Jump to content

guns, knives and students...Any thoughts, comments or safety suggestions?

Posted

I've got a LOT to say about this issue!

Well I guess I'll start then. I am completely devestated by the Newtown Tragedy in CT 12-14-12. Its scarey to think that a psychologically unstable kid could shoot little elementary school kids so violently and fairly easily. So what do we do. What precautions can we take to prevent this type of gun violence. Well we start with tightening up gun laws. Now we need to address mental healthcare and school safety as in structural change. What do school nurses think? What suggestions do you have regarding mental health in the students and what would you like to see as far as safety from intruders in your buildings?? What about psych docs, nurses, sped kids all that...meds and restraints...all of it?

Flare, ASN, BSN

Specializes in school nursing, ortho, trauma.

There are a lot of things that can be done - schools across the country have done things from putting bullet proof glass and tightening up visitor policies, to putting an armed officer in the school. Some schools have armed staff members that were trained in some capacity before their jobs at the school (ex military, avid hunters, retired police, etc) The bottom line is that you can arm yourself to the teeth, if someone wants in that badly, they will find a way. This is not meant to scare you- it's just meant to be realistic. After all, I am sure the good folks that went to see the Batman film that July night were not at all thinking about protecting themselves from a shooter.

But you did bring up the real crux of the matter. Gun laws can be mandated all day long, but as long as there are guns out there and bullets available people will attain them - legally or not. The answer doesn't lie in banishing all weapons, because the criminals will only fashion weapons or smuggle them in from countries where they are legal. No, the heart of the matter is to take all the time and energy pointing fingers at the weapons and instead start looking at the people commiting the crimes and their mental health issues. Now this IS something worth legislating. To get a gun permit in many places now, you just have to fill it out and have a few buddies vouch for you. There is no check into your mental health. There is no interview by a local pd to see that you are of sound mind. Maybe in some places there is - but not in all and that is where we are lacking.

Now back to the school safety issue. Yes, we need to stop anyone in the hall we don't recognize as staff or student. Visitors need passes too. I think the students should have to wear id badges like the staff - lord knows it would help my day out in a number of ways. In some schools they already do this. Anyone that doesn't belong should be questioned. Yes, it could be that grandpa got lost looking for his little darling but it could be something worse. It never hurts to ask someone if they need help finding some place then gently saying ok, but first we have to get you a visitor pass so you don't keep getting stopped.

twinmommy+2, ADN, BSN, MSN

Specializes in ED. Has 16 years experience.

There is something that bothers me. We are using Newtown to further propaganda, in a factless way since he didn't actually use any tactical type rifles in the attack, he used handguns, but we are going to go ahead and put all these restrictions on something that wasn't used?

Now how about all the kids in the urban areas who are shot down in and around schools across America, I rarely see news stories daily about them. Why arn't there mothers and fathers being asked to be on TV with Obama?

Why arn't we implementing more programs that teach children about gun safety in schools so they know what to do if they come into contact with one, like Eddie Eagle?

How does taking away a gun from a law abiding citizen protect us from criminals who won't pay attention to the law in the first place?

Stella_Blue

Specializes in Emergency Nursing.

There is something that bothers me. We are using Newtown to further propaganda, in a factless way since he didn't actually use any tactical type rifles in the attack, he used handguns, but we are going to go ahead and put all these restrictions on something that wasn't used?

Now how about all the kids in the urban areas who are shot down in and around schools across America, I rarely see news stories daily about them. Why arn't there mothers and fathers being asked to be on TV with Obama?

Why arn't we implementing more programs that teach children about gun safety in schools so they know what to do if they come into contact with one, like Eddie Eagle?

How does taking away a gun from a law abiding citizen protect us from criminals who won't pay attention to the law in the first place?

