Christ's Word
New member
Still having trouble with menopause I see.....
toldailytopic: What can be done to help prevent the epidemic of school shootings?
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
If that's the best you have I guess it will just have to do. :e4e:
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
For Pete's sake, I'm a few pages into this thread and it's practically turned into another 'evolution' debate.
What's happened here is an outright atrocity and tragedy. Humanity doesn't revolve around a 'creationist' or 'evolutionary' view of the world. Belief doesn't depend on one or the other or vice versa either.
Geez...
:sigh:
What's happened here is an outright atrocity and tragedy. Humanity doesn't revolve around a 'creationist' or 'evolutionary' view of the world. Belief doesn't depend on one or the other or vice versa either.
Geez...
:sigh:
That doesn't matter. If you think it is wrong, then you must have a reason to do so. Show that reason to think what I showed is wrong. You must have something.
Logical Fallacy
Gun accidents happen therefore gun accidents can not be avoided
Red herring
No one suggested organizing well armed school militia, without providing significant training. I would, in fact, argue that a person who is heavily armed without significant training is not "well armed"!
rainee
New member
Hi Barbarian,
Sigh.
So you say some states have an abysmal education system?
Are you going to try to correlate that to school shootings?
I don't think you can gather that kind of information at least for now, maybe someday. But I doubt you will find Creationism had any foothold at all at schools such as Columbine, or in that area of Connecticut where Adam attended or in Springfield, Oregon where Kip Kinkel shot and killed his parents before going to his school and shooting.
I think evolution will be found in all of the schools as the popular and accepted stand.
Luke Woodham, a then 16 year old from Pearl High School in Mississippi, and 1997 shooter who killed his mother and then went to the school to shoot claimed he had turned to Satanism and black magic that would give him what he wanted. He also said he did it as a cross dresser who was picked on.
Luke was stopped with a hand gun by the Vice Principle:
So Luke not only didn't use a gun to kill his mother, he also was stopped by the presence of a gun in an adult's hand.
Letsargue
New member
Ecclesiastes 12:13 KJV – “Let us hear the ( Conclusion ) of the ( Whole matter ): (( “FEAR” )) God; and keep His Commandments: for ( This is the Whole Duty of Man )”. ---&--- Jude 1:23 KJV – “Others save with “ (( FEAR ))”, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh”. -------//-- What are both of those (( FEARS )) about?? -- Let’s see you all add some of your carnal "Fears" to correct anything that bothers you about anything in your world of SIN!!! --- It’s "ALL" in the Gospel that God is commanding the World of unbelievers to have Faith in; -- BUT NO!!!!! – Do everything your way!! – Read the above again and ask yourself if you can add anything to IT!!!! You most likely WILL!!!
Paul – 121812
So are books on grammar and history and math. You think those had a causal impact?
lain:
Barbarian observes:
Yep. And the point is, if we armed teachers, more students would be dead than if we didn't arm teachers. Accidental handgun deaths are much more common than deaths from school shootings. You're proposing a solution that is many times more dangerous than the hazard.
Basic principle of Safety; accidents can be controlled, but not eliminated. Introduce a hazard, and it will eventually lead to a loss.
Barbarian observes:
And TH noted that unless we spent a lot of time drilling in actual simualted circumstances, people would be very unlikely to respond properly in those one in a million circumstances where a gun might help.
Reality.
What would you throw out to make that training happen? You see, teachers already must do training frequently. There's a cost in money and in academic preparation, if you add training. And in this case, for a very unlikely event. Security people have looked at all of this, and found that a better use of resources is training teachers what do do in such events, and in making perimeter security more solid.
These are former FBI agents, law enforcement people, and the like, who are well aware of the way these rare incidents have happened, and know what the best defense for these would be.
Right. Another reason not to do it. How much training do you think is necessary to have a person prepared to know when to use lethal force at the right time?
Moreover, the lack of realistic hazard makes vigilance highly unlikely. That is human nature.
Yep. And the point is, if we armed teachers, more students would be dead than if we didn't arm teachers. Accidental handgun deaths are much more common than deaths from school shootings. You're proposing a solution that is many times more dangerous than the hazard.
Basic principle of Safety; accidents can be controlled, but not eliminated. Introduce a hazard, and it will eventually lead to a loss.
Barbarian observes:
And TH noted that unless we spent a lot of time drilling in actual simualted circumstances, people would be very unlikely to respond properly in those one in a million circumstances where a gun might help.
Reality.
What would you throw out to make that training happen? You see, teachers already must do training frequently. There's a cost in money and in academic preparation, if you add training. And in this case, for a very unlikely event. Security people have looked at all of this, and found that a better use of resources is training teachers what do do in such events, and in making perimeter security more solid.
These are former FBI agents, law enforcement people, and the like, who are well aware of the way these rare incidents have happened, and know what the best defense for these would be.
Right. Another reason not to do it. How much training do you think is necessary to have a person prepared to know when to use lethal force at the right time?
Moreover, the lack of realistic hazard makes vigilance highly unlikely. That is human nature.
rainee
New member
Hi Paul,
YOu are using good verses I see! One of which is too hard for me to understand at this time, sigh. (Again as per usual for you?
