Hypothesis: Should children and teachers from the U.S be equipped with military grade weaponry for self-protection?

Avatar image for godsavemenow
GodSaveMeNow

950

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Poll Hypothesis: Should children and teachers from the U.S be equipped with military grade weaponry for self-protection? (181 votes)

Yes 15%
No 85%

Proposal: So much school shootings of late in the USA, so little self responsibility to protect oneself.

Nuclear deterrence has resulted in relative global peace ever since World War 2. If schoolchildren and teachers are equipped with the basic rifles and grenades, the likelihood of an attack will drastically decrease due to the drastically increased fear of a costly aftermath.

The government could spend some money to issue a rifle with 5 rounds for each student over the age of 12, for an entire school cohort. Every start of the day each student must fill up a form to be issued the weapon and rounds. If the rifle is too big for a child to handle (puberty issues), a pistol can be issued instead. At the end of the day, each classroom is to be locked down and every single student must rounded up and have their rifles and rounds accounted for and returned. The armourer will check carefully before unlocking the classroom for the students to leave. Every classroom should have 2 grenades in an accessible glass box behind the teacher's table, in the extreme case of a terrorist attack. Weapon maintenance will happen once a year for the school to check and replace defective weapons and rounds. Each child will be responsible to do weekly checks that their weapons are not defective.

This may sound costly but if the rifles and rounds are purchased in bulk with old weapons recycled from the military and police, the NRA can work out significant savings with their partial sponsorship via obligatory advertisements displayed in schools and kindergartens.

The teachers should hold monthly drills with students on how to handle their guns and show free advertisement videos of guns every morning. Old rifles and pistols that are no longer needed or used by the U.S military and police can be rounded up and given to the schools to save costs, where again children are to be educated with and self-responsible to fix any damages to these old weapons. This should help balance the NRA and government's budget, increasing future generation's interest in firearms and ensuring a good stream of revenue.

Each child should always feel safe and secure when going to school, and grow up to be self responsible for their own well being.

Discuss.

NOTE: I do NOT belong to the NRA.

 • 
Avatar image for firestarlord73194
FireStarLord73194

6196

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

You can't solve violence with more violence

Avatar image for malkavthemaven
MalkavtheMaven

476

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Personally I think if you want a military grade weapon you should enlist. If you survive bootcamp and make it through at least 1 tour of duty then sure you can have a military grade weapon at home. Other than that, not unless you are willing to go in for psych evaluations, background checks, registration, etc.

Avatar image for heatblaze
Heatblaze

10422

Forum Posts

17

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

It's like you're asking for trouble.

Avatar image for deactivated-5d26a3a3d293d
deactivated-5d26a3a3d293d

3054

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Lol, this is hilarious.

Avatar image for thorthunder98
Thorthunder98

7004

Forum Posts

1578

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Yes why not give every kid a gun makes total sense.

Haven't more children been killed in school shootings than American soldiers in active duty?

May as well arm the kids to defend against the enemy that is their own classmates....

Avatar image for themaximus
TheMaximus

709

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Seriously metal detectors in every school and more security will solve this issue.

Avatar image for tonymartial
TonyMartial

10584

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Teachers should but not children.

Avatar image for danmarshall
DanMarshall

613

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#258  Edited By DanMarshall

I dont follow this stuff all that close but i assume most of these shootings are with family owned guns and that would be pretty easy to avoid if that were the case if they were locked up properly like theyre supposed to be.

I gotta say working in a school it would really help if teachers werent so damn lazy and enforced the rules instead of trying to be friends with the students and letting them run around wherever they want without any supervision. Funnel the kids in and out of the main entrances of the buildings and dont let them use side doors. If you have metal detectors and armed guards who had to go through a lot of tests and background checks we wouldnt have as many of these occurrences.

Avatar image for lvenger
Lvenger

36461

Forum Posts

899

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 50

User Lists: 18

At best you could make the argument for teachers being allowed guns due to them having the maturity and sense on how to properly use guns but there is never ever going to be any good justification for giving children guns to defend themselves. And giving teachers guns is a bad idea in of itself.

