Not every single time. A kid with a gun facing off with a shooter could panic You have a shootout More innocent people could die
Mass shootings are happening, we’re past the point of contemplating hypotheticals. It hasn’t thwarted any mass shootings or saved any lives. The only thing that’s done that so far is another armed person.
The “shootout at the ok corral” theory has been debunked. The only thing to ever thwart a mass shooting so far has been another person with a gun.
I can't think of a time a shootout ensued at a school after an opposing gun showed up. The shooter leaves or commits suicide.
Yes, they are....because parents aren't being responsible with how they store their guns and how they rear their kids. They aren't paying attention. It's not a hypothetical parents have come across their kids plans to commit mass shootings and stop them from happening by calling the police and school.
Because students haven't been allowed to carry guns at school. At columbine there was a shootout between school cops and the shooters. It didn't stop them. They still killed many students after that before killing themselves.
Your points aren’t bad ones. Im not disregarding the idea that those are things that need addressed. I just think there needs to be another line of defense when those steps fail, which they so often do.
So once... And I would submit that having armed staff and trained/permitted 18 year old students would have almost certainly resulted in far fewer deaths at Columbine.
This sounds like a very Republican argument. "People just need to get jobs... " "Just stop doing drugs... " "If everybody would just choose to help more..." ...we wouldn't need government services, etc. These same illogical arguments are being made by gun control enthusiasts. But the reality is, we can't punish or restrict our way out of this. Guns aren't "just bad" and they aren't going anywhere. Regardless of this law or any gun control kids will be able to bring guns to school. Regardless of what their parents do. You're not being logical. Focus on increasing access to healthcare, education, and improving the social safety net. Get those and the judicial system fixed and most of our gun problems will go away, along with most of our problems with violent crime and murder.
Gun control can work. It might take 100 years, but it could work. Gradually reduce the number of guns in circulation, make them more expensive and harder to obtain, increase penalties for misuse. It could potentially be done. You are right that those other things you mentioned would be very good to do. But they are all approximately the same level of impossible as gun control, i.e. they might be fixed sometime after we are all dead, if the country survives that long. But there's no reason we shouldn't take tiny, tentative baby steps toward addressing all the issues in the meantime. barfo
If we put this much energy into addressing mental illness, wouldn't that also solve the same issue? Or, more importantly, actually address the root cause of the issue? Getting rid of the guns doesn't get rid of the murderous people. It just limits the tools that are available to them.
My point was that we (the government of, by, and for the people) aren't going to put 'this much energy' into anything at all. barfo
Yeah there is. There is data showing those things actually work. Indisputable data. Most people actually like the idea of their kids getting a good education and not being in crazy debt. Most people like the idea of being able to take time off. They like the idea of knowing they won't go bankrupt if they get sick. Most people don't want the right to own all guns to go away. They just don't. There is nowhere that there are no guns, so people want to be able to defend themselves as well. I can't make healthcare in my garage in an afternoon. Or an education. These things are far easier, far more proven, far less divisive, and in my opinion far more likely to happen than eliminating guns. The reason to stop about guns is that there is a weaker case for gun control then there is for everthing else on that list. And pushing gun control costs us valuable political capital that could help get those things done. And they are all far easier than gun control because we wouldn't need to amend the constitution, restricting the rights of every American to make them happen. Without democrats hammering on gun control Hillary Clinton would have likely beaten Trump. Gore would almost certainly have beaten Bush. How different would the world be today in that situation?
They also like the idea of not getting shot. I think not getting shot is super popular right now. There are no guns on Uranus, so far as we know. You don't have a bottle of bleach or some horse dewormer in your garage? Ok. I don't see any of them happening, but maybe I should withhold judgement until I've waited a full century instead of just most of one. I don't accept that hypothetical. There's always some social issue that conservatives can rally around, it hardly matters what it is. Maybe liberals should stop writing books, to keep Republicans from being able to burn them? Women should stop getting pregnant, to take away the abortion 'issue'? Etc. If it wasn't guns it would have been something else. barfo
Maybe... But you would have gained Democrat votes that would have won you Gore and Hillary. Not conservative votes. I know countless "democrats" who didn't vote for either because of the pushing of gun control. People who voted for Bill Clinton. There isn't another issue that would have scared them like that. The gun issue is a swing voter issue. Seems to me you get fewer votes if you can be painted as coming after guns. You get more votes if you cannot.
I can’t think of a time when a shootout ensued at a school when NOBODY BROUGHT A FUCKING GUN TO THE SCHOOL!
At most school shootings (during school hours, inside the school), killings typically continue until somebody else brings a gun to the school.
