More Bad Ideas from the Gun Crowd

I covered Sarah Hoyt’s incoherent pro-gun argument the other day here. Larry Correia has had a few things to say also but mainly on Facebook (he’s been slowly depoliticising his blog for a while). It is mainly the usual stuff that I’ve covered here before – encourage teachers to carry concealed weapons.

Correia’s theory is that is schools are gun free zones then this encourages shooters. The fact that the recent school shooting HAD an armed officer present and this did NOT deter the shooter or limit the death toll is apparently not germane to the issue.

“You can’t count on guards, or the state, or feelings, or another law, or stupid gun free zones, or some liberal’s wishful thinking.”

Well, you really, really, really can’t count on guns as the appalling mountain of evidence keeps demonstrating.

Larry points to the policy in Utah of allowing teachers with an appropriate licence to carry concealed weapons on school grounds. Meanwhile in Utah in 2014:

That absurdity aside, the Utah law also prevents the school from knowing IF a teacher is or isn’t carrying a gun.

In reality more guns in schools means more shootings in schools. The impact on mass shootings would be zero (as can be seen by the fact that having armed officers at a school does not deter shooters) but there would be additional deaths, injuries or scares as a consequence of more armed teachers.

The results may be ironic ( ) or tragic: (The following link may be upsetting and includes refernce to suicide.–law/students-return-lithia-springs-high-after-teacher-shoots-self-classroom/o9ekUOCFkr8jY76Vnxw3oI/ ) but more guns in schools wont prevent mass shootings.


39 thoughts on “More Bad Ideas from the Gun Crowd

  1. It’s not just Larry Correia. Those words came out of Trump’s mouth, too. Arm teachers. Because teachers have the spare time and willingness to spend it getting themselves skilled with a gun, and practice simulations of a shooting event. Oh, and steel themselves against the possibility of needing to kill one of their fellow teachers or kids. And not necessarily the ones they already don’t like.

    I suppose they could use In-Service days (does the US even have those?) to brush up on their training. Because who needs to get better at, you know, teaching, or the subject one is supposed to be teaching?

    Liked by 3 people

  2. I could believe that if all 3.6 million US school teachers went armed that it would cut mass shootings in half or more, but simply because of accidents/abuse, it would probably increase the average student’s chance of being shot by a factor of 100 or more. It’s not that it wouldn’t work; it’s that the cure would be vastly worse than the disease.

    “Nuke the school from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.”

    Liked by 2 people

    1. The black students (esp. male) would be 300% more likely to be killed by a teacher who “feared for their life”.

      Of course, that would be a feature, not a bug to the people who are espousing this.


  3. Cynical Ryan sees Trump’s NRA endorsed plan of arming teachers as a way of increasing gun sales. The NRA only pays lip service to representing gun owners, they primarily lobby for gun manufactures. Polls show that most gun owners favor more regulation.

    They’re basically today’s tobacco lobby.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Oddly enough gun sales are down now that Obama’s out of office — “Trump is coming for your guns” just doesn’t have the same ring of fear to it. The NRA has to make up that shortfall somehow.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. A friend of mine who is a teacher said yesterday:

    “You can ask me to teach your children, you can ask me to risk my life for your children, but you cannot ask me to kill for your children because you refuse to look at other solutions to these issues.”

    Liked by 7 people

  5. I wouldn’t say ‘more bad ideas’ since these are the same ole, tired, tattered, threadbare bad ideas the gun nuts have always been spouting off.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. Of course, they’re not actually trying to offer any sensible suggestions, they just want to prevent any sane discussion of the topic.

      Liked by 3 people

  6. The Utah teacher, and the other incidents I’ve seen recently — a professor at Idaho State University who shot himself in the leg, a Pennsylvania teacher who left her gun in the bathroom — those worry me. Given the number of incidents we have here in the states where toddlers shoot other toddlers, and ten year olds playing with their dads’ guns shoot their friends or relatives, I can imagine the consequences in a school where (let’s say) 20% of the teachers have guns in their desks, purses, or jackets.

