Why Does The U.S. Have More School Shootings Than Everywhere Else?

[Arbo]

Sorry, but break into my house, and odds are you are leaving in a body bag, period.

+1...

 

[jaeger19]

And if I was threatened by 3 muscled guys, what jury is going to convict me if I use a weapon to defend myself?

What, am I supposed to charge in like Chuck Norris and beet them down? Not likely.

Bernard Geotz was accosted by 4 guys on the subway and lost his civil trial. The Jury awarded the plaintiff 43 million dollars.

Actually, I am in the military NOW.

And my son ran into a similar situation a few years ago. Guy tried to pick a fight with him in bar, my son said to hell with it and started to leave. Guy hit him from behind, my son left him with a broken jaw, concussion, broken clavicle, and cracked ribs.

Did I mention my son went to Nationals for Tae-Kwon-Do? And has been training off and on for MMA?

Cops arrested my son, preliminary hearing 2 days later, all charges dismissed. Even the DA said they were not interested in trying to prosecute this (and this was in LA, my son was on probation at the time).

DAs rarely try to push cases if they see little chance of winning. And this is especially true if it revolves around self-defense. Normally they go for other charges, like concealed weapon charges, drunk with weapon, etc.

.

DA's will push stuff if it furthers their careers. So you never know what they are going to do. Your son let his attacker have the first punch and from behind no less. If something else occurred.. you sons training could have been used against him. Like I said.. I have seen it happen.

 

[jaeger19]

but not all breaking and entering's end in bloodshed. if it is a thief, is the first thing to do is to attempt to scare the thief away? if the thief values his own life he would not engage in confrontation

No offense but you are assuming rational thinking in a person that's willing to risk going to prison for 20 years for breaking and entering and getting a TV and maybe a wallet.

IF a thief was that rational.. they would not be thieves... How many guys are in jail for the rest of their life for shooting a clerk, or other non threatening person and making off with a handful of cash?\

 

[Arbo]

Bernard Geotz was accosted by 4 guys on the subway and lost his civil trial. The Jury awarded the plaintiff 43 million dollars.

It's not a shock that a lib NY jury would reward criminals.

 

[Oozlefinch]

Bernard Geotz was accosted by 4 guys on the subway and lost his civil trial. The Jury awarded the plaintiff 43 million dollars.

Bernie Goetz was also not in his home.

He was on a subway, with an illegally concealed weapon.

I guarantee, if that had happened in his home, there would not have been a civil lawsuit.

DA's will push stuff if it furthers their careers. So you never know what they are going to do. Your son let his attacker have the first punch and from behind no less. If something else occurred.. you sons training could have been used against him. Like I said.. I have seen it happen.

Yea, it could have. So what? And my son did not "let" anything, he was leaving to try and avoid a fight and was attacked from behind.

How many times have people had somebody break into their home, and a DA prosecuted them for defending themselves?

Other then maybe NY, where by law you have to try and get out.

 

[Oozlefinch]

It's not a shock that a lib NY jury would reward criminals.

To be honest, BG did break the law. It was not clear that he was actually in danger, and he did have an illegal handgun without a concealed carry permit.

In my mind, that makes him a criminal. So I really can't equate with him, I see no difference between him and a drug dealer with a concealed pistol.

 

[scatt]

To be honest, BG did break the law. It was not clear that he was actually in danger, and he did have an illegal handgun without a concealed carry permit.

In my mind, that makes him a criminal. So I really can't equate with him, I see no difference between him and a drug dealer with a concealed pistol.

You support any and all laws?

 

[Arbo]

To be honest, BG did break the law. It was not clear that he was actually in danger, and he did have an illegal handgun without a concealed carry permit.

In my mind, that makes him a criminal. So I really can't equate with him, I see no difference between him and a drug dealer with a concealed pistol.

In my mind if he was in danger, I don't care if the gun was legal or not or if he has a permit or not, to me the right of self defense overrides all other laws that have gone against our right of self defense.

 

[Oozlefinch]

You support any and all laws?

Pretty much.

I am very much a "law and order" individual. Three strikes laws, double time for repeat offenders, max jail time instead of plea bargains, I do not care if a criminal rots in jail, they made their choice, now they pay the price.

Same with Capitol Punishment. If you do something that is so bad that a jury sentences a person to pay the ultimate price, I could not care less what kind of childhood they had, or what kind of drugs they were on.

