[Rancid]

Yes, we can rebuild all schools to essentially be fortresses.

In Santiago (and perhaps most Latin American cities), it is easier because most of the schools are built around an inner courtyard, with the outer wall of the school serving as a barrier to accessing the property. Gotta love those Morrish influences.

Robb Elementary in Uvalde seems to be a series of long buildings placed in rows inside a fenced off area.

To attain the same level of protection as one of the schools that @wat0n or I attended, you would need to build a more or less unclimbable wall around an area the size of a large city block. Is it doable? Yes. Is it really expensive? Yes. If they get a good deal, about 100$ a linear foot of masonry wall with smooth veneer. Let’s say a 4,000 foot perimeter. So, at least half a million dollars if you want minimal gates.

The school district has ten schools, so it would be 5 million for all ten schools.

This is approximately twice the entire school budget.

So, the scheme is laudable and would probably be effective. But without a massive funding influx, it is also unfeasible.

That's not what I'm suggesting. Basically, locking the doors to each of the buildings, and putting in a buzzin system, like many schools already have.

[Godstud]

@Godstud so what makes you believe some of the insurgent groups will not attack schools in the future?

Because it's not the USA.

Also, the insurgency(inactive for years) isn't nation-wide. If Florida has a hurricane do they batten down the hatches in Hawaii?

They also don't do earthquake drills. We had an earthquake Magnitude 1.0 in NE Thailand just 5 hours ago!!! Why isn't everyone freaking out???! School hasn't even been cancelled. Why aren't they thinking about the children???

Your arguments are weak and ill-conceived. They amount to: "What if! What if! What if!"

[wat0n]

Yes, we can rebuild all schools to essentially be fortresses.

In Santiago (and perhaps most Latin American cities), it is easier because most of the schools are built around an inner courtyard, with the outer wall of the school serving as a barrier to accessing the property. Gotta love those Morrish influences.

Robb Elementary in Uvalde seems to be a series of long buildings placed in rows inside a fenced off area.

To attain the same level of protection as one of the schools that @wat0n or I attended, you would need to build a more or less unclimbable wall around an area the size of a large city block. Is it doable? Yes. Is it really expensive? Yes. If they get a good deal, about 100$ a linear foot of masonry wall with smooth veneer. Let’s say a 4,000 foot perimeter. So, at least half a million dollars if you want minimal gates.

The school district has ten schools, so it would be 5 million for all ten schools.

This is approximately twice the entire school budget.

So, the scheme is laudable and would probably be effective. But without a massive funding influx, it is also unfeasible.

But it's a drop in the ocean in the context of a $700+ billion special infrastructure scheme (it's added on top of the $500+ billion of regular infrastructure spending every year). It's not great, but definitely possible.

We'd love to live in a world where walls and fences aren't necessary (let alone cops and armies), yet we don't.

You said we could devote police funding to understand the roots of gun violence, while I think it's not necessarily a bad idea over the long run we do need something in the short/medium run.

Walls or even just tall fences with anti-climbing and anti-ramming protection (they exist) are one such option, simple and effective. Obviously walls provide better protection but a fence could work just as well, for most purposes. Anything that delays (ideally deters, if not then stops and, if it doesn't, then at least delays) an attacker can end up saving lives and compensate for the investment...

Possibly, the need for a lower police presence (just in schools where students themselves may actually be the attackers or which have to deal with gangs operating in the vicinity) may pay for them over the long run.

IIRC the school had 5 people protecting it (2 cops and 3 security guards). How about we lower it to 2 security guards, that could save ~$90k per year and this may be an underestimate, after walling or properly fencing the school?

@Godstud insurgencies come and go, as I said Thailand could start shoring school security up prioritizing the southern part of the country and go from there. Honestly I'm surprised the insurgents haven't hit schools if access is so easy.

