Elementary school shooting

[bigrebnc1775]

Let us not forget, the Columbine shooters bought guns from friends, privately. Friends who are now doing hard time because the shooters weren't around to hang.

What a stupid Statist thing to say. Friends know friends there isn't any Cleetus seems like a good guy. If I buy a firearm from a friend they know me they already know my background better than any police record check will ever show. There is not need for government getting involved in things that is not it's business.
Let us not forget those guns were taken from the homes of the fathers I don't think those kids bought those firearms.

VPC - Where'd They Get Their Guns? - Columbine High School, Littleton, Colorado

Robyn Anderson, a friend of Klebold and Harris, bought the shotguns and the Hi-Point 9mm Carbine at The Tanner Gun Show in December of 1998 from unlicensed sellers. Because Anderson purchased the guns for someone else, the transition constituted an illegal "straw purchase." Klebold and Harris bought the TEC-DC9 from a pizza shop employee named Mark Manes, who knew they were too young to purchase the assault pistol, but nevertheless sold it to them for $500.

Sorry, man, they got them from third parties...

You don't think I can read?

the transition constituted an illegal "straw purchase."

 

[JoeB131]

What a stupid Statist thing to say. Friends know friends there isn't any Cleetus seems like a good guy. If I buy a firearm from a friend they know me they already know my background better than any police record check will ever show. There is not need for government getting involved in things that is not it's business.
Let us not forget those guns were taken from the homes of the fathers I don't think those kids bought those firearms.

VPC - Where'd They Get Their Guns? - Columbine High School, Littleton, Colorado

Robyn Anderson, a friend of Klebold and Harris, bought the shotguns and the Hi-Point 9mm Carbine at The Tanner Gun Show in December of 1998 from unlicensed sellers. Because Anderson purchased the guns for someone else, the transition constituted an illegal "straw purchase." Klebold and Harris bought the TEC-DC9 from a pizza shop employee named Mark Manes, who knew they were too young to purchase the assault pistol, but nevertheless sold it to them for $500.

Sorry, man, they got them from third parties...

You don't think I can read?

the transition constituted an illegal "straw purchase."

You claimed the Columbine shooters took their guns from their parents, not that they got them from third buyers who shouldn't have sold them.

And that's the point. 40% of gun purchases happen without a background check.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

VPC - Where'd They Get Their Guns? - Columbine High School, Littleton, Colorado



Sorry, man, they got them from third parties...

You don't think I can read?

the transition constituted an illegal "straw purchase."

You claimed the Columbine shooters took their guns from their parents, not that they got them from third buyers who shouldn't have sold them.

And that's the point. 40% of gun purchases happen without a background check.

Dumb ass the firearms were bought legally there was a back ground check, and you're trying to say 1 purchase and transfer is 40%. out of millions of gun sales in the U.S STOP BEING SO ******* STUPID.
You claimed they bought them, we were both wrong.

 

[Katzndogz]

Merry Christmas, gun yanker psychos. My children are enjoying the pellet gun I got my 9 y.o. son. We've been shooting the shit out of stuff. It's a hoot.

Too bad there are 20 families in CT that aren't enjoying Christmas with their families this year.

That is because we refuse to control the mentally ill. Those kids may as well be bound hand and foot to be thrown into a pit of hungry tigers. They join others who also been sacrificed on the altar of political correctness.

 

[boedicca]

Public schools already destroy the intellect of children, so why should they be concerned with their bodies.

 

[Luissa]

After reading this thread and reading the news.. I can tell you this, I don't want my son's teachers having guns, I don't want a guard outside his school etc.
My son is not a prisoner, I don't want him going to school in prison. And I find it interesting that small government right wingers are the majority of the ones who want teachers armed and or armed guards at school.

 

[Luissa]

Public schools already destroy the intellect of children, so why should they be concerned with their bodies.

Spoken like a true right wing loon.

 

[koshergrl]

After reading this thread and reading the news.. I can tell you this, I don't want my son's teachers having guns, I don't want a guard outside his school etc.
My son is not a prisoner, I don't want him going to school in prison. And I find it interesting that small government right wingers are the majority of the ones who want teachers armed and or armed guards at school.

So you are saying that you don't want your child protected if an armed gunman comes to his school.

Tell you what..why don't you just hang a sign on him that says "You can shoot me first. My mom has told my teachers not to protect me. I am expendable." That way, the killers can get tired shooting the children whose parents don't care about their safety, and the parents who do want their kids to survive will have a chance to lock and load, and kill the guy before he gets to their kids.

