@greenteakitten said in #59:
> That's what I thought.
> Schools have deterrents. They just aren't very effective.
>
If it's not guns, metal detectors and or more security. That's why it's not effective.
> And this is where not growing up in public school comes in. If you were homeschooled, you most likely don't understand what it's like to have both parents working long hours. To be the first one dropped off and the last one picked up. Public school exists because not everyone has the privilege to be able to afford changes like staggered school hours. (It can hardly be called a "privilege" to be honest. If you look at the average class schedule, staggering it would lead to a living nightmare for everyone involved.)
>
I truthfully do think it's necessary, I don't know if you walk though metal detectors often but I do on a pretty regularly basics.
They can tell to a extent what your carrying as far a metal objects go, for example in my pockets I carry a wallet, a wash clothe(we own older cars, so it's for checking oil and stuff) a metal flashlight, a small steel tape measure, a about 15keys on a metal clip, a lighter, and a pocket knife. I usually leave my knife in the car so as not to set the mental director off, but one about two months ago I brought it in on accident. So I just hoped they just wouldn't pick it up, cause the car was a goog walk back and I was only gonna be past the security for like 8 minutes. But sure enough they caught it, they never bother me for anything else, But they could definitely could tell it apart from the other metal in my pockets. So my point with that is their not gonna have to stop everyone with..... Well truthfully I don't even know what kids, teens, would even be carrying to it off. Cause it would take a pretty good chunk of metal, so just to keep out knives and guns would not take a very thorough job. Pretty much you'd just walk through, unless you got a metal object collection on you.
> Not to mention, it's a good example of making a new problem without solving any existing ones. Staggered school hours only create extremely long work days for teachers,
Truthfully I don't think it's necessary, as I mentioned up above the security wouldn't be much if any of a problem. But to the defense of the option of staggered school hours, students do use buses right? Your telling me a kid leaveing 15-30 minutes earlyer is just going to destroy peoples life's. And the teachers don't have to be there any longer, just have some come a 30-60 minutes early. And they leave 30-60 minutes early, and some just keep normal hours and close up.
really bad elective schedules for students, and a bunch of overworked parents who are now even more exhausted because they can't get a normal pick-up, drop-off time. It does absolutely nothing to help curb school shooting.
>
The hole point was if there was a hold up because of security, this was to combat the concept of students just standing and waiting. And as for parents working so hard, most work harder then they have to because they waist there money. So instead of just leaving in there means, they just by things that can't afford on credit. Witch makes you pay more because then you owe interest on your house, car, credit cards, yata yata. Then you got to have pay have insurance on the house and pay higher insurance car, Because when your paying for a car on a loan you got to have full coverage. And so on, my point being they put them selves in those sirtcomstances so not feeling to sorry for them. I do feel sorry for the children who have to be subjected to public school because there parents would send them in the world we live in today.
> Nobody acts like an adult anymore sadly.
> And have more kids in the streets? For simply protesting? I can smell the lawsuits from miles away already.
>
Well if we can't punish students for just screwing around at school making a hassle for security, and holding up other students from class..... Well whats next, we can't expell them for protecting that they have to do home work by just not doing their home work? If that's the point we're at legally and other wise then we ain't gonna get safer schools no matter what, whats next we can't keep them from bringing their guns to school cause the school will get a lawsuit from the family of the kid who couldn't bring hi sapost Beretta to school...... Well.. I guess we're just not going to solve school shootings... Ever.
> And no, this is not a parent's problem to fix. Making a kid behave, sure. But if metal detector tests drag on for hours that is not a kid problem, that's a problem with the metal detector policy in the first place.
>
One again, com pro mise, you don't get safety with out inconvenience. Plus like I stated above I don't really think it would cause to much of a delay anyway.
> That is exactly what I'm talking about when I say mixing religion.
> Look, I agree with you that no secular solution will ever be truly foolproof. But what I'm trying to point out here is that you can't expect everyone to be a perfect genuine goody-two-shoes Christian overnight either,
>
I don't. That's why we need the security, and the guns.
>and anyone that wants to promise such a thing is being a pure manipulator. Theocracies in history have never been successful because anyone that tries to run a government like that merely falls victim to >corruption and scapegoating quickly.
True.
> That is why we keep religion strictly out of this. Because it won't change a thing while we're all still here on God's green earth.
>
I never said to bring it into this, just that as christians we can't ever think for a second it will ever be fixed by seculer means. Other then by security and guns, you could call that secular if you please, but I wouldn't condone it. didn't Jesus tell the disciples to carry a sword? So he wasn't against weapons.
> I haven't seen such a thing in those places either.
> Regardless, clear backpacks have been tried and tried again as a preventative measure against gun violence. They are rightfully called "security theaters" by security experts because they have never meaningfully protected students, while only invading privacy (nobody really likes doing things like carrying pads for everyone to see.)
>
I've already said I don't think there necessary, if there's a concern about a backpack they could just run it through a canvarbelt style detector.
