thigh...

Yeah. Right.

As for being off topic. I think not.

We’re witnessing the rise of Trump’s “second amendment people”, that he’s been calling out to since before the election.

I think I’ve seen about an hour or so of clips of him inciting such acts, in neat little montages, this past week.

[galpinos]

I think a big concern over the whole “armed guards in schools” is efficacy of it. I can understand Pete’s point, i.e. people are being shot in schools, introduce people who are capable of stopping this happening – armed guards.

However, taking out a “shooter” in an attempted school massacre seems like quite a hard task and would require someone with a pretty advanced skill set in managing the situation without increasing the injury/death toll so, who will be employed as these armed guards? I have zero military/police experience but I would say this would take a lot of training to get an effective armed guard.

Having seen a bit of coverage of what seems to be being implemented (training teachers to be armed/installing rent-a-cop style individuals) the armed response would be at best ineffectual and at worst exacerbate the situation whilst also, to echo Andy P’s point, “further entrench the normalization of gun violence as an ineradicable and acceptable feature of the culture.”

[mrjonathanr]

.... the armed response would be at best ineffectual and at worst exacerbate the situation whilst also, to echo Andy P’s point, “further entrench the normalization of gun violence as an ineradicable and acceptable feature of the culture.”

^ this.

I think the argument for armed personnel in schools etc has merit if you think potential shooters are going to shelve their plans as a result, or are going to be stopped by the guards so that it results in fewer lives lost.

I don’t think the former is especially likely; shooters will know their lives are over one way or another post attack. The latter is as likely to produce better armed shooters as it is to stop them imo.

The UK police face armed criminals daily but don’t habitually carry guns: arms races don’t necessarily make people safer.

These aren’t simple issues though Trump and his ilk would like us to think otherwise. This article about the dangers of wearing bike helmets by Chris Boardman makes very interesting reading.
It may be more relevant than you think: real world outcomes can be very counterintuitive. Have a look:
https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/article/20171126-Chris-Boardman-0