h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

First off, gun violence in schools is decreasing. It's just being reported more prominently.

Secondly, creating gun free zones creates an area where it is perfectly safe for an armed perpatror. He can kill people casually knowing that he is the only person in the area that is armed.

In 1998, of the 6 school shootings, 2 were stopped by armed citizens before the police could respond.

I don't recommend that teachers should be armed, but they should be allowed to carry a firearm if they want to and they are normally legally allowed to. In Georgia, our law outlawing guns in school zones actually allows for any person to carry in a school zone if it is approved by the principal.

Armed citizens are a deterent to criminal predators.

Just an addition. Here in Montana, our Republican candidate for State Superintendent of Public Instruction announced she would like to give every teacher a gun and holster and allow them to line the students up outside and "shoot every darn one of them". What a moron.

I tried to reference that. Can you point me in the direction of a newspaper article or sometihing like that where she is quoted as sayin that?

This post has been removed.

Thanks for the site. I could only find one article in my breif search, but I guess that's enough.

I agree, it is in poor taste. There are times to joke about stuff, but you have to be careful where you are and who you're with. A canidate for office should be particularlly careful.

Regardless of being careful, if you want to be in charge of the state's public school system, you have to be cognizant of the image and ideas you present. I happen to be a strong supporter of Second Amendment rights but I don't think violence in schools or arming teachers to combat misbehavior is anything to joke about. School violence is not limited to urban areas. We've had guns and shootings in schools in Montana. The "Old West" mentality that permeates policy discussions here can be outrageous sometimes.

Are you arguing against me or the canidate. I can't defend her position; I'm not really sure what her position is.

My position on guns and schools is that you must be careful about the 'law of unintended consiquences'. In my view, creating special areas where law abiding citizens can't carry guns, also creates an area where armed predators can operate with impunity.

I don't suggest that teachers should be armed. However, teachers who are otherwise qualified to carry concealed weapons, should be allowed to. Obviously, they must be extremely careful if they choose to do so. Generally, there is a little known provison in the school safety zone laws that allows principals to lets certain people carry on campus.

I think the school safety zones have gotten out of hand.

The really abusrd end of the movement wants to prohibit officers from carrying guns in schools. There are actually some school police who are supposidly not allowed to carry firearms. These people actually suggest that an officer might come in on a bad day and shoot up a school. -- Oh my God!! Some people are loons!

I'm arguing against the impression I received from your earlier comments about politicans having to be careful. If I read you right, had Ms. Herman been in the correct company, she could say such things with impunity.

Why would a teacher want to carry a concealed weapon into a school? I know there are schools in areas of the country where violence is endemic. However it is the job of the security personnel within the school to head off any potential problems. The idea of my child's teacher (granted, I don't have a child, this is just hypothetical) packing heat is rather unnerving. Regardless of whether or not a person is qualified or licensed they shouldn't feel the need to carry a gun in every situation.

A close friend of mine's husband has a concealed weapon permit. He is a nurse/home health aide. He carries that gun with him everywhere. Were I one of his clients I would not feel comfortable having him armed in my home.

Do you really think "predators" research which areas are school-safety zones and which are not? If someone wants to commit violence, they will do it regardless of local zoning. It's an extension of gun-control arguments: regulation only applies to law-abiding citizens. Criminals aren't worried about penal codes or the Brady bill.

Everybody needs to have a place to blow off steam. If I'm out with a bunch of freinds and I say something outlandish, I don't see anything wrong with that. If I say it around someone who might repreat it to the press, then I see a problem. You're showing lack of judgement about who you hang out with or about where you open your yap.

I just think they should be allowed to if they feel the need to do so. Security personnel are rarely present when they are needed. They can't be everywhere.

I carry a gun with me almost everywhere I go. I don't advertise that fact, but I don't keep it a secret either. I'm pretty sure most of my friends know. One guy used to pat my side whenever we hugged. I've never had anyone complain. On one occasion they were grateful.