Avatar image for tonymartial
TonyMartial

10584

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Seriously metal detectors in every school and more security will solve this issue.

More security? So going to school should be like going to the airport?

Avatar image for themaximus
TheMaximus

709

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for chimeroid
Chimeroid

9276

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@tonymartial: if it means saving the lived of children YES

Would you say the same thing about gun control? Because having strict gun control laws (and actually strict, not US definition of strict) seems to work for LITERALLY EVERYONE ELSE

Avatar image for themaximus
TheMaximus

709

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@chimeroid: Personally i thought gun control would work at first, but i dont see how it would. Criminals will still find ways to get them, what countries are successful using this method and how strict is the control?

Avatar image for chimeroid
Chimeroid

9276

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@chimeroid: Personally i thought gun control would work at first, but i dont see how it would. Criminals will still find ways to get them, what countries are successful using this method and how strict is the control?

1. But your current issue has nothing to do with criminals. You have an issue with kids having access to their parent's weapons and everyone treating weapons as toys (i assume you are from the US, if not, I apologize). The first thing you should eliminate is people who are playing around with guns on youtube. It is not a healthy thing to show your kids.

2. LIterally every other country in the developed world. There is no other country right now with the issue of kids shooting schools up LITERALLY OVER ONCE A WEEK.

However, the direct proof comes from Ozzies. Australia had the exact same issue the US did with mass shootings happening way too often. But then, they had a government buyback program and took away all guns that were not owned for a purpose (you can still have a gun for self-defence or hunting, with a license, you just can't buy a hundred guns and a million bullets to play around in the back yard), and guess what? It worked, they literally fixed the issue by taking guns away.

Now, i believe that is taking it a step too far.

In my honest opinion, the thing that should be limited is the amount of ammo you are allowed to own.

And, of course, the stupidity.

I see 'Muricans online commonly talking about how they are ready to fight their government with their guns to keep their rights. And i see people failing to realize that the threat of violence to change the legislation is the literal definition of terrorism...

Avatar image for deactivated-5b2121a0a9a00
deactivated-5b2121a0a9a00

10000

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 7

I find it hilarious that people always say applying strict gun laws won't solve the problem, yet at the same time it's working for every other first world country who uses them.

Avatar image for rl4
RL4

1700

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Not only should teachers AND students be armed, but the school itself should be armed. I’m talking razorwire, land mines, attack dogs, defensive artillary, offensive artillary, SAM missiles, and gator infested moats.

And no, I don’t care if Alligators are endangered, because the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is an alligator with a bigger gun.

Avatar image for deactivated-5c07a0327fd39
deactivated-5c07a0327fd39

4592

Forum Posts

2328

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

@rl4 said:

Not only should teachers AND students be armed, but the school itself should be armed. I’m talking razorwire, land mines, attack dogs, defensive artillary, offensive artillary, SAM missiles, and gator infested moats.

And no, I don’t care if Alligators are endangered, because the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is an alligator with a bigger gun.

Actual footage of my reaction:

No Caption Provided

Avatar image for deactivated-5c07a0327fd39
deactivated-5c07a0327fd39

4592

Forum Posts

2328

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

And who TF bumped this?

Avatar image for deactivated-5c8fd6cb3e4f4
deactivated-5c8fd6cb3e4f4

18365

Forum Posts

152

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Not this thread again.

Dis is literally one of the dumbest ideas introduced on this site. I mean IK its a hypothesis but ffs put some acct. thought into it

Avatar image for streak619
Streak619

8544

Forum Posts

36

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

No, that would be the worst idea since legalising guns.

Avatar image for deactivated-5b84aca03eae8
deactivated-5b84aca03eae8

6261

Forum Posts

2264

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

This thread should've been locked long ago geez.

Avatar image for rl4
RL4

1700

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for deactivated-5c07a0327fd39
deactivated-5c07a0327fd39

4592

Forum Posts

2328

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

This thread should've been locked long ago geez.

I called the mods in post #7. Nek minnit... Nuffin'

Avatar image for outside_85
Outside_85

23518

Forum Posts

18735

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 39

User Lists: 1

I find it hilarious that people always say applying strict gun laws won't solve the problem, yet at the same time it's working for every other first world country who uses them.

