White males in the United States are raised to believe that they are the natural kings of all society, always to be at the top of the chain. That is starting to change slightly now in Western culture, and some are being left on the fringe.
The shooters , being raised in this environment, react to feeling marginalized personally by taking out their personal grievance on all of society. In other words, they feel they are the rightful kings to everything and if not shown the respect due to the kings they will take it out on all of society. The gun is the natural means to accomplish this as they have been used to further white supremacy for centuries.
The white power structure, whose goal is to enforce white supremacy, is scared to allow any regulations on guns for white people as they feel that guns are their power. They fear that if they regulate guns, then the things they have done to other peoples will be done to them. They are willing to live with loss of life in mass shootings to preserve what in their mind is the greater good. That good to them, is white supremacy. Your average white guy goes along with this thinking.
This is why you are seeing this lets arm the teachers thing, which of course is totally idiotic.
But I see that as childish wishful thinking, and attempts to do so would certainly result in people like me becoming disarmed long before the “perps” are. For example: I think it’s fine for me to carry my CCW into a school. It’s not like I intend to shoot anybody. But the law says I can’t, so I don’t, even if I believe my personal safety is compromised. Nikolas Cruz clearly does not share my respect for the law.
I don’t want the populace at large to be disarmed. I’m convinced that the founding fathers knew full well what they were doing with this matter. I’m all for those with criminal intent being disarmed, if this can be done without intruding on the natural rights of others, of course. Now that’s the trick of it, isn’t it?
I’m going to go with Claymores. Sure, there might be a little collateral damage, but that’s the Price We Pay for living in a Free Society where everybody can exercise their 2nd Amendment rights.
I used to enjoy travelling and flew a lot but my last trip was years ago. After being humiliated and creeped out by being subjected to “the routine” at each connecting airport, three times on one trip, I bought a cheap used car and drove home.
The TSA has already hired many of the marginally employable – to hire another massive number of people to fondle school girls in the hallways would truly mean scraping the bottom of the barrel.
Do we really want even more Security Theater or can we consider allowing teachers who aren’t afraid of guns, who train with them, know how to use them, and carry them outside of school protect themselves and the kids voluntarily and at no cost to you or me?
You wouldn’t put a sign on your front door saying “We don’t have guns”; why put them on the places your kids spend their days?
I used TSA as an example of the extreme in crowd control facility security and even alluded to such in the following reference to “stupid cost.” But what we have now is the other end of the physical security spectrum: Many schools with absolutely no reasonable physical security measures established, or nearly so. Anyone who doesn’t see this obvious shortfall under the circumstances must be daft. It should be addressed as a BARE MINIMUM beginning step right along with anything else that gets considered. People not understanding this must be daft.
…or bent on using illogical arguments towards the REAL agenda. Sure it’s all about public crowd safety?
Let’s be perfectly clear about this; despite your inaccurate paraphrasing, I did not use the term ‘shitbird’ in reference to teachers.
As to your hypothetical, it is certainly plausible to concoct any number of theoretical scenarios in which a firearm could be used defensively. However, if we’re all being honest here, you have to balance that with the additional hazard that having a firearm in the classroom poses. Specifically, there is the need to secure the firearm in some kind of a rapidly accessible secure container (biometric or keyed safe), to assure that assumptive armed teachers have been vetted for weapon competence and emotional stability, et cetera. Unless the weapon is kept in the classroom overnight, a teacher will have to carry it back and forth from home to school and the increased potential for theft, and of course, the liability to the school should a teacher actually need to use the firearm and hit a bystander rather than the assailant, or the case of a negligent discharge, or a teacher losing control of the weapon to an assailant who proceeds to use it on other victims.
There are all manner of reasons why requiring or even allowing teachers who are not otherwise highly trained in weapons tactics to not carry a firearm in the classroom aside from the simple fact of how uncomfortable it will make many students and parents, and as some kind of counterargument to doing something to proactively prevent would-be shooters from acquiring weapons it is the most convoluted and baseless of arguments.