You are right that mankind will and does add things in efforts to try to fix something. But I will have to think about that too, as to whether God doesn't understand such actions. King David went to sleep at night as an old man with an armed guard standing around his bed as he slept. Did God condemn that?
Last edited:
rainee
New member
So are books on grammar and history and math. You think those had a causal impact?
Ok, please explain to me why Dahmer's testimony that being taught evolution dehumanized people in his eyes is not to be considered as significant? You all are ignoring a murderer trying to explain something.
Or have you heard of a killer saying grammar, history or math sent him on a spree?
Well let me preface that with: I'm not good at math and you are really into keeping count and score and stuff like that as you have said here.
And lots of people very good at math are found to be mentally ill. :think:
Hi. Good to talk to you, again.
Yep.
Violence in general. Ignorant people are more prone to violence. Would you like some information on that?
But there were a surprisingly large number of such shootings in states where evolution has been opposed. Much more than population and chance factors would predict.
As you know, correlation doesn't mean causation. But the strong correlation between rejection of evolution, and violent crime does remove the claim that there's a connection between evolutionary theory and violence.
The factor of sociopathy gets skirted in our politically correct atmosphere. Sociopaths tend to be above average in intelligence and often capable of the appearance of cooperation and charm.
Because ... Dahmer said it. He did what *most* evil, violent criminals do ... made excuses for his bad deeds. It's not his fault, but the fault of society for allowing evolution to dehumanize him.
rainee
New member
You have absolutely no proof or evidence of that.
And I wouldn't arm a teacher but have an armed person in the office - who had to take practice regularly.
The truth of the matter is people don't usually like to attack people who can attack back. It takes away a feeling of power. This might be a great deterrent.
Ahh, really? You, sir, are being haphazard in throwing all shooting accidents into one category. Do you mean hunting accidents? Gun cleaning accidents? Someone getting into another's guns and shooting themselves or others? Each one of those scenarios is far different from what is being proposed here.
I admit guns are dangerous. That is why they may work as deterrents.
Are you talking about cars or guns? If you are talking about cars what do you propose? If you aren't perhaps you should be.
Agreed! Anything stated by a depraved pseudo-human being cannot be taken into account as reality. They dwell almost completely within their own festering ideas. Their words and deeds are extensions of those ideas.
rainee
New member
Rusha you are saying this because you didn't read one thing about him after being incarcerated, aren't you.
He made no excuses and wanted to be wiped from the face of the earth with no grave or funeral..
For the same reason you can't credit Ted Bundy blaming pornography for his condition. They're manipulative liars and narcissists.
No, I'm not giving credibility to someone attempting to mitigate his personal responsibility and manipulate you and others willing to buy into it.
I don't place faith in people so unhinged that they take pleasure in the suffering and death of others. I don't credit them with either altruism or honesty and neither should you.
I've said I like statistics.
So you're suggesting Einstein might have been a serial killer? Well, at least we know that if he was you'd be more likely to credit his motives and honesty.
lain:
Last edited:
Wile E. Coyote
New member
I agree with this statement. :up: This is why I don't trust aCW.
"I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked." Ezekiel 33:11
Barbarian observes:
Yep. And the point is, if we armed teachers, more students would be dead than if we didn't arm teachers.
I have abundant evidence for it. Compare the frequency of fatal shootings in schools anually, with the death toll from accidental shootings annually. You're proposing to control a highly unlikely hazard with a much more dangerous one.
This is why people who understand security, don't want teacher to be armed; the control is more dangerous than the hazard you want to control.
As TH said, it would have to be a person who frequently drills in realistic situations, so that they'd be able to react effectively in an emergency. A law enforcement officer, for example.
No one attacks police officers? You sure about that?
And you are assuming all assaults in schools are the same. Comes down to likelihoods. And bringing guns into schools will produce a much greater likelihood of injury and death, than not bringing them in.
Barbarian observes:
Basic principle of Safety; accidents can be controlled, but not eliminated. Introduce a hazard, and it will eventually lead to a loss.
Doesn't matter what you're talking about. Works the same way.
Controls that work and don't introduce more hazard than they control.
Yep. And the point is, if we armed teachers, more students would be dead than if we didn't arm teachers.
I have abundant evidence for it. Compare the frequency of fatal shootings in schools anually, with the death toll from accidental shootings annually. You're proposing to control a highly unlikely hazard with a much more dangerous one.
This is why people who understand security, don't want teacher to be armed; the control is more dangerous than the hazard you want to control.
As TH said, it would have to be a person who frequently drills in realistic situations, so that they'd be able to react effectively in an emergency. A law enforcement officer, for example.
No one attacks police officers? You sure about that?
And you are assuming all assaults in schools are the same. Comes down to likelihoods. And bringing guns into schools will produce a much greater likelihood of injury and death, than not bringing them in.
Barbarian observes:
Basic principle of Safety; accidents can be controlled, but not eliminated. Introduce a hazard, and it will eventually lead to a loss.
Doesn't matter what you're talking about. Works the same way.
Controls that work and don't introduce more hazard than they control.