It's the idea of 'American Exceptionalism' at it's weirdest... when the term doesn't mean America is best at something, but where stuff that works everywhere else 'except' in America.

Anyways (nothing to do with you @all-father), the dumbest argument here against gun-laws is that 'criminals dont obey the law', well no s*** Sherlock, that tends to be why they are criminals. But the argument is stupid because it implies that there shouldn't be laws because law-breakers wont follow them, if thats the idea then you might as well stop checking for drugs, abolish the police and dismiss all the courts. It's like giving up.

Also in this case, and in most school-shooting cases it makes no sense, most of the guns used during these events tend to belong to a parent that's legally bought them, the shooter themselves have sometimes legally bought them, most of it all is legal right up till the shooting starts. And waiting till that moment to do something is just far too late. Now I've seen more than a few 'solutions' to the problem and they all seem kinda stupid to me:

  • Abolishing gun-free zones (like many/most schools are), the argument is that shooter target these places because they know they are not going to see return fire before the cops show up. Which is rubbish, school shooters target schools because there are people in the school they don't like, like certain teachers, bullies and ex-girlfriends and whatnot. School shooters are not like terrorists that target a place at random to kill as many random people as possible.
  • Blaming the amount of doors, a particularly dim bulb of a representative suggested that schools in America have too many entries and exits, which makes it too difficult to monitor who comes and goes so the solution would be to close some of them. I guess thats a solution to guns... shame about all the kids that are then going to be burnt alive in case of a fire, also it just makes it harder to get away from an armed lunatic.
  • Airport like security + armed guards: Sounds very expensive, time consuming, and it sounds very much like your school is an army base and doesn't feel safe at all for kids.
  • Medication, in the wake of Texas, another representative blamed a legal medication as part of the problem... look the only way you could blame medicine for this is if the medicine in question was known to give the taker violent outbursts or completely warped their minds... which usually isn't the case with school shooters.

My own suggestions might sound just as dim to some, but here they are:

  • Mandatory waiting period on gun purchases: As far as I understand, in America you can technically go into a gun store and leave armed in a matter of hours. I would suggest cranking that up to a couple of days. If you are a law-abiding citizen, you shouldn't care because a gun is not an emergency item you need here and now, normally. And in case you do, you can get a permit from the police to bypass this (in case your life is actively being threatened). This should stop most of the 'spur of the moment' type of shooters that are otherwise almost impossible to prevent because there is very little time between their bad day concluding and to the bullets start flying.
  • Make it mandatory gun owners keep their weapons in a locked closet that only they can unlock rather than just leave them lying around the house. If you can't be carrying it all the time or keep an eye on it, at least make it so no one else can run off with it or them. Some will ofc say 'but that means I can't defend myself from home invaders' but you can only wield one gun at a time, maybe two, but having it lying next to you while you sleep should be as good... though I have to wonder if anyone can get into your bedroom and steal the gun without waking you, then you aren't going to be woken by anyone sneaking through your window either. the whole situation is dependent on the other people making enough noise to wake you in time, which you can't rely on.
  • Expand on the people who cannot get guns legally. There are more people banned from flying, from what I understand, than there are people banned from owning a weapon... that shouldn't be the case. Certainly it will not stop any of these people from getting a weapon if they really want to, but again this is also about society/lawmakers showing that they are at least trying to prevent these people from getting armed. The point is that it should be difficult, very difficult if possible, for dangerous people to get weapons, and it should be easy to take them away from them if they are found having them.
  • Take a look at what kind of weapons and modifications you really want or need out and about in society, the Second Amendment clearly says 'well-regulated militia', not 'armed to the teeth'. Now I know there is a supreme court ruling on this question, but considering how abortion is also legal per the surpreme court and how difficult politicians still manage to make it, I feel as if that previous ruling isn't set in stone. Simply ask what people need something like an AR-15 or other military style weapons for. Same with stuff like high capacity magazines, silencers, bump-stocks... why do you really need these things? And should you get new limitations implemented, have periods of time where gunowners can show up and hand in their illegal armaments without getting into trouble with the law, and perhaps throw in an added bonus of getting some money in return (within reason) the first time. You can have periods later on where they can just come in and leave them.
  • But most of all: Just dont say any of this is too difficult to do in America, or that it doesn't matter if you do. It does far more damage if you don't even try.
Avatar image for themaximus
TheMaximus

709

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@chimeroid: the issue is with criminals and kids. Weve had school shootings and event shootings. I agree the people thinking they can take on the government are delusional. And if that method worked for Australia and other countries i agree it should be implemented in America as well. But you and i both know the gun owners aren't going to allow this.