After I was assaulted a few years ago by the kids with metal pipes, I actually helped the police catch them. And when the DA called me in to discuss "Victim Restitution Fund" payments and a possible plea bargain, I told him I wanted none of that. I did not want money, I wanted them persecuted to the fullest extent of the law. And that is what happened, the one that chased and hit me got a plea bargain deal for 20+ years.

He was basically told he could plead guilty in my case, or take his chances in facing myself and the other 4 people they knew he had done that to, 3 of which had been assaulted with the pipes even after they gave them the food - one of which was a pregnant woman. Then he could take his chances when they asked for multiple 15-20 year sentences to run consecutively.

And they never took money, each and every time they called in a delivery to a house nearby, and attacked them for the food. And they were not poor, the Aunt/Mother owned 2 buildings and the businesses in both of them (one a barbershop, the other did cell phones and t-shirts). This was just them thinking this was "gangsta", and a way to get kicks and entertainment.

No pity from me there as he sits in jail until he is almost 40. I do not care who a person is, do the crime and do the time.

 

[jaeger19]

Bernie Goetz was also not in his home.

He was on a subway, with an illegally concealed weapon.

I guarantee, if that had happened in his home, there would not have been a civil lawsuit.

I would take that bet having lived in places like NY and Chicago.. and probably in a lot of cities that tend to be more liberal than rural areas.

Yea, it could have. So what? And my son did not "let" anything, he was leaving to try and avoid a fight and was attacked from behind

Turning your back on an aggressive person is letting them get a chance at you.

How many times have people had somebody break into their home, and a DA prosecuted them for defending themselves?

Other then maybe NY, where by law you have to try and get out.

Too many times.. thats why there has been stand your ground laws and castle doctrine laws....


.

 

[jaeger19]

To be honest, BG did break the law. It was not clear that he was actually in danger, and he did have an illegal handgun without a concealed carry permit.

In my mind, that makes him a criminal. So I really can't equate with him, I see no difference between him and a drug dealer with a concealed pistol.

honestly, if you see no difference between him and a drug dealer with a concealed pistol.. your perspective is seriously flawed.

 

[Oozlefinch]

I would take that bet having lived in places like NY and Chicago.. and probably in a lot of cities that tend to be more liberal than rural areas.

And I have lived for almost half my life in California, LA and SF. Can't get much more liberal then that.

However, NY is slightly different, "stand your ground" is illegal there, you must flea if possible.

As for a civil lawsuit, just about anybody can sue for anything, that is their right. A criminal can sue a homeowner because their dog attacked them while they were raping their daughter, that is how the system works.

Does not mean they will win anything however. It is also not a legal matter, that is why it is called a civil suit.

 

[Rocketman]

Good topic for discussion.



Why Does The U.S. Have More School Shootings Than Everywhere Else?

Liberal ploicy makers have taken discipline out of the schools. When I was a kid our shotguns and/or deer rifles were in the truck so we could hunt after school, no school shootings ever. Of course we respected our teachers and knew trouble at school meant trouble at home. It is not that way anymore. Teachers make low pay and have to put up with these kids that receive no parenting, it is amazing, and it is no wonder we are falling behind the rest of the world.

 

[blackjack50]

Liberal ploicy makers have taken discipline out of the schools. When I was a kid our shotguns and/or deer rifles were in the truck so we could hunt after school, no school shootings ever. Of course we respected our teachers and knew trouble at school meant trouble at home. It is not that way anymore. Teachers make low pay and have to put up with these kids that receive no parenting, it is amazing, and it is no wonder we are falling behind the rest of the world.

As much as I agree. I feel that some schools are a safer environment without the guns in the truck. I had a student, a ridiculously ignorant punk of a student with no respect, come into my class with a 6 inch "tacticool" sheath knife in his back pocket. I called him out and told him to leave it in the truck. The little bastard mouthed off to me about Florida law (which he didn't know), and how he needed it for "self defense" in a school where nobody gets in life or death fist fights. I was a student there. I know. When I sent his ass to the headmaster...who informed him that we could make it a police matter...his daddy wanted to protect him.

So what does that "story" mean? It means I don't trust these dip**** kids to have guns in their vehicles or knives in their pockets. There is some fundamental differences between kids now and back then. I think they lash out more. They don't get emotional counseling from stable families. They are bombarded with TV and Internet and video games from an early age. They have no concept of what is "appropriate" and what isn't. Because they get away with ridiculous crap and their parents protect them from real consequences...but then they get detentions for having their shirt tails untucked (we have a dress code).