> Examples of how to get around a clear backpack rule:
> 1) Conceal weapons in thick winter clothing instead. Who's going to be able to tell the difference under that bulky winter coat?
> 2) There are significant amounts of school shootings committed by former students or non-students. In both cases, policing current students would lead to little effect.
>
School I'd.
> 3) Clear backpacks are usually far less durable than traditional ones due to the material they are made out of. This leads to families who are already experiencing financial pressure having to spend even more money on a policy that never worked in the first place.
>
True, not necessarily.
> I did. Maybe I just wasn't very good at being direct about it.
> 1) Better enforcement of gun laws
> - I think this is the most obvious one to be honest. It's also the hardest one because it comes with the most amount of backlash.
>
Of course... It's kind of the second amendment, its to protect the first.
There is a famous quote by Benjamin Franklin, if my memory serves me right that goes something like this.
"Those who would give up freedom for comfort, deserve neither"
Freedome isn't comfortable, there's a constant war against it. War isn't comfortable, there is a vigilant watch we where sapost to keep on the government, we failed to keep it. And the founding fathers whored use to keep that watch. One of them said something to the effect of,
"We give you a republic if you can keep it"
And we basically lost it already, people willingly want to forfeit there rights to the government for some "confort"
Watch this please.
m.youtube.com/watch?v=P4zE0K22zH8> 2) Better school perimeters
> - Some schools have multiple back doors that are open 24/7. These back doors seldom serve as more than just a fire safety measure so that students don't end up trapped in the event of a front gate losing function. A better guarded back door would help in cases of active shooter instances.
> 3) Education
> - More lockdown drills! This doesn't actively affect school shootings by preventing them, but it does make them less effective.
> - Watch carefully for students that appear problematic. School shooters are mentally ill; most of them are not shy about it. Better monitoring would lead to discovering problems early. In other words, staff should care about all of their students and pay close attention. This is the only place where the mental health I mentioned plays in: better care taken around the issue would help.
> 4) Security guards
> - Very, very minimal, just maybe two at any given moment. Problems with budget, sure, but it would be nice.
> 5) Doors
> - Provide secure locks on classroom doors and windows. In the event of a school shooting, a lock that can be used quickly, while also keeping everything secure, will be crucial to survival. Some classrooms lack the ability to lock from the inside which is just such a terrible design choice to be honest.
>
Agreed, mostly.
> Gun violence cost the USA a whopping $557 billion. Of that, taxpayers spend about $13 billion for criminal justice services, emergency service, and medical care.
>
Cost of freedom. If we start exicuting more murders, terrorists, rapists... Maybe that number would be lower.
> In contrast, even the most comprehensive gun violence plan, complete with community violence protection ($50 million, 2024 spending bill), background checks/"red flag laws"
>
Red flag laws are the most unconstitutional thing I think I ever heard of, it's basically you just say the right things to the police about someone. And they can just take their guns away, no do process to be seen.
>($750 million, bipartisan bill that allows confiscation of guns from people deemed problematic) would not even equal a billion dollars. Notice that I don't advocate for the complete ban of guns here. Just enough regulation to help reduce school shootings.
>
Shall not be infringed.
> That's a huge difference right there. People just have to be willing to make it.
>
The problem is it just gives the government to much control over the rights of law abiding citizens.
> Well, there's quite a big difference between the meaning of the sentence with the word Muslim and with the word museum.
>
Sorry but I haven't gone back to figure out what I said wrong, but I didn't say Muslim anywhere That I remember. It was probably museum, sorry. Sometimes the spell check gets the best of me, and I don't catch it.
> We've been trying for a long time, and it doesn't really work out. You can't "un-racist" people that easily.
>
Without talking about a specific occurrence, I'm not to interested in debating about how racist people are in general. Truthfully I think it's significantly lower then most people think, I'll leave it there for now.
> First of all, since they can't buy a bomb, a homemade one would be much more likely to be riddled with issues that could delay its detonation or stop it altogether. Second of all, you have spent many paragraphs arguing the case that making it harder to kill would greatly help in discouraging school shootings, something I agree with. So why the sudden switch-up? Why are you suddenly deciding that they just cannot be stopped, a stance I thought neither of us had?
>
My point was all the gun regulation in the world won't stop people from committing acts of evil, and no matter what weapons they choose to use the solution is guns to fight them of. Of course guns in concert with security measures adequit to provide a sufficient amount of a deterrent.
Sorry this one took so long. And please don't interpret me as being harsh towards you, It might have come of that way but I didn't mean it that way. I do enjoy talking to you, even if we don't agree... But you should agree with me lol!!! (•-• ) So if we could reframe from such long posts and maybe ask make them like one or two questions I'd really appreciate it, I think it would help me to give some better answers because I couldn't focus on the question at hand and not feel like I have to answer like 15 different questions at one. Your smart like that, but I don't express my self as good through text. So it takes me awhile to do a job that I want to put my name on, I'm trying to do better at it, so it's good practice.