Avatar image for chimeroid
Chimeroid

9276

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@chimeroid: the issue is with criminals and kids. Weve had school shootings and event shootings. I agree the people thinking they can take on the government are delusional. And if that method worked for Australia and other countries i agree it should be implemented in America as well. But you and i both know the gun owners aren't going to allow this.

Here is the issue. The government shouldn't ask them at all. THeir threats of domestic terrorism should be taken seriously and they should be jailed if they threaten violence in response to new legislation.

Avatar image for themaximus
TheMaximus

709

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for xzone
xZone

11094

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#278 xZone  Online

@firestarlord73194: wtf do you mean lmao. Violence can't be solved with more violence? What do you think we should do then? Should we have let the Nazis take over the world? That's just an utterly ridiculous statement. If violence is not stopped it becomes oppression

Avatar image for rl4
RL4

1700

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@xzone said:

@firestarlord73194: wtf do you mean lmao. Violence can't be solved with more violence? What do you think we should do then? Should we have let the Nazis take over the world? That's just an utterly ridiculous statement. If violence is not stopped it becomes oppression

ahhh yes, who doesn't remember the violence and bloodshed of the Women's revolts of 1920? All that mass murdering they did got them the right to vote. Clearly violence is the solution.

Avatar image for hittheassasin
HitTheAssasin

9277

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#280  Edited By HitTheAssasin

No. It's literally the absolutely worst way to go about improving the USA's amount of school shootings, which, in turn, is caused by their utterly outdated and reckless gun laws, which are upheld due to some silly need for all possible freedoms, which subsequently results in far too many unnecessary deaths, all to uohold one stupid, already clearly proven principle.

Avatar image for thenewguysnm1
Thenewguysnm1

7550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

This is literally the stupidest thing i have heard in a while

Avatar image for thenewguysnm1
Thenewguysnm1

7550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Im from England so i may not be the most knowledgeable but wouldnt it just increase tension and fear especially in the classroom.

And i can guarantee there will be teachers abusing there weapons and shooting students

Avatar image for xzone
xZone

11094

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#283 xZone  Online

@rl4: Yeah, all those non violent protests that stopped the Nazis too. There is time for both, deal with it

Avatar image for rl4
RL4

1700

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@xzone:

*implies school shootings are equivalent the the holocaust*

Cool story bro...

Avatar image for xzone
xZone

11094

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#285 xZone  Online

@rl4: What? Lmao did you read what I said? He said that you can't stop violence with violence, I said you have to sometimes. And you said women gained the right to vote via non violent protest, how tf does that equivilate to school shootings? I don't know if the OP means actually giving weapons to kids, cause that would be retarded, but having teachers that know how to defend the class is NOT a bad idea. Having security walking the halls is not a bad idea either.

Avatar image for rl4
RL4

1700

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@xzone:

Oof. Nice backpedal.

In case you genuinely don’t get it:

1. You said violence is sometimes necessary

2. You suggest arming teachers (violent solution) as a way to address school shootings

3. You cite the rise of the Nazis as a reason to justify a violent solution

White kids=Nazis

Solid logic dude <3

Ergo, if them

Avatar image for xzone
xZone

11094

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#287 xZone  Online

@rl4: You are not connecting these dots very well. Also, try not to be so smug if you don't mind. I generally agree with your posts, but let me lay this out.

You said giving women the right to vote was the same as this. That's a lesser analogy than mine by any standards. I was only using the nazis as an example that sometimes you must use violence. Wether you want to arm teachers or not idc. What I was saying to the guy is correct. You can not stop violence without defense. If someone pointed a gun at your face would you just let him shoot you? Or would you defend yourself. You defending yourself is violence, but if you did not defend yourself you would be killed. Simple point.

