Highly Trained Armed Security In Schools - Reallocate IRS Funds to Do It

Quote by ElCoco

OK, I've got it that those facts don't fit easily into your narrative. You'll need to adjust it or remain uncomfortable.

It's good to read you're willing to envision an approach to dealing with the problem that doesn't rely on the fantasy of eliminating guns since it won't happen.

Sorry for the apology.

I don't need advice, but thanks for trying.

I'm sincerely apologetic that you and others who align with your thinking have accepted large-scale loss of lives due to preventable gun violence in stride. I don't want guns eliminated. I want them regulated in a way that is honest about accepting guns as the problem instead of needing children to attend school with armed guards because of the accepted and preventable inevitability of them being killed by guns. I'm also sincerely apologetic about whatever got you to the point where the only discourse in which you're able to engage in this conversation about guns is reminding me that guns going away is a fantasy, especially in light of the fact that I never said I want guns going away.

I'm aware that grossly misinterpreting the fact that current regulations surrounding guns are intended to increase access to guns, and are therefore the culprit for ever-increasing gun violence is imperative to your narrative, and I pity you for that as well.

But we can be done with this now. Talking in circles with the willfully obtuse isn't a hobby of mine.

Cheers.

Quote by Ironic

How do background checks ease gun access?

They’re only required if you purchase a gun through a Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL). Not everyone who sells guns is or has to be an FFL. Additionally, the background checks are only required for the person purchasing the gun. Meaning if I purchased a gun through an FFL, the background check would be run on me, which is fine if I’m purchasing the gun for myself. But if I gifted or sold this gun, the recipient of said gun will have had no background check.

So while background checks don’t ease gun access, regulations that make it permissible to purchase/sell a gun without a background check helps in easing gun access.

Quote by Ironic

So, you agree background checks don’t ease gun access. Do you agree background checks that prevent the sale of a gun to the would-be purchaser restrict gun access?

They can if the would-be purchaser has an adverse enough history to prevent them from being deemed suitable enough to own the gun.

But if someone who can’t pass a background check wants a gun, they can still purchase one legally from someone who isn’t an FFL, because the background check regulation only applies to those who are FFL’s. An easy enough work-around is to purchase a gun from someone who isn’t an FFL, which makes the background check regulation virtually obsolete. A simple fix to this regulation would be to either make all gun sales require a background check, or to only legalize gun purchases from FFL’s.

The background check regulation doesn’t regulate all legal gun sales, and until it does, it’s not effective. Ineffective gun regulations ease access to guns by default.

I don't know, maybe it's not a great idea, seeing stories like this everyday. No priests as counselors either. Thanks.

Quote by Tantaleyes

Do you behave in ways you think will get you killed?

No, I'm not suicidal. My behavior might get me killed though, as such is life. Chances of me getting killed by a gun shot are way less here in the Netherlands though than they'd be in the US, for the simple reason that changes of me getting into contant with a firearm here are way less than over there.

Quote by Tantaleyes

Do you behave in ways you think will get you killed?

So, are you going to blame the victims of mass shootings and runaway gun violence?

So, here are some things you can do to get killed by guns in the USA:

Go shopping at a mall

Attend elementary or high school

Go to college

Pump your gas at a convenience store

Walk in a convenience store

Shop at Walmart

Attend a concert

Go to a nightclub

Stop in your car at a traffic light

Sit on your living room couch

Eat in a restaurant

Walk down the street

Attend a birthday party

And on and on...

Quote by Buz

So, here are some things you can do to get killed by guns in the USA:

Go shopping at a mall

Attend elementary or high school

Go to college

Pump your gas at a convenience store

Walk in a convenience store

Shop at Walmart

Attend a concert

Go to a nightclub

Stop in your car at a traffic light

Sit on your living room couch

Eat in a restaurant

Walk down the street

Attend a birthday party

And on and on...

Solution: Highly trained armed forces in all these situations. Duh.