Bravo twinmommy+2. I wish more people thought like this. They think if they just take away our right to bear arms all problems will be solved. Well I think we just found out the hard way today in Boston that more problems will arise in different ways. Lets just take away household chemicals to make bombs as well. They best way is just to always be on your tip toes and arm yourself. They have concealed handgun permits for a reason and that is to protect yourself, and I know I am sure protected. I know if I were at the movie theater that day I would have had my gun on me! Criminals are always going to find a way around the law its just the way its always been. We just need to teach proper gun safety. A ban and a registration is NOT the answer and will solve nothing! When the Columbine shooting happened there was a assault riffle ban then and it still happened there.

Jory, MSN, APRN, CNM

Has 10 years experience.

Bravo twinmommy+2. I wish more people thought like this. They think if they just take away our right to bear arms all problems will be solved. Well I think we just found out the hard way today in Boston that more problems will arise in different ways. Lets just take away household chemicals to make bombs as well. They best way is just to always be on your tip toes and arm yourself. They have concealed handgun permits for a reason and that is to protect yourself, and I know I am sure protected. I know if I were at the movie theater that day I would have had my gun on me! Criminals are always going to find a way around the law its just the way its always been. We just need to teach proper gun safety. A ban and a registration is NOT the answer and will solve nothing! When the Columbine shooting happened there was a assault riffle ban then and it still happened there.

Keep the laws the way we have them and if you wait long enough, there will be a massacre that will top the last.

THERE ALWAYS IS. Just hope you or your children are not near it...because somebody's will be and it won't be someone else.

I always like it how people scream "Oh, we can't have more laws and regulations, we can't give up anything" and then expect cases like Sandy Hook not to happen again.

There is NO REASON for semi-automatic weapons to be manufactured for private use in this country AT ALL, no reason whatsoever.

They have one purpose: To kill.

It is obvious you don't know anything about firearms or how to use them and what they are used for, nor the people who own and use them, Doctors, attorneys, college professors, nurses, school teachers, etc... I've never met a firearm yet that jumped up on my shoulder, or into my hand and shouted, " I'm going to shoot someone". Yes, unfortunately there will be another Sandy Hook. When the media feeds the beast, (mentally ill) on a 24 hour basis for days after such an event there is always someone who thinks they can do better. Frankly I'm sick of people who refuse to acknowledge that the problems is not a firearm, it is a society that glorifies violence. It is a society who doesn't want to deal with the mentally ill. In the theater shooting it finally came out the shooters physiologist had filed complaints and told campus police that this man was stalking her and homicidal. She feared for her safety. No one discusses her role as his physician to protect him from himself or harm to others. If she know he was homicidal, she could have had him committed, but she didn't. My question is why. She alone could have made a decision that could have saved lives.

On the issue of banning of firearms, Obama is coming in the back door and he is using innocent people as propaganda to meet his agenda. The UN has tried to ban the citizens in the US for years though a disarmament treaty. The latest attempt to do so was shot down. Do you really want other nations to dictate what we can own here in the US. Look at the proposal by Obama and look at the proposed treaty by the UN. See any similarities?

twinmommy+2, ADN, BSN, MSN

Specializes in ED. Has 16 years experience.

No matter what they do to gun rights for law abiding citizens, there will be more massacres. This issue drives me nuts. I have four children in the public school system, so the previous comment about I hope your kids aren't around when it happens, really kind of sucks. If I were able to do what I wish, I would take them out of school and home-school them all.

Attacks in schools, malls, playgrounds, marathons, other major places of buisness won't end with changes in gun laws because criminals don't abide by laws.

Jory, MSN, APRN, CNM

Has 10 years experience.

It is obvious you don't know anything about firearms or how to use them and what they are used for, nor the people who own and use them, Doctors, attorneys, college professors, nurses, school teachers, etc... I've never met a firearm yet that jumped up on my shoulder, or into my hand and shouted, " I'm going to shoot someone". Yes, unfortunately there will be another Sandy Hook. When the media feeds the beast, (mentally ill) on a 24 hour basis for days after such an event there is always someone who thinks they can do better. Frankly I'm sick of people who refuse to acknowledge that the problems is not a firearm, it is a society that glorifies violence. It is a society who doesn't want to deal with the mentally ill. In the theater shooting it finally came out the shooters physiologist had filed complaints and told campus police that this man was stalking her and homicidal. She feared for her safety. No one discusses her role as his physician to protect him from himself or harm to others. If she know he was homicidal, she could have had him committed, but she didn't. My question is why. She alone could have made a decision that could have saved lives.

