The Cold Math of Securing Schools

Ridiculous hypothetical, which requires a moron who doesn't notice an armed individual approaching.

It's an entirely realistic hypothetical, since it's very easy for an armed individual to approach without anyone noticing he's armed. Put a small pistol in your pocket and your AR-15 and magazines in a duffel bag, walk up to the guard, pull your pistol from your pocket, shoot him in the head, and then grab your AR-15 and go. It adds maybe five seconds to the process of getting into the school.
 
lol.....cheap compared to hunting down all the guns and taking them away from people

That's not needed. The usual approach in the US, when we ban something, is that we ban the manufacture and import of new items but we don't hunt down the old. That's how the assault weapons ban worked, for instance. It's also how it worked when we banned lawn darts, or cars that can't pass modern crash-test standards, and so on. Over time, the old weapons would become less consequential for a bunch of reasons:

(1) rising population would mean falling per-capita numbers
(2) higher demand for the grandfathered weapons would drive up the price, resulting in them congregating more in the hands of wealthier and older people, who commit fewer crimes (the same as old collector cars)
(3) they'd also tend to congregate in large collections, and even museums, where they'd be less available for mayhem
(4) many would wear out or be lost
(5) many would be seized when involved in crimes (including simply the crime of possession in the case of someone with a criminal record or otherwise not permitted to own a weapon)

It would take a while, but with every year following a ban, the guns would be less and less harmful to society. And as guns became less ubiquitous, use among the criminal underground would drop, because they'd be seen as less necessary to counter other criminals (the same way, for example, criminals in Japan are vastly less likely to have a gun, because guns aren't common in the society).

It wouldn't solve the problem overnight, but it would improve the situation a lot faster than most realize.
 
On a cost vs. benefits basis, perhaps a ban on the recent high school graduate (the OP) is merited.
 
Their job is to protect their students, too. If arming some trained teachers stops the slaughter, arm them.

Never, that's not their job. You will come up with any excuse not to implement reasonable gun restrictions. Surely you will want to arm the students also. More guns always makes us safer- right?
 
Never, that's not their job. You will come up with any excuse not to implement reasonable gun restrictions. Surely you will want to arm the students also. More guns always makes us safer- right?

More guns in the right hands makes childrfen and everyone else safer.

If a child is about to be shot, would you prefer that the teacher be armed or that the child be sl;slaughtered?
 
Yet the door opens from the inside when the latch bar is pressed.
Are you really this stupid?

If something can be opened by pressing a latch bar then it is NOT keyed from the inside.

I don't think I am the one that is stupid here since you don't seem to know what "keyed from both sides" means.
 
why have lib'ruls never heard of fire exits?.......is it because they never leave their basements?

Fire exits are required to be opened from the inside easily. That means they can't require a key to unlock the door before exiting which is what would be required if a door is keyed from both sides as Rune claimed.

Here is the NFPA requirement.
Locks and latches cannot require the use of a key, a tool, or special knowledge or effort to operate from the egress side.
 
If something can be opened by pressing a latch bar then it is NOT keyed from the inside.

I don't think I am the one that is stupid here since you don't seem to know what "keyed from both sides" means.

Moron.
When you press the open bar an alarm goes off .
I described the doors at my high-school
. If they existed 40 years ago they certainly exist today.
 
Back
Top