4 ms·

I agree, but I also think a more controversial step is needed: eliminate gun free zones. If the expected outcome of an attempted mass shooting is a quick and i

I agree, but I also think a more controversial step is needed: eliminate gun free zones. If the expected outcome of an attempted mass shooting is a quick and ignominious death it will be a major deterrent. Teachers and administrators have been voluntarily carrying concealed firearms in Utah for roughly a decade.

coinbasetwwa 4y ago
This is the solution people should get behind. You can’t wave a magic wand and make 320 million guns disappear, the alternative is much simpler.
- mahastore 4y ago
mahastore 4y ago
- lliamander 4y ago
  > It will not deter the person who is hell bent on killing others and have no regards for life including his own self. It absolutely will. The vast majority of mass shooters target gun free zones, for obvious reasons. Just because they expect to die eventually doesn't mean they want to die right away. They want to be famous and feel powerful by killing as many people as possible. That is denied them if they are killed or wounded straight away. > The best thing is to stop EASY PEASY access to guns that shoot more than one round at a time. The only guns licensed folks should be able to carry are ones that shoot one round and need to be reloaded again manually. Other guns should be simply banned for the GENERAL public. - There is virtually zero chance of this happening - There is zero evidence that policies which constrain the ammo capacities of guns used by law-abiding citizens has any effect on homicide rates - Enacting such a policy would make guns significantly less effective for self-defense. > This solution that has been proposed for years i.e for teachers and volunteers to carry concealed firearms is THE M0ST stupid solution that humanity has ever come up with. If you could demonstrate some actual knowledge of the subject at hand, your opinion of whether some policy is "stupid" might actually matter to me. There are gun control advocates in this discussion who have demonstrated some knowledge of this issue, and I respect their opinions more for it. > It seems that some sections of our humanity aspire to live in a world where your right to LIVE depends upon how quick you are with your reflexes or how BIG of a gun you have. It's really quite comical what you think is going on in the heads of other people.
  - mahastore 4y ago
    - lliamander 4y ago
      I have given plenty of reasons for why that is a good idea. To another commentor I even cited a firearms and use-of-force expert to explain why this is a good idea. You have done nothing to respond to those arguments but sling insults. If you continue to insult rather than argue then expect to get flagged.
      - mahastore 4y ago
mahastore 4y ago
spicymaki 4y ago
You are making bad assumptions here: Imagine the chaos of multiple people with guns trying to take down an assailant with the police involved. Who are the good guys here? Friendly fire happens with cops accidentally shooting hostage victims occasionally and they are well trained. Do civilians really know how to deal with hostage scenarios? Do teachers want to carry firearms to protect elementary school students? Are the school districts going to pay for training and armament? What if a teacher attacks the children in their class? What if a student carries a weapon to the school and creates a hostage situation? (You eliminated a gun free zone). Assailants can be better armed than teachers and they can wear armor, which teachers/security personnel will not be equipped with. (See Buffalo massacre) These are just off the top of my head. I would like to hear a security analyst take on it.
- lliamander 4y ago
  Here's one qualified person's explaination: https://monsterhunternation.com/2015/06/23/an-opinion-on-gun-control-repost/ https://monsterhunternation.com/2015/06/23/an-opinion-on-gun... Edit: and let me just respond to one thing > You are making bad assumptions here I'm not just making assumptions. This is the conclusion I come to from reading firearms experts like the one I just linked, sociological analysis of gun ownership, use of force law, etc. I'm not saying a chaotic situation like that couldn't happen, but that can be prepared for, and the result would still be a significant net positive.
  - subsection1h 4y ago
    > This is the conclusion I come to from reading firearms experts To what extent have you studied criminology? How many relevant research papers have you read that have been published in the journals of the American Society of Criminology, which is the largest criminological organization in the US?
    - lliamander 4y ago
      I'm not saying I have a PHD in the subject, but reading some of the works from the likes of John Lott and Gary Kleck. Why do you ask?
simon1ltd 4y ago
I looked up something quickly, to see if it was still true. In the UK, where you're not allowed to use firearms to defend yourself, home invasions where someone is home is 64%. In the US, where it is permissible, home invasions where someone is home is 27.6%. You're over twice as likely to be robbed while you're home in the UK as you are in the US. I'm sure the factors are complex, but knowing that you're actually risking your life when you break into a home in the US has to be one of the factors. https://www.nimblefins.co.uk/home-insurance/burglary-statistics https://www.nimblefins.co.uk/home-insurance/burglary-statist... https://www.thezebra.com/resources/research/burglary-statistics/#:~:text=Frequent%20home%20invasions%20happen%20between,is%20home%20during%20a%20burglary https://www.thezebra.com/resources/research/burglary-statist....
renaudg 4y ago
Uvalde police let the shooter do its thing for an hour because they feared being outgunned by his AR-15. Tell us again how giving a firearm to Betty the school lunch lady will help in any way ?
- lliamander 4y ago
  An AR-15 is not a shield of invulnerability. A CCW holder with a handgun and the element of surprise can get the drop on someone with an AR-15.[1] I know Betty the lunch lady is supposed to be a strawman of sorts, but women are actually pretty good shots. It's amazing how quickly criminals, even when they are armed and outnumber you, will fold once you present armed resistance[2]. [1] https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/police-man-shot-colorado-gunman-killed-officer-78500318 https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/police-man-shot-colorado... [2] https://sandrarose.com/2016/09/georgia-woman-shoots-three-home-invaders-killing-1/ https://sandrarose.com/2016/09/georgia-woman-shoots-three-ho...

