tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post1359900084627689156..comments2024-03-18T17:28:44.693-07:00Comments on Rondam Ramblings: Well, that didn't take longRonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11752242624438232184noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-75150890792700562832018-03-22T10:02:18.173-07:002018-03-22T10:02:18.173-07:00In the U.K. most police do not carry guns.
Most. ...<i>In the U.K. most police do not carry guns.</i><br /><br />Most. Not all. So they don't disarm everybody. And UK military certainly is not disarmed.<br /><br /><i>Personally, I think that guns should be treated more like airplanes.</i><br /><br />This is a reasonable position, but note that it is not consistent with your previous statement that there is no way to tell who will use guns Peter Donishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09122769947782402203noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-18720787343097991232018-03-22T08:10:55.660-07:002018-03-22T08:10:55.660-07:00> > We could choose otherwise.
> Really?...> > We could choose otherwise.<br /><br />> Really?<br /><br />Yes. Of course. There is nothing in the laws of physics that compels anyone, even the police, to carry a gun. I'm not saying that disarming law enforcement entirely would be prudent, but it is an option. In the U.K. most police do not carry guns. British police officers overwhelmingly support this policy.<br /><br />Ronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11752242624438232184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-28897915644618799512018-03-21T18:49:21.759-07:002018-03-21T18:49:21.759-07:00We could choose otherwise.
Really? Bear in mind t...<i>We could choose otherwise.</i><br /><br />Really? Bear in mind that not arming anybody includes not arming law enforcement or military. As I said, even Australia doesn't do that.<br /><br /><i>Teaching and law enforcement are two completely different professions.</i><br /><br />Which is irrelevant to the point I was making in what you quoted, that not arming anybody is not a viable option.Peter Donishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09122769947782402203noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-33200206453472542412018-03-21T17:57:01.374-07:002018-03-21T17:57:01.374-07:00> not arming anybody is not a viable option
On...> not arming anybody is not a viable option<br /><br />Only because we choose for it not to be. We could choose otherwise.<br /><br />> Even Australia has armed law enforcement.<br /><br />Teaching and law enforcement are two completely different professions. Trying to have the same person perform both roles pretty ensures that neither one will get done very well.<br />Ronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11752242624438232184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-53959800318535051442018-03-21T17:06:31.774-07:002018-03-21T17:06:31.774-07:00That arming teachers is a stupid idea.
I'm no...<i>That arming teachers is a stupid idea.</i><br /><br />I'm not sure I see how that follows from "there's no way to tell for sure who will use guns responsibly". I could see how "arming anybody is a stupid idea" follows from it, but not arming anybody is not a viable option. Even Australia has armed law enforcement.<br />Peter Donishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09122769947782402203noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-2032801949289920062018-03-21T09:13:15.392-07:002018-03-21T09:13:15.392-07:00> So what, exactly, is the point?
That arming ...> So what, exactly, is the point?<br /><br />That arming teachers is a stupid idea.<br /><br />> > Australia's gun control law is much more stringent than in the U.S.<br /><br />> How so?<br /><br />28 day waiting period, you have to provide a "genuine reason" for why you need a gun, and there's a national registry.<br />Ronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11752242624438232184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-91391388232832560322018-03-20T17:37:58.879-07:002018-03-20T17:37:58.879-07:00There *is* no good way to predict who is going to ...<i>There *is* no good way to predict who is going to wield a gun effectively in a crisis and who won't. That's the whole point.</i><br /><br />So what, exactly, is the point? This seems to me to be an argument for not letting the government decide who gets guns and who doesn't, particularly if that involves disarming the good guys. Is that your position?<br /><br /><i>The shooter was Peter Donishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09122769947782402203noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-42560519716846618112018-03-19T22:39:37.275-07:002018-03-19T22:39:37.275-07:00> > This was an active-duty reserve police ...> > This was an active-duty reserve police officer.<br /><br />> Unfortunately, that is not a very good proxy for "responsible gun owner". It should be, but it isn't.<br /><br />What else is there?<br /><br />There *is* no good way to predict who is going to wield a gun effectively in a crisis and who won't. That's the whole point.<br /><br />> you can't Ronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11752242624438232184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-22743509912048146232018-03-19T16:04:45.093-07:002018-03-19T16:04:45.093-07:00Then look at what they did in Australia:
Ok, havi...<i>Then look at what they did in Australia:</i><br /><br />Ok, having looked at the article, what it's describing is already the state of current law in the US. So if Australia is going to be our model, then all of the people calling for new legislation in the wake of every shooting are calling for the wrong thing. What they should be calling for is for our current laws to be enforced.<br /><Peter Donishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09122769947782402203noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-5447725817032243832018-03-19T12:50:59.919-07:002018-03-19T12:50:59.919-07:00I didn't invent that slogan.
I know. But &quo...<i>I didn't invent that slogan.</i><br /><br />I know. But "good guy with a gun" is not equivalent to "random person who does not have to meet any requirements for responsible gun ownership".<br /><br />Also, the proposal for armed security personnel in schools that the article describes is not the same as arming teachers. You can have armed people in the school whose solePeter Donishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09122769947782402203noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-90274240631448188482018-03-19T11:58:04.474-07:002018-03-19T11:58:04.474-07:00> the argument for allowing citizens to be arme...> the argument for allowing citizens to be armed is not that that's the only way to stop bad guys with guns<br /><br />Tell that to Wayne LaPierre, executive VP of the NRA.<br /><br />http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/12/21/nra-only-way-to-stop-a-bad-guy-with-a-gun-is-with-a-good-guy-with-a-gun/<br /><br />I didn't invent that slogan.<br /><br />> a particular teacher is stupid Ronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11752242624438232184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-23740334821391112472018-03-19T10:17:28.962-07:002018-03-19T10:17:28.962-07:00Just saw this so my comments are a little late, bu...Just saw this so my comments are a little late, but...<br /><br /><i>The idea that the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun is an adolescent fantasy born of watching too many Westerns.</i><br /><br />This is both a straw man and irrelevant to the actual issue with the incident you describe in this post. It's a straw man because the argument for allowing citizens to Peter Donishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09122769947782402203noreply@blogger.com