November 8, 2017

"Parents at one Miami-area school are being offered the chance to purchase bulletproof panels for their children's backpacks to guard against a school shooting."


"It's just a tool.... I'd rather be prepared for the worst than be stuck after saying, 'Wow, I wish we would've done that.'"

131 comments:

AReasonableMan said...

Guns everywhere, making us safer.

MadisonMan said...

Well, this is a stupid idea.

Suggesting your kid is likely to be shot is something that would give a kid nightmares.

Parents, try not to pass on your fears to kids while they're in Elementary School. Wait 'til they're in High School.

(reposted to remove a typo)

The Cracker Emcee Activist said...

They were offering these during the crack wars of the '90's, too. Unfortunately, ghetto incomes don't typically rise to this sort of thing. How many more generations can Democrats force Black folks to duck and cover, actually or metaphorically?

Kate said...

I was going to ridicule this, but then I see the school is Florida Christian. The article brings up Sandy Hook. It's the title "Christian", not "Elementary School", that makes protection seem not so crazy any more.

Angel-Dyne said...

Wow, there must be a lot guys driving trucks with Gadsden plates and Confederate flags terrorizing Miami.

Stay safe, kids.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

There are ~50 million elementary and secondary school students in the US. Each year, ~20 are kill by being shot while at school. 5 of those are suicides. Most of the rest are individual shootings, not Columbine or Sandy Hook type shooting sprees.

LYNNDH said...

Why even take them to school. I mean a lot of kids are killed in traffic and pedestrian accidents. Take NO CHANCES.

Spiros Pappas said...

I just discovered the Game Show Network this week. Many, many reruns from the 1980s and 1990s air on this channel. I was struck by how much more intelligent people were back then. The contestants were sharp and witty. Yet our kids, and especially your kids, are not so smart. We know from studies of urban communities, that experiencing and observing violence is linked to lower IQs. Is a similar phenomenon happening in middle class communities. All the violent TV and video games. The school shootings. Is this stuff making our kids dumb? It sure seems like they're a little bit slower.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

~1600 children under 15 die in auto accidents each year in the US. That means a child is ~100 time more likely to die in a car accident then by being shot by someone else at school.

Fernananindiananaide said...

Ya don't want those overpriced school books getting shot fulla holes.

Spiros Pappas said...
I was struck by how much more intelligent people were back then.


Game shows as sampling. Check.

Yet our kids, and especially your kids, are not so smart.

Actually they are so smart.

We know from studies of urban communities, that experiencing and observing violence is linked to lower IQs.

No, we don't know that.

Although your thesis is baseless, it's also self-contradicting in that there was FAR MORE violence, murders, etc in the 1980s and 90s than there is now. Look it up.

Fernananindiananaide said...

Ignorance is Bliss said...
~1600 children under 15 die in auto accidents each year in the US.


This is fun for all ages:
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/mortality_tables.htm

~30,000 kids less than one year old die every year.

Big Mike said...

They need them much more in Chicago.

Big Mike said...

@Spiros Pappas, the schools used to educate people. Now they indoctrinate the kids; there’s a difference.

traditionalguy said...

They could easily sell the full body sized book bags that you can climb into like the full body prophylactic in Police Squad .

MadisonMan said...

I was going to ridicule this, but then I see the school is Florida Christian.

What, Christians can't be ridiculed for bad ideas?

The people who approved this are pandering and innumerate.

Fernananindiananaide said...

Big Mike said...
@Spiros Pappas, the schools used to educate people. Now they indoctrinate the kids; there’s a difference.


And yet performance on standardized tests in math and reading remain quite flat from 1970 to 2006 (Fig 2). Slight early dip in "science", though, but improving since 1982.

Note the complete lack of correlation with school spending.

Rusty said...

AReasonableMan said...
"Guns everywhere, making us safer."

Yes they do.

Unknown said...

MadisonMan: Yes, Christians can have bad ideas. But now that the Democrat party has openly declared war on Christians and cheered targeting them, it makes sense that a Christian school needs to do something as they are now targeted by leftists; and who knows when the next mad leftist will try to commit a mass murder?

Islamic schools certainly don't worry about this kind of thing, do they?

--Vance

madAsHell said...

I was in Los Angeles (Studio City), and drove by a Jewish school. Armed guards overlooked the children as they jumped out of their automobiles, and entered the walled compound.

AllenS said...

AReasonableMan said...
Guns everywhere, making us safer.<

Is this a sick joke about Chicago? Or St Louis. Or Baltimore?

MadisonMan said...

who knows when the next mad leftist will try to commit a mass murder?

That will happen a long time after a similar number of Christian Children are killed in automobile accidents on their way to school.

If you want to inculcate fear into your kids, by all means do this. Protect them from the World. Let them get to young adulthood with zero coping skills and a problem with anxiety. But hey, parent, you will have protected them from some unlikely and unknown bogeyman. Well done!!

cubanbob said...

The Christian school is way down in South Dade. Its not a crime or gang ridden area. This is a bit over the top.

Todd said...

I bet the parents of kids in Chicago schools are jealous.

Freder Frederson said...

