Top Conservative Publication: Shooting Occurred Because Women Ran The School

Started by Solar, December 20, 2012, 07:32:46 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Solar

Quote from: kramarat on December 21, 2012, 07:37:47 AM
Okay. One 70 year old veteran jumped on him. Hardly proof that any man would have done the same.

Back to the school shootings. The author is talking, like having women dominate the teaching profession is something relatively new. It's not at all.

http://www.wakingbear.com/archives/a-history-of-teaching-in-america-as-told-by-those-who-know.html

She also presupposes that just because a person is male, that they are mentally and physically prepared to take on a killer with a gun. I disagree. You are prior military, and would probably handle the situation differently than most men. I'm not saying that most men are cowards, but I don't think that most men have a natural instinct to know how to deal with an armed murderer.

I don't. I'd die trying to protect the kids, but if I was able to successfully subdue a guy that was shooting at me, it would be shit luck, not because of a particular skill set.
So the fact that one old man stepped up and did what is expected of all men, isn't proof?
I give up, we'll just have to agree to disagree.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

thefirebrand

...shouldn't we be figuring out how to keep people from trying to shoot at children, rather than militarizing our schools?
Common sense would suggest that if someone is doing something bad, the goal should be to stop them rather than everyone arming themselves in response.

taxed

Quote from: thefirebrand on December 21, 2012, 12:59:20 PM
...shouldn't we be figuring out how to keep people from trying to shoot at children, rather than militarizing our schools?
Common sense would suggest that if someone is doing something bad, the goal should be to stop them rather than everyone arming themselves in response.

Common sense says that if these shootings keep happening in gun ban zones, and these shootings seem to only be thwarted by someone who is carrying, then the more people who carry, the less of these shootings.
#PureBlood #TrumpWon

Solar

Quote from: thefirebrand on December 21, 2012, 12:59:20 PM
...shouldn't we be figuring out how to keep people from trying to shoot at children, rather than militarizing our schools?
Common sense would suggest that if someone is doing something bad, the goal should be to stop them rather than everyone arming themselves in response.
It's kind of ironic, I grew up in Sacramento, and all school cops were armed and we didn't have any shootings.
That was in the 50s, 60s and early 70s, and now they aren't allowed to carry.
And yes, now shootings are occurring on campus.

I think something is bassackwards.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

kramarat

Quote from: Solar on December 21, 2012, 12:37:17 PM
So the fact that one old man stepped up and did what is expected of all men, isn't proof?
I give up, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

What's the disagreement again? I thought it was about the article.

Charlotte says that women and children are sitting ducks for mass killings, and that the presence of a man probably would have stopped it. That's complete nonsense. Everybody is a sitting duck.

In almost all of these whacko shootings, men are around. None of them turn out well. My only point is, that I don't think that the majority of unarmed men have some kind of innate ability to take down armed murderers that are shooting at them, just because they happen to be male.

Next time you're out in public, look around at the average men that are around. Would you trust your life to them?

I'll take my chances with a trained and armed woman, over an unarmed man in one of these situations.

thefirebrand

Quote from: taxed on December 21, 2012, 01:04:49 PM
Common sense says that if these shootings keep happening in gun ban zones, and these shootings seem to only be thwarted by someone who is carrying, then the more people who carry, the less of these shootings.
I would contend that the most effective and safest approach would be to address the issues behind gun violence, rather than the guns themselves.

taxed

Quote from: thefirebrand on December 21, 2012, 01:39:52 PM
I would contend that the most effective and safest approach would be to address the issues behind gun violence, rather than the guns themselves.

They have no fear.  Install the fear in these people, and it will become less frequent.
#PureBlood #TrumpWon

thefirebrand

Quote from: taxed on December 21, 2012, 01:52:27 PM
They have no fear.  Install the fear in these people, and it will become less frequent.
Y'know, it's an interesting thing...I think it comes down to a choice between fear and love. Fear, as a driving factor, is just not as thorough a defense as love. I know that sounds simplistic; let me explain.
A "love" approach would be to put energy and funds into actively treating mental illness. Every single school shooter must, by definition, START with mental illness. No sane person guns down children.  Caring for the mentally ill would help reduce many issues; gun violence, drug addiction, poverty, etc. That's not rhetoric - countries that have a comprehensive approach to mental illness and substance abuse have lower crime rates in general.
A "fear" approach is more concerned with defensive or punitive action. Instead of treating the disease, the symptoms are masked with more guns.
In the long term, I simply prefer the first option.

