5 ms·

Look up how many kids are killed by cars. Then go see how many are killed by guns outside school. Then check how many are killed by guns in school.

by lolc 7y ago

shadowgovt 7y ago
It is an interesting aspect of human psychology that more people are afraid of a mass shooting in a school, though far more students will graduate knowing someone who died in a car crash than someone who died in a mass shooting. ... but it is how human psychology works, so the school must account for it.
- Mirioron 7y ago
  It's essentially the same thing as air travel safety vs cars. What seemed to work for air travel is to make it into trivia so that any time this point comes up somebody repeats back the trivia.
- slothtrop 7y ago
  Well 9/11 is etched in the collective psyche, still talked about, and the toll there wasn't great either. Acts of terror terrify. I don't think it's so much that people worry about the odds, they just categorically do not want to accept regular school shootings as a normal thing. Why should they?
blattimwind 7y ago
Your argument is very, very weak whataboutism. Just because people die of other things more frequently does not mean that you are not supposed to prevent deaths. Your argument suggests that we should not be bothering with a justice system at all, because far more people die of cancer and heart disease than are murdered or crippled, therefore it would be dumb to put any money down for preventing and prosecuting murders.
- lolc 7y ago
  No. If we look at the draconic measures being taken the reaction is way out of line with the problem. If we reacted to the other dangers the same way, society wouldn't function. Schools are turned into high-security institutions, or the appearances of it. Watching kids for fear of them freaking out is not a good signal to send. It means you only care when it's too late.
  - slothtrop 7y ago
    A proper measure isn't about "scale of reaction" it's whether it's effective. These draconian measures are red herrings; I'm not sure they're even meant to prevent anything, because they won't work. They will not prevent school shootings, full stop. It's opportunistic bullshit from legislators.
- shkkmo 7y ago
  Do you have any evidence that clear backpacks have a meaningful impact of deaths in schools from guns? Is that impact sufficient to warrant the culture of fear that is being incolcated into these poor kids? It's not whataboutism, it's cost benefit analysis.
  - blattimwind 7y ago
    > It's not whataboutism, it's cost benefit analysis. GP didn't make that analysis; they merely implied that nothing should be done about school shootings because more kids get run over. That's whataboutism in its purest form: "We should doo something about school shootings!" - "But what about all the kids getting run over???"
slothtrop 7y ago
Far more school shooting deaths than any other developed country by my count. You're choosing to brush it off because it represents a small percentage of the population. That's a ridiculous position, you could hold the same if school shooting fatalities were in the 10,000s instead of 200s; too insignificant. The weight is in whether it's acceptable or it isn't, not how likely your kid is to get shot. It's been worse in the past 20 years than the 20 years prior. You're either a) tacitly saying that the certainty of future school shootings is absolutely fine with you, or b) that it can't be helped, which isn't true. Pick one. We don't have to accept high rates of vehicular deaths either. Automation will make this moot in the end, but far stronger punishment for inebriated driving is due, among other things.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- lolc 7y ago
  > You're choosing to brush it off because it represents a small percentage of the population. That is what you concluded from what I am saying. Why did you conclude that? > you could hold the same if school shooting fatalities were in the 10,000s instead of 200s; too insignificant Oh but look at those magnitudes! > You're either a) tacitly saying that the certainty of future school shootings is absolutely fine with you, or b) that it can't be helped, which isn't true. Pick one. I did not intend to say either of those things. That's your interpretation. But again, why did you think that? My take: A good chunk of the population in the US is sold on alarmism and "something needs to be done". > far stronger punishment for inebriated driving is due Great. Another non-solution giving the appearance that something is being done. Then when that doesn't work you cry for still more to be done. More punishment. More prying. It's a cycle I won't participate in. I'm disgusted by it! Why aren't we discussing the resources these kids had, or didn't have, facing their adulthood? How come they decided the way to feel in control was shooting their peers? They're not the only ones! A lot of kids feel that. Few act it out. Thankfully. Why do they feel that? No matter, let's watch their backpacks for guns.
  - slothtrop 7y ago
MereInterest 7y ago
Cars are designed to transport people from place to place, and cause death as an unfortunate side effect. Guns are designed to propel bullets at high speed, and cause death as the intended primary effect. There can be other conversations about the effectiveness of public transportation, and how the US infrastructure was designed around cars instead of buses/trains, but there is a pretty big difference beyond the number of deaths caused.
- banads 7y ago
  What is your point? Everyone knows cars and guns are designed differently. Seems like you are trying to rationalize irrational terror. Statistics show a student should logically be more wary of dying in a car wreck on the drive to/from school than getting shot at school. Are you suggesting our students should ignore math?
- umvi 7y ago
  At the end of the day, the dead don't really care how they were killed
- sdinsn 7y ago
  The primary function is irrelevant.
root_axis 7y ago
Funnily enough, you need to be trained, licensed, and registered with the government to legally operate a motor vehicle.
- LyndsySimon 7y ago
  On a public road, yes. There’s nothing legally stopping you from buying a car with cash, not registering it at all, and driving it on your own property. I recall driving farm trucks (and tractors, etc.) while hauling hay when I was about ten years old.