    Or, you know, leaving them behind in the bathroom for their 3rd graders to find.

    Liked by 4 people

  7. I wonder if any of the people who call for teachers to carry weapons have ever been inside a school or a classroom since graduation. Because otherwise, they’d know how stupid and inpracticable that idea is.

    For starters, even if a teacher regularly trains with a gun (which they would have to do on top of all their other work) and is willing to shoot (and many wouldn’t be), there is a pretty high chance that in a crisis situation with panicked students and fellow teachers running around, they would not hit the shooter but a student or teacher.

    Not to mention that there is a very high chance that a prospective school shooter wouldn’t even have to acquire a gun of their own anymore, since they could just try to grab the teacher’s. Or a student might try to steal the teacher’s gun and use it for mayhem outside the school. Also, there are grabby kids who grab everything that’s not nailed down. Keeping such kids from swiping chalk or push pins is bad enough. Now imagine a gun in that context.

    Then there is the risk of accidents. Even if a teacher wears their gun on their body at all times, occasionally teacher are called upon to break up fights and the like. Way too easy for a gun to accidentally go off and injure the teacher or a student. Finally, there is the risk that a teacher simply has a breakdown and uses the gun to kill themselves (maybe even in the classroom in front of students) or to shoot another teacher or a student in a fit of anger. I have met more than one problematic or unstable teacher whom I really wouldn’t want to trust with a gun.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Rather chillingly, consider that it would take about five minutes for kids to work out which of their teachers were armed. Volunteering to be the trained and armed teacher with the best chance of stopping an attack *actually* means you’re volunteering to be the first victim of a planned attack, as the better armed attacker with the advantage of surprise deals with the main threat first.

      Liked by 3 people

  8. The young white men who go into these schools, mostly schools they attend or attended and know well, are going in expecting to probably die. They may have a plan for trying to slip out — and then may because they are white get taken in alive — but they expect that they are probably going to die and the majority of them are shot dead or commit suicide. After Columbine, thousands of armed police guards were hired for schools. Mass shootings in schools increased; the shooters weren’t deterred — they were encouraged by the armed guards because it makes it a more dramatic, bigger spectacle of murder and suicide. (And the school cops have mostly spent their time rousting, beating and arresting students of color instead of dealing with white mass shooters.)

    The constant attempts to lower the age of gun buying isn’t to arm black teens — who the right declares to all be gang members — but to arm white male teens, who deal with hormone surges, romantic disappointments, teachers who won’t give them the grades they want and are taught to view efforts to help POC students overcome discrimination obstacles as stealing stuff that is rightfully theirs. Trying to put a bunch of guns in school gives dealers like LC money, but it means those shooters don’t even have to buy guns or get them from their Obama-bashing family stores — they just walk right in, break open a drawer or a supply closet and take those guns and ammo instead. It makes it easier for those willing to forgo the assault rifles in their suicide martyr attacks. And since teachers can’t easily get to the guns — since that would be giving students too much access to them — when the shooters do use assault rifles and kill twenty people in three minutes, the guns they have stored away will be useless. The kids will already be dead.

    Universities are not gun free zones — they have armed campus police. One of the most famous shooters shot from a tower in a university — having guns didn’t stop him. The Vegas shooter shot from atop a hotel tower. Mass shooters in malls faced mall security that had guns and it didn’t work. Mass shooters in schools have been known to hide in closets, attacking and then mobilizing so that nobody knows where they are. That’s why we’re always being told at first that there might be multiple shooters — one shooter can spray bullets and then run to another spot before anyone, even with gun on hip, has a chance to respond.