Darth Fife

Quote from: thefirebrand on December 21, 2012, 02:32:21 PM
Y'know, it's an interesting thing...I think it comes down to a choice between fear and love. Fear, as a driving factor, is just not as thorough a defense as love. I know that sounds simplistic; let me explain.
A "love" approach would be to put energy and funds into actively treating mental illness. Every single school shooter must, by definition, START with mental illness. No sane person guns down children.  Caring for the mentally ill would help reduce many issues; gun violence, drug addiction, poverty, etc. That's not rhetoric - countries that have a comprehensive approach to mental illness and substance abuse have lower crime rates in general.
A "fear" approach is more concerned with defensive or punitive action. Instead of treating the disease, the symptoms are masked with more guns.
In the long term, I simply prefer the first option.

Every single school shooter was also on some kind of anti-depressant or psychotropic drug - maybe if we didn't drug our children at the drop of a hat... :rolleyes:

Just sayin'...

thefirebrand

Quote from: Darth Fife on December 21, 2012, 02:38:21 PM
Every single school shooter was also on some kind of anti-depressant or psychotropic drug - maybe if we didn't drug our children at the drop of a hat... :rolleyes:

Just sayin'...
I ABSOLUTELY agree with you. Part of the issue in the mental healthcare world is that doctors are being pressured by pharma companies to pass out drugs like they're candy. More time should be spent on addressing root causes of mental illness, as well as more focus on behavioral/cognitive therapy.  As it is, children are being given antidepressants and told to shut up because everything is just fine.

Solar

Quote from: kramarat on December 21, 2012, 01:33:44 PM
What's the disagreement again? I thought it was about the article.

Charlotte says that women and children are sitting ducks for mass killings, and that the presence of a man probably would have stopped it. That's complete nonsense. Everybody is a sitting duck.

In almost all of these whacko shootings, men are around. None of them turn out well. My only point is, that I don't think that the majority of unarmed men have some kind of innate ability to take down armed murderers that are shooting at them, just because they happen to be male.

Next time you're out in public, look around at the average men that are around. Would you trust your life to them?

I'll take my chances with a trained and armed woman, over an unarmed man in one of these situations.
Who said anything about armed woman, where in the Hell did that come from?
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

kramarat

Quote from: Solar on December 21, 2012, 02:45:49 PM
Who said anything about armed woman, where in the Hell did that come from?

That came from me. The author suggested that a janitor with a bucket could have stopped it. I'm suggesting that if one or more of the women were trained and armed, they would have stopped it better. No man needed. :smile:

keyboarder

Ta Da!  I don't have them often but here goes and it's just my brain backfiring from my other end I guess but one idea is as good as another. 

I haven't seen any mention of the pool of already trained men and women that we already have that could easily fill the openings for school safety resource peeps.  The men and women returning home from service could fill some if not most of these spots.  Don't get me wrong, each and every one of them would have to undergo a mental evaluation because let's face it, war changes people-much like this school tragedy has changed the lives of those that witnessed it.  We also have already retired service men and women that might like extra money in their retirement.  If states would offer a good enough program for these people, there shouldn't be a lot of vacancies.    It certainly would bring the unemployment rate down a bit.  They wouldn't have to wear their combat garb or salute or any of the stuff they were accustomed to doing in the military, but they certainly would be able to handle situations that might arise toward terrorism.  They would be professional, they are trained to their jobs the best that anyone can be trained.  Most of this would already be done for the schools. 

Schools could also look into getting the ballistic types of glass for schools.  My grands have attended schools here where we live and I can guarantee you that I can walk into this one particular school, a middle school, and sign my grands out without so much as a state ID to do it but I always offer them my SC dr Lic (they don't require it).  At one point in time, they started requiring ID to pick your grands up from school.  Don't know what happened but that got stopped.  I was horrified at the apathy of the school.  They have school sign out for people that the parent's designate but my son allows only the grandparents to pick up his kids.  When I pick them up, I put their name down, time in and time out, and "grandma" for who's picking them up.  Duh!  There's another set of grandparents but they aren't allowed.  This could create a problem.  I'm waiting on that one too.   :popcorn:
.If you want to lead the orchestra, you must turn your back to the crowd      Forbes