Look up how many kids are killed by cars. Then go see how many are killed by guns outside school. Then check how many are killed by guns in school.

by lolc 7y ago

Look up how many kids are killed by cars. Then go see how many are killed by guns outside school. Then check how many are killed by guns in school.

shadowgovt 7y ago

It is an interesting aspect of human psychology that more people are afraid of a mass shooting in a school, though far more students will graduate knowing someone who died in a car crash than someone who died in a mass shooting. ... but it is how human psychology works, so the school must account for it.

Mirioron 7y ago
It's essentially the same thing as air travel safety vs cars. What seemed to work for air travel is to make it into trivia so that any time this point comes up somebody repeats back the trivia.
slothtrop 7y ago
Well 9/11 is etched in the collective psyche, still talked about, and the toll there wasn't great either. Acts of terror terrify. I don't think it's so much that people worry about the odds, they just categorically do not want to accept regular school shootings as a normal thing. Why should they?

blattimwind 7y ago

Your argument is very, very weak whataboutism. Just because people die of other things more frequently does not mean that you are not supposed to prevent deaths. Your argument suggests that we should not be bothering with a justice system at all, because far more people die of cancer and heart disease than are murdered or crippled, therefore it would be dumb to put any money down for preventing and prosecuting murders.

lolc 7y ago
No. If we look at the draconic measures being taken the reaction is way out of line with the problem. If we reacted to the other dangers the same way, society wouldn't function. Schools are turned into high-security institutions, or the appearances of it. Watching kids for fear of them freaking out is not a good signal to send. It means you only care when it's too late.
- slothtrop 7y ago
  A proper measure isn't about "scale of reaction" it's whether it's effective. These draconian measures are red herrings; I'm not sure they're even meant to prevent anything, because they won't work. They will not prevent school shootings, full stop. It's opportunistic bullshit from legislators.
shkkmo 7y ago
Do you have any evidence that clear backpacks have a meaningful impact of deaths in schools from guns? Is that impact sufficient to warrant the culture of fear that is being incolcated into these poor kids? It's not whataboutism, it's cost benefit analysis.
- blattimwind 7y ago
  > It's not whataboutism, it's cost benefit analysis. GP didn't make that analysis; they merely implied that nothing should be done about school shootings because more kids get run over. That's whataboutism in its purest form: "We should doo something about school shootings!" - "But what about all the kids getting run over???"

slothtrop 7y ago

Far more school shooting deaths than any other developed country by my count. You're choosing to brush it off because it represents a small percentage of the population. That's a ridiculous position, you could hold the same if school shooting fatalities were in the 10,000s instead of 200s; too insignificant. The weight is in whether it's acceptable or it isn't, not how likely your kid is to get shot. It's been worse in the past 20 years than the 20 years prior. You're either a) tacitly saying that the certainty of future school shootings is absolutely fine with you, or b) that it can't be helped, which isn't true. Pick one. We don't have to accept high rates of vehicular deaths either. Automation will make this moot in the end, but far stronger punishment for inebriated driving is due, among other things.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
lolc 7y ago
> You're choosing to brush it off because it represents a small percentage of the population. That is what you concluded from what I am saying. Why did you conclude that? > you could hold the same if school shooting fatalities were in the 10,000s instead of 200s; too insignificant Oh but look at those magnitudes! > You're either a) tacitly saying that the certainty of future school shootings is absolutely fine with you, or b) that it can't be helped, which isn't true. Pick one. I did not intend to say either of those things. That's your interpretation. But again, why did you think that? My take: A good chunk of the population in the US is sold on alarmism and "something needs to be done". > far stronger punishment for inebriated driving is due Great. Another non-solution giving the appearance that something is being done. Then when that doesn't work you cry for still more to be done. More punishment. More prying. It's a cycle I won't participate in. I'm disgusted by it! Why aren't we discussing the resources these kids had, or didn't have, facing their adulthood? How come they decided the way to feel in control was shooting their peers? They're not the only ones! A lot of kids feel that. Few act it out. Thankfully. Why do they feel that? No matter, let's watch their backpacks for guns.
- slothtrop 7y ago

MereInterest 7y ago

Cars are designed to transport people from place to place, and cause death as an unfortunate side effect. Guns are designed to propel bullets at high speed, and cause death as the intended primary effect. There can be other conversations about the effectiveness of public transportation, and how the US infrastructure was designed around cars instead of buses/trains, but there is a pretty big difference beyond the number of deaths caused.

banads 7y ago
What is your point? Everyone knows cars and guns are designed differently. Seems like you are trying to rationalize irrational terror. Statistics show a student should logically be more wary of dying in a car wreck on the drive to/from school than getting shot at school. Are you suggesting our students should ignore math?
umvi 7y ago
At the end of the day, the dead don't really care how they were killed
sdinsn 7y ago
The primary function is irrelevant.

root_axis 7y ago

Funnily enough, you need to be trained, licensed, and registered with the government to legally operate a motor vehicle.

LyndsySimon 7y ago
On a public road, yes. There’s nothing legally stopping you from buying a car with cash, not registering it at all, and driving it on your own property. I recall driving farm trucks (and tractors, etc.) while hauling hay when I was about ten years old.