    And someone who deals in guns like LC knows this, so it is again a lie. If the states have no money for arts classes, physical ed, sports teams, school clubs, books, school supplies, foreign language instruction, computers, etc., then they don’t have the money for guns in schools. And pretending that teachers who’ve never shot guns before will be better than armed and trained guards is obviously ludicrous. The only way to decrease school shootings and the savagery of them is to first pour money into schools to better deal with troubled kids and second to cut off easy, legal access to assault rifles, bump stocks and the most aggressive weapons, as well as tighter background checks, not giving the mentally ill the right to buy guns, waiting periods, etc. All these things have been shown to work, but they are an identity issue so they are fought, an identity deeply tied to race in the U.S.:

    But anyway, PZ Myers, a university professor, had the funniest (in the sad way of these things,) response I’ve seen so far:

    I don’t think these guys are really considering what it would mean to arm all those liberal elite academics they so despise.

    Liked by 3 people

  9. An armed teacher encountering a shooter is going to have just a few seconds to make a decision whether or not to shoot. That’s assuming that future shooters don’t target armed teachers first, in which case they might have less time.

    That’s a few seconds to decide to shoot someone who they may already know. School shooters are likely to have a connection to the school, and teachers are likely to know the shooters. In other words, we may be asking teachers to kill someone they know. And to make the decision in a few seconds.

    Let’s not forget that an armed, trained deputy did not go into the school while the shooter was active.

    I personally taught for a couple of years; it was not one of my better decisions. I do have at least one student in jail now for murder. Thankfully he wasn’t a school shooter, but had he come into my school and had I been armed I have no idea if I could have shot him. Anybody who hasn’t been trained to kill people who tells themselves they can is an idiot.

    Liked by 5 people

    1. And let’s not forget that in the infamous Columbine school shooting, the SWAT teams remained outside while a teacher bled to death in the school library. At that point both the shooters were dead (suicide); students in the library were holding up signs to the windows pleading for help. Yet the trained guys with guns stayed outside, because they didn’t know the situation in the school.

      Liked by 5 people

  10. Well again, we can throw the logic and the stats at them, but it’s not going to change their attempts to block any logical discussion on gun control because it’s about their identity and sense of power of that identity. They’re already trying to revive violent games and movies as a blame. In that post-Columbine comprehensive study I mentioned, the one where access to guns was found scientifically to be the number one factor in teen gun violence, violent movies and games were found to have none to negligible effect on teen gun violence. That was decades ago and there have been more than two decades of further study that also prove that gun control efforts work, arming people with weapons in schools does not work and that violent movies and games have no real effect versus access to guns, life circumstances and peer pressure. But they don’t care because it’s become part of propping up the wall of their identity.

    Today, Trump gave a speech at CPAC on behalf of the NRA where he condemned gun-free zones. CPAC is a gun-free zone. The very people who want open and concealed carry by teachers at schools to kill student shooters, teens able to buy assault rifles, no background checks, no waiting periods, no bans on any weapons or ammo, etc. know that having their own conservative attendees allowed guns at their private event is not a good idea. But if liberals don’t want something, then it should be forced on the liberals, to show their far right identity’s power and that they control rule of force, that their identity gets to decide things and threaten others. That’s what makes them feel better. And if they don’t have it, then obviously their objectors want to kill them and throw them in camps, etc. Since the 1990’s, when Murdoch set up shop in the U.S. and gave them media platforms and the Internet started to rapidly develop, this has been the basic strategy, from atheist, libertarian tech feudalists to theocratic, sell our daughters as teen wives to our cousins Christians. And overall it’s worked, though it’s held together by very slender threads of contrived wedge issues and fraud like gerrymandering and voter suppression that are racing against demographic pressures.

    They are desperately trying to shore up all the white male young ‘uns they can get with radicalization, including the promise of getting to shoot people with guns in a righteous revenge cause. Which is why we have domestic terror cells in the U.S. and an increase in mass shooters. It’s why we have a Death Belt — red states that have blocked gun control as much as possible and consequently have the highest rates of gun violence, most of it domestic shootings by men of their families with legal guns.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. The Gun Belt, the Death Belt, the Stroke Belt, the Teen Pregnancy Belt, the Domestic Violence Belt… guess what they have in common?