But now that the Democrat party has openly declared war on Christians and cheered targeting them, it makes sense that a Christian school needs to do something as they are now targeted by leftists; and who knows when the next mad leftist will try to commit a mass murder?

Where the fuck does this libel come from. Democrats (many if not the majority are Christians) have not declared war on Christians or cheered targeting them. Provide some evidence for such an outrageous statement.

And who would you consider the last mad leftist to try to commit a mass murder? I guess I could grant you the guy who injured Steve Scalise (although he didn't succeed in actually committing mass murder, and that was politically, not religiously motivated). But Dylann Roof targeted Christians.

As for your contention that Islamic Schools don't have to worry about this kind of thing, that is complete bullshit. Not to mention that conservatives are so ignorant, they shoot up Sikh temples because apparently they don't know the difference between Islam and Sikhism.

Freder Frederson said...

AReasonableMan said...
"Guns everywhere, making us safer."

Yes they do.


There is absolutely no evidence of this. If it were true this would be the safest country in the world. It is absolutely not.

And in fact, higher gun ownership rates correlate with higher violent crime rates. And if your answer is "Chicago", it is really not that simple. New York has similar draconian gun control laws and it has a very low violent crime rate (and contrary to all your hand wringing, the end of stop and frisk did not result in a surge of crime).

Fernananindiananaide said...

cubanbob said...
The Christian school is way down in South Dade. Its not a crime or gang ridden area. This is a bit over the top.


The article's headline is false - surprise! I'm shocked at the fake news!

The school does not offer bulletproof backpack inserts.

The headline should be:

"Florida School Offers Order Forms for Bulletproof Backpack Inserts that Anyone Else Can Buy Except in Connecticut".

But don't forget, kiddies: In Florida it's a crime to commit a crime while wearing body armor, so take off your backpack before jay-walking across the street to smoke cigarettes.

Lance said...

I'm old enough to remember the razor-blades-and-pins-in-Halloween-treats scare from the 70's and 80's. This strikes me as more of the same.

AReasonableMan said...

vFreder Frederson said...
There is absolutely no evidence of this.


Guns Everywhere is a faith based religion.

The Cracker Emcee Activist said...

"And in fact, higher gun ownership rates correlate with higher violent crime rates. And if your answer is "Chicago", it is really not that simple."

Really? I live in an area that has stratospheric gun ownership and violent crime is virtually nonexistent. As you yourself acknowledge in the second sentence of the quote, "it's true except when it isn't".

And that, my friends, is why gun owners will never trust progs with any kind of gun control initiative.

Gahrie said...

Guns Everywhere is a faith based religion.

Guns everywhere is the exercise of a Constitutional right.

Rusty said...



Blogger AReasonableMan said...
vFreder Frederson said...
There is absolutely no evidence of this.

Guns Everywhere is a faith based religion.


No. It's a reality.
Your absolute faith in the power of the state is a religion.

Here is something for you to consider.
There are 100 million firearm owners in the United States.
Between them they own 300 million firearms.
You could repeal the 2nd amendment tomorrow and unless you want to declare war on 100 million Americans nothing will change.
100 million firearm owners determine gun policy, not congress.

Spiros Pappas said...

Big Mike, the test scores are the same, but the questions are different.

AReasonableMan said...

DOD Nominee: ‘Insane’ A Civilian Can Buy Semi Automatic Weapons

Freder Frederson said...

Really? I live in an area that has stratospheric gun ownership and violent crime is virtually nonexistent. As you yourself acknowledge in the second sentence of the quote, "it's true except when it isn't".

Yes, really

n.n said...

Perhaps in Pro-Choice communities, where agency is deprecated, and both human dignity and value are progressive.

Todd said...

AReasonableMan said...
Guns Everywhere is a faith based religion.
11/8/17, 10:52 AM


There is more empirical data in support of "guns everywhere" than there is in support of man made global warming...

EDH said...

AReasonableMan said...
DOD Nominee: ‘Insane’ A Civilian Can Buy Semi Automatic Weapons"

Winslow is a former U.S. Air Force colonel who also serves as the vice chair of medicine at Stanford University. The Air Force has admitted fault for failing to report Kelley’s past military criminal convictions to the FBI, which would have blocked Kelley from purchasing a firearm.

How did I know to go to the article and look for Air Force background? What is "insane" are government employees who fail to report crimes to databases, utterly fail to diagnose the perp's mental problems and subsequently allow him to flee mental health facilities without consequence.

And then publicly declare in congressional testimony that "civilians" are the problem and should be denied their constitutional rights.

n.n said...

Scalpels (and vacuums, and forceps) everywhere is a faith based religion, used to disarm and deny lives deemed unworthy, inconvenient, or profitable.

Self-defense, on the other hand, is a universal human right.

n.n said...

Rights and responsibilities.

Problem: criminal, psychotic, and depraved human beings.
Solution: Ban illegal possession of guns by criminal, psychotic, and depraved human beings.

Problem: unworthy, inconvenient, or profitable babies... and overpopulation.
Solution: final solution: abortion of unworthy, inconvenient, or profitable babies.

A revealing juxtaposition of mainstream religions.

Todd said...

