(read last paragraph for a summary)
1st: I've also read the first part
2nd: if I would agree (and I don't) that there is a BIG threat of (any!) lunatics seeking "mass slaughter in (...) public schools" I would even welcome the recommendations that follow in this 2nd part.
3rd: I swore myself, NEVER to answer your regular provocations seen here in the "Ordnance-Corner" but you should never say 'never'... :-S
As seen many times, your strange ways of thinking and desperate efforts to convince the Public for very lopsided opinions this story shows only what supports your claim (usually only one or few arguments) and diminish what speaks against it. And yes, it's not DR66's story but apparently he shares the views expressed there.
So let me come to the pre-conditions:
Did something like "mass slaughter in (...) public schools" ever happen in real? Yes, once, Beslan. Very sad, one of the big moral lows of the last 50 years (outside of actual wars). Yes you should worry, yes you should make plans how to prevent or counter-act.
Did Islamic extremists perform this?
No! Probably those who did it were Islamic too but that was not decisive: "Beslan" was an act of Chechnya (Chechen?) extremists that you can call terrorism but it was within Russia and Russian government claimed it to be an internal affair (OK, also arguable but that's a different discussion) and NOT anyhow connected with what can be described as terror threat of (a few, very) extremist muslims (I'm sure you can find much more drastic phrasing) against the Western world/culture or simply against the USoA.
Also -the story claims-
The most sacred thing to us [Americans] is our children,
our babies," Rassa said. Killing hundreds of them at a time
would significantly "boost Islamic morale and lower that of
the enemy" (us).
This I also challenge. I might not know much about Islamic countries, or the Arabian world but the few insights I had tell me that they love children at least as much as Western world does (maybe even more than Germans (I am German) if I look at the latest reports).
So therefore I am quite convinced that if something like in Beslan would happen in the US, done by Islamic terrorists, it would not "boost Islamic morale" because it is just plain wrong as children are innocent and not the "oppressing, decadent, capitalistic enemy". Also in the view of the average Islamic (if such a person exists at all).
Next to the pre-caution measures proposed:
As this is America, an economical reasoning first: >:-)
one of the proposal is to put armed security people into every school: if we estimate ~50 Mio. pupils in the USA and therfore at least 50.000 schools (rough estimation) and 100,000$ per armed security person per year that's at least Five Billion Dollars for a potential threat (and not a reality). We have other dangers that demands less money for prevention and yet it's not spent.
Finally an example for evaluating the wrong risks to the wrong extent: the story says
As for the idea that having qualified, armed, and trained individuals at
a school would increase the risk to the children's lives; that is nothing
more than sensational fear mongering. Yes, there is a small risk that
something could go wrong. However, there is a greater risk of those
little prodigies dying in a car or bus wreck on their way to school.
The relation is right: the bigger threat is to lose your child's life in some traffic accident.
But also:
Experience shows (i.e. fact; it already happened, hundreds of times!!) that if you give 50 - 200,000 people arms, even if trained and qualified, there will be at least 1-10 people each year that you mis-juged or did not train sufficiently and that will abuse in some way his position, i.e. will do s.th. nasty to a pupil in the school, up to "accidentially" shoot one either in acclaimed self-defense, or because "it acted up like a terrorist".
Note that I claim this on evidence on similar situations in the US costing several lifes per year; I'm sure you have much better numbers on this than me, DR66. :-)
So in the same way it is more likely that a (US) pupil is injured (or even dies) by a traffic accident than being (fatally) injured by additional armed (qulified, trained) school security staff,
it is still more likely that a (US) pupil is injured by additional armed school security staff than injured during a school hostage-taking by terrorists (of any kind).
And these are only the obvious shortcomings of that story.
As a consequence the ideas of that story are valid if things will get worse but do not justify the measures NOW, as they would also definitely take a toll on people (i.e. US pupils in this scenario).
Lurker "liberal Pacifist" 69 |