      They’re all the same: namely the Loser Traitors of 1861-1865 Belt.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. As someone pointed out at Twitter:
      “´Kids are watching to many violent movies´says the people dreaming of teachers taking down a shooter John-Woo-Style”

      I agree completly with Kat – tzhis is not an idea, this is a flimsy facade to not do anything. The fact that the US has a history of shooting and US Army bases – bases full of soldiers, trrained to use weapons! – shows that armed teacher wont prevent shootings.
      Its not just the training (and thats a big point), its that teacher can only act when the shooter has statred killing! I.e. The strategy is no limit the number of students dying, instead of, you know, prevent satudents to die at all.

      And prevention? As Kat said (and Army Shootings show) there is the bif misconception in most Pro-Gun arguments, that shool shootings are planned events. In most cases its a relativly spontaneous event – not enough time to get a gun through darknet and certainly not planned in a “OH, better not, the teachers might sop me”-kind of way. A lot of shooters turn the gun against themselves anyway.
      On the exact same day of the school shooting in the US, a student in Germany got arrrested, because he, after month of being bullied, stole a pepper spray from his parents and used it on all his classmates.
      Draw your own conclusions.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Some mass shootings are planned, e.g. the Olympia mall shooting in Munich was clearly planned beforehand. But most mass shootings in the US, especially those perpetrated by teens or young adults, are the result of frustration, bullying, long simmering anger bubbling over. In countries where guns are not easily available, a frustrated teen uses their fists, pepper spray or maybe a knife at worst. Or maybe they plan elaborate revenge schemes that they never carry out, because by then the mood has passed. However, when guns are easily available, such frustrations can easily turn very lethal indeed.

        Another thing that’s notable is that particularly teen and young adult shooters often had a long history of being bullied. Most of the German mass attacks perpetrated by teens were linked to bullying – while the Erfurt school shooting was linked to horrible state level school policies (since changed) which meant that two failed exams basically ruined the shooter’s entire life prospects (he could have moxed to another state, but that’s not exactly easy for a teenager). So if teachers were more proactive in clamping down on bullying, instead of looking away, maybe many situations would never escalate to the point of becoming dangerous.

        Liked by 1 person

  11. I don’t know if it is because they are lying or because they are too ignorant to know what “Gun Free Zones” are for, but every time a guin nut like Correia references them, they are simply spreading disinformation about them. They aren’t intended to stop someone like the Parkland shooter, and never have been. They are intended to prevent the more common, yet still lethal side-effects of having lots of firearms around, side-effects that lying gun-nuts like Correia like to pretend don’t exist.

    Think about it this way: Think back to your teen years. Think about the petty disputes, extreme drama, and high emotions that go along with that time in one’s life. Think about the times someone in your high school broke into someplace they weren’t supposed to be to get something they weren’t supposed to have and then misused it. Think about the bad breakups, angry resentments, and extended feuds kids have. Think of the stupid negligence that many teenagers engage in on a daily basis.

    Now take a couple thousand teenagers in a large building every day and put a couple of dozen guns in there with them. Think that is going to work out well?

    That is what gun free zones are intended to prevent.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I don’t normally point out typos, since I make plenty of my own, but using “guin nut” to describe Larry Correia of all people is simply too good not to point out, considering that Ursula K. Le Guin probably embodies everything about SFF that Correia hates.

      Liked by 2 people

  12. I think the most possible good faith argument, such as it is, goes like this: If there are teachers with guns in the schools, then people who shoot up schools will be deterred from attacking, and that deterrence is the best we can do, because to maintain our 2nd amendment freedom, we must not enact “any more” gun laws.


