Originally Posted by Brian Carlton
(Post 3067002)
I write this post to you specifically, because you're an individual who's fully capable of rational thought without holding a specific bias. The bias on this subject is legendary and those on the RWNJ portion of the spectrum cannot be swayed from their position where they are legally right to own whatever firearm they wish. Arguing with them is a total and complete waste of time and space as there is no possible intelligence that ever comes from them.
As you are certainly aware, when 19 DB's decided to take the lives of 3000 people on 9/11, they accomplished that task with a set of box cutters. Note that these instruments were not permitted on the aircraft at that time, however the scrutiny of such devices was not the best. The government response was to beef up security at the airport so no box cutters could possibly get by the screening checkpoint. This would be a typical reaction of the government.
The government, it the one tidbit of intelligence that it has, decided to reinforce the cockpit doors, figuring, rightly so, that you cannot hijack an airplane if you can't get into the cockpit.
The DB then decides, since box cutters and guns won't get through the checkpoint, to utilize a bomb in his shoe. This failed due to his stupidity but the government's reactive response is to search the shoes of every single passenger on every aircraft on every single day.
Be assured that the DB will not use a shoe bomb again.
The next thing that the DB will do is to use a shoulder fired anti-aircraft missile fired from the ground. This is very easily accomplished and an airliner is a sitting duck for such a weapon. The government's response will probably be to attempt to ban all shoulder fired weapons because they are reactive and they have to do something to placate the population.
It is not difficult to extend this argument to weapons that can be hand carried.
At the present time, in or around NY, it is effectively impossible to own a handgun and carry it outside of your home. This has not made the slightest dent in the gun deaths in NY. Most are caused by illegal handguns.
If I go with your argument to strongly regulate all handguns, the next DB shows up with a rifle (Whoops...........the current DB used a rifle). If you were to attempt to take away all rifles, the next DB shows up with a shotgun. In any case, the unarmed citizens are sitting ducks for a deranged DB who is hell bent on taking the lives of innocent people.
However, if you use the analogy of the airliner:
You cannot take out the aircraft if you cannot get into the cockpit.
I'm not sure what it would take to keep a concerted DB out of a public school. You have seen a perfectly sound system being thwarted by a gun that destroyed the locking capability of the door.
The only solution that I have is a twofold solution that would utilize the locking doors in conjunction with two heavily armed guards that stay in the building at all times.
Note, however, that you have only accomplished the safety of the children while inside the building. They still must arrive and depart from the building, and, as such, are still sitting ducks for a concerted DB with a rifle.
I do realize the emotional response that caused many on here to condemn the specific weapon. However, there is always another weapon that is different from the banned weapon, and/or there is always another method that is different from the current tragedy, and fully preventing another school tragedy inside the classroom will simply result in the DB using an easier target such as a shopping mall or a movie theater.
We have a society that is becoming more violent and random violence has become a fact of life in this country. Banning one or two tools used for that violence won't change that fact.
|