Please research the number of gun deaths in Japan...I'll save you the trouble, less than 10 a year.

We have over 500 accidental shooting deaths per year from children alone.

Now, go ahead and tell me how guns are not the problem.

I never said ban them all, just the ones that can take out, oh, let's say 26 defenseless children in a few minutes without reloading.

Someone would have to have a very, very warped mind to justify how semi-automatic weapons are needed for private ownership.

Stella_Blue

Specializes in Emergency Nursing.

Please research the number of gun deaths in Japan...I'll save you the trouble, less than 10 a year.

We have over 500 accidental shooting deaths per year from children alone.

Now, go ahead and tell me how guns are not the problem.

I never said ban them all, just the ones that can take out, oh, let's say 26 defenseless children in a few minutes without reloading.

Someone would have to have a very, very warped mind to justify how semi-automatic weapons are needed for private ownership.

Ok but stabbing 8 defenseless children in a school in Japan is ok.

http://abcnews.go.com/m/story?id=80964

You see just because there is no guns does not mean there is no violence. Creeps will just find another way. Do you think Japan is just some place with rainbows and unicorns because theres no guns, nope still plenty of violence. Maybe Japan should ban their knives too!

Jory, MSN, APRN, CNM

Has 10 years experience.

Ok but stabbing 8 defenseless children in a school in Japan is ok.

8 Children Dead in Japanese School Stabbing - ABC News

You see just because there is no guns does not mean there is no violence. Creeps will just find another way. Do you think Japan is just some place with rainbows and unicorns because theres no guns, nope still plenty of violence. Maybe Japan should ban their knives too!

I never said it would end violence, I said it would cut down the number of deaths.

Here is the difference...6 dead versus 26 in a few minutes.

The USA ranks #1 in three things:

1. Gun manufacturing

2. The most lax gun laws of any industrialized nation.

3. The most gun deaths of any industrialized nation...BY HUNDREDS.

...and before you bring up the Switzerland example, like everyone does, it's important to note that the country has NO ARMED FORCES...the citizens are it and they have to take two years worth of courses before they get issued one.

I never said it would end violence, I said it would cut down the number of deaths.

Here is the difference...6 dead versus 26 in a few minutes.

The USA ranks #1 in three things:

1. Gun manufacturing

2. The most lax gun laws of any industrialized nation.

3. The most gun deaths of any industrialized nation...BY HUNDREDS.

...and before you bring up the Switzerland example, like everyone does, it's important to note that the country has NO ARMED FORCES...the citizens are it and they have to take two years worth of courses before they get issued one.

I didn't know that about Switzerland. So essentially they have to defend themselves in the event of war...does that mean crime as well?

This issue has weighed heavily on me lately. I am from an area of the country where many people take great pride in gun ownership and have a whole host of associations about family and country tied up in gun ownership. To a degree, I understand their perspective... I can't help but feel, however, that we need to make some common-sense changes to gun laws. Obviously, that alone will not solve the problem of violence in this country, but it can be part of a multifaced approach that involves mental health, law enforcement, and supporting troubled families, among other things. Despite having many friends and family members who take great pride in gun ownership and scoff at *any* further restriction, I am deeply upset that the most recent legislation didn't pass. I don't understand why people are so dogmatic and cannot make even the most minor changes--ones that will impact their private gun owership in minimal ways, if at all.

I also appreciate what a previous commenter said about more "routine" handgun violence against urban youth. At my school, a child (teenager, honor roll student) was killed in street violence a couple years ago. He was the only child of a single mother--I cannot imagine her pain. This is all too common in the area where I work. These kids go unmentioned in the national media. They need a voice, too.

