DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Here We Go again... Open Season?

No, I don't believe he said that at all. Although, it IS typical for you to do what you just did: Put words in peoples mouths that they never said.

Couple of questions, if you could answer them.

1. Exactly what training do you have concerning fire arms?
2. Have you ever faced a shooter?
3. What makes you feel that certain teachers DON'T have the same training, or even better, than you?
4. There are many ex military people that got out of the service and became teachers, don't you think?

My comment is based on this comment from you.


You have stated the belief that anyone should be able to carry a gun with no training required in several threads on this board over and over again and anyone who reads this forum knows that's true.

CCW training from both Ohio and in Tennessee before Tennessee no longer required that training be required along with gun safety and target shooting from a young age from my father.


No and as such I don't feel I would be qualified to carry a gun in a school to protect children either.


Some teachers may have. I'm sure the vast majority of them don't. What some seem to be putting their faith into is that all schools would have such teachers on their staff and those would be the teachers carrying those guns and would volunteer to do such.


Some I'm sure. I actually had such a teacher. But knowing him as I did he would never have proposed he carry a gun in school or support such an idea either.

Why do you seem so sure that the people you seem to describe as competent exist in all schools and if they do, would be the people willing to carry a gun in school?

The religious school in Tennessee only had 209 students with a small staff.

Why do you suppose that gun control works? It has been proven over and over again it does not work. Banning guns and gun control only take guns out of the hands of the law-abiding citizens. Criminals break laws and would have no issue buying guns illegally just like they buy drugs. A law has never stopped a criminal. If it did our prisons would not be full.

Could you show me anywhere that I support banning any guns? Our prisons are full because many inmates are serving time for non violent offenses.

All I have promoted here is gun safety training in order to carry a weapon and to limit the number of rounds that a magazine can hold to possibly help limit the number of victims. I'm not sure you have been following along.

One thing that is supposed to separate law abiding citizens from criminals is being responsible.

I have also not opposed that SRO be able to carry in schools as long as it's kept discrete. And while I would prefer it be done by people that have experience in active shooter situations, I would at least like for it to be done by someone with extensive active shooter training. I want people who have actually been in a profession that has helped prepare them as much as possible to handle these types of situations rather than having teachers whose profession is to teach our children fill such roles.

I don't feel any of that is unreasonable.

Don’t you know…It’s always ..“They’re coming to take all our guns away!” Don’t you know …. they always say “gun control has proven not to work, over and over”. When no real gun control legislation has passed through Congress in decades. These lies is what they pander while our children are being slaughtered.

What kind of questions are they going to ask to determine if you are mentally healthy or not?

1. Do you take any medication?
2. Have you ever thought about death?
3. Do you say the pledge of allegiance?
4. Have you recently upped your life insurance?
5. Do you own more than 15 rounds of ammo?
6. Do you have a life-ending disease like cancer?
7. Do you hate republicans?
8. Do you hate democrats?

That's why I would be curious to see how they come up with something that is standardized.


How would training/testing help reduce mass shootings?

All but #3, #5 and the last two Q..are reasonable. And how would training and testing not help reduce mass shootings?

First let me say that I agree with you in terms of what criteria would constitute forbidding someone from owning firearms in relationship to mental health. I broached that topic earlier with no response. What we keep hearing is that this is a mental health issue and how our mental health system needs overhauled. And while I certainly agree with that sentiment nobody seems to be quite willing as of yet to say how or what policy changes they recommend as it pertains to our gun laws to help keep those guns out of the hands of people who aren't mentally stable or what constitutes someone as not mentally stable.

Currently under federal law which I also posted, you have to be deemed by a mental healthcare professional to be a danger to yourself or others, have been involuntarily institutionalized or be a convicted felon. According to those guidelines almost all school shooters of age to purchase a firearm have done so legally. So while I do agree the mental healthcare system needs rebuilt, only by changing the current laws will prevent these shooters from legally buying weapons. But it's a fine line to try and walk as what that does or does not involve and it seems nobody wants to tackle that part of the issue. Other than saying "It's a mental healthcare issue" there haven't been any actual solutions offered.

As for what I quoted from your post above. Having people with active shooter training or experience in our schools won't stop school shootings. But then neither will an overhaul of our mental healthcare system nor limiting magazine capacity. But what I think they will do combined is help cut down on the number of victims. At this point that's far better than the approach we've been taking so far.

So you use a false syllogism to arrive at a conclusion that contradicts my statements on this in the past.

The government should not require training for you to exercise your right to keep and bear arms. I will not yield that stance. Period.

