I wish that this were true, but I do not think so in our fast moving society anymore.
Going on the "offense" against all strange people would cause a Kristallnacht ... Way too many innocent people being taken down.
"Kill all Others" ...


Agreed.
I'd expand that to "There is no solution to human violence."
As long as we have a 2A that we recognize, it will get much of the blame for any violence that occurs.

I dont begrudge you the opinion that community involvement is a massive part of an actual long term solution, I agree with it. (my preferred form also includes a constitutional militia)

That said, the fact remains that not only is it a politically unlikely solution its also likely a long way out from successful implementation even if it were politically viable today. I also agree that high profile, low frequency events shouldn't be the focus, unfortunately they are. I mention these things not to "hypocritically shoot down" a potential solution but to acknowledge the reality we live in.

Whenever I mention the "reasonably accetable level of mayhem" option I always catch much grief. In the end a 100% effective solution is a unicorn. No one even wants to discuss the pragmatic approach of actual acceptable effectiveness less than 100%. By some measures we are already > 99% effective.

Even having a discussion about how to evaluate such metrics is far too gruesome for most - is that what 'they' want to spend federal money on investigating? I think not.

I thought the reality we live in is the one we are trying to change?

You know it is. And you know what I was saying. Stop patronizing.

This is exactly how I think.
The correct argument will not win in our present society.

I'm torn on the issue of arming teachers and/or security guards in every school. On the one hand, I think it's certainly better than nothing. On the other hand, I agree with some of the problems that others have pointed out. For example, I think there is some validity to Alpine's point that the first shooting that happens in spite of armed security will give fodder to the anti-2A crowd, who will say that it's "proof" that good guys with guns aren't the answer. Also, MorrisWR is right that the cost to provide armed security in every school will be astronomical.

I am leaning towards limited armed security at schools because I think it gives us a better chance of containing the threat as opposed to not having that security in place at all. The ant-2A crowd will pursue their agenda regardless of the truth, so we can't concern ourselves too much with what they might do. We just have to do what makes the most sense. But whatever we do, we cannot ignore the cost to taxpayers. The national debt is a much bigger threat to our security than school shootings. The emotional case for school security has been made; now I want to see the logical and financial cases for it.

Actually, I don't know what you are trying to say.

I'm done with you. Have an outstanding evening.

Sent from Proxima Centauri B through the ether using FTP transmission technology, Honey Encryption, and Peanut Butter & Jelly sandwiches

You called it:

Right now the media, especially liberals, are spamming the internet with the idea that a trained good guy with a gun was there in the vicinity of the shooting, and failed to act. However, entire law enforcement agencies with all their knowledge and training failed to act first to stop this, even after the guy said what he was going to do and nothing.

Law enforcement at schools, which I'm a proponent for, is a bandaid to the problem. Just like democrats enacting gun laws that don't actually stop violent offenders. Right now there are students planning walk out protests to protest violence in schools. What they should be doing is protesting each other. If kids, and parents, want violence in schools to end then it needs to start with the kids themselves. They have the control and power over the violence as they are the ones committing it. The students are the ones excluding, bullying, and harassing one another. So if students want this to stop they need to take a long hard look at how they are treating the people around them. The whole 'treat others how you want to be treated' idea. They don't have to like everyone, which isn't going to ever happen in the most perfect world, but students need to learn to respect one another. Respect is earned and if they want to be treated with respect, then they need to do the same to others.

I've been in education for almost two decades now and I've seen a breakdown in how students treat one another. Students aren't holding themselves accountable for what they say or do and neither are their peers, or parents. Too many students say something, or post something, but get negative feed back and follow it up with, 'just kidding,' or 'no offence'. Our politicians, celebrities, sports athletes, and other people our children look up to do the same thing. Where is the accountability? There is a cartoon floating around, and on the top is a picture of a student in the past with their parents in front of a teacher. The parents are looking at the kid with an angry expression asking him to explain the bad grades. In the bottom part it show the same set up in present day, but instead the kid is smiling, and the parents are angry at the teacher asking the teaching to explain why their kid is failing. Which goes to the whole idea of how students and parents aren't holding the student accountable for their actions. In the case of the cartoon probably not doing their work, and most likely goofing around in class.

Gone are the days of throwing a few punches to settle a difference and it was over fairly quickly and the two of you moved on. Now because schools are afraid of a lawsuit, fights are a big no no and kids are resorting to sophisticated social warfare. Instead of it being an issue between two students now it involves five or six. These issues don't stop at the end of the day, but continue on through social media and text messages. This just causes problems to continue and prevent people from moving on. Now students feel this is how they should be socializing as it is connecting them to their peers and gives them something to talk about. So creating drama to socialize around isn't healthy socializing.

Parents don't help this out either as a growing number of parents are so involved in their own online social world, or they are more worried about being their child's friend, or their kid can do no wrong it must be someone else's fault (such as in the bottom of the cartoon I referenced earlier.) I have parents that admit to me all the time they don't know how to be a presence, or take control over their child's online intake. They are afraid they will cause their child to lose friends or their child will hate them because of their decision to parent. Some are on it and have access to all their child's phone info, messages, and social media and check it regularly, and are involved in their life. I have a number of parents that I look up to for the fantastic job they are doing. As a parent of thee myself I know it isn't easy. But when you decide to bring life into this world it is your responsibility to help them navigate the ups and downs of life. They are kids aren't born with the tools necessary and as the parent this social education starts at home. Schools are required to teach an anti bullying/anti violence program, but can only do so much. Schools can't control how students treat each other at home, or at a sleep over, or who gets invited to hang out with who after school. But if we are relying in the public, or private, education systems to teach our children how to be a respecting human beings we are doing it wrong.

