Why don’t we just skip right past the paint nonsense and give every student a little can of pepper spray? This one has a 10-foot range, which is a lot further than spray paint, and you don’t have to worry about getting it right in the eyes like a paintball.
Good luck to the kid who doesn’t draw first in a schoolyard fight.
The economics are literally the least problematic aspects of this, uh, proposal. However, to address your concern about the costs, I suggest that we apply a tax on all nursing bottle nipples to pay for it, because really, these children should solve their own problems, and they should be learning to do so as soon as they exit the womb. Damn bullet magnets.
Or get Canada to pay for it as repariations for the war of 1812.
[barney stinson]Problem. Solved. You’re welcome.[/barney stinson]
I don’t think rationality is an option in considering a proposal that sounds like an SNL skit pitch that was rejected for being too stupid, and by too stupid, I mean even dumber than the “Night at the Roxbury” sketches. When an idea is too stupid for Corky Romano, it is impenetrable to logic and reason.
Stranger
Paint in the eyes is only part of it. Paintballs hurt. In fact, the pain caused by paintballs hitting someone would be much more likely to be a factor than whether paint gets into the shooter’s eyes (which would require an extraordinary shot; hitting something as tiny as the eyes on a moving target.)
It’s still a bad idea, but whether the shooter is wearing goggles or not is unlikely to make any difference.
You think labeling something a “gun-free zone” does anything effective?
[QUOTE=SlackerInc;20872780
]
I’ve shifted to thinking in terms of spraying them with paint, in a wide mist. I’m not talking about causing pain in the shooter’s eyes (though I’m not opposed to that on principle or anything) but making it hard for him to see. Wouldn’t it be even harder to see with goggles coated with paint, compared to with paint in your eyes?
[/QUOTE]
Look, it’s a dumb idea on so many levels that it’s not worthwhile to discuss it.
I disagree. We should discuss it. We should just use very silly voices while doing it. ”I’m French! Why do you think I have this silly accent, you stupid ‘king’?”
Stranger
The goggles, would you say that they do nothing?
I see where** SlackerInc**'s confusion is arising. You see, SI, Police Academy IV was not a documentary. They weren’t real police officers. They were saying words and doing things that somebody wrote for them. They were acting. Not. Doing. A. True. Thing.
A school district in Pennsylvania has put a bucket of rocks in every classroom.
Sometimes life is its own satire.
First, I can’t find information that says the shooter shot through windows in classroom doors. Could someone point me in the right direction? I do find that a Parkland math teacher had students lock the classroom door. The shooter couldn’t gain access and moved on. The school where I taught had narrow windows in classroom doors–about 18" by 5". It would have been difficult to strike many students by shooting through that window. And I can’t say this enough: locked classroom doors are a good deterrent. No, they’re not enough, but they’re a good first step. My classroom door was always closed and locked. It was a big nuisance due to kids coming back from the restroom, etc., but I thought it worthwhile. Our doors could only be locked from the hallway side, and locking the door with a shooter in the halls didn’t appeal to me.
Second, as I stated, I thought having kids throw things at a shooter was unrealistic. I did, however, buy a can of wasp spray, which could shoot 12 feet. I didn’t kid myself this was going to stop a shooter, and spray paint would be even less effective. My desperate and probably foolish hope was that if he somehow breached the door, I could engage him a few seconds so a few kids might escape. It was marginally better than nothing. I rehearsed (alone) often (classroom closest to main entrance) because I hoped I’d be less likely to freeze if a shooting occurred. I assumed I’d be killed and told my students to get out the window (We rehearsed this, too, though not as often) and ignore what was happening to me and others behind them. Again, I doubt it would play out that way, but it was all I had.
If you are going to arm students it would be a lot cheaper to just give them all pointed sticks. A phalanx of kids braced by the door armed with 1 to 2 meter long pikes should make short work of any shooter. And if you are dead set on the paintball idea then give a couple of the kids on the edges paintball guns and form a Tercioinstead.
Every school should have a massive pile of explosives placed underneath that can be activated by a number of large, red, unsecured buttons placed around the grounds.
The buttons should be pressed whenever a shooting starts, that way, very few of the deaths can be attributed to guns.
Having the buttons unsecured means that some number of schools will explode each week even when there’s no shooter around, thereby masking the danger of guns and dissuading shooters who are looking for infamy. It will also force people to value human (and especially child) life significantly less, thereby reducing the emotional trauma when they die.