That is not the same logically as school staff not requiring training as terms of employment for carry at school. I have stated previously that arming staff should be at the discretion of school leadership and that leadership has the right to determine what qualifications they require, much like when they hire an English teacher. My employer determines if they allow me to carry at the office, it is their property. They can decide who can and cannot carry.

Thanks for that clarification. See how easy that was? I understand you think that no training should be required for anyone to carry a gun that can kill many people. The reasoning used for that belief does not address the practical dangers it poses to others. School grounds are not a privately owned business and as such shouldn't be decided by the whims of a school board. It seems any practical, across the board minimum standard that makes sense is frowned upon.

Yeah..what could possibly go wrong with a little training and mental testing before bearing firearms? OMG the world would collapse upon its self!

Schools are considered private property and are treated as such. Schools decide hiring policies in conjunction with district and state level policies. This would be no different, and where already allowed, is no different.

Public schools are public property, subject to the laws regarding public property, including local school board regulations.

Yes I see they are treated like private property for posting security and trespassing legalities. But they are on public lands.

Private schools are, at least typically, private property.

Not quite. Public schools are publicly owned private property. Here's a good test for you, go to one and demand your rights to move freely and protest. You will be asked to leave, and arrested if you do not. The same is not true for the sidewalks in front.

Let's address something that you have refused to comment on thus far. In your "unfettered gun carrying" opinion, what further restrictions would you feel comfortable agreeing to in terms of people who have been deemed to have "any mental issues" be restricted from purchasing and owning firearms? I keep seeing people, including yourself say this is a mental health issue and we both agree that overhauling the mental healthcare system is needed. Yet I laid out the federal law in relationship to purchasing and owning firearms which it seemed you agreed was comprehensive enough. So how would you extend those restrictions in a manner you would not feel it infringes on the right to bear arms?

Public property refers to property owned by the government (or its agency), rather than by a private individual or a company. It belongs to the public at large. Examples include many parks, streets, sidewalks, libraries, schools, playgrounds that are used regularly by the general public.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/public_property

Yes I edited my post. Agreed.

Understood.

One clarification, public lands are usually different that public property. State park, national forest, that sort of thing is usually what is captured under public lands.

Yep. It won't fit the manifesto.

At least you stopped pretending you're not MAGA. And your damn right it's hateful rhetoric because I HATE WHAT MAGA PEOPLE ARE DOING TO THIS COUNTRY.

The trans boogie man will get you if you don't spread that transphobic hate! Didn't you know?... Any credible outlet would leave details like this out because it fuels hatred toward an already under-assault PROTECTED group.

It's sad that you can't see the difference between Trans lifestyle freedoms and Nazi thuggery. And I would rather have a socially acceptable government decision than allow the bigots and Fox Primetime viewers to set social standards. We'd all have to live the real-life Handmaid's Tale if the fearful right has its way.

Oh look, he's an urban dictionary guy... I'm impressed. Some people just let their political views overrule their logical minds. You are a glaring example. Kick rocks.

I think we are seeing examples of why our country produces so many individuals who murder others or take their own lives. The divide is real. We are perhaps the least "united" modern nation in the world. The results are far too many people walking around w/hate in their hearts. They label. They bully. They call others' names. The spread their hate on a daily basis. And then they blame guns.

You are a fine example of the behavior you complain about. You just said other posters on this board are examples of why the USA has so many murderers and high rates of suicide. How did that assist the divide or aid the conversation. Pointing fingers at others instead of engaging in conversation no matter if you agree or disagree? And no - the USA is not the most divided country in the world. Other countries have ignorant people that point fingers at their countrymen and say "see those individuals they are examples of why we have so many problems". Unless you have travelled widely over EU and Australasia and other first world countries I think maybe you should remove the absolutism in your claims. You tried the same thing with "video games" being one of the causes of all the gun violence in the US until repeatedly it was shown and discussed that every nation has the same video game and violent movie culture that the US does. It's an easy deflection instead of real engagement.

Nobody’s blaming guns here. That’s the typical false accusation as usual from the far right. It’s just too damn easy for bullies, revenge motivated, and mentally ill individuals spreading hate to amass a bunch of AR’s and ammo to kill dozens of children in just a few seconds. Get off your high horse. You’ve bullied a few around here, we’ve all seen it.

From an article about how the political divide is hurting US teens.

From the link I posted earlier:






https://www.latimes.com/politics/ne...n-in-worldwide-survey-essential-politics

J/K It’s almost amusing that the trump brigade always turns their every flaw, their every cheat, their every crime, back onto the left as if they have done the same things. But it’s not.