Quote by Dani

Solution: Highly trained armed forces in all these situations. Duh.

Maybe you just pointed to a solution that both sides, the ones who feel guns are needed for protection of their families, as well as those who think not just everyone should have guns, can live with. Everyone who feels, or whose parents feel, that they need the kind of protection apparently only a firearm can give, should be able to hire a highly trained armed security professional.

Quote by Chryses

And have the highly trained armed security professional at the school.

Sure, and accompanying you while you walk the dog, go to church, do the groceries, visit the pub or the cinema, go on vacation, etc. And just like the kids in school, you won't need to carry a gun yourself.

It's a win-win situation really: only highly trained professionals carrying/owning guns while still providing that secure feeling for those who think you need guns for that and as a bonus even the creation of many new job opportunities.

Quote by Chryses

And paid for by the redirected IRS funds per the OP.

Your proposal will raise the price tag, but then again, your are not paying for the services, are you?

All the funds that the US should've been putting into providing health care could be spend on this for one. With the increased security that those highly trained armed security professionals will provide to school children, church goers and anyone else, a lot of that money will of course no longer be necessary anyway. And people who'll be using these highly trained armed professionals' services can of course spend all the money they get from selling their own firearms as well as the money they spend by no longer having to buy ammunition on those services, as well as their NRA and shooting range membership fees which they'll no longer need.

Quote by Chryses

P.S. ??? only ??? That will never happen, as you know.

But… you only need a good guy with a gun, no? That's the highly trained armed security professional of course. So yeah, "only", because that was always the promise.

Quote by Chryses

... chuckling ... "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to , shall not be infringed."

Everyone is entitled to his or her fantasies. Enjoy yours.

Number of times a well regulated militia has fought American Tyranny: 0

Number of times a well regulated militia has killed Americans citizens in a mass shooting: 176,972,091

Quote by Chryses

The number of times the right of the people to keep and bear Arms is protected by the Constitution: 1

Good luck, Felix.

So why can't Americans have submachine guns?

Quote by Chryses

Go ask the SCOTUS.

Sounds like the right to bear arms isn't absolute.

Quote by Chryses

Then argue your case before the SCOTUS.

Looks like I cornered you with logic... once again.

Quote by Chryses

Perhaps some day you will.

lol

Quote by Chryses

... chuckling ... "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to , shall not be infringed."

Everyone is entitled to his or her fantasies. Enjoy yours.

It doesn't say anywhere that highly trained armed security professionals can not be part of a well regulated militia. In fact I'd say those highly trained armed professionals should be very much regulated indeed. So, the security of the free state is secured.

As for the right of the people to bear arms (the part you left out for some reason)… people are of course free to sign up to become a member of the very well regulated corpse of highly trained armed professionals.
Also, we've seen that the promises made in your constitution have not always been taken seriously before. We've also seen that amendments can be repealed. So I'm positive that, if you really want it, that there's room for you to sort this out eventually, and that schools in the US will be a safe place again (MASA).

Quote by Chryses

You are, of course, entitled to your opinions. The SCOTUS has already ruled on the subject. Feel free to review what you think of their opinion with them.

Ah yeah, SCOTUS. Another example of changing minds over time. So, I'm still positive you'll find a way to make US schools safe again at some point. It's a shame you Americans have so little confidence in yourselves. I'm sure you can do it if you set your mind to it. Good luck! Hopefully you'll live to see that day.

Quote by Chryses

You are, of course, entitled to your opinions. The SCOTUS has already ruled on the subject. Feel free to review what you think of their opinion with them.

This level of discourse from you is so unproductive. It's always "Well there's a ruling on it, take your opinion up with them."

The point of the Think Tank is to hash out opinions on all political and hard-hitting subject matter, including rulings. If all you have to offer is "That's your opinion, take it up with______," then it's best you sit out participating in the Think Tank. This and any other unproductive posts of this nature from you will be removed going forward.