AReasonableMan said...
DOD Nominee: ‘Insane’ A Civilian Can Buy Semi Automatic Weapons
11/8/17, 11:10 AM


The "insane" thing is someone that is either so ignorant of firearm technology/terms that they would make that statement about semi-auto weapons OR that they know what they are talking about and still hold that position.

If your rifle is not a black-powder, bolt-action, revolver, or single-shot/pump, it is semi-automatic. Like over half of all rifles produced.

If your hand-gun is not black-powder, bolt-action, revolver, or single-shot, it is semi-automatic. Like over half of all hand-guns produced.

Was he "confused" and meant to say fully-automatic weapons? These are already tightly controlled and require a background check, finger-prints, and LOTS of paperwork and money to legally get.

So is he ignorant, insane, or both OR is he like many in that he prefers his "subjects" un-armed?

Henry said...

Kate said, "I was going to ridicule this, but then I see the school is Florida Christian. The article brings up Sandy Hook. It's the title "Christian", not "Elementary School", that makes protection seem not so crazy any more."

They should just issue each kid a bible.

Henry said...

The "insane" thing is someone that is either so ignorant of firearm technology/terms that they would make that statement about semi-auto weapons OR that they know what they are talking about and still hold that position.

In the Doctor's defense he was more specific than that, defining the thing that civilians shouldn't be allowed to buy as "a semi-automatic assault rifle like an AR-15".

Apparently he isn't up on the assault weapon definition war.

Maybe the law should be that each time there is a mass shooting the weapon used is outlawed until the next max shooting.



Fabi said...

The more ignorance about guns the greater desire for gun control, Todd. Great comment by you upthread.

Todd said...

Henry said...

In the Doctor's defense he was more specific than that, defining the thing that civilians shouldn't be allowed to buy as "a semi-automatic assault rifle like an AR-15".

11/8/17, 12:00 PM


Sorry not much better. "assault rifle like an AR-15" is news-person for "evil looking". I can purchase at least a half dozen different semi-auto rifle models that all take the same round as those evil AR-15s but don't "look" like those evil AR-15s, that are at least as accurate and have at least as fast a fire rate. They are getting their panties in a wad over aesthetics.

Its because its black, isn't it? Democrats/liberals are such racists!

Drago said...

Field Marshall Freder valiantly trying to understand statistics and correlations.

It's adorable.

Like a puppy trying to get peanut butter out of a hollow bone.

Drago said...

In other utterly predictable moron lefty news, Tim Kaine exposes his ignorance of the 3/5ths compromise.

Unexpectedly.

LLR Chuck will have to work overtime to minimize that gaffe.

Rusty said...

Blogger Drago said...
"Field Marshall Freder valiantly trying to understand statistics and correlations.

It's adorable.

Like a puppy trying to get peanut butter out of a hollow bone."

Except , in the dogs case, it eventually gets the peanut butter. I don't hold out much hope for Freder.

Drago said...

"There is more empirical data in support of "guns everywhere" than there is in support of man made global warming..."

Well, since there is literally zero empirical evidence of man-made global warming, that is a low bar indeed.

Hey, that gives me an idea, why don't we create flawed gun control models, collect flawed gun control data sets, "modify" the already flawed data sets to be more of what "we need" to make our point, then publish those results in journals where there are political filters applied to prevent any real criticism, then hide our data sets and models so its all a black box and then demand the right and power to restructure the entire global economy which would give us ultimate power over all activities!

That is the one, sure-fire way to gain left-wing support.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

This is an existing product. It's for sale to everyone, now. It has been for a while.
What does "being offered the chance to purchase" mean, then? Offered a discount for a large group purchase or something? Ok.
Shock, horror, our degraded times, damn the NRA, etc! Good one.

Drago said...

Rusty: " I don't hold out much hope for Freder."

There is always hope...except in places where the lefties have complete control.

Those places become "Hope" wastelands.

But only every single time.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Drago said;
"Those places become "Hope" wastelands."

They are also wastelands when it comes to food, toilet paper, etc.

However, they get FREE healthcare so it's all good.

n.n said...

they get FREE healthcare

They are eligible for subsidized medical care. It's not free because the costs are redistributed. It's not health care, because medical and health care, while correlated, are separable practices and with frequently disparate outcomes.

Rabel said...

Give ballistic armor to teenage boys and watch as their natural instinct to test the boundaries leads to hilarity and hospitalization.

Rabel said...

Let Mikey put it on and go downrange.

JackOfClubs said...

I don't know what they mean by "offered the chance to purchase". These things are readily available commercially for about $99. The one in the article is selling for $120 which seems a bit high, but maybe is higher quality or has other features that justify the price.

I suppose they mean that the guy is actively promoting these for the school where his kid goes. I don't see a problem with this, per se, but it is of very limited utility. It will only protect from random fire. If the shooter systematically goes around making sure the wounded are dead (as the guy in the Texas church shooting evidently did) it won't be much help. Also the kids would have to think to use it, which isn't likely without a lot of training.

Jupiter said...

Spiros Pappas said...
"Big Mike, the test scores are the same, but the questions are different."

