4 ms·

Bulletproof safety pods for schools draw the internet's ire

3 points by samizdis 4y ago

josephcsible 4y ago
- AnimalMuppet 4y ago
  There's a strong sense of "it shouldn't be like this" - that our kids should not be being used for target practice. Making them hardened targets doesn't feel like the right direction. We want a solution where they don't get shot at. "We" in the previous paragraph not meaning me, AnimalMuppet, and you, josephcsible, but rather "people in general". But I say "we" instead of "they", because I at least understand the general sentiment.
  - salawat 4y ago
    ...I mean the last line is pretty telling that some magical thinking is going on. >Klinger thinks it is essentially "making money on the backs of the fear that people have. We have been prioritizing the wrong things over and over and over and then wondering why nothing changes." Somebody goes and adapts a product to a new use case, and it's doing things wrong? Seems to me it's actually something novel being done. I too would like to see something drastically different done. Arming the children would probably go leagues beyond anything else, or say... requiring police to put their own lives at risk as part of doing their jobs, or training teachers to do the same. Or adults realizing that the world is a fundamentally dangerous place and taking responsibility for protecting not just their own lives, but their fellow man's... But hell, that's hard. Can't have that.
- gtvwill 4y ago
  Because restriction of gun ownership is the only thing that works. Source: Americans still getting killed by guns despite all the other crap you've tried to implement. Legit dumbest country ever re protection of its own citizens. Place is basically in permanent civil war. But oi....can't be taking their freedom to shoot eachother away now can ya? Lol. Pair the gun response w the likes of roe v wade crap an we got ourselves a state full of bumpkins pushing politics like it's the 1950s. But for some reason folks keep defending the place....
  - m4nu3l 4y ago
    I can't read the original comment, so I'm only replying to this one. I don't live in the US however I know that implementing restrictions is only possible if the Second Amendment is changed. While I think gun violence is a tragedy that needs to be solved, I do believe that the Second Amendment has good reasons to be there. When it was written there was no standing army nor police, so it allowed people to quickly form an army if required and allowed people to defend themselves. These are not as important points as they were at the time. But one that has gotten more important with time (I believe) is that it was also meant to allow citizens to rebel to a "tyrannical government". In other words it was meant to prevent the US to become Russia, North Korea or China - Not without a fight at least. I also think that restricting guns is not guaranteed to work. If you look at the UK, gun restrictions are pretty recent and there was a time both the US and the UK had freedom of gun ownership. Yet the UK had very few mass-shootings.The UK might still have few mass-shootings even with less gun restrictions. On the other hand, some countries that have very strict gun restrictions but have higher gun violence than the US (e.g. Mexico). So the reality is that it's complicated.
beepbeepcabbage 4y ago

3 points by samizdis 4y ago

josephcsible 4y ago

AnimalMuppet 4y ago
There's a strong sense of "it shouldn't be like this" - that our kids should not be being used for target practice. Making them hardened targets doesn't feel like the right direction. We want a solution where they don't get shot at. "We" in the previous paragraph not meaning me, AnimalMuppet, and you, josephcsible, but rather "people in general". But I say "we" instead of "they", because I at least understand the general sentiment.
- salawat 4y ago
  ...I mean the last line is pretty telling that some magical thinking is going on. >Klinger thinks it is essentially "making money on the backs of the fear that people have. We have been prioritizing the wrong things over and over and over and then wondering why nothing changes." Somebody goes and adapts a product to a new use case, and it's doing things wrong? Seems to me it's actually something novel being done. I too would like to see something drastically different done. Arming the children would probably go leagues beyond anything else, or say... requiring police to put their own lives at risk as part of doing their jobs, or training teachers to do the same. Or adults realizing that the world is a fundamentally dangerous place and taking responsibility for protecting not just their own lives, but their fellow man's... But hell, that's hard. Can't have that.
gtvwill 4y ago
Because restriction of gun ownership is the only thing that works. Source: Americans still getting killed by guns despite all the other crap you've tried to implement. Legit dumbest country ever re protection of its own citizens. Place is basically in permanent civil war. But oi....can't be taking their freedom to shoot eachother away now can ya? Lol. Pair the gun response w the likes of roe v wade crap an we got ourselves a state full of bumpkins pushing politics like it's the 1950s. But for some reason folks keep defending the place....
- m4nu3l 4y ago
  I can't read the original comment, so I'm only replying to this one. I don't live in the US however I know that implementing restrictions is only possible if the Second Amendment is changed. While I think gun violence is a tragedy that needs to be solved, I do believe that the Second Amendment has good reasons to be there. When it was written there was no standing army nor police, so it allowed people to quickly form an army if required and allowed people to defend themselves. These are not as important points as they were at the time. But one that has gotten more important with time (I believe) is that it was also meant to allow citizens to rebel to a "tyrannical government". In other words it was meant to prevent the US to become Russia, North Korea or China - Not without a fight at least. I also think that restricting guns is not guaranteed to work. If you look at the UK, gun restrictions are pretty recent and there was a time both the US and the UK had freedom of gun ownership. Yet the UK had very few mass-shootings.The UK might still have few mass-shootings even with less gun restrictions. On the other hand, some countries that have very strict gun restrictions but have higher gun violence than the US (e.g. Mexico). So the reality is that it's complicated.

beepbeepcabbage 4y ago