In the aftermath of the horrible shooting, turn on the TV and there is no shortage of "experts" giving their ideas for a magic solution to prevent another mass shooting.  No doubt every one of them has a personal or financial agenda, but is there really a common sense approach that will make a difference?

Gun Bans-I heard one estimate there are over 300,000,000 guns in this country.  How does anybody really know?  I have 3 the federal government does not know about, they were family heirlooms.  If we ban any single type (hand, repeating, etc) what about the millions that already exist?

Give guns to teachers-this may be the dumbest idea anybody has ever come up with. I hate to think we are at the point where we need armed security in schools, but we may be there.  It would have to be an armed police officer, not some vigilante wanna be like George Zimmerman.

More mental health funding-Did this kid seek mental health help and was denied because none was available?  If we have more help available, how do we identify who needs it?  Make every American take a mental health evaluation?  Something tells me mad men who are willing to do an act like this really will not take the time to get help voluntarily.

Ban violent video games and movies-this ranks right up there with banning guns.  They are both big business and it will never happen.  As a parent of two small children, I have no problem with it though. 

We live in a nation of over 300,000,000+ people.  How do we stop one crazy like this from performing such a horrific act.  I am afraid real solutions may be non-existent.

As mentioned in another thread, we are going to see legislation that exempts 900+ weapons and guns.  Is this really going to accomplish anything?  In the aftermath of such an event we always hear cries that "something" has to be done.  I guess this is an attempt to do "something" and make everyone feel better.

The arming teachers proposals I have heard going around are not just let teachers with a conceal carry take guns into schools. They are saying create a program, by which teachers certify, train and recertify, if they choose to opt into then program. The training would be similar to the training law enforcement officers go through to certify. I do agree that just letting whatever random teacher pack heat is a bad idea.

Most of the shooters lately have had diagnosed mental issues. If a person is diagnosed with certain disorders, schizophrenia for example, we could require regular evaluations and verification that they are on meds. If they fail to comply then, much like in the 50s and 60s, we institutionalize you.

However, I agree that no solution will stop every whacko on the planet. Heck there have been two mass knife attacks in China recently at schools. One resulted in 8 deaths and another 7-8 injuries. The other resulted in 22 injuries, but fortunately no deaths.

I don't know the solution, but it can't be denied that as long as we have the 2nd amendment right, these things are going to happen.  I thought the timing of the below link was interesting, and the stats speak volumes.  The Chinese are having issues with school attacks as well, but guns are not readily available there.  Thus, they're using knives typically.  The latest attack yielded 22 injured children, but no fatalities.  If the kid in Connecticut had to use a knife, I'm guessing there would have  been similar results as compared to the 26 he was able to kill with firearms.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/worl...-china-20723910

cowboykidd wrote: The arming teachers proposals I have heard going around are not just let teachers with a conceal carry take guns into schools. They are saying create a program, by which teachers certify, train and recertify, if they choose to opt into then program. The training would be similar to the training law enforcement officers go through to certify. I do agree that just letting whatever random teacher pack heat is a bad idea.

Most of the shooters lately have had diagnosed mental issues. If a person is diagnosed with certain disorders, schizophrenia for example, we could require regular evaluations and verification that they are on meds. If they fail to comply then, much like in the 50s and 60s, we institutionalize you.

However, I agree that no solution will stop every whacko on the planet. Heck there have been two mass knife attacks in China recently at schools. One resulted in 8 deaths and another 7-8 injuries. The other resulted in 22 injuries, but fortunately no deaths.

Sorry Kidd, didn't see your last bit about the China angle.

Unfortunately there is no common sense solution to an insane deranged individual. 

I hate the idea of arming people in a school.  Guns don't belong in a schools, as I would be more affraid of accidents than I am afraid of the deranged individuals.

I am not a fan of outlawing guns, or even certain types of guns.  I don't want the criminals to know they have more firepower than their targets.  However, this argument conflicts my statement about not wanting guns in a schoolhouse.  The attackers know this is a defenseless place. 

We could install metal detectors at the schools entrances, but then they will target the school buses or parking lots.

I am glad that many of these lunatics have not discovered self manufactured explosives yet. 

Currently, I side with the idea of not letting the crazy people in this world change our lifestyle, but this thought is currently teetering.

TailgatingBrian wrote: Unfortunately there is no common sense solution to an insane deranged individual. 

I hate the idea of arming people in a school.  Guns don't belong in a schools, as I would be more affraid of accidents than I am afraid of the deranged individuals.