It isn't just a lack of "discipline." Because sometimes the discipline is ridiculously strict on stupid things. I think it is the lack of focus on certain issues. Issues that are relevant. So like you said it is discipline, but not a lack thereof. Just a poorly focused discipline.

 

[blackjack50]

I might add that education has long been regarded as a joke. As has educational psychology. People don't see the necessity for proper emotional care for kids. There isn't enough money in the budget to handle paying the RIGHT teachers. The professional teachers. The ones who can lead, or see mental/emotional problems developing. And we have teacher's unions protecting the stupid and lazy teachers. And demanding more pay for those stupid and lazy teachers. They also protect the old school teachers who don't bother to learn and adapt to new developments in technology and psychology. Just because you have more years...doesn't make you a better teacher. You need to work. Just like every other field.

We have a crisis. Our crisis is a lack of respect for the educated. For those who know the science of education. A lack of pay for the good ones, a healthy protection of the crappy ones, and a firm entrenchment in ways that no longer matter. Idk. I see the way kids learn now and it pisses me off. But in an increasingly technological society...do we really have a choice?

 

[Rocketman]

As much as I agree. I feel that some schools are a safer environment without the guns in the truck. I had a student, a ridiculously ignorant punk of a student with no respect, come into my class with a 6 inch "tacticool" sheath knife in his back pocket. I called him out and told him to leave it in the truck. The little bastard mouthed off to me about Florida law (which he didn't know), and how he needed it for "self defense" in a school where nobody gets in life or death fist fights. I was a student there. I know. When I sent his ass to the headmaster...who informed him that we could make it a police matter...his daddy wanted to protect him.

So what does that "story" mean? It means I don't trust these dip**** kids to have guns in their vehicles or knives in their pockets. There is some fundamental differences between kids now and back then. I think they lash out more. They don't get emotional counseling from stable families. They are bombarded with TV and Internet and video games from an early age. They have no concept of what is "appropriate" and what isn't. Because they get away with ridiculous crap and their parents protect them from real consequences...but then they get detentions for having their shirt tails untucked (we have a dress code).

It isn't just a lack of "discipline." Because sometimes the discipline is ridiculously strict on stupid things. I think it is the lack of focus on certain issues. Issues that are relevant. So like you said it is discipline, but not a lack thereof. Just a poorly focused discipline.

yeah I was talking about the late 70's early 80's compared to now. I also grew up in a small community, I am sure that plays a part as well.

 

[RDS]

This could be the solution:

The guidance package also results from President Obama's Now is the Time proposal to reduce gun violence. It called on ED to collect and disseminate best practices on school discipline policies and to help school districts develop and equitably implement their policies. To both continue ED/DOJ efforts in connection with SSDI and fulfill the administration's commitment to "Now is the Time," the guidance package was developed with additional input from civil rights advocates, major education organizations and philanthropic partners.

U.S. Departments of Education and Justice Release School Discipline Guidance Package to Enhance School Climate and Improve School Discipline Policies/Practices | U.S. Department of Education

 

[blackjack50]

yeah I was talking about the late 70's early 80's compared to now. I also grew up in a small community, I am sure that plays a part as well.

It was like that for me too. I graduated in 07. I was in the cusp of all this change. It happened sooner in public schools that had money, or the super fancy private schools.

 

[Rocketman]

It was like that for me too. I graduated in 07. I was in the cusp of all this change. It happened sooner in public schools that had money, or the super fancy private schools.

07, I feel like an antique on American Pickers

 

[Leo]

07, I feel like an antique on American Pickers

LOL, all age is relative - so you are only old (or young) if you think you are. And 07 was seven years ago, I 'graduated' (or finished high school - we only 'graduate' when we get a degree from a university here) not quite two years ago. :mrgreen:

 

[jaeger19]

As much as I agree. I feel that some schools are a safer environment without the guns in the truck. I had a student, a ridiculously ignorant punk of a student with no respect, come into my class with a 6 inch "tacticool" sheath knife in his back pocket. I called him out and told him to leave it in the truck. The little bastard mouthed off to me about Florida law (which he didn't know), and how he needed it for "self defense" in a school where nobody gets in life or death fist fights. I was a student there. I know. When I sent his ass to the headmaster...who informed him that we could make it a police matter...his daddy wanted to protect him.