Don't worry. State $ponsored NPR has told the queer to take up arms and protect themselves. Guns are good... for some, but scary in the hands of others. It was humorous that while promoting arming themselves they had to add a 'trigger' warning that gunshots would be heard in the story. 🤣

There is so much more that goes into teenage and adult culture/life/division/experiences/angst than just political discord. Racism, wealth divide, drugs, crime ... all would play as much of a factor as political divide - quite possibly more.

And much more important than being at the top of a chart on political (or any other type of division) the degree of variation is important. Claiming that the 208 school shootings in the USA is a result of the US being the most divided country - when the next 1st world country on the list was France with 2 school shootings .... a variance by a factor of 100 - but a comparison of "division" shows only a 10% variation between the division in France and the USA respectively means that the political division absolutely does NOT explain the rate of schools shootings/mass shootings. It is a factor - it is not the root cause or biggest factor. It does not mean that every other subject or suggestion to discuss regards to gun violence should be shot down.

https://www.techpolicy.com/Blog/November-2021/Which-Countries-Are-the-Most-Divided.aspx

https://www.techpolicy.com/getmedia/b44f9d9c-470c-4392-8da7-aa50814956c3/gentzkow-110521-01.aspx

Oh look, he's a blind raging guy.

"Trumpian MAGA Facisits" didn't create a right to defend oneself, and with people like you that blindly hate anyone that doesn't capitulate to their views, one doesn't need to wonder why some of us value our rights.

Can you guess where you can put those rocks, or do you need a map.

Yet it's been reported almost everywhere. I even posted an article in this very thread stating it. Oh the humanity.

I've been telling liberals to arm themselves for a long time now. When observing the other side it's obvious they may need them.

I may switch it up a bit, because may not be talking about the elephant in the room.

It is known that the Trans/LGBT community has been the targeted victim of mass shooters previously. Think Pulse nightclub in Florida, and more recently the Colorado bar that was the scene of another mass shooting. That, along with Tennessee's recent 'Drag Queen' bill, and the proliferation of anti-LGBT legislation in various states, a pattern begins to form. There is targeting of those in the Trans/LGBT community, and one of the groups that is doing the the targeting often point to Christian values. Now, I would not generally include the Presbyterian religion as part of the Christians that target the LGBT community.

So when a Christian school is the scene of one of these horrible events, we are shocked. But should we be? The mind of anyone who would commit one of these crimes on behalf of a belief either in terms of lifestyle or Christianity is just something that is not understood.

Maybe some insight will be gained when we find out the content of whatever was in the possession of the shooter. It is just sad all around.

I think we should all be shocked any time such mass shootings happen anywhere and especially to children at school. These children are all innocent children that end up being the target of someone who is deranged.

But what we do know is that she attended this school as a student. What her experiences were while she was a student there is something unknown at this time. That may or may not help explain her reasoning further. There is no excuse but understanding the why would probably be helpful.

As I stated on page 6 of this thread, mass murders and suicides are not just about guns. They are not just about gun control and mental illness, although some of the issues troubling teens are linked to mental health. There are a plethora of reasons that contribute to how this country has given birth and nurtures so many young people that resort to such acts. On this page, I addressed how we divided politically, racially, and religiously. Some people will scoff at those issues, but the research tells us that they are real issues that cause a lot of unrest in this country. Some may even try to twist words around to argue against anyone who does not see it their way. I'm not going to waste time arguing w/those folks.

Instead, I want to focus on another problem that our youth face. Social isolation. We have many homes where children are permitted to play video games, watch TV, and play on their phones for much of the day. The parent or parents don't want to take enough time to limit some of these activities. I know that my wife and I and many other sound families would put time constraints on how much time our kids could spend on these electronic devices. Everything is fine in moderation, but spending too much time in those "activities" is not healthy for the mind or the body. I say this because they are often solitary activities. I played sports w/our kids. My wife and I took them hiking, boating, biking, etc, etc. We were engaged. Throwing and catching a ball w/others is better than playing a sports game on a video game. Playing outside games w/friends is better than watching tv by yourself.

The examples are endless, but engaging w/others is good for the mind, body, and soul. I do not think it is healthy to spend too much time entertaining yourself in the above electronic activities in isolation. Kids need to learn to cooperate w/others. To learn and engage w/others. To problem solve as part of a team. To explore new things. To discover their environment w/hands-on activities. To learn which behaviors are socially acceptable and which are not.