    1. Maybe they figure the bullet that gets used shooting the teacher first won’t hit a student. There’s one saved!


    2. Uh-huh. And why exactly are a bunch of untrained to poorly trained armed teachers who have to keep their guns unloaded in the supply closet or a desk drawer and hope that none of the students steal it somehow more threatening and more of a deterrent to mass shooters in schools than armed and trained security guards and cops already at most of these schools? They already tried having guns in schools and universities after Columbine and it didn’t work. The (white, male) mass shooters who go into those schools aren’t trying to pull off a heist and get away with the loot. They’re looking to commit murder-suicide and being a martyr. An increase in guns in the schools is an incentive to go do a mass shooting there, not a deterrent.

      And they know that. They know that armed guards at malls where mass shootings have occurred did not deter mass shootings. Armed guards and cops at music festivals and concerts did not deter mass shooters — or mass bombers for that matter. Armed security at clubs did not deter. Armed congregants at churches didn’t deter mass shooters at churches, entire phalanxes of armed and trained soldiers have not deterred mass shootings at military bases. They know this. It’s lip service to the identity cult.

      It’s not bad ideas. It’s not good faith arguments. It’s lying and denial because power is more important to them than their kids’ lives. They have to have gun control not be the answer because they made gun control the territory of the enemy who is stealing their identity, their power and their goodies and who must be crushed. They locked themselves in a corner and to get out of it, they have to give up their identity. Very few of them are willing to do that, even if it means their kids live in terror and die.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Armed cops at schools have never stopped any shootings, or even much violence of the usual teenage sort.

        They have arrested thousands of black students, though (and brown ones). Gotta get that school-to-prison pipeline going early.

        It’s all about control of the masses.


    1. I’ve repeated the line a couple of times since seeing it yesterday, with the phrasing, “Some people are calling AR-15s Rubios, because they’re so easy to buy in Florida.”


    2. Joy Reid: What do you say to the ppl who call you crisis actors?

      David Hogg (Parkland survivor and student journalist): I’m sorry you’ve lost faith in America but we haven’t & we’re gonna outlive you.

      These kids have been to war, and they don’t want more of their friends to die. And they’re pithy.

      Liked by 1 person

  13. I’m liking the survivor girl’s Rubio line, and also “When a Republican asks for your vote in November, tell them it’s ‘too soon’.”


  14. This is a flimsy, silly beside-the-point, but it does keep coming to mind when I see these idiots talk about arming teachers, or kid themselves that by going armed-with-gun to lunch or shopping or a movie they’re going to thwart and put down attackers like the one at Parkland. Or Vegas. Or Sandy Hook. or the Orlando night club. Etc.

    There’s a little indy movie made about 10 years ago called JCVD. It stars action hero Jean Claude Van Damme, playing himself. He goes into a bank, and he is among the people taken hostage when armed thugs enter and take over the bank.
    For the rest of the movie, every time someone recognizes him–the criminals and the cops and the other hostages–people keep expecting him to leap into action hero mode, disarm the criminals, and save everyone.
    But, uh, this is reality (so to speak). Yeah, he has martial arts training. He’s also a middle-aged actor with children he wants to see again. And in reality, a few high kicks aren’t going to save the day against guys with assault rifles. Throughout the movie, he is rationally afraid of the criminals, rationally afraid of the armed cops preparing to shoot the criminals standing right next to him, and praying to live through this crisis.

    IOW, even a movie action hero–perhaps ESPECIALLY a movie action hero–recognizes that the fantasies influencing GOP politicians and their insane proposals are indeed -fantasies- and should not be the basis of gun policy.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. As Governor of California, even Schwartzenegger supported a few common-sense gun control measures. And literally said it was b/c life isn’t a movie.

      Of course he knows global warming is happening, so he’s more in touch with reality than today’s GOP

      Liked by 1 person

  15. We’ve had one school shooting in Sweden. It was in 1961. I guess all those shooters were encouraged by the gun free zones at schools, but it didn’t really matter, because they had no guns.

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.