So what does that "story" mean? It means I don't trust these dip**** kids to have guns in their vehicles or knives in their pockets. There is some fundamental differences between kids now and back then. I think they lash out more. They don't get emotional counseling from stable families. They are bombarded with TV and Internet and video games from an early age. They have no concept of what is "appropriate" and what isn't. Because they get away with ridiculous crap and their parents protect them from real consequences...but then they get detentions for having their shirt tails untucked (we have a dress code).

It isn't just a lack of "discipline." Because sometimes the discipline is ridiculously strict on stupid things. I think it is the lack of focus on certain issues. Issues that are relevant. So like you said it is discipline, but not a lack thereof. Just a poorly focused discipline.

I agree with your point about poorly focused discipline... I had to pick up my son from school a few years ago because he brought a gun to school. He was in kindergarten and brought a GI joe to school and it had a little gray handgun in a holster... and the vice principle informed me that they had a Zero tolerance policy when it came to guns.


Now.. as far as schools being safer with these rules? Not at all.. because the morons that would use a knife or gun recklessly aren't going to obey the rules against having a gun in the truck.

 

[imagep]

LOL, all age is relative - so you are only old (or young) if you think you are. And 07 was seven years ago, I 'graduated' (or finished high school - we only 'graduate' when we get a degree from a university here) not quite two years ago. :mrgreen:

What never fails to amaze me is how many recent high school grads will say stuff like "these kids today aren't learning anything". And they don't mean that in jest, nor are they including their own experience. they literally think that in just a year or two or three since they were in school, that schools have become worse. Either that, or they are just parroting what their parents say, who of course are just parroting what their parents said. Everyone likes to think better of their generation than the younger generation, even if only a few days separate the two.

My evaluation, based upon my personal experience being compared to my sons experience (who is a recent HS grad) is that our schools are pretty much the same today, as they were when I was in school, 30+ years ago.

By the way, some people in the US, at least in my area, compete HS without actually graduating. they just get a certificate that says that they "completed" the 12th grade, but there is no implication that they actually received a high school level education.

 

[imagep]

I agree with your point about poorly focused discipline... I had to pick up my son from school a few years ago because he brought a gun to school. He was in kindergarten and brought a GI joe to school and it had a little gray handgun in a holster... and the vice principle informed me that they had a Zero tolerance policy when it came to guns.


Now.. as far as schools being safer with these rules? Not at all.. because the morons that would use a knife or gun recklessly aren't going to obey the rules against having a gun in the truck.

When my kid was in elementary school, he was almost sent home for wearing a tshirt that had an image of a gun in it's design. My son presented an argument to the teacher of why that was rediculous, and she sided with him after hearing the argument.

 

[blackjack50]

I agree with your point about poorly focused discipline... I had to pick up my son from school a few years ago because he brought a gun to school. He was in kindergarten and brought a GI joe to school and it had a little gray handgun in a holster... and the vice principle informed me that they had a Zero tolerance policy when it came to guns.


Now.. as far as schools being safer with these rules? Not at all.. because the morons that would use a knife or gun recklessly aren't going to obey the rules against having a gun in the truck.

Schools wouldn't be safer with guns. Not for students anyway. Not even in their vehicles. I might debate for adults and lawful carry. But I also know teachers and I think real security would help. Class G license for REAL and experienced law enforcement or military. Not Barney fife.

That policy about guns is a joke. It is a toy. Zero tolerance for 0 tolerance policies.

 

[jaeger19]

Schools wouldn't be safer with guns. Not for students anyway. Not even in their vehicles. I might debate for adults and lawful carry. But I also know teachers and I think real security would help. Class G license for REAL and experienced law enforcement or military. Not Barney fife.

That policy about guns is a joke. It is a toy. Zero tolerance for 0 tolerance policies.

I didn't say they would be safer.. (though there is an argument that armed teachers would be safer)... But they would not be less safe either... because rules against guns are not going to work for those that want to blow their classmates away.

so all those rules against guns.. say in their vehicles.. creates a nuisance and restriction for law abiding students and does absolutely NOTHING to deter the morons and murderers... because they don't follow the rules in the first place.

That's the problem we have.. we focus on the gun as the problem.. and not on the person.