Teacher in school accidental firearm discharge

[dgiharris]

Murphy's Law, if anything else.
But one accident does not a trend make.

I'm curious, how many "accidents" are required before you feel confident in declaring this a bad idea?

I'm being serious no snark. 3 more accidents? 10? 20? 1 per month?

I like to use math and data. So here is some math.

There are roughly 3 Million teachers in America. So lets say we decide to arm the special teachers. So, lets say that amounts to arming 3% of the teachers.

3% x 3,000,000 = 90,000 teachers armed

Teachers teach roughly 180 days a year. So the amount of times something can go wrong is
180 days x 90,000 teachers armed = 16,200,000 chances for a mistake to happen

Lets assume that these teachers are near perfect, 99.99% meaning that mistakes only happen 0.01% of the time

0.01% x 16,200,000 = 1620 instances of a "Mistake" happening

Each of these mistakes occur in a classroom full of kids, say 25 kids per class on average
further less assume that there is a 1% chance of a kid being hurt by this mistake

1620 x 25 kids x 1% = 40 kids per year

I feel the above math is super generous and can easily be made worse.

If instead of the teachers being 99.99% perfect and we made them just 96% near perfect
then the number of kids being hurt jumps to a staggering 162,000 kids per year

This doesn't even take into account other problems like kids getting ahold of these guns that are locked away in the classroom.

So yeah, I'm not a big fan of this idea. Math really doesn't work out in favor of it

 

[iluvatar5150]

But at least Charles Bronson knew how to be weapons safe around young people, amirite?

I’ll get my coat.

Yes.

I changed it so it would read in such a as to emphasise the point I was making.

I assumed saying ‘fixed that for you’ would be clear for most people but I do apprciate you clarifying it for people who did not bother to read the article or were unclear on the meaning of ‘fixed that for you’.

Gratitude, brother!

FYI: "Fixed that for you" is considered goading or something around here and will get you dinged by the mods.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I'm curious, how many "accidents" are required before you feel confident in declaring this a bad idea?

I'm being serious no snark. 3 more accidents? 10? 20? 1 per month?

I like to use math and data. So here is some math.

There are roughly 3 Million teachers in America. So lets say we decide to arm the special teachers. So, lets say that amounts to arming 3% of the teachers.

3% x 3,000,000 = 90,000 teachers armed

Teachers teach roughly 180 days a year. So the amount of times something can go wrong is
180 days x 90,000 teachers armed = 16,200,000 chances for a mistake to happen

Lets assume that these teachers are near perfect, 99.99% meaning that mistakes only happen 0.01% of the time

0.01% x 16,200,000 = 1620 instances of a "Mistake" happening

Each of these mistakes occur in a classroom full of kids, say 25 kids per class on average
further less assume that there is a 1% chance of a kid being hurt by this mistake

1620 x 25 kids x 1% = 40 kids per year

I feel the above math is super generous and can easily be made worse.

If instead of the teachers being 99.99% perfect and we made them just 96% near perfect
then the number of kids being hurt jumps to a staggering 162,000 kids per year

This doesn't even take into account other problems like kids getting ahold of these guns that are locked away in the classroom.

So yeah, I'm not a big fan of this idea. Math really doesn't work out in favor of it

I've decided not to carry on with this thread since it'll just devolve in to the whole "anti-gun vs pro-gun" debate, and I frankly can't bring up a single care to want to get involved in that.
I stand by my remark, and that's it.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Here's another one:
School resource officer accidentally discharges sidearm at Va. school

 

[ThatRobGuy]

3% x 3,000,000 = 90,000 teachers armed

Teachers teach roughly 180 days a year. So the amount of times something can go wrong is
180 days x 90,000 teachers armed = 16,200,000 chances for a mistake to happen

Lets assume that these teachers are near perfect, 99.99% meaning that mistakes only happen 0.01% of the time

0.01% x 16,200,000 = 