I'll grant you that most predators aren't very good at relating cause and effect. I can't tell you how many times I've heard people complain about the police arresting them. I don't think the police ever forced anyone to drink and drive, beat their wives, break into a house and so forth.

However, they do understand victims. If someone is intent on shooting someone at a school, I think they understand they can do it with impunity. We've drawn a lot of attenition to the fact that schools are gun free areas.

So, what then, is the solution to violence in schools? Do you foresee a future where everything is peaceful because everyone is carring a weapon? That is a fallacy, as anyone who has a passing knowledge of American history can tell you. Many harken back to the "good old days" of America (or, commonly out here, the Old West). Nearly everyone owned a gun prior to the 20th Century. Life, to paraphrase Hobbes, was nasty, brutal, and short. Those with hot tempers, immature attitudes, improper parenting, or a chip on their shoulder are more likely to harm someone, then and now.

A nation where everyone feels the need to carry guns isn't exactly a peaceful or free nation. The Second Amendment may give us the right to bear arms, but do we really need to exercise that right at all times? What does it say about a person who has a weapon upon them 24/7?

There is no easy solution to school violence. If there was one, I doubt that you could implement it. School administrators are too wishy-washy to actually enforce discipline. They're so worriefd about how parents will react that they're paralyzed, and that's where a lot of the change needs to be made.

We have a lot of knowledge about more effective ways to run schools, and address problems of high risk youth but we don't use it. One of the simplist reforms is to reduce school size. If you get a school down to a size of 300 to 500 students, a lot of problems disappear. In a smaller school everyone knows eachother, and you're not lost in the crowd. You don't need to be violent to be noticed, and if you are violent, you're attacking someone you know rather than a random member of another group.

There are other things to be done, but this is the one that I remember off of the top of my head, and it's probably one of the more effective things that could be done.

I carry a firearm for two reasons. I don't care to be the victim of a violent crime. Secondly, I think I'd feel pretty silly if I were to witness a violent crime, and I wasn't able to intervene because I left my gun at the house. I may not be able to intervene anyway because of the situation, but there may be situatuions where I can help.

Smaller class sizes necessitate changes in funding--at the local, state, and federal level. We have record numbers of kids in public schools, even with charter, private, and voucher schools siphoning off students.

Would bringing back past standards of disipline work? School uniforms? You can keep on asking these questions until you're blue in the face, but it all comes down to one (or, rather two) thing: parents. If parents wouldn't plop their kids down in front of the boob tube or Nintendo, take some time to get involved in their homework and the PTA, enforce values and academic standards, and actually INTERACT with their children, rather than buying them whatever they are whining for at the moment, things might be different. And that's just the lower-, middle-, and upper-classes. I haven't even touched on the welfare state creating an entire underclass with no work ethic. Why work for $ 5.35 a hour when you can make more money staying home? If the minimum wage was actually a living wage, if corporate America didn't sell off our jobs to assorted third-world banana republics, if politicians would actually represent the voters and not lobbying groups, if, if, if....

Well, you get the picture. My rant is done for now. This year I'm writing in my choice for President: John McCain. And Russell Feingold as Vice-President.

I think the school size thing would be the biggest help. It would be difficult and possibly expensive, but...

I'm not 100% for the PTA. In theory, it's a good thing, but I think in practice it becomes another way to intimidate the adminstration.

Let's review my views on people in the schools:
Parent - People who complain that their children are perfect. If they will admit that they're not perfect, then they think their children deserve to be the one exception to the rule.

Adminsitrator - People who are intmidated by parents and won't back up classroom teachers.

Teachers - Experts in pedagogy, but not terribly compitant in their field. Since they're degree is in teaching (with some study in their field) rather than the field they teach, they lack the love and deep appreciation of their field that is required to actually teach it.

Students - Unappreciative demons.

I'm not destined to be a happy person. Maybe Lord of the Flies wasn't so bad.

This post has been removed.

Actually, I don't much like shooting. I'm quite fond of those other things you mentioned. Except I prefer having my cat in my lap.

Isn't that what I typed? My cat in my lap? Uhhhhhh.....