 

[koshergrl]

I honestly think parents just don't care if their kids die. They are willing to make a stand against gun ownership and child protection, behind the bodies of their kids.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

After reading this thread and reading the news.. I can tell you this, I don't want my son's teachers having guns, I don't want a guard outside his school etc.
My son is not a prisoner, I don't want him going to school in prison. And I find it interesting that small government right wingers are the majority of the ones who want teachers armed and or armed guards at school.

You prefer dead teachers and kids to dean bad men with guns. Interesting.

 

[JimBowie1958]

You don't think I can read?

the transition constituted an illegal "straw purchase."

You claimed the Columbine shooters took their guns from their parents, not that they got them from third buyers who shouldn't have sold them.

And that's the point. 40% of gun purchases happen without a background check.

Dumb ass the firearms were bought legally there was a back ground check, and you're trying to say 1 purchase and transfer is 40%. out of millions of gun sales in the U.S STOP BEING SO ******* STUPID.

You say that like he has a choice; he doesnt, genetics short changed the poor boy.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I honestly think parents just don't care if their kids die. They are willing to make a stand against gun ownership and child protection, behind the bodies of their kids.

Well, libtard parents, sure, but that is an increasingly more rare item as time goes on.

 

[Aristotle]

After reading this thread and reading the news.. I can tell you this, I don't want my son's teachers having guns, I don't want a guard outside his school etc.
My son is not a prisoner, I don't want him going to school in prison. And I find it interesting that small government right wingers are the majority of the ones who want teachers armed and or armed guards at school.

So you are saying that you don't want your child protected if an armed gunman comes to his school.

Tell you what..why don't you just hang a sign on him that says "You can shoot me first. My mom has told my teachers not to protect me. I am expendable." That way, the killers can get tired shooting the children whose parents don't care about their safety, and the parents who do want their kids to survive will have a chance to lock and load, and kill the guy before he gets to their kids.

This is the most silly way of thinking and in fact its downright stupid.....(No offense)

For one, as we've discussed a million times over there is no guarantee that arming teachers will protect nor prevent the killings of students. since the creation of this thread I've asked those of you since you have the belief that teachers ought to be armed I challenged you to solve the budgeting issue states have to fund such an initiative. None of you could challenge me on this issue therefore you failed.

I then switched my position to asking the question of who should be armed (college professors, kindergarten teachers, pre-school teachers, elementary teachers etc) nobody could articulate a cohesive response, as all I received was "your stupid" response....another fail.

Then I offered a scenario (since you gun phonbes failed to answer my questions) regarding a situatuion in which a professor whose back is turned in a lecture hall of +110 students and asked you guys how can a college professor be prepared for a school attacker with an assault rifle when a professor who maybe armed has their back turned? All I asked is in this situation how can a professor be an effective protector if their back is turned? Nobody on the gun-phobe side could even address this...another fail.....

So I say this koshergrl you guy arguing these points do not have a leg to stand on. So far in this thread if I'm either breaking down your argument with real-life scenarios or you guys just simply resort to personal attacks and insults. In all honesty not one person has demonstrated an effective scenario or argument to show their position. All you guys are doing is saying:

"If you don't want to arm teachers you might as well put a sign on your kid saying that 'I'm a target' blah blah blah."

Yet you cannot even display an effective argument as to how, despite police presence already at schools, arming a teacher would be any different than having an unarmed teacher especially in light of unpredictable scenarios.

I await your failed response.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Public schools already destroy the intellect of children, so why should they be concerned with their bodies.

Spoken like a true right wing loon.

Lol, you dont know Boedicca, apparently, but I can promise you she is no *rightwing* loon.

Congrats, Boedicca, with the right thinking you're left, and the left thinking you're right, sounds like you are getting closer to the truth of things, but I might be presumptive.

 

[JimBowie1958]

*sigh* more bullshit from this condescending ass hole, sheesh.

After reading this thread and reading the news.. I can tell you this, I don't want my son's teachers having guns, I don't want a guard outside his school etc.
My son is not a prisoner, I don't want him going to school in prison. And I find it interesting that small government right wingers are the majority of the ones who want teachers armed and or armed guards at school.

So you are saying that you don't want your child protected if an armed gunman comes to his school.