As children get older, they may not "fit in" w/many of their peers. They do not progress emotionally. They spend more and more time in isolation and have difficulties engaging w/others. They often become social misfits who are not liked by their peers. Well-meaning psychologists in the schools make special rules for these kids and they stand out even more. For example, there was a boy that I taught math and science too that would throw fits of rage. One time he picked his nose and smeared the snot on a girl's arm. She screamed at him, saying something like "Get away from me, you freak." He threw himself on the floor and went into a screaming, withering rage. The raging part happened over and over. The answer from the psychologists were to ignore his rages and let him work it out. How do you think that went over w/the other kids? We don't remove these troubled students from the regular classroom due to their "rights," but instead make excuses for the child's improper behavior. The child learns to make these excuses for his poor behavior.

Next, we all know the importance of social media and how mean kids can be. Hell, we see adults on here engaging in social media bullying. By the time they are teens, there are many kids who are social misfits who increasingly spend more and more time alone. They may blame others for their issues. They may hate themselves. They may be angry and outraged, or they me reclusive and depressed.

Some may live tortured lives for the rest of their years. Drug and alcohol abuse. Homelessness. Multiple brushes w/the law. Others may take the lives of others and some resort to taking their own lives.

What are we doing about these issues as a country? Some say "thoughts and prayers to the victims." Others make it a political party argument and blame the other side.

There are more issues in our country that cause these problems other than the ones I have covered in about four separate posts. Hopefully, we can talk about some others. There is one thing for sure, though. A country that is so divided that they only want to blame the other side and label anyone w/a different opinion w/tags like "Trumpians" or "Libtards" is only furthering the divide and creating more and more problems for our young people and our nation as a whole.

******I apologize for the skeleton format of this post. Obviously, I couldn't provide much depth because there is so much more on this issue to talk about, but it's a starting point for those who want to ponder the effects of social isolation.

Here are a few articles about Social Isolation for teens for anyone who wants to learn more.

https://trailscarolina.com/blog/social-isolation-in-teens-the-damaging-effects-of-being-left-out/


https://bnitreatment.com/teenage-loneliness/


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8543788/

So you think children being isolated is a bad thing but suggest they isolate a child that has behavioral issues in the classroom? I certainly agree with you that there should be serious consequences for their actions which isn't happening but I don't think pulling them out of the classroom is the answer. I mean that would only serve to isolate them further which you yourself say is a big part of the problem.

Look, I get what you're saying and suggesting. But you may wish to look even deeper. Many parents both work to provide for their families these days. Often times children are being raised by a single parent who works multiple jobs. It seems as though much of the problem you describe is a bi-product of kids having parents working and they are left to their own devices.

I don't believe this is as political of a thread as you're making this out to be. I think that is a general consensus that we have a broken mental health system that needs revamped. There is pretty much a general consensus that we need school resource officers in schools to help protect our children. It's only the details of that where the disagreement lies. There is certainly a division about magazine ammunition restrictions on firearms but I think the bigger question is why do people make that political? I'm a gun proponent, not anti gun.

I would also like to point out to you that school children, all the way up to younger voters are the least politically engaged people in our society as a collective group. They vote at a much lower rate than any other demographic. It's not like they're at home watching CNN wringing their hands over the political division in our country.

And while I certainly agree with you that there are a much greater number of children who self isolate than any time before now, I think it's safe to say we all knew people in school who were socially awkward, didn't participate in school activities and were isolated and didn't associate with others.

Please don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying these issues don't add to the problem. I'm saying I don't think it's to nearly the degree you are seemingly making it out to be.

I do however feel that some of the online crazy things children now have access to may be somewhat more a cause for concern. Their are many ideologies recruiting children to their cause because they know they can take advantage of young minds.

Finally some worthwhile discussion - albeit with some finger pointing and hollier than thou attitude that permeates most of one posters writings. Yes - it's a complex issue that involves many, many factors. Everyone was on board with that. But some on the board wanted to insist that Guns were less of a factor in all this and accuse others that if they talked about guns as being one PART of the problem then somehow we were trying to make it ALL about guns, which it is not and never was. Same poster went on to say that people on this board are examples of why we have so many murderers and suicides in this country.... while raging about the division in this country and pointing fingers at others. Can't make this stuff up. And while we look at the social and political strife and impact - we absolutely need to look at why countries with similar division and angst within them have so many less mass shootings and school shootings. It's like that part of the conversation is being avoided because it doesn't suit someone's agenda. Again - it all plays a part, all of it is worthy of analyzing and discussing. And comparisons to other first world industrialized countries - some that have very stringent gun control and others with high numbers of guns - are all areas where we might learn something.