Criminals and crazy people don't obey the law, so no law could have prevented this.
:first:
Criminals and crazy people don't obey the law, so no law could have prevented this.
Criminals and crazy people don't obey the law, so no law could have prevented this.
:first:
Especially in the grand scheme of things. Universities invest MILLIONS into athletics and student activities. If they cannot swing 40k a year to help save lives, that is on them.Overall it might cost millions but not for each individual school.
With the price of tuition from thousands of students I'm sure the schools could easily afford it. I think it's reasonable to require that the school properly secure it's customers.
A gunman opens fire and kills at least 10 at the Umpqua Community College in Oregon.
President Obama made a statement saying congress should enact gun control laws.
So I want to know....
What law could have prevented yesterday's tragedy?
There are no complete failsafes that's true.Unless the shooter is familiar with the location and knows the schedules of guards. The shooter could easily be on the other side of campus or building from the guards. For an average college classroom building, being o the opposite side represents a fair distance.
So what do you suggest?Laws do not prevent crimes.
Laws declare certain activities to be illegal and some declare the potential legal consequences for doing illegal activities.
Laws are not self enforcing.
Moral character prevents wrong doing.
Okay... what do you suggest?I agree that armed guards would have helped in this situation, but legislating for such measures is writing defeat into law. Lawmakers should prepare laws from an idealist's perspective, ie, make rules as if there wasn't a murder epidemic to deal with.
A school like CU of Boulder would need a staff of trained, armed, security guards to add to the ones they already have (many big schools already have security).Which building? Note, the distance across campus is measured in miles.
Even still.... isn't having an armed guard better than not having an armed guard???Not really. An armed guard could have stopped this guy, if he was alert and prepare for the incident and if the guy wasn't ready to do anything in order to get as many victims as possible. If there was more than one armed guard, there would be more of a possibility of stopping this incident.
I've read of many incidents where the shooter/s who would stop at nothing to kill as many people as possible. The survivors of those incidents would talk about the heightened senses of the killer/s. The way I read them, the killer/s were ready for pretty much anything.
I'm not a gun control nut. I don't believe that we need more gun laws (we should enforce the ones we have, instead, if we keep all of them). In fact, I think we have too many gun laws at this time.
Understand that the vast majority of weapons used in mass shooting were obtained legally.
WOW!!I guess you guys have the same opinion on abortion right? You can't catch all the pregnant women who might get abortions since it's not something done in public, so why have a law against it?
Understand that the vast majority of weapons used in mass shooting were obtained legally.
Source
Making something illegal isn't about stopping every possible incident of something, it's about making it more difficult to do.
BINGO! And that's why I am opposed to gun control laws.As I have said, "Any gun control measure only effects those good citizens who obey the law..."
The expense of having a staff of armed guards in every college in the USA would be incredibly expensive. People are already complaining about the cost and quality of education.A school like CU of Boulder would need a staff of trained, armed, security guards to add to the ones they already have (many big schools already have security).
So lets add more. Lets be more diligent. Lets come up with a doable solution.
Yep. And... if we made guns illegal to buy... guns would still exist and criminals would get their hands on them and use them against un-armed people.Stating the gun was 'obtained legally' means nothing! The user, in most all cases, did not obtained it legally.
BINGO! And that's why I am opposed to gun control laws.
The president is protected by a trained and armed security force. Schools should have trained, armed, protection as well.
Too bad. Colleges makes billions of dollars and it's their obligation to protect their customers.The expense of having a staff of armed guards in every college in the USA would be incredibly expensive. People are already complaining about the cost and quality of education.
Nothing is a guarantee. Therefore what? We give up?And there's no guarantee armed guards would protect anyone.
Exactly!Anytime I have anyone at my home who I may not know well, or any minor, I lock up my guns.