Tell you what..why don't you just hang a sign on him that says "You can shoot me first. My mom has told my teachers not to protect me. I am expendable." That way, the killers can get tired shooting the children whose parents don't care about their safety, and the parents who do want their kids to survive will have a chance to lock and load, and kill the guy before he gets to their kids.

This is the most silly way of thinking and in fact its downright stupid.....(No offense)

For one, as we've discussed a million times over there is no guarantee that arming teachers will protect nor prevent the killings of students.

Nothing in life is GURRANTEED, but arming teachers does have the best track record of being EFFECTIVE at stopping these kinds of masscres, dumbass.

since the creation of this thread I've asked those of you since you have the belief that teachers ought to be armed I challenged you to solve the budgeting issue states have to fund such an initiative. None of you could challenge me on this issue therefore you failed.

Nobody 'failed' anything, other than your failure to think. Shit, in two seconds I thought of 1. letting parents VOLUNTEER to guard their local schools after being trained and vetted. 2. Allowing volunteer concealed carry permit holders that teach to voluntarily carry at school. 3. Allow local folks to donate whatever resources are needed. 4. The rest of the country could use cerebrums from cadavers to put into the skulls of liberal nincompoops like you so that maybe you could catch a brain cell or two.

I then switched my position to asking the question of who should be armed (college professors, kindergarten teachers, pre-school teachers, elementary teachers etc) nobody could articulate a cohesive response, as all I received was "your stupid" response....another fail.

'Cohesive response' being a libtard way of saying 'you agree with me'.

lol, you are so full of shyte.

Then I offered a scenario (since you gun phonbes failed to answer my questions) regarding a situatuion in which a professor whose back is turned in a lecture hall of +110 students and asked you guys how can a college professor be prepared for a school attacker with an assault rifle when a professor who maybe armed has their back turned? All I asked is in this situation how can a professor be an effective protector if their back is turned? Nobody on the gun-phobe side could even address this...another fail.....

Not ALL proffessors would ahve their backs turned, Nimrod. Aside from the fact that the perp would not know who was armed and who wasnt in the first place.

So I say this koshergrl you guy arguing these points do not have a leg to stand on. So far in this thread if I'm either breaking down your argument with real-life scenarios or you guys just simply resort to personal attacks and insults. In all honesty not one person has demonstrated an effective scenario or argument to show their position.

Just because you refuse to think about what people are telling you does not mean that the argumetns presented are ineffective, dumbass.

All you guys are doing is saying:

"If you don't want to arm teachers you might as well put a sign on your kid saying that 'I'm a target' blah blah blah."

Funny, I dont see anyone saying blah, blah, blah, stupid.

Yet you cannot even display an effective argument as to how despite police presence already at schools, how arming a teacher would be any different than having an unarmed teacher especially in light of unpredictable scenarios.

Lol, you cant see how that principle being armed and trained might have had a beter result than to throw her soon to be dead body at that punk?

You are ******* stupid for sher.

I await your failed response.

OK, here you go....

 

[JimBowie1958]

After reading this thread and reading the news.. I can tell you this, I don't want my son's teachers having guns, I don't want a guard outside his school etc.
My son is not a prisoner, I don't want him going to school in prison.

You apparently dont know what a prison is.

Is a bank a prison if it has armed guards?

Does the 11 guards that hover around the POTUS kid make her a prisoner?

Is the POTUS a prisoner of the Secret Service?

IS that fat ass Barr a prisoner of her armed guards she pays for herself?

Just say it like it is; you would rather your kids be murdered than to have any effective protection if itmeans you have to tell you libtard friends that you want guns to remain legal options for school protection.

 

[Aristotle]

Jim this is my last response to you.....You are presenting yourself to be an uneducated loon, incapable of debating without the use of insults...So here is my final reductio ad absurdum in response to you.

JimBowie1958 said

"Nothing in life is GURRANTEED, but arming teachers does have the best track record of being EFFECTIVE at stopping these kinds of masscres, dumbass."

My response:

Yes in life there are no guarantees (except death and taxes) but Jim, care to show any statistics in the United States (not other countries) where the above statement is true? Better yet, nevermind because there are no present data showing the success rate of armed teachers in the United States! Time.com states:

"One of the reasons why there are so few homicides at school is because these places are largely successful at keeping guns off the premises. Adult supervision and, in very high-risk schools, metal detectors have proven to be effective deterrents. While there are no specific data regarding having armed adults in schools, an analysis of U.S. mortality data found that people with guns in the home are at greater risk than those without guns in the home of dying from a homicide there. There is no reason to think schools would be any different: the more guns there are, the more opportunities there are to use them." See:School Shootings: Arming Teachers Isn't the Answer | TIME.com

"The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report that each day, an average of 13 people between the ages of 10 and 24 are victims of homicide in the U.S., making homicide the third leading cause of death among youth and young adults; it is the leading cause of death among African American youth. Yet very little of this violence occurs on school grounds. Children spend more than a third of their waking hours on campus, but less than 2% of youth homicides occur at school."

