And can you enumerate all the examples of high school massacres that did not involve a gun?
You can probably blind someone with a pencil, but in general someone who aims to kill a lot of people as quickly as possible is going to choose the tool designed for that specific purpose, if he can get his hands on one.
I can think of a thousand scenarios, but if schools tried to operate as if all those scenarios were possible and must be acted against, for all the children under their care, the school system itself would come to an abrupt halt. Do you have solutions that do not involve massive lines of students each undergoing a detailed search of body and baggage?
Would you have wanted to look in his backpack and locker? What if there was no gun but something else ( use your imagination) that could render harm to the kid or others?
That doesn’t answer my question. Pipe bomb is the only substantive response so far, and making pipe bombs has become a lot more difficult than it was back in the '70s when my friends and I experimented with blowing up a few porta-potties.
A handgun is, practically speaking, the only item that is feasibly available to a teenager that has the capability of killing mass numbers of kids from a distance. You stated that a gun in the backpack is not the only thing to worry about, and I’d like to know what exactly you are referring to. What ELSE, aside from a pipe bomb, do you figure it’s likely a teenager can fit into a backpack that will result in mass murder?
For those disturbed kids gaining the attention of their alarmed teachers and other kids? Take as much time as you want to screen or assess their risk of harming themselves or others.
Or a single murder? Doesn’t have to be a gun.
I’ve had students where I was asked to put my scissors when they were in the room, because they had a history of self-harm, and parents couldn’t stay home with them forever, nor afford a residential center. Even then, we didn’t check their bag daily. Bags are given a cursory search at the door, and that’s it. If we started searching bags for every kid on our radar, it would profoundly change the tonearm relationship.
Again, I am sure there was a formal assessment done. If kid was coached through it by parents encouraging him to “not get caught, lol”, then the school didn’t have any real reason to 5hink he was armed right then.
Of all the arguments in the gun control debate, the silliest one is the notion that we shouldn’t try to limit gun ownership because so many other things are dangerous too.
If it’s really the case that there’s no conceptual difference between tools designed specifically for quick and effective killing and the many other potentially lethal items that surround us, the logical conclusion is that you shouldn’t have any problem with banning guns completely - because for home defense you can push home invaders into your swimming pool to drown them, and you can hunt elk with a kitchen knife.
Aren’t you in law enforcement? Shouldn’t we be asking you this question?
Is this a conversation about gun control? Leave me out of your random musings about it. I have given no indication of my stance on gun control.
I feel strongly in this case the administration failed to adequately address the risk posed by this murdering student.
You have certainly given an indication in trying to make the case that we should be equally concerned with all the other ways a disturbed kid could inflict harm.
I’ve always thought of the equivalent being: telling the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation to knock it the F off, since there are so many other causes of death in the USA/world.
Focus on the disturbed individual that is hauled out of class into a meeting f with admin s and parents over alarming evidence of doing real harm to themselves or others. But unless they have a gun @Riemann You’re not concerned? Choking strangling stabbing raping bludgeoning?
When a disturbed student is in possession of a tool specifically designed for quickly and easily killing others (or themselves), that’s when common sense says we should be most concerned for everyone’s safety.
It’s a silly straw man that we would not otherwise be at all concerned about a student’s mental health and everyone’s safety.
Parents don’t typically give their kids pipe bombs or rat poison either.
Finally!
Finally I have realized that disturbed teenagers with sharp pencils or erections are just as dangerous as disturbed teenagers with guns?
Keep going you’ll get there baby steps may be required for greater understanding that not all murderous individuals choose guns to inflict harm.
But they’re much much more likely to be successful and get a higher body count if they choose guns.
I don’t think that’s a debate.