Avatar image for brucerogers
BruceRogers

18185

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

This is still a lethally stupid idea.

Avatar image for alavanka
Alavanka

2930

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Only if they receive military discipline and training. I'd rather have a guy that knows how to clear rooms and hold angles using a glock than a scared 40 year old woman that is just as likely to shoot me in a panic armed with the best rifle in the world. Plus, when officers do arrive on scene, the last thing they need is some scared kid waving a gun around.

Avatar image for xzone
xZone

11094

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#291 xZone  Online

Horrible, horrible idea.. For the kids part anyways. Teachers however, maybe, but upping security is the obvious choice

X

Avatar image for kevd4wg
Kevd4wg

14927

Forum Posts

266

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I've had a teacher threaten to kill me so I'll pass

Avatar image for anthp2000
ANTHP2000

33523

Forum Posts

150

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@kevd4wg: Fr?

OT: If even a decent number of people believe it's a good idea, I'm even more convinced humanity is stupid.

Avatar image for kevd4wg
Kevd4wg

14927

Forum Posts

266

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#294  Edited By Kevd4wg

@anthp2000 said:

@kevd4wg: Fr?

OT: If even a decent number of people believe it's a good idea, I'm even more convinced humanity is stupid.

Yeah, not sure if they were serious, but I don't want to risk it

Edit: A different one of my teachers said something along the lines of "if they let teachers have guns I'd shoot a bunch of you dumbasses so let's not let teachers have guns"

Avatar image for alavanka
Alavanka

2930

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#295  Edited By Alavanka

Militarygrade weapons? No. That would be absurd. Even as a gun owner, I need special permits to operate a fully automatic rifle in a gun range. People can defend themselves just fine with a semi-automatic pistol or rifle. They don't need a fully automatic gun. They would probably be unable to handle the recoil, and end up using it on a semi-auto setting anyways. All you really need for self defense is to find a strong corner, and dominate it. You don't need to clear rooms, or go after the assailant. And lmao...grenades. Oh my lord. Putting grenades in the hands of an untrained child or women in a state of panic is just asking for friendly fire.

I would only support this idea if the children have mandatory training for at least 2 hours a day. At that point, I would rather there be armed police officers that regularly patrol schools than arming teachers and students.

Avatar image for ourmanuel
ourmanuel

15379

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#296  Edited By ourmanuel

No. I know you might’ve had the best intentions at heart, but this isn’t the way to do it. This is just asking for trouble.

“2 grenades” yeah, no.

However, I do believe that it would be more effective if schools had better equipped, armed TRAINED security and also for gun laws to be a bit stricter in the case of background checks. The USA has a pretty big gun problem that’s only made worse by some hard core right wingers who want to “protect muh freedoms”. Then they wank the second amendment and try to make it seem like guns are the safest thing ever and that they don’t have a big spree/mass killing problem in the USA.

Though it’s pretty much too late now for much to be done about the big gun culture in America. The best that could be done is improving background checks, banning some gun parts(or at least making them harder to buy by the average joe) and maybe improving mental health and/or educating parents about signs to watch out for/how to keep their guns from their kids.

Avatar image for redhood_jaytodd
RedHood_JayTodd

1730

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Surprised this is still being debated.

Avatar image for deactivated-5c1e5b9f31ff6
deactivated-5c1e5b9f31ff6

32

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

This is ridiculously stupid.

Avatar image for kanyecosby
KanyeCosby

7974

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Giving weapons to students at school is an absolutely stupid idea. In fact, that’s probably one of the dumbest ideas I’ve heard in a long time. Giving weapons to teachers is not as dumb, and I can at least see a good argument being made for that, but they don’t have the experience necessary to deal with weapons and potential school shooters. It’s better to have actual security guards at school. I also don’t think that metal detectors would be a practical solution, becausd not only are they extremely expensive, but they would also inhibit the learning experience for students. It would create an almost hostile learning environment and it would take an absurd amount of time to get everyone through. Can you imagine thousands of students all with backpacks having to go through these security checkpoints?