See reference: School Shootings: Arming Teachers Isn't the Answer | TIME.com

JimBowie1958 said

"Nobody 'failed' anything, other than your failure to think. Shit, in two seconds I thought of 1. letting parents VOLUNTEER to guard their local schools after being trained and vetted. 2. Allowing volunteer concealed carry permit holders that teach to voluntarily carry at school. 3. Allow local folks to donate whatever resources are needed. 4. The rest of the country could use cerebrums from cadavers to put into the skulls of liberal nincompoops like you so that maybe you could catch a brain cell or two."

My response

I believe you mentioned retired military "vets" right? Ok. I also stated some pages ago that at what recompense does someone who volunteers their life and time? When you volunteer your life, especially at the expense of others like a school or a famous celebrity, there is a piece of paper that we working adults sign called a "contract." No school whether big or small is willing to risk someone who volunteers to protect their kids in getting killed and having some sort of financial or social backlash, the risk is too great. Even ex-navy SEALS who work privately for some contractors I'm sure sign sort of contract which says "if you get killed in the line of duty we are not responsible" but hey, these guys are not volunteering, they are getting paid pretty well. So I would assume some decorated Marine who is badass is not going to risk their life for a bunch of kids with no form of compensation, and if there is some form of compensation, then it is not volunteering. As for point #2 in your post, um, they have classes for that when you get your concealed/exposed firearms permit anyway, so its a useless endeavor.

JimBowie1958 said

'Cohesive response' being a libtard way of saying 'you agree with me'.

lol, you are so full of shyte.

My Response

My point exactly. You cannot say anything sensible enough to debate my accusations so alas you prove me right by resorting to name calling.

JimBowie1958

"Not ALL proffessors would ahve their backs turned, Nimrod. Aside from the fact that the perp would not know who was armed and who wasnt in the first place."

My Response

It doesn't matter. There is a term called "reconnaissance." Sure your average mentally disabled person may just berserk the entire area without regards to who is and is not armed. But anyone can blend in a college classroom. All you need is a backpack and a look as if you belong at the university. You can definitely case the area to see how many people are in the classroom, and the position of the professor. Even if the professors back isn't turned, you can in many cases in classrooms, position yourself behind everyone else to conceal your weapon. If I really wanted to do damage and maximize my potential to escape I'd definitely position myself where I can complete my objective and increase my potential for escape. As I said before, the only people that do not think along these lines are those with a mental deficiency or those who truly just care about maximizing as much damage without concern of their escape. A good example of this is the "Batman movie theater shooter."

JimBowie1958 said

"Just because you refuse to think about what people are telling you does not mean that the argumetns presented are ineffective, dumbass."

My Response

Some more insults. Well, I've listened to your position, koshergrl's and others and there was not enough evidence that you all have demonstrated the validity of both your claims.

JimBowie1958 said

"Funny, I dont see anyone saying blah, blah, blah, stupid."

My Response

You're right. I added that, because since none of you actually had well thought out responses, your subsequent points surmised what you think to be is true, which turned my brain off hence, the blah blah blah effect.

JimBowie1958 said

Lol, you cant see how that principle being armed and trained might have had a beter result than to throw her soon to be dead body at that punk?

You are ******* stupid for sher.

My Response

Before you call someone stupid, make sure your spelling is in order. I do not see why its so hard to spell "sure" and "better but I digress. Let me ask you something. Do you realize that in public schools there is 1 Principle and 1 Assistant Principle? Maybe times have changed but that is 1 person that is armed in a school of possibly 100 kids. Yes that would be an effective strategy for 1 person to protect over 100 kids. Good job at that response Jim.

JimBowie1958 said

"OK, here you go...."


Yes Jim, very tasteful. Jim, you are still a failure at debates. If I were you, before you respond in a debate especially with insults, I suggest you learn how to critically think your positions before you respond with emotion, vigor, and anger. Your attempts at refuting several of my previous and recent comments have failed. Since you're no fun in this debate I'll ignore you from here on out....Now that I've added you to the douchebag roledex, I can actually debate with someone who actually has a rational opinion.