This kind of senseless, there’s-nothing-to-do-but-arm-everyone-and-let-God-sort-it-out mentality makes it really difficult for rational gun owners to validate legitimate reasons for responsible gun ownership, even setting aside the potential for hazard by deliberately putting weapons inside of a classroom to prevent a problem which is not prevalent in any other developed nation. The notion that we are helpless to take any action to reduce mass shooting events is a kind of institutionalized helplessness promulgated by a movement which has long since ceded the moral high ground or in any way acted in the best interests of the public at large and may well have functioned as a dark money conduit for Russian influence in the 2016 presidential election.
I think this post is the perfect example of the point I was making. White people feel that any kind of regulation infringes on their freedom as the natural kings of Western society to do what ever they want.
Rules are for the other, the marginal, not for the kings.
This mindset is taught to white males from birth and so deeply ingrained that they are totally willing to sacrifice their own children to maintain this current order.
I’m a 47 year old black man,but I grew up among white people, and have an insight as to how they think. We all know if it was black males doing this, their would be all kinds of new laws coming out. Crackdowns, innocent people getting killed by law enforcement.
Since it’s white males, you see none of this. All you hear is that there is nothing we can do, lets arm the teachers, make them responsible. I work with people who actually think this is a good idea.
I’m actually glad I’m older so I won’t have to deal with the chaos that is coming.
These days, the only schools which don’t have guns are the ones where resource officers decline to intervene in active shooter scenarios.
Hey, maybe that’s the current NRA dogma: Arm the teachers so we can remove the resource officers, not even bother to call in police who won’t enter the building either, and rely on educators to secure the premises.
That would be the only way it would be realistic to arm teachers, because if there are or might be police officers in the building, the only strategy for a teacher to pursue is to lock the door and hide, weapon holstered. If they’re out and about with a drawn weapon, the police shoot them, probably before the active shooter does. If they’re in the classroom with an armed weapon, the police shoot them through the window. Police don’t have time to identify friends and foes if the friends may or may not be wearing uniforms, this isn’t Hogan’s Alley.
Thanks for elaborating on one of the MANY reasons this is a such a BAD idea. Some others have already been mentioned. I’m pro 2A, but still gobsmacked at how anyone, even hardcore NRA-types, propose this nonsense.
I agree, it is racist, but the U.S. is a racist state built on the idea white supremacy. Is there any dispute about that?
I’m not anti white, in fact I think the whole white supremacy idea is bull. White people hated and killed each other for centuries before they were given a common enemy, aka brown people.
The whole thing is an idea, a means of control, but this thread is not the place to get into it.
The bottom line is that the majority of the white population believes that guns are their power as a society, and to give up that power on any level would leave them at the mercy of the other, aka brown people.
They are willing to put up with a few casualties and arm teachers to maintain the current order of things.
The evidence that there is substantial racial influence in criminalization and sentencing is pretty difficult to ignore without throwing out facts altogether, historical and current.
As part of the CE requirements? Heck, some places already have other training for dealing with a armed intruder as part of their offerings so I don’t see it being impossible. Maybe not a good idea but ------ doable.
What fucking backpedel? You trim down my post to one sentence without other context and try to claim that I’m reversing myself? Let’s look at that entire statement again, which is, after all, only three posts above your response:
*If we’re going to be honest, there are a number of basic precips in our modern political system that exist because of institutional racism, notwithstanding the Three-Fifths Compromise as well subsequent agreements such as the Fugitive Slave Act, the Missouri Compromise, and the Compromise of 1850, as well as voter suppression going up all the way to the Voting Rights Act of 1965 which maintained effective supremacy of white voters into the modern era, and the Nixonian War On Drugs which has been pursued to the current time by labeling illegal drub use as a ‘black’ problem and statistically incarcerating black offenders at rates dramatically higher than comparable offenses by white offenders.
The evidence that there is substantial racial influence in criminalization and sentencing is pretty difficult to ignore without throwing out facts altogether, historical and current.*
The next time you are going to disingenuously try to misconstrue and disfigure my words, at make the attempt to be vaguely clever about it. This is not Fox News.