[Godstud]

@Godstud insurgencies come and go, as I said Thailand could start shoring school security up prioritizing the southern part of the country and go from there. Honestly I'm surprised the insurgents haven't hit schools if access is so easy.

Your fears are unwarranted. You are a fear-mongering alarmist.

Address a problem that isn't a problem with no problem in the foreseeable future. Check. That's logical and reasonable.

The insurgents don't attack schools because they are upset with the government, not children. SE Asians seem to care more about children than guns.

[wat0n]

:roll: Your fears are unwarranted. You are a fear-mongering alarmist.

Address a problem that isn't a problem with no problem in the foreseeable future. Check. That's logical and reasonable.

The insurgents don't attack schools because they are upset with the government, not children. SE Asians seem to care more about children than guns.

Guess this depends on the SE Asians, doesn't it?

Thais have been trying their luck with the insurgency there. Just because you don't perceive the danger it doesn't mean it doesn't exist nor it makes it irrational to take preventive measures, even more so since they are not irremediably expensive

[Godstud]

Guess this depends on the SE Asians, doesn't it?

Whataboutism. Sri Lanka is a country with a lot of problems. I guess when pointing out how great Western nations are I should use the worst place possible as an example? You make disingenuous arguments. Pathetic.

Thais have been trying their luck with the insurgency there. Just because you don't perceive the danger it doesn't mean it doesn't exist nor it makes it irrational to take preventive measures, even more so since they are not irremediably expensive.

You're nothing but an alarmist. Taking measures against a threat that does not exist, is dumb.

Fear-mongers, like you, want schools to be prisons. I guess we should arm our teachers with guns and body armour, because of an incident in another country.

Moronic arguments. Why address a NON-EXISTENT problem? Answer the fucking question, and engage your brain when doing so.

Why not address the root cause of these shootings? GUNS? Why is that something you ignore??

[wat0n]

@Godstud I'm not making claims about all East Asians, just showing you are being far too optimistic/naive.

Your position reminds me of those who have resisted getting vaxxed for COVID because "it only kills old people and fatties" (just read Igor's posts). Yes, if you are young and healthy you will probably not get a serious case... But it's still possible that you will die from it.

Yes, these attacks may be extremely unlikely or unusual where you live, but they aren't impossible.

As for your last question, what's the root cause of these shootings? If it's guns, why have they kept increasing when gun control measures have been roughly the same for several years now?

And also, what makes you believe it's so easy or cheap to take all guns from circulation? There are more firearms than people in this country. How are you going to do the mass disarmament you'd need for guns to cease being a factor? Why would it be so bad to shore up physical security in schools in the meantime?

[Godstud]

You're an alarmist. You want people to live in fear because of some unreasonable possibility that you are inflating.

Schoolkids should be vaccinated against the flu.

People in Colorado start doing hurricane drills.

London schoolkids also be taking tsunami drills. It's not impossible!!!!

See how fearful and unreasoning that is? That's you.

You are making disingenuous arguments, that are based on the flimsiest of possibilities, and for threats that do not exist, to any significant degree.

Fact: Thai schools do not need to react to school shootings in the USA, even if some alarmist from Chile says so.

[Politics_Observer]

@Godstud is absolutely correct. Gun control has to be a federal initiative with strong gun control federal laws enforced in all 50 states. All 50 states will need strict and tough gun control laws uniformly across the entire country to keep people safe.

[wat0n]

No, Thai schools need to prevent insurgents from seeing them as targets.

But more generally, as a matter of principle an uninvited stranger has no business to do inside a school while students are in class.

@Politics_Observer even if the US did reach that type of agreement (honestly, it should), hasn't the US already crossed the Rubicon? How will you get all the guns going about freely under control? How long will it take you to put this whole situation under control?

[Godstud]

No, Thai schools need to prevent insurgents from seeing them as targets.

This isn't an issue. You couldn't make a school not a target(for someone thinking like you) unless you made it into a fortress, with armed guards.