 

[koshergrl]

After reading this thread and reading the news.. I can tell you this, I don't want my son's teachers having guns, I don't want a guard outside his school etc.
My son is not a prisoner, I don't want him going to school in prison. And I find it interesting that small government right wingers are the majority of the ones who want teachers armed and or armed guards at school.

So you are saying that you don't want your child protected if an armed gunman comes to his school.

Tell you what..why don't you just hang a sign on him that says "You can shoot me first. My mom has told my teachers not to protect me. I am expendable." That way, the killers can get tired shooting the children whose parents don't care about their safety, and the parents who do want their kids to survive will have a chance to lock and load, and kill the guy before he gets to their kids.

This is the most silly way of thinking and in fact its downright stupid.....(No offense)

For one, as we've discussed a million times over there is no guarantee that arming teachers will protect nor prevent the killings of students. since the creation of this thread I've asked those of you since you have the belief that teachers ought to be armed I challenged you to solve the budgeting issue states have to fund such an initiative. None of you could challenge me on this issue therefore you failed.

I then switched my position to asking the question of who should be armed (college professors, kindergarten teachers, pre-school teachers, elementary teachers etc) nobody could articulate a cohesive response, as all I received was "your stupid" response....another fail.

Then I offered a scenario (since you gun phonbes failed to answer my questions) regarding a situatuion in which a professor whose back is turned in a lecture hall of +110 students and asked you guys how can a college professor be prepared for a school attacker with an assault rifle when a professor who maybe armed has their back turned? All I asked is in this situation how can a professor be an effective protector if their back is turned? Nobody on the gun-phobe side could even address this...another fail.....

So I say this koshergrl you guy arguing these points do not have a leg to stand on. So far in this thread if I'm either breaking down your argument with real-life scenarios or you guys just simply resort to personal attacks and insults. In all honesty not one person has demonstrated an effective scenario or argument to show their position. All you guys are doing is saying:

"If you don't want to arm teachers you might as well put a sign on your kid saying that 'I'm a target' blah blah blah."

Yet you cannot even display an effective argument as to how, despite police presence already at schools, arming a teacher would be any different than having an unarmed teacher especially in light of unpredictable scenarios.

I await your failed response.

Mass killers target groups that they know have no protection. This is why they choose people, often children and other students, in "gun-free" zones.

Despite this proven fact, you insist that children remain unprotected. It shows a callous disregard for the lives of children, and in fact an outright desire that they continue to be targeted and killed.

Nothing new there.

 

[jtpr312]

After reading this thread and reading the news.. I can tell you this, I don't want my son's teachers having guns, I don't want a guard outside his school etc.
My son is not a prisoner, I don't want him going to school in prison. And I find it interesting that small government right wingers are the majority of the ones who want teachers armed and or armed guards at school.

So you are saying that you don't want your child protected if an armed gunman comes to his school.

Tell you what..why don't you just hang a sign on him that says "You can shoot me first. My mom has told my teachers not to protect me. I am expendable." That way, the killers can get tired shooting the children whose parents don't care about their safety, and the parents who do want their kids to survive will have a chance to lock and load, and kill the guy before he gets to their kids.

This is the most silly way of thinking and in fact its downright stupid.....(No offense)

For one, as we've discussed a million times over there is no guarantee that arming teachers will protect nor prevent the killings of students. since the creation of this thread I've asked those of you since you have the belief that teachers ought to be armed I challenged you to solve the budgeting issue states have to fund such an initiative. None of you could challenge me on this issue therefore you failed. Actaully I did answer your post about budgeting for the police. It would cost approx 5 billion a year to put a Police Officer, not a guard, a sworn Law Enfocement Officer in EVERY school in the nation. We currently spend ten times that on the "War on Drugs". The war on drugs is over, the good guys lost, take some of that money and use it for something important, like providing proetction for our kids, you know, what the Police are sworn to do, Protect and Serve. We currently send untold billions overseas every year in "Financial aid", much of it to nations that hate our guts and want to see us destroyed, use some of that. We have untold billions a year spent on politician's vote buying pork projects, use some money that we currently use today to proteect mice in a swamp in SF, or making tunnels for turtles, or bridges to nowhere and airports that service no one and the 1001 other things our Dear Leaders have wasted money on to purchase their constituents votes and use it to protect our children.