Actually, it has been necessary to revise the scoring of IQ tests downward in order to make the average come out to 100. This is known as the Flynn Effect. As far as anyone can tell, people are getting smarter, at least as measured by IQ tests. Sure doesn't show up in their behavior. And it seems to have flattened out recently.

Jupiter said...

AReasonableMan said...
"Guns everywhere, making us safer."

My guns aren't intended to make you safer.

buwaya said...

Running thought-experiments about the purpose of the Second Amendment in the context of modern conditions. The purpose of course is to preserve the possibility of revolt against an oppressive government - this bit is constantly evaded or eluded by opponents of gun ownership.

Wargaming the thing, in my head, of how an disaffected population could effectively oppose a hated central government as it would likely manifest in modern times, I find the idea of semi-military arms rather pointless. There would be no percentage in fighting the police or the military. The point of the fight would be to make the police and military unsustainable through economic ruin and administrative failure; the destruction of civilian institutions, and the inability to govern.

That is, as usual, the proper targets of the revolutionary are the civilians on the other side, not their military forces. And one does not need AR-15's for that purpose, just the proximate fear of individual murder at any time. Lack of personal security is the point, in order to control the population and shift their allegiance, out of perception of where the greater risks lie.

For this purpose, the best weapon probably is a small concealable handgun, or even knives, for use at point-blank, against "enemy" civilians and their families in their homes, on the street, in their vehicles, their workplaces.

Useful ref -

"The Village" - Bing West
An account of the efforts to suppress the Viet Cong, specifically to get the rural population on-side and prevent their control by the guerrillas. Ultimately this failed because there simply weren't the resources (and it would have required enormous resources, in manpower especially) to keep the civilians safe from guerrilla atrocities. The Viet Cong won "the village" through unstoppable terrorism because it was impossible to prevent them from murdering people at will. It was impossible to guard everyone all the time.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Bruce Schneier is a security expert whose blog I read. I caught an interview with him on NPR this past weekend. He pointed out that there are two kinds of security. Actual physical security and "feeling" secure and that the two are not necessarily related. You can be physically insecure and feel secure and vice versa. He also pointed out that if something is in the news, you don't need to put to many resources into guarding against it. Personally. By definition, if it is on the news it is a rare event. You should be worrying about stuff that doesn't make the news. One of his examples was domestic violence.

I guess what I'm trying to say her is that this is stupid.


https://www.schneier.com/

Jim at said...

But it's a gun-free zone.
There is no way there would be a shooting.

Gun. Free.

Todd said...

"The Village" - Bing West
An account of the efforts to suppress the Viet Cong, specifically to get the rural population on-side and prevent their control by the guerrillas. Ultimately this failed because there simply weren't the resources (and it would have required enormous resources, in manpower especially) to keep the civilians safe from guerrilla atrocities. The Viet Cong won "the village" through unstoppable terrorism because it was impossible to prevent them from murdering people at will. It was impossible to guard everyone all the time.

11/8/17, 1:01 PM


Was there ever an attempt to "arm" the villages? Let them guard themselves/protect themselves from the guerrillas?

buwaya said...

The other unavoidable matter concerning the Second Amendment is the scenario it assumes. The Second Amendment is valuable in order to maintain a "pool" of armaments in civilian hands, while the government is in a non-oppressive state.

Once the government falls into a condition whereby it induces a revolutionary atmosphere, the Second Amendment will be gone. Weapons in civilian hands will then be illegal. The purpose of the Second Amendment therefore is to make it very difficult to implement a revocation of the Second Amendment.

tim maguire said...

Ron, you might be trying to say it's stupid, but I thought you were saying it's understandable. If something worries you and there is an affordable solution that makes you feel better, then it is rational to take precautions even if it's an irrational fear.

As we often remind liberals comparing terrorism deaths with car accidents, it's not as math problem.

buwaya said...

"Was there ever an attempt to "arm" the villages? Let them guard themselves/protect themselves from the guerrillas?"

Yes and yes.

Its an excellent book.

Fernananindiananaide said...

Jupiter said...
Actually, it has been necessary to revise the scoring of IQ tests downward in order to make the average come out to 100. This is known as the Flynn Effect.


Based on game show contestants Spiros Pappas claims that kids are dumber and/or the schools are worse, and you're claiming kids are smarter.

"Because children attend school longer now and have become much more familiar with the testing of school-related material, one might expect the greatest gains to occur on such school content-related tests as vocabulary, arithmetic or general information. Just the opposite is the case: abilities such as these have experienced relatively small gains and even occasional decreases over the years."

Which is consistent with standardized testing showing that everything is about the same over about 40 years. The schools are obsessed with improvements, especially since the "No child left behind" bullshit, so I doubt they're adjusting the tests to hide improvements.

Better data.

buwaya said...

Since the most important function of the Second Amendment is to make it difficult to implement a revocation of the Second Amendment, there are conclusions that necessarily follow.

The purpose of the Second Amendment therefore would be subverted by the mere registration of arms, no matter the otherwise liberal nature of ownership rules, as this would make a mass-confiscation of arms much easier.

This is much worse, from the point of view of preserving the option of revolt, than restrictions of type, or characteristics of weapons. A huge mass of untraceable cheap pistols and their ammunition would be much more valuable to the modern revolutionary than even a large number of registered automatic weapons.

exiledonmainstreet said...

n.n., I was being sarcastic.