If we’re going to spray something, why would we choose paint? If the goal is to disable the attacker, wouldn’t you just use pepper spray? At that point, you don’t even need to equip the entire classroom with a couple dozen units, just give one big can to each teacher.
Right, because this is the only possible explanation for the resistance you’re encountering. It’s a far more plausible explanation than admitting that your proposals are unworkably flawed. :rolleyes:
Some people seriously can’t get it through their heads that there are more ideas in the world than “MUST BAN GUNZ” and “I LOVE GUNZ”, and then interpreting anyone not exactly on your side of that dichotomy as necessarily being on the other side. Seriously, it’s pretty sad to see such limited thinking.
I thought of that, but remember goggles? Paint on goggles means you’re blinded; pepper spray on goggles less so. But I don’t hate a combo! Here’s another thing people seem to have trouble with: I’m not out to present my plan from the mountaintop, and then insist on all its particulars to the end of time. I’m totally open to brainstorming and trying different things.
AGAIN: as another teacher backed me up on, the current thinking in education is already to have kids fight back. So I’m only spitballing ideas to make that more effective.
Watch out: suggesting commonsense ideas to slow shooters down will get you nothing but abuse from the “BAN GUNZ!” crowd, because anything other than “BAN GUNZ!” they see as a threat to their movement and their perceived political momentum. Which may be true to an extent, but in this case I’m out for practicality, not politics.
I suppose they might be more hesitant to razz your contribution because you’re an actual teacher; but my wife is a teacher and her endorsement of the idea hasn’t slowed anyone down.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not just kids/education. Anyone who has had formal active-shooter response training is taught the same thing - “Run, Hide, Fight:”
-If at all possible, flee the building; this is your best chance for a safe outcome.
-If you don’t have a safe path for egress, your next best option is to hide. Close the door to your room/area, lock it or block it with furniture if possible, turn out the lights, be quiet and stay out of sight.
-If the shooter is going to enter your room/area, your last option is to fight back. Team up, ambush if possible, and fight dirty. Gouge eyes, kick the crotch, bite off whatever exposed flesh you can. Be relentless and commit to inflicting serious, painful, permanent, lethal injuries to the shooter, whatever it takes to disable him and protect your life. Most office/school rooms have things that can be used as weapons - books, scissors, coffee cups, staplers, whatever. Take a look around you right now and think about what you might grab if the occasion arises.
A bucket of rocks in the classroom actually isn’t a terrible idea. Although they may seem terribly primitive when facing an assailant with a gun, rocks don’t cost anything, they’re maintenance-free and reliable, and using them safely and effectively doesn’t require any training beyond what most kids experience on the playground. They can inflict debilitating and potentially lethal injuries. Keeping them in a bucket under teacher control limits the opportunities for misuse.
This is what I found:
Note, I now have “Parkland Shooting”, “Sandy Hook”, and “School Classroom Picture” in my recent search history. Hi NSA!
So, it is ineffective and detracts from doing anything productive to address the problem, but at least it doesn’t actively create a new hazard like arming children with paintguns or teachers with actual firearms. Is this how far logic and reason have sunk in American discourse?
Stranger
People virtuously pretending “Both Sides Do It” is the biggest unearned advantage the Republicans have.
Ha! My wife has enough trouble keeping the kits from punching each other and taking stuff from her desk if it isn’t locked.
You know, I didn’t actually think you were being dishonest and had a hidden agenda, until you posted this way over-the-top defensive screed, and now I kinda think both might be true. Feel free to report me to the mods for making this observation. The rule on not calling you a liar does not mean I have to take what you say as divine gospel.
So you’re advancing a plan that bets kids lives on something you’re “pretty sure” on. Forgive me for not finding that even remotely convincing.
No, hiding or playing dead would probably increase your odds of survival dramatically. Charging a gunman who is actively killing people when you are unarmed is effectively suicide. Sure, if you have a group of five, you might take down the gunman, but at least three of those five people will likely end up dead to accomplish it.
Also, unlike most here, I’ve been in an couple active shooting incidents, though mine were drug deals gone bad and not school related. Believe me, there are a lot of emotions that can go through your head other than sheer terror and anguish. Your assertion that in a situation where death is likely people will just lose hope and sacrifice their lives is garbage. In my experiences, people have very strong self-preservation instincts, and they completely take over.
Really? From my point of view, getting stabbed in the chest with a 5 inch blade hurts. Having your jaw shattered while you are being curb-stomped hurts. Broken ribs puncturing your lungs hurts. Paintballs merely sting.