I am not a fan of outlawing guns, or even certain types of guns.  I don't want the criminals to know they have more firepower than their targets.  However, this argument conflicts my statement about not wanting guns in a schoolhouse.  The attackers know this is a defenseless place. 

We could install metal detectors at the schools entrances, but then they will target the school buses or parking lots.

I am glad that many of these lunatics have not discovered self manufactured explosives yet. 

Currently, I side with the idea of not letting the crazy people in this world change our lifestyle, but this thought is currently teetering.

I would just wonder what type of lifestyle requires a handgun or semi-automatic weapon.

GumbyFromPokeyland wrote:

TailgatingBrian wrote: Unfortunately there is no common sense solution to an insane deranged individual. 

I hate the idea of arming people in a school.  Guns don't belong in a schools, as I would be more affraid of accidents than I am afraid of the deranged individuals.

I am not a fan of outlawing guns, or even certain types of guns.  I don't want the criminals to know they have more firepower than their targets.  However, this argument conflicts my statement about not wanting guns in a schoolhouse.  The attackers know this is a defenseless place. 

We could install metal detectors at the schools entrances, but then they will target the school buses or parking lots.

I am glad that many of these lunatics have not discovered self manufactured explosives yet. 

Currently, I side with the idea of not letting the crazy people in this world change our lifestyle, but this thought is currently teetering.

I would just wonder what type of lifestyle requires a handgun or semi-automatic weapon.

A police officer.  A soldier.  A hunter.  A gun collector.  A guy who likes to target practice.  A dooms-dayer.  A security guard.  Armored car driver.  A man who camps at surfside jetty.  A woman defending her body from an attacker.  Joel Myrick was an assistant principle when he put his to good use.

TGB, no point in giving Gumby examples. He doesn't care if the DOJ statistics say that only 8% of violent crimes invovle a gun. He doesn't care if 6% involve knives, or that the majority involve no weapon at all. He doesn't care that the research shows that guns are more likely to be used for defense than crime. He doesn't care that children are more likely to drown than be shot.

All he knows is that he thinks guns are scary and no amount of evidence otherwise will change his mind. It is like a person who is scared of flying. It doesn't matter if you can show that it is statistically the safest way to travel, all they can remember is that one scene in a movie where the plane crashed.

Not that it matters for the purpose of this discussion, but it is of interest that the most deaths (45) in a single incident involving a public school occurred in 1927, by a madman using bombs.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

1) Increase in mental health funding. Make insurance companies carry some sort of mental health plan. (I promise you, the two biggest national health crisis facing our country is mental health and obesity.)

2) Arming teachers is just stupid! This isn't a realistic option. However, hiring off duty police officers to patrol schools is an option. One armed guard per school.

3) Lock the doors! Why is this so hard? When school starts, lock the doors to where anyone who needs to get inside has to pass through security.

4) Open the discussion about gun control. Not even allowing an open and honest debate about possible solution is a disservice to our entire country. Gun control does not mean banning guns.

5) Stop publisizing these acts of violence. We don't have to know what the killer ate for breakfast the morning of his act of terror. Don't put his face on tv, don't talk about him at all. No name, no picture, nothing.

MadMau wrote: Not that it matters for the purpose of this discussion, but it is of interest that the most deaths (45) in a single incident involving a public school occurred in 1927, by a madman using bombs.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

How many assault weapons and semi-auto guns were available in 1927?

pokegoats wrote:

MadMau wrote: Not that it matters for the purpose of this discussion, but it is of interest that the most deaths (45) in a single incident involving a public school occurred in 1927, by a madman using bombs.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

How many assault weapons and semi-auto guns were available in 1927?

What part of "not that it matters for the purpose of this discussion" did you not comprehend?

MadMau wrote:

pokegoats wrote:

MadMau wrote: Not that it matters for the purpose of this discussion, but it is of interest that the most deaths (45) in a single incident involving a public school occurred in 1927, by a madman using bombs.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

How many assault weapons and semi-auto guns were available in 1927?

What part of "not that it matters for the purpose of this discussion" did you not comprehend?

What part of "How many assault weapons and semi-auto guns were available in 1927?" did you not understand?

pokegoats wrote:

MadMau wrote:

pokegoats wrote:

MadMau wrote: Not that it matters for the purpose of this discussion, but it is of interest that the most deaths (45) in a single incident involving a public school occurred in 1927, by a madman using bombs.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

How many assault weapons and semi-auto guns were available in 1927?