TestTube said...

Tying this into an earlier thread...

Another stupid idea is "Bike to School Day", which is actually encouraged among some of our schools.

I actually was stupid enough to participate in this event...Once. Yes, one time I accompanied my child as he mounted a flimsy metal frame precariously balanced one two wheels and wobbled his way through rush hour traffic to his elementary school.

I say this to my shame.

Never again. When transporting children to school, it is permissible to let them walk if and only if conditions -- such as the existence of sidewalks and traffic lights -- allow safe pedestrian travel. Other than that, children should be transported to and from school safely buckled inside a sturdy vehicle.

Participation in "Bike to School" day should precipitate a visit from Child Protective Services, not praise from the school administration.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

If something worries you and there is an affordable solution that makes you feel better, then it is rational to take precautions even if it's an irrational fear.

In the security biz that's called security theater. The problems with security theater are:

1) Resources are limited. Time and money spent on making you feel better without actually increasing security are not available for actually increasing security.

2) Which means you are actually decreasing your security.

The real issue is that humans are pretty bad at prioritizing what needs to be done to be secure because people who looked at lions and pondered if they needed to be worried left way fewer descendants than the ones that climbed a tree or banded together and used spears to drive the lions away.

Lem said...

There was a complaint a few years ago that the kids backpacks 🎒 were too heavy. Bulletproofing them would make them even heavier?

exiledonmainstreet said...

Jupiter said...
AReasonableMan said...
"Guns everywhere, making us safer."

My guns aren't intended to make you safer.

11/8/17, 12:58 PM

They have that effect though. Mark Steyn has noted that the home invasion rate in NH is pretty low and opines that it is in part due to the fact that the gun ownership rate is pretty high. He says that NH certainly has its' share of left-wing hippies who would never touch a gun, but since burglars don't know if the house they are breaking into belongs to an anti-gun hippie or a deplorable who will shoot them full of holes, they might just take a raincheck and head to Massachusetts, where the odds of breaking into a gunless home are better.

So the anti-gun leftist surrounded by gun-toting deplorables IS protected by them, although ARM will never say thank you.

I Have Misplaced My Pants said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
I Have Misplaced My Pants said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
I Have Misplaced My Pants said...

Participation in "Bike to School" day should precipitate a visit from Child Protective Services, not praise from the school administration.

Found the statist!

How about this? Why don't you go ahead and evaluate risk for your kids, and let the rest of us do it for ours, and mind your own goddamned business?

Idiots like you who think that CPS involvement, with all the related churn and trauma to a family, over trivial bullshit is somehow a reasonable response to parenting choices that were considered completely normal until the handwringers and crybabies took over the suburbs fifteen years ago piss me right the hell off.

tim maguire said...

Thanks Ron. I would draw a distinction between personal action and societal action.

Security theater such as we see in airports is a waste of precious resources that arguably makes us less safe, but the economics of the home are different. The money for bullet proof backpacks is unlikely to be coming out of some broader security budget such that the family will have to forgo some more effective security system. If another budget item suffers (not usually the case), it will more likely be the "let's go to Disney World!" fund.

Todd said...

exiledonmainstreet said...

So the anti-gun leftist surrounded by gun-toting deplorables IS protected by them, although ARM will never say thank you.

11/8/17, 1:40 PM


If those opposed to guns were true to their convictions, they would post "This house is a gun free zone" signs on their lawns.

Jupiter said...

"The purpose of the Second Amendment therefore would be subverted by the mere registration of arms, no matter the otherwise liberal nature of ownership rules, as this would make a mass-confiscation of arms much easier."

Yes, exactly. Which is why there are Ghost Guns.

Fernananindiananaide said...

EDH said...
flee mental health facilities without consequence.


Sheeit, that's easy!

Todd said..."This house is a gun free zone"

They don't work! I put up some of those signs hoping to entice burglars so I could shoot them, and so far nothing.

;-(

exiledonmainstreet said...

If those opposed to guns were true to their convictions, they would post "This house is a gun free zone" signs on their lawns.

11/8/17, 1:46 PM

Actually, I have seen a house that has a "Gun-Free Zone" sign in the window. Of course, it is in a low crime, prosperous, very white suburb.

Imagine living in the inner city and putting that sign in your window.

"Help Yourself to My Shit!"

TestTube said...

Pants,

I can see that my quite reasonable observation has provoked an unreasonably angry response.

Obviously, I have touched a nerve here, I can see that. Tender conscious and all that. Perhaps you have even participated -- more than once -- in "Bike to School" day.

But name-calling and getting angry at me is not going to fix anything. Don't hate me. Don't hate yourself. Just accept that your lousy parenting skills are the core issue here, and let's move forward.

Curious George said...

"LYNNDH said...
Why even take them to school. I mean a lot of kids are killed in traffic and pedestrian accidents. Take NO CHANCES."

"Ignorance is Bliss said...
~1600 children under 15 die in auto accidents each year in the US. That means a child is ~100 time more likely to die in a car accident then by being shot by someone else at school."