Quote by Chryses

We did hash out opinions on this hard-hitting subject. I thought everyone is free to express their opinion about the merit of the proposed legislation. Are you now saying that only certain opinions are allowed?

I will reiterate this once more, and then there will be no further discussion on the subject.

Any postings along the lines of "That's your opinion, take it up with [insert ruling body here]" will be removed. It is unproductive discourse, as it is a direct attempt to halt or otherwise discourage discourse.

Quote by Chryses

Whatever the solution will be for this problem in America, it will be an American solution.

Also, moving forward, there will be no tolerance for any discourse that is meant to discourage or otherwise exclude non-American opinions on American subject matter.

Being that Lush is available to any nationality, and especially given that American politics/events impact other nations, this type of discourse is ignorant at best and discriminatory and unnecessarily exclusionary at worst.

Quote by Chryses

... chuckling ... What makes you think I have little confidence in myself, and how is your question on-topic?

Not sure what question you're referring to.

You seem to have little confidence that the US can make the right decision to fix the excessive gun violence spiral your country is facing.

Quote by Chryses

If that is true - which it is not - you should be able to provide some evidence to support your claim. I invite you to document your claim.

This, for instance:

Quote by Chryses

... chuckling ... "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Everyone is entitled to his or her fantasies. Enjoy yours.

Quote by Chryses

In what way does that confident statement indicate a lack of self confidence.

Time and time again you suggest that these things are not to be changed.

Gentlemen, it’s time you both take this conversation out of this thread. Please and thank you.

Republicans: "It's not the guns, it's mental health!"

Also Republicans:

Quote by ElCoco

Yes! I'm confident we'll solve that problem. Thanks for the input.

While your commitment to this bit of using passive-aggressive platitudes in place of actual discourse has been, well, something, it’s a blatant attempt to bypass or otherwise halt actual conversation. Therefore it doesn’t belong in the Think Tank. Kindly refrain from doing this going forward.

Please and thank you.

Quote by Ironic

What can be posted about the proposed bill without you threatening the member?

I'm asking because I'm confident the problem of school (or all the) shootings can be solved, but I'm not sure that anyone can disagree with the idea of taking away guns from Americans without being threatened.

Thanks for asking, I’m happy to clarify. I’ll do so by reposting what I have previously:

1. Any discourse that is meant to discourage or otherwise exclude non-American opinions on American subject matter. Being that Lush is available to any nationality, and especially given that American politics/events impact other nations, this type of discourse is ignorant at best and discriminatory and unnecessarily exclusionary at worst.

2. The point of the Think Tank is to hash out opinions on all political and hard-hitting subject matter, including rulings. If all you have to offer is "That's your opinion, take it up with______," then it's best you sit out participating in the Think Tank. This and any other unproductive posts of this nature from you will be removed going forward.

3. Passive-aggressive platitudes in place of actual discourse. It’s a blatant attempt to bypass or otherwise halt actual conversation. Therefore it doesn’t belong in the Think Tank.

4. Obviously, anything that veers too far off topic.

You’re free to discuss any idea or proposed solutions you like, provided your post doesn’t violate any of the aforementioned. I’m fine with the narrative that I delete posts with which I disagree. However, the truth s I don’t remove/edit posts simply because I disagree with them, as evidenced by this very thread and others teeming with beliefs that don’t align with mine. The Think Tank would be a boring place if it was just an echo chamber of my beliefs. Yikes.

Posts that meander or take away from actual discourse, or attempt to halt the discourse of others played a large part in the Think Tank being shut down several months ago, and in turn, me having to delete thousands of threads one by one before bringing back the Think Tank was even considered plausible.

Post whatever you like, but anything that’s unproductive in terms of discourse will be removed.

Quote by Ironic

What can be posted about the proposed bill without you threatening the member?

I'm asking because I'm confident the problem of school (or all the) shootings can be solved, but I'm not sure that anyone can disagree with the idea of taking away guns from Americans without being threatened.

So how do you think the problem of school/mass shootings in the US can be solved then?