But more generally, as a matter of principle an uninvited stranger has no business to do inside a school while students are in class.

Not an issue. Not a problem. Why do you feel the need to fabricate problems where none exist?

It might not be IMPOSSIBLE, but there are many impossible things that they don't guard against.

[Politics_Observer]

@wat0n

Australia did it with a gun buyback program. We would probably have to institute a similar program.

[wat0n]

@wat0n

Australia did it with a gun buyback program. We would probably have to institute a similar program.

I've heard about it, but I don't know if enough Americans would buy in (or sell out if you want). I don't know, it doesn't hurt to try but I would honestly not keep my hopes up.

@Godstud care to explain how does it contribute to the education of students to have random people walking inside schools uninvited? It can at least be distracting so I can in fact see the bad side, without getting into any tragic scenarios. But I don't see what would students and the educational community at large gain.

[Politics_Observer]

@wat0n

You could also institute laws that if you are caught with a gun without a permit that has very stringent and high standards after the gun buyback grace period is over, then you will face very serious prison time with a felony on your record in addition to having your gun confiscated without being compensated for it given it would then be illegal.

[wat0n]

@wat0n

You could also institute laws that if you are caught with a gun without a permit that has very stringent and high standards after the gun buyback grace period is over, then you will face very serious prison time with a felony on your record in addition to having your gun confiscated without being compensated for it given it would then be illegal.

Now we're talking. You could be more lax in rural areas where very few people live and guns may be necessary to protect from e.g. bears, but this should be the general principle. Buyback is fine too.

[Politics_Observer]

@wat0n

Certain firearms for hunting, that do not have high capacity magazines, and no bump stocks, are OK to own in rural areas for hunting purposes but should require a hunter safety course. Even in cities, hunting rifles are OK so long as they are strongly regulated and required to be kept locked up by law in that city. Should be the same for rural areas. Moreover, when you own firearms, that actually makes you more of a target for thieves who might want to steal your guns.

That happened to my uncle who lives way out in the sticks. He was a target for burglars because he owned guns and his guns were the target of the thieves. So owning guns does not necessarily make you less of a target for crime. Sometimes it will make you more of a target for crime because people will want to steal your guns.

[wat0n]

@wat0n

Certain firearms for hunting, that do not have high capacity magazines, and no bump stocks, are OK to own in rural areas for hunting purposes but should require a hunter safety course. Even in cities, hunting rifles are OK so long as they are strongly regulated and required to be kept locked up by law in that city. Should be the same for rural areas. Moreover, when you own firearms, that actually makes you more of a target for thieves who might want to steal your guns.

That happened to my uncle who lives way out in the sticks. He was a target for burglars because he owned guns and his guns were the target of the thieves. So owning guns does not necessarily make you less of a target for crime. Sometimes it will make you more of a target for crime because people will want to steal your guns.

Yeah, I'm thinking more of "what if a grizzly bear shows up into my house in the middle of nowhere?" kind of situation. It's fair to say you'd need a firearm to defend yourself.

[Politics_Observer]

@wat0n

Most bears will run away from you. You might just scare them off unless you want bear meat. Grizzlies are up in Alaska. You might need a rifle for them if they walk upon your house or upon you while you are out in the wild. Most bears will just run away if they see you in most circumstances, unless, they feel their cubs are threatened.

[Godstud]

@Godstud care to explain how does it contribute to the education of students to have random people walking inside schools uninvited? It can at least be distracting so I can in fact see the bad side, without getting into any tragic scenarios. But I don't see what would students and the educational community at large gain.

1. Random people are not walking inside schools uninvited.
2. There are no side effects of this, as no random people are walking inside schools uninvited.
3. Schools are fun places of learning, and not prisons.
4. Random people are not walking inside schools uninvited.

[wat0n]

@Godstud nothing stops random people from walking.

As for point 3), if the school let my kid out without permission and lost him I'd obviously seek a lawyer. This is definitely not about schools being prisons or not.