What part of "not that it matters for the purpose of this discussion" did you not comprehend?

What part of "How many assault weapons and semi-auto guns were available in 1927?" did you not understand?

We both know you had a knee jerk reaction to the post, which was simply an interesting factoid and not meant to argue for or against gun control.  

But I'll play along, if you like.........

I don't know, probably not many now that you ask.  We should probably go back to those pre-assault, semi-auto gun days!   Solve everything, ey?

I'm not a huge fan of gun control and believe in the right to bear arms, plus I know very little about firearms.  But having said that, it does not seem to me that things such as "assault weapons" which can fire a significant number of rounds in just a few seconds can really be considered guns or firearms.  It seems they represent a device that is used to wage war ... you cannot use them for hunting, they seem overkill for home protection, so why does anyone need them, other than to kill quickly, and do they really represent the "right to bear arms"? (the language BTW representing the needs at the time for a well-armed militia).  Do explosive devices represent arms, do guided missiles represent arms?  JMO

Having said that, it seems the core problem may be the mental health aspect of the situation, and how do we addresss the core reason such things like this happen.

mtberry wrote: I'm not a huge fan of gun control and believe in the right to bear arms, plus I know very little about firearms.  But having said that, it does not seem to me that things such as "assault weapons" which can fire a significant number of rounds in just a few seconds can really be considered guns or firearms.  It seems they represent a device that is used to wage war ... you cannot use them for hunting, they seem overkill for home protection, so why does anyone need them, other than to kill quickly, and do they really represent the "right to bear arms"? (the language BTW representing the needs at the time for a well-armed militia).  Do explosive devices represent arms, do guided missiles represent arms?  JMO

Having said that, it seems the core problem may be the mental health aspect of the situation, and how do we addresss the core reason such things like this happen.

I am also a firm believer in the right to bare arms, but like you think that we can draw a line somewhere, possibly more than it currently exists.   And you're right that the mental health aspect is a BIG key.

It's a big problem and becoming bigger because IMO, society is more fractured and we've become too permissive in tolerating deviant behavior.

"Lock the doors" sounds nice, but is not feasible in many schools. Many schools were not built with single point entry in mind. Many campuses have multiple buildings that students have to move in and out of, gyms, cafeterias, other classroom buildings, etc... Additionally, in this case I believe they had single point entry into the office, thus why the administration was among the first killed. Let us say for example you have an armed officer sitting at the desk. If someone comes in shooting there is nothing that keeps him from getting killed and now we are back to square 1.

I agree that mental health is a big part of this, though.

pokegoats wrote:

MadMau wrote: Not that it matters for the purpose of this discussion, but it is of interest that the most deaths (45) in a single incident involving a public school occurred in 1927, by a madman using bombs.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

How many assault weapons and semi-auto guns were available in 1927?

After WWI automatic weapons were very easy to get a hold of.  As were hand guns.  However, there was the ever constant threat that if you shot someone, one of his friends/relatives would immediately or eventually shoot you back.

pokefan4life wrote: 1) Increase in mental health funding. Make insurance companies carry some sort of mental health plan. (I promise you, the two biggest national health crisis facing our country is mental health and obesity.)

2) Arming teachers is just stupid! This isn't a realistic option. However, hiring off duty police officers to patrol schools is an option. One armed guard per school.

3) Lock the doors! Why is this so hard? When school starts, lock the doors to where anyone who needs to get inside has to pass through security.

4) Open the discussion about gun control. Not even allowing an open and honest debate about possible solution is a disservice to our entire country. Gun control does not mean banning guns.

5) Stop publisizing these acts of violence. We don't have to know what the killer ate for breakfast the morning of his act of terror. Don't put his face on tv, don't talk about him at all. No name, no picture, nothing.

Someone needs to check to see if hell froze over, as I agree with PF4L.  I am not real aware of the mental health epidemic being that big of a problem for soceity, but that is probably just my naivety. 

I would also add that financing our problems is another big problem that out country is facing.

As to Kidds commment, locking the doors might not be all that practical as many buildings are built like campuses.  My school even 20 years ago, had self locking doors that were openable from the inside (in case of fire).  This seems obvious.  However, this was a teachers son.  He would easily skirt a locked door or security.

Most schools these days do lock their doors and you have to buzz the front office for them to let you in. However that doesn't stop someone from busting out a piece of glass and letting themselves in, as schools aren't constructed to withstand an armed assault. There will never be a way to eliminate these kinds of things. The best that our society can hope for is a way to prevent them as well as we can.