Again I go back to my initial start in that if students want to end violence in schools they need to be an active participator in how they treat one another. They are the ones who are going to continue or end the violence in schools. We as parents need to help them on this path, but it is up to them to do the work as they are the ones in the front lines of this issue.

Maybe if you can get them to go inside the building and confront the shooter.
This deputy hid outside while the shooting was going on.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/salvadorhernan ... umMDYQ4gA3
The Armed Florida School Officer Didn't Go Into The Building During The Mass Shooting
An armed school resource officer at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High stood outside the building while the shooter opened fire on students and teachers, Sheriff Scott Israel said.

An armed school resource deputy at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida stood outside the building and did "nothing" while a shooter opened fire on students and teachers, Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel said Thursday.

"Devasted," Israel said of his reaction at seeing video footage that showed the deputy taking a position outside the building, but never going in during the rampage that killed 17. "Sick to my stomach. There are no words."

Israel identified the deputy as Scott Peterson.

After surveillance video captured the deputy standing outside the building, Israel said he was placed on unpaid leave.

Peterson has since filed for retirement.

Video of the school shooting showed Peterson arriving at the west end of the school's Building 12, Israel said, then taking a position where he could see the entrance to the building.

"He never went in," Israel said.

Well said Sir.

Liberals claim they want a "common sense discussion" but they reject plans that WILL and DO work in favor of untenable pie-in-the-sky notions that will never work and will never be accomplished.

Liberals reject anything but more gun control. A quick look at the news shows that criminals bent on murder tend to ignore law. Gee, who knew?! Whether it's stealing or buying illegal guns, or using other readily available weapons, criminals can and do commit heinous murder with near impunity, until MEN WITH GUNS ARRIVE AND STOP THEM!

So as I see it, the arrival of men with guns to stop them needs to occur much faster. More on that in a moment.

There are few over-arching ways to address the mass violence in society:

1. Address the underlying violent ailments in society. This is a complex socio-economic issue but is the root of the moral decay problem. Violence in media, destruction of family, bullying, and so forth. If we want any hope of success, this must successfully happen. Restore the family, better role models, better friend networks, healthy activities, religion, and so forth. Restore the value of life. It's no coincidence that a society that kills ~3,000 babies every day without even caring is going to have serious human life value problems. Very complex. Very important.

Again, let me just repeat, abortions murder 3,000 babies every day, most with tax dollars, mostly for convenience. That's 175 Florida school shootings every single day, and the media is silent. Let that sink in. And that will answer why our society is so *****. We commit infanticide like we change our dirty socks...

2. Diet and exercise. Our kids and adults are unhealthy and obese and have mind rot. Reduce the demand side of drugs and reduce the chemicals pumped into foods. Diet is so important. Complex but necessary. These chemicals we ingest **** with our brains.

3. Guard our kids better with layered security and guns. We guard our banks, our leaders, our military bases, our homes, and so forth with fences, walls, locked doors, cameras, guns, etc. Yet most school campuses a stranger can just walk on and open fire. That is INSANE. Layered security, walls, fences, whatever. A team of armed guards. Cost?? How about eliminating garbage liberal programs like social justice courses. Cost?? Is it less expensive to have hundreds of kids murdered and bulldoze schools? Cost is not even an issue here. Also, while we shouldn't necessarily mandate that teachers carry a gun, we should allow them to do so for personal and student self protection. That's a no-brainer. Sure, enchance their background checks and require heightened training, but allow them the right to defend themselves. If they are huddled in a classroom, they would be heroes if they had a gun and ended the fight - like that dead football coach. If he had a pistol, he could have lived and saved kids.

4. Gun control - that's a non starter because it doesn't work anywhere in the world (in any free nation of diverse people). It might work in irrelevant pockets of homogenious cultures, but the USA is simply too diverse and we are free. The only true gun free society would be so oppressive it would be a cure worse than the illness. Regardless, based on the failure of the drug wars, it is quite literally impossible to ban criminals from getting weapons. So any gun restrictions simply victimize citizens by disarming us to some degree (wait periods, gun restrictions, mag restrictions, and so forth). And another point, criminals will either buy or steal illegal guns, or simply adapt to other weapons like trucks to run people over (seen around the world), knives and swords in mass murders (seen around the world), IEDs made literally by illiterate or the low IQ folks and even here in the USA where small and large truck bombs and pressure cooker bombs have killed scores of people, and a host of other easily obtained devices and weapons of murder. Going down the path of banning every conceivable dangerous item is a road to the ruin of our great free nation.

Think of it - taken to the extreme, you would not be able to own pointy sticks, knives, ball bearings, fertilizer, gasoline, matches, rope, oil, firecrackers, bullets, guns of any sort, gunpowder, lighter fluid, nails, nail guns, pneumatic air compressors, electricity, batteries, bleach, rat poison, or any of a LONG list of common items.


With great freedom comes sacrifices and great responsibility. While tragic, any society, particularly a free one, is going to suffer from murders, accidents, and violence. But the overall good of the free society endures. And a free society allows the individuals the best opportunity to protect himself/herself from tyranny and crime. It's that straight forward.

The government has shown, time and again, it is inept to protect us (at times). While it does a decent job overall, it cannot prevent every crime or attack. The individual citizens must fill the gaps and be able to protect ourselves from the wolves.