I then switched my position to asking the question of who should be armed (college professors, kindergarten teachers, pre-school teachers, elementary teachers etc) nobody could articulate a cohesive response, as all I received was "your stupid" response....another fail. Simple answer. ANY law abiding citizen that can take and pass a gun saftey course. As we have seen over and over and over again, criminals and psychos have no respect for the "Gun Free" zone signs we put around school, lol, like the dumbasses that lead us ever thought they would.


Then I offered a scenario (since you gun phonbes failed to answer my questions) regarding a situatuion in which a professor whose back is turned in a lecture hall of +110 students and asked you guys how can a college professor be prepared for a school attacker with an assault rifle when a professor who maybe armed has their back turned? All I asked is in this situation how can a professor be an effective protector if their back is turned? Nobody on the gun-phobe side could even address this...another fail.....Stupid freaking scenerio so I'll give you the dumbass answer, that professor dies, some students may die, the teacher's in the other rooms who are armed can respond and maybe keep the gunman from shooting 10, 15, 20 or more while they wair for the police to arrive.

So I say this koshergrl you guy arguing these points do not have a leg to stand on. So far in this thread if I'm either breaking down your argument with real-life scenarios or you guys just simply resort to personal attacks and insults. In all honesty not one person has demonstrated an effective scenario or argument to show their position. All you guys are doing is saying: "If you don't want to arm teachers you might as well put a sign on your kid saying that 'I'm a target' blah blah blah."

Yet you cannot even display an effective argument as to how, despite police presence already at schools, arming a teacher would be any different than having an unarmed teacher especially in light of unpredictable scenarios. so far the nonsense I've seen you post in this thread, like this post for example, has down nothing to break down anyone's argument and has only shown us that morons and liberals, usually one and the same, love to bloviate on topics they're clueless about. Here's a little "Real life scenerio" for you simple, IF the Pincipal and Counselor at Newtwon where armed with a concealed weapon rather than their pencils they very well may have been able to stop Lanza from killing twenty+ people, they certainly would have slowed him down enough for other teachers to arm themselves and answer their doors with a pistol in thier hands rather than with their hands help up in supplication only to be shot like a helpless rabbit in a trap.

I await your failed response. This is the worst thing about this whole situation. Dumbasses like you in the political arena are making decisions regarding my rights on insane bs like you're spewing here. You have not given ONE valid reason why the law abiding citizen should have their rights restricted due to the criminal behavior of OTHERS, nor have you given us one shred of evidence that banning certain weapons or magazines would in any way make our schools or kids safer. You have done nothing but provide us with tons of evidece that you are totally unqualified to offer an intelligent opinion on this topic because you lack knowldge on the topic.

.

 

[Luissa]

After reading this thread and reading the news.. I can tell you this, I don't want my son's teachers having guns, I don't want a guard outside his school etc.
My son is not a prisoner, I don't want him going to school in prison. And I find it interesting that small government right wingers are the majority of the ones who want teachers armed and or armed guards at school.

So you are saying that you don't want your child protected if an armed gunman comes to his school.

Tell you what..why don't you just hang a sign on him that says "You can shoot me first. My mom has told my teachers not to protect me. I am expendable." That way, the killers can get tired shooting the children whose parents don't care about their safety, and the parents who do want their kids to survive will have a chance to lock and load, and kill the guy before he gets to their kids.

My son has a better chance of dying in a car wreck should I not drive him in a car?

I will also tell you this, other than the military people here I am probably one of the only posters here who has seen bullet fragments pulled out of their family member's face. My parents did everything to protect us, we lived in a good neighborhood, went to a good school, my mom even had a gun even though my dad is not into guns and my brother was still shot randomly.
It has nothing to do with not wanting to protect my son. It is smart enough to know that even though these incidents are horrible they don't happen every day, and that my son is better off going to school without an armed guard. He has a very very very small chance of being killed at school in this way. Right now he loves school, he is not scared to go to school. But as soon as you put an armed guard there he and others will start asking questions, and then become scared.
The bigger problem today, is children losing their innocence, not the slight chance they might shot at school. Plus if you treat a school like a prison, and treat everyone who enters like a criminal, they are going to start thinking they are a criminal.
To add to that, my brother who was shot is a republican, my other brothers are also republican and none of them own gun except the one who lives on a ranch. The brother who was shot did talk a lot about owning a gun once, he lived with a lot of fear but he still doesn't own a gun.
I have no problem with people owning guns, but I don't want my son going to school afraid. I don't want to give up that kind of freedom.