Jory, MSN, APRN, CNM

Has 10 years experience.

I didn't know that about Switzerland. So essentially they have to defend themselves in the event of war...does that mean crime as well?

In a war, yes. They are on their own. That is why they are famous for remaining "neutral", because if they get into a conflict, they essentially have limited means of defense.

I have never been there, but I do believe that they have a police force, but their crime rate is very low. It's not as extensive of a police force as we have here in the States.

A gun is issued to every citizen by the government, but an extensive training program goes with it.

akulahawkRN, ADN, RN, EMT-P

Specializes in Emergency Department. Has 6 years experience.

Actually, the geography of Switzerland is partly the reason for their neutrality. Quite literally, the Swiss hold the high ground. There are few good passes through the country and those make for natural funnels. That allows for interlocking fields of fire and they already know the range. They have been officially neutral for a very long time. That neutrality is very good for business... Also, since most able-bodied Swiss men have spent some time in the military, they also have an amazing capacity to mobilize an army within hours. In any event, Switzerland shows that high levels of gun possession/ownership by a populace doesn't always equal high violent crime/murder rates. The US has a violence problem, not a "gun" problem.

Also, if firearms have only a singular purpose of killing, I guess that the many hundreds (if not thousands) of competitions held around the world every year that result in basically NO deaths and very few injuries, where there are at least as many guns there as participants, must be complete failures as far as guns are concerned because nobody got killed.

Something else to remember: when you call 911 for a police response, you're calling for someone with a gun to come over and deal with your problem. Guns aren't magically less dangerous simply because they're held by a police officer. They're also more willing to point it at people and usually have fewer repercussions for doing so... as long as they stay within policy even if they inadvertently shoot the wrong person who didn't do anything wrong. He or she may even point it at you... until you're identified as the good guy. It may also take them a very long time to come to your aid. They have no duty to protect you, even if you call for help.

Jory, MSN, APRN, CNM

Has 10 years experience.

Actually, the geography of Switzerland is partly the reason for their neutrality. Quite literally, the Swiss hold the high ground. There are few good passes through the country and those make for natural funnels. That allows for interlocking fields of fire and they already know the range. They have been officially neutral for a very long time. That neutrality is very good for business... Also, since most able-bodied Swiss men have spent some time in the military, they also have an amazing capacity to mobilize an army within hours. In any event, Switzerland shows that high levels of gun possession/ownership by a populace doesn't always equal high violent crime/murder rates. The US has a violence problem, not a "gun" problem.

Also, if firearms have only a singular purpose of killing, I guess that the many hundreds (if not thousands) of competitions held around the world every year that result in basically NO deaths and very few injuries, where there are at least as many guns there as participants, must be complete failures as far as guns are concerned because nobody got killed.

Something else to remember: when you call 911 for a police response, you're calling for someone with a gun to come over and deal with your problem. Guns aren't magically less dangerous simply because they're held by a police officer. They're also more willing to point it at people and usually have fewer repercussions for doing so... as long as they stay within policy even if they inadvertently shoot the wrong person who didn't do anything wrong. He or she may even point it at you... until you're identified as the good guy. It may also take them a very long time to come to your aid. They have no duty to protect you, even if you call for help.

I just want to note that my objection is not firearms in general. My objection is to ANY high-capacity firearm...there is no purpose for them in our society other than with authorities. They are designed for one purpose: To kill

There are many stupid police officers...being 21, having a clean background check and a valid driver's license and a GED is pretty much the requirement, plus 6 weeks in a police academy.

Yes, police officers do have a duty to protect citizens...millions of dollars in lawsuits have been won by families when officers either did not act or ignored a call and someone died. If there was no duty to protect, no money would have been won.

This is a $2.3 million dollar example, of when police fail to act.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Cry_for_Help:_The_Tracey_Thurman_Story

Do you know what semi-automatic even means?