coinbasetwwa 4y ago

This is the solution people should get behind. You can’t wave a magic wand and make 320 million guns disappear, the alternative is much simpler.

mahastore 4y ago

mahastore 4y ago

lliamander 4y ago
> It will not deter the person who is hell bent on killing others and have no regards for life including his own self. It absolutely will. The vast majority of mass shooters target gun free zones, for obvious reasons. Just because they expect to die eventually doesn't mean they want to die right away. They want to be famous and feel powerful by killing as many people as possible. That is denied them if they are killed or wounded straight away. > The best thing is to stop EASY PEASY access to guns that shoot more than one round at a time. The only guns licensed folks should be able to carry are ones that shoot one round and need to be reloaded again manually. Other guns should be simply banned for the GENERAL public. - There is virtually zero chance of this happening - There is zero evidence that policies which constrain the ammo capacities of guns used by law-abiding citizens has any effect on homicide rates - Enacting such a policy would make guns significantly less effective for self-defense. > This solution that has been proposed for years i.e for teachers and volunteers to carry concealed firearms is THE M0ST stupid solution that humanity has ever come up with. If you could demonstrate some actual knowledge of the subject at hand, your opinion of whether some policy is "stupid" might actually matter to me. There are gun control advocates in this discussion who have demonstrated some knowledge of this issue, and I respect their opinions more for it. > It seems that some sections of our humanity aspire to live in a world where your right to LIVE depends upon how quick you are with your reflexes or how BIG of a gun you have. It's really quite comical what you think is going on in the heads of other people.
- mahastore 4y ago
  - lliamander 4y ago
    I have given plenty of reasons for why that is a good idea. To another commentor I even cited a firearms and use-of-force expert to explain why this is a good idea. You have done nothing to respond to those arguments but sling insults. If you continue to insult rather than argue then expect to get flagged.
    - mahastore 4y ago

mahastore 4y ago

spicymaki 4y ago

You are making bad assumptions here: Imagine the chaos of multiple people with guns trying to take down an assailant with the police involved. Who are the good guys here? Friendly fire happens with cops accidentally shooting hostage victims occasionally and they are well trained. Do civilians really know how to deal with hostage scenarios? Do teachers want to carry firearms to protect elementary school students? Are the school districts going to pay for training and armament? What if a teacher attacks the children in their class? What if a student carries a weapon to the school and creates a hostage situation? (You eliminated a gun free zone). Assailants can be better armed than teachers and they can wear armor, which teachers/security personnel will not be equipped with. (See Buffalo massacre) These are just off the top of my head. I would like to hear a security analyst take on it.

lliamander 4y ago
Here's one qualified person's explaination: https://monsterhunternation.com/2015/06/23/an-opinion-on-gun-control-repost/ https://monsterhunternation.com/2015/06/23/an-opinion-on-gun... Edit: and let me just respond to one thing > You are making bad assumptions here I'm not just making assumptions. This is the conclusion I come to from reading firearms experts like the one I just linked, sociological analysis of gun ownership, use of force law, etc. I'm not saying a chaotic situation like that couldn't happen, but that can be prepared for, and the result would still be a significant net positive.
- subsection1h 4y ago
  > This is the conclusion I come to from reading firearms experts To what extent have you studied criminology? How many relevant research papers have you read that have been published in the journals of the American Society of Criminology, which is the largest criminological organization in the US?
  - lliamander 4y ago
    I'm not saying I have a PHD in the subject, but reading some of the works from the likes of John Lott and Gary Kleck. Why do you ask?

simon1ltd 4y ago

I looked up something quickly, to see if it was still true. In the UK, where you're not allowed to use firearms to defend yourself, home invasions where someone is home is 64%. In the US, where it is permissible, home invasions where someone is home is 27.6%. You're over twice as likely to be robbed while you're home in the UK as you are in the US. I'm sure the factors are complex, but knowing that you're actually risking your life when you break into a home in the US has to be one of the factors. https://www.nimblefins.co.uk/home-insurance/burglary-statistics https://www.nimblefins.co.uk/home-insurance/burglary-statist... https://www.thezebra.com/resources/research/burglary-statistics/#:~:text=Frequent%20home%20invasions%20happen%20between,is%20home%20during%20a%20burglary https://www.thezebra.com/resources/research/burglary-statist....

renaudg 4y ago

Uvalde police let the shooter do its thing for an hour because they feared being outgunned by his AR-15. Tell us again how giving a firearm to Betty the school lunch lady will help in any way ?

lliamander 4y ago
An AR-15 is not a shield of invulnerability. A CCW holder with a handgun and the element of surprise can get the drop on someone with an AR-15.[1] I know Betty the lunch lady is supposed to be a strawman of sorts, but women are actually pretty good shots. It's amazing how quickly criminals, even when they are armed and outnumber you, will fold once you present armed resistance[2]. [1] https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/police-man-shot-colorado-gunman-killed-officer-78500318 https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/police-man-shot-colorado... [2] https://sandrarose.com/2016/09/georgia-woman-shoots-three-home-invaders-killing-1/ https://sandrarose.com/2016/09/georgia-woman-shoots-three-ho...