He can already punch her, not all schools are high schools and that's not the norm for spree killers - Edit 2
Before modification by Isaac at 30/12/2012 03:08:33 PM
Very unrealistic case too, typically speaking an attack on a school will fall into 1 of 5 categories
1) Random lunatic looking for easy prey
2) Angry employee
3) Angry relative of employee
4) Angry Student
5) Angry relative of student
Note that 1, 2, 3, and 5 the person would be arriving armed already, and an armed teacher/staff is again beneficial. I'd be curious for an example of a spree killing that began with the killer unarmed and becoming armed by taking someone else's weapon. It's not impossible but it is very low-prob. Now a kid with no alternate access to weapons might try something like that but then that lack of access will generally mean they have little to no gun lore or skill and frankly I'd give pretty decent odds on them squeezing the trigger to a big nothing, accidentally ejecting the magazine, and probably shooting with the sort of accuracy that leaves barns untouched.
Only in #4 is that even a realistic option, except big problem being that your hypothetical linebacker is statistically unlikely to be a spree killer. Linebackers may not be at the top of the HS social ladder but they are definitely not the bottom and school athletes typically aren't 'picked on' by their fellow students much relatively. I really doubt many linebackers get their lunch money beaten out of them.
Of course a big thing here is that not all schools have teenagers in them, most, in fact, don't have any. Were I to concede to your point though, and say 'lets try it at elementary schools then' I'm sure you'd find some other thing to object to. I hate arguing with people who have already made up their mind. Hell we could have biometric smart guns nobody but the owner could shoot and I'd bet you'd find an objection.
But 5 'backgrounds' there, 4 the gun can only help, 1 the gun will help except for a minority of cases where the angry student doesn't come pre-armed and also has a solid working knowledge of pistols, keeping in mind that that the working knowledge will generally indicate the student in question already has easier access to a gun then taking it off their teacher. The potential possible helpful cases seem to vastly outweigh the possible unhelpful ones.
Well feel free to say something because I've difficulty seeing how a concealed weapon would damage the desired power dynamic, kids are supposed to be under the power of their teacher or any other responsible adult acting as parental proxy.
1) Random lunatic looking for easy prey
2) Angry employee
3) Angry relative of employee
4) Angry Student
5) Angry relative of student
Note that 1, 2, 3, and 5 the person would be arriving armed already, and an armed teacher/staff is again beneficial. I'd be curious for an example of a spree killing that began with the killer unarmed and becoming armed by taking someone else's weapon. It's not impossible but it is very low-prob. Now a kid with no alternate access to weapons might try something like that but then that lack of access will generally mean they have little to no gun lore or skill and frankly I'd give pretty decent odds on them squeezing the trigger to a big nothing, accidentally ejecting the magazine, and probably shooting with the sort of accuracy that leaves barns untouched.
Only in #4 is that even a realistic option, except big problem being that your hypothetical linebacker is statistically unlikely to be a spree killer. Linebackers may not be at the top of the HS social ladder but they are definitely not the bottom and school athletes typically aren't 'picked on' by their fellow students much relatively. I really doubt many linebackers get their lunch money beaten out of them.
Of course a big thing here is that not all schools have teenagers in them, most, in fact, don't have any. Were I to concede to your point though, and say 'lets try it at elementary schools then' I'm sure you'd find some other thing to object to. I hate arguing with people who have already made up their mind. Hell we could have biometric smart guns nobody but the owner could shoot and I'd bet you'd find an objection.
But 5 'backgrounds' there, 4 the gun can only help, 1 the gun will help except for a minority of cases where the angry student doesn't come pre-armed and also has a solid working knowledge of pistols, keeping in mind that that the working knowledge will generally indicate the student in question already has easier access to a gun then taking it off their teacher. The potential possible helpful cases seem to vastly outweigh the possible unhelpful ones.
To say nothing of the power dynamics that a teacher having a lethal weapon would entail.
Well feel free to say something because I've difficulty seeing how a concealed weapon would damage the desired power dynamic, kids are supposed to be under the power of their teacher or any other responsible adult acting as parental proxy.