" MadisonMan said...
That will happen a long time after a similar number of Christian Children are killed in automobile accidents on their way to school."

What fucking idiocy. Avoidance of risk is an individual assessment. The fact that a kid has a greater chance of dying in a car crash than getting ass raped by Kevin Spacey doesn't mean you shouldn't cancel that play date as long as Kevin comes to you.

Jupiter said...

I am, no doubt, paranoid, but I think that the real point of making gun ownership illegal is precisely to cause violence between gun owners and the police. From the point of view of a thing like ARM, me and a cop killing each other on my doorstep when he comes to take my guns away is a win-win.

I fully expected this scenario to come into effect rather swiftly after the last Presidential election, and I was very seriously pondering how I was going to deal with it. I learned of Trump's election with a vast sense of relief. Vast.

Drago said...

"As far as anyone can tell, people are getting smarter, at least as measured by IQ tests. Sure doesn't show up in their behavior. And it seems to have flattened out recently."

Nutrition and medicine have improved the human condition.

But we are still the same humans with the same flaws that we've always been.

Which is why our Founders were so brilliant in their construction of our Constitution and Separation of Powers.

Which is why the leftists must destroy them. The structures they created are the only things standing between the leftists/LLR allies and the next lefty "Utopia".

Ambrose said...

Once offered, it would be hard to not buy this. How can parents take the one in whatever chance that their kid will be the only one without a bulletproof vest?

exiledonmainstreet said...

"I fully expected this scenario to come into effect rather swiftly after the last Presidential election, and I was very seriously pondering how I was going to deal with it."

"Officer Unfriendly, it's true, I used to have guns, but I lost them. In the woods. On the lake. Canoe accident. I shouldn't have taken my rifle in the canoe with me."

I expect that many, many guns would suddenly be lost in unfortunate accidents if an outright ban was ever stupidly attempted.

The damned government couldn't even make sure one violent, crazy ex-Air Force asshole couldn't get a gun and it's going to collect over 350 million of them?

Jupiter said...

Ambrose said...
"How can parents take the one in whatever chance that their kid will be the only one without a bulletproof vest?"

If I needed to run away from someone with a gun, the first thing I would do is ditch my backpack.

I Have Misplaced My Pants said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
exiledonmainstreet said...

TestTube, you seem to be obsessed with bikes and bike safety, bike etiquette, etc.

I Have Misplaced My Pants said...

I can see that my quite reasonable observation has provoked an unreasonably angry response.

No, my response is not a bit unreasonable, but yes, I am indeed very very angry at people like you and your attempts at extending the benevolent hand of the state into family life, and I will criticize and fight you at every turn.

Fernananindiananaide said...

Deaths per year (2007) (CDC link above -> here)
Age 05 to 14: 06,147
Age 15 to 24: 33,982
Age 25 to 34: 42,572
...etc...

# of deaths increases with age group, with elementary school aged kids being by far the safest group - and most of them don't even pay taxes.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

the economics of the home are different. The money for bullet proof backpacks is unlikely to be coming out of some broader security budget such that the family will have to forgo some more effective security system.

True enough, but you are also inducing paranoia in the kid. You are telling them that the universe they live in is so dangerous that they need to wear body armor to go to school. Which is ridiculous. But that's what your teaching them.

AReasonableMan said...

Ambrose said...
Once offered, it would be hard to not buy this. How can parents take the one in whatever chance that their kid will be the only one without a bulletproof vest?


Concerned but fiscally responsible parents could tell their kid to hide behind the other kids and use their lifeless bodies to absorb the bullets.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Sound thinking ARM, sound thinking.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

TestTube said...

Another stupid idea is "Bike to School Day"...

Personally, I like Take Our Children to the Park…And Let Them Walk Home by Themselves Day.

I live in New Hampshire. I'm try to decide between Everglades and Denali.

exiledonmainstreet said...


"If I needed to run away from someone with a gun, the first thing I would do is ditch my backpack."

Exactly. And run zig-zag, because that would make you much harder to hit.

AReasonableMan said...

As problematic as Trump has been as President most of his woes stem from the vastly worse GOPe. This is incredible:

RAMESH PONNURU said...
Last week, I wrote an early reaction to the House Republican tax plan that suggested that its “big losers” would be upper middle class people in high-cost areas of high-tax states. I argued that a tax reform that raised their taxes could be justified if it met certain tests. (This tax reform gets mixed grades on those tests.)

I wrote then, though, that more analyses would have to be done to get a fuller picture of the bill. The ones that have been done so far suggest that a lot of households further down the income scale will face tax increases.

Check out the second chart here, for example. It shows that a quarter of tax filers with children making between $10,000 and $20,000 a year will get a tax increase under the Republican bill. (That’s even if some tax credits that the legislation slates to expire are renewed.) Also facing tax hikes: more than half of filers with children making between $20,000 and $30,000 a year, and nearly two-thirds of filers with children making between $30,000 and $40,000 a year. More than forty percent of parents, all in all, will see tax increases.

Republicans ought to consider this result unacceptable.

Fernananindiananaide said...

I Have Misplaced My Pants said...
No, my response is not a bit unreasonable,


You're both right and you're both wrong. More wrong than me, anyway!

- Riding a bus is a lot safer than anything else*.

- School buses don't have seatbelts and not riding the bus isn't a crime.

extending the benevolent hand of the state into family life

You're right that, like other demons, CPS-types are too evil to summon casually, but sometimes there are actual crimes by even more eviler people, of which riding a bike isn't one, though I guess you could punch people.

*except staying home, as long as the kids urinate and defecate outside. Which would probably make someone call CPS. Sigh.

Etienne said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jupiter said...

AReasonableMan said...

"Also facing tax hikes: more than half of filers with children making between $20,000 and $30,000 a year, and nearly two-thirds of filers with children making between $30,000 and $40,000 a year. More than forty percent of parents, all in all, will see tax increases.

Republicans ought to consider this result unacceptable."

Hey, ARM, good to know you're looking out for Republican interests. Trump could not have won without people like you, and it will take people like you to get him re-elected. Keep up the good work.

And BTW, when you go from paying $0 to $5 per year, that is indeed a tax increase. So you and good old Romesh are correct.

Big Mike said...

Dear ARM the idiot. Under the GOP plan as it stands now, people will have a $24,000 exemption. Ergo a taxpayer making between $10,000 and $20,000 will pay nothing under the GOP plan.

exiledonmainstreet said...


"You're right that, like other demons, CPS-types are too evil to summon casually, but sometimes there are actual crimes by even more eviler people"

Holy hell, I am so sorry I followed that link.

AReasonableMan said...

Jupiter said...
good to know you're looking out for Republican interests


Simply pointing out the amazingly bad optics of the tax bill coming right after the amazingly bad optics of the health care bill.

If you have a dispute with the data analysis this is the original link, knock yourself out.

n.n said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
n.n said...

exiledonmainstreet:

re: free healthcare and sarcasm

I was the second string completing the first play, clarifying the terms and scope of "free" and "healthcare".

rcocean said...

Typical Americans.

Lets import Gang Members from Mexico and deranged crooks from all over the world - cause "Immigration" is great!

Then we can all discuss cladding our kids in bullet proof armor.

What a bunch of moroons.

Tank said...

Every debate about gun control is exactly the same.

AReasonableMan said...

Big Mike said...
Under the GOP plan as it stands now, people will have a $24,000 exemption. Ergo a taxpayer making between $10,000 and $20,000 will pay nothing under the GOP plan.


Not all families with children have two adults.

"The GOP wants to create a larger “zero tax bracket” by doubling the standard deduction to $12,000 for singles and $24,000 for married couples."

"the Republican plan does not say what it would do about what’s known as “head of household” filing status, which increases the standard deduction available to solo parents and other caretakers. If it’s eliminated, as it was in Donald Trump’s campaign tax plan, then the child tax credit would have to rise by some $700 to keep a single mom with two children earning $35,000 from getting a tax increase, Hemel told me.

Again, the new GOP framework is silent on this issue. But that alone is reason to be wary. “I think a fair inference is they’re hosing heads of households,” Hemel said."

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Not all families with children have two adults.

Agreeing with ARM here. There are many single head of household filers. Not all families have two adults to get the 24K increase to offset the loss of the personal deduction.

Not all families with dependents have CHILDREN as dependents either. Your dependent can be an adult or even several adults..... so eliminating the personal deduction for dependents and increasing the Child Care credit, is not helpful in many cases.

TestTube said...

Exiled,

I wouldn't say I'm obsessed with bicycles. Let's just agree that I am on a roll.

Please note in the other thread my ideas on new bicycle features that can make bicycling more safe, and even more enjoyable.

TestTube said...

Pants,

Angry you may be, but I don't think you are going to be very effective either criticizing OR fighting me while you are on a bicycle.

Abdelkrim Amrani said...

Keep the good work!!

Rabel said...

RAMESH PONNURU commits an error of omission. The site he links to refers to effects in 2027 which are due to the fact that the tax plan must meet a 10 year deficit neutral requirement and some aspects of the plan are therefore not currently extended beyond 10 years.

In addition, some of the "tax increases" cited are actually reductions in tax credits to filers who do not owe any tax.

As Ramesh is not stupid but rather is a neverTrumper who has given up any pretense of honest neutrality, I will assume his error of omission would better be labeled as a lie.

rhhardin said...

You'd think they'd make them into superman outfits.

exiledonmainstreet said...

TestTube: lol, so you've been trolling us. Good list, but you left off "enclose bicyclist in suit of armor, just in case all the other safety features don't work."

TestTube said...

Exiled,

Suit of armor? I like the cut of your jib, sir (or ma'am)!

THERE's the forward-thinking brilliance that brings me back to Althouse's blog!

Jupiter said...

"It's just a tool," said George Gulla. "I'd rather be prepared for the worst than be stuck after saying, 'Wow, I wish we would've done that.'"

That's kind of the way I feel about having guns.

Drago said...

ARM: "Again, the new GOP framework is silent on this issue. But that alone is reason to be wary."

Nonsense.

All of obamacare was punted to Agencies and federal department "deciders" and the lefties loved loved LOVED it!

In fact, on that basis alone, I would have expected you to approve. I mean, since you'd not want to appear hypocritical or anything.

Drago said...

We should definitely trust ARM and his pals to lecture on guns....and apparently chainsaws...but mostly Gun-Chainsaws!

https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2017/11/08/what-in-the-actual-fck-there-is-no-topping-usa-todays-look-at-devin-kelleys-rifle/?utm_campaign=twitchywidget

And no, it's not a joke. ARM's beloveds at USA today think an actual chainsaw is an actual attachment option for an AR-15!

We must let these rocket scientists guide us in all things!

Bob Ellison said...

There's this thing, this tax thing, where you're supposed to think that everybody pays, everybody's in the system. Taxes are OK, because everybody pays.

Then there's the other thing, the reality thing, where every working person pays about 16% payroll taxes, most people pay about 8% sales taxes, most people pay almost no income taxes, and the rich people pay all of the rest (around 15%).

What a bunch of goddamned lies.

It's a Bernie thing.

buwaya said...

If one has kids, one understands things that would not otherwise make sense.

Chainsaws on guns go back a ways, to the Warhammer 40K miniatures game, where they a thing. Various figures use chainsaws or sometimes chainsaws as bayonets, of sorts.

There are videogames too it seems.

bgates said...

"Guns are too dangerous for you - give them to us and we will protect you", say the members of the party of Harvey Weinstein, Kevin Spacey, Anthony Weiner, &c.

ARM, Freder: it's my opinion that it's less dangerous to live in a country with over a hundred million firearms which the insane and evil can occasionally use to commit atrocities, than it would be to trust people like you.

Howard said...

Blogger Drago said...
Well, since there is literally zero empirical evidence of man-made global warming, that is a low bar indeed.


You would also agree that all those combat aircraft shot down by heat seeking missiles that were designed using the same radiative physics that quantifies the carbon dioxide greenhouse warming effect weren't really shot down, rather the incompetent pilots augered in at the bottom of a self-imposed death spiral like JFK jr.??

I think what you might mean (giving you the benefit of the doubt as the Eddie Rickenbacker of the Cold War) is that the chicken little predictions of world-wide catastrophe from the empirically verified carbon dioxide warming has "literally zero empirical evidence."

Drago said...

Howard: "I think what you might mean..."

Not quite, but I am not in a place I can spend time engaging.

The Rickenbacker line however is gold. Gold I tell ya!

I love your asides.

Bad Lieutenant said...

I would be interested in knowing the degree of Administration involvement with the plan's design. Surely President Trump is deeply interested in tax reform, which he deeply wants, and must have a vision of.

Howard said...

Most arguments for and against guns are batshit crazy irrelevant.

Gun guilt drips from the right as they over-compensate by blathering on and on about how many people are saved by guns. This is bullshit, the US violence is fueled by a systemic gun culture.

The left repeats guilt trips about all the whites killed by guns in the high profile mass shootings and the black criminals shot by white police that account for a mere slight trace of gun violence.

The fact is that gun ownership is a constitutional right, for good or evil. The US is awash in guns and given other civil rights that the left hold dear, cannot be confiscated.

Given the facts, the problem is not guns because guns are a given. The guns will always be available. The variable that can be controlled are criminal and crazy people. We need better criminal and crazy control because guns are out of control.

Instead, we get both sides measuring their dicks via virtue signalling. The bulletproof backpack is just another impotent emotional burp in an endless circlejerk war of words.

buwaya said...

Warhammer 40K figure with chainsaw bayonet -

https://orig00.deviantart.net/3553/f/2014/010/5/b/pegasus_marines_sternguard_veteran_by_djp15-d71lhqx.jpg

Drago said...

Howard: "Gun guilt drips from the right as they over-compensate by blathering on and on about how many people are saved by guns."

Note to self: stating straightforward facts in a straightforward way is "blathering on and on".

Drago said...

Howard: "Instead, we get both sides measuring their dicks via virtue signalling"

Alternatively, one side is assessing the comments of the other side saying they want us dead, in camps and permanently sidelined, and oh yeah, disarm.

Meanwhile, the other side makes note of the very reasons the 2nd Amendment is there in the first place.

In some peoples minds, its all just so gosh darn equivalent.

While we are at it, why do some people go on and on and on about freedom of speech and of the press?

I mean, come on already!

Achilles said...

Howard said...
Most arguments for and against guns are batshit crazy irrelevant.

Gun guilt drips from the right as they over-compensate by blathering on and on about how many people are saved by guns. This is bullshit, the US violence is fueled by a systemic gun culture.


Since 95+% of "gun violence" is committed by democrat voters I agree we shouldn't allow democrat voters to have guns. Especially the ones that are already barred from legal ownership.

iowan2 said...

More Children die at the hands of their parents, than from guns. I guess we should ban parents. In Iowa, more children have been starved to death, by their parents, than been killed by guns.

All of this "debate" is stupid. Unless you will do the work to change the Constitution, you are nothing but virtue signaling, and care less about the victims than the murderers that actual use guns to kill.

Bad Lieutenant said...

For ten of these ballistic inserts you could buy a Dan Wesson CBOB and throw in training and licensure for the teacher carrying it.