Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Teachers Fake Gunman Attack

Posted by samzenpus on from the stop-crying-teacher-would-never-really-kill-you dept.

Anti_Climax writes "Staff members of an elementary school staged a fictitious gun attack on students during a class trip, telling them it was not a drill as the children cried and hid under tables. It'll be interesting to see what happens to these teachers after the charges brought against students in recent months."

6 of 863 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Right Idea, Wrong Implementation by whisper_jeff · · Score: 0, Troll

    Well, how common are school fires?

    I think statistically they are in the same neighborhood.

    Feel free to mod me as "troll," but bwahahahahahahahahaha!! Now that was funny. Statistically in the same neighborhood. Right. Good one.

  2. Re:Poor judgement by spikedvodka · · Score: 0, Troll

    or a teacher with a concealed carry permit, or _any_ non-passive response,

    Nice try, but it is a violation of federal law to bring a fire-arm onto public school property.
    (The one exception being Police Officers in the course of their official Duties)

    I also remember hearing about a study that says having a gun in that sort of situation is a Bad Thing(TM) because it changes your first instinct to be "draw weapon" instead of "duck & Cover/Run/punch/etc" where a gunman would already have his weapon drawn, and presumably pointed at you

    --
    I will not give in to the terrorists. I will not become fearful.
  3. Re:Under the PATRIOT Act... by kestasjk · · Score: 1, Troll

    I'm guessing the "give all students guns and Virginia Tech wouldn't have happened" crowd won't be commenting on this story.. Imagine how much worse this would have been if everyone had guns. This situation isn't a common occurrence, but false alarms in general are.

    --
    // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
  4. Re:Under the PATRIOT Act... by sgt_doom · · Score: 0, Troll
    Hell yes, kannibal klown, why not simply raise everyone in the Spartan way - nothing like the good old times. And if they can't tolerate surviving nude in the cold winter, tough on them, huh?

    Or, maybe as adults they could all go through military boot camp. Such training would make them tough like Dick Cheney (Oops! A draft dodging super-wussy. Bad example.) or Paul Wolfowitz (Oops! Another draft dodger. Poor example.), or George Bush (Oops! He received a direct commission to 2nd looey - Now how the hell did he manage that??????).

  5. Re:Under the PATRIOT Act... by murderaliberal · · Score: 0, Troll

    Shut up liberal.

    --
    sig
  6. Re:Under the PATRIOT Act... by imroy · · Score: 0, Troll

    The first is that a lawfully armed professor / student could have ended his rampage sooner.

    Emphasis on "could". It's no guarantee. What if there were gun-carrying students or faculty members at VA Tech? What if that didn't stop Cho? Would the pro-gun people then say that more armed students would have stopped him? I just don't see "more guns" to be the solution to gun violence. The guns are the problem, so get rid of them. And don't think that's impossible. Many countries have very tight controls on gun ownership that work. It's just a very difficult proposition for the U.S. coming from its current state.

    This is a group that has passed several background checks, studied the law regarding the use of lethal force in their jurisdiction, and demonstrated non-trivial proficiency with a firearm.

    Don't forget that Cho obtained his guns and ammo legally and supposedly went through (most of) what you suggest. If anything comes of the VA Tech shooting, hopefully they will at least close off the loop-hole that left his background record clean just because he didn't submit himself to psychiatric therapy. He should have never gotten the guns he had.

    In general, there is added deterrent to say armed robbery, if the robber's mark might shoot back.

    Yes, which leads to a kind of arms race between the law-abiding civilian population and the criminal element. I'd much rather have a criminal feel nice and safe with a simple handgun than feel he has to be armed with a semi-automatic or fully-automatic gun. I'd much rather give a thief what he wants and get away with my life than get into a shoot-out or stand-off with someone who has less to lose than myself. I'm not a superhero and a gun won't make me into one. The gun may be called the "great equalizer", but criminals can just as easily get bigger and more dangerous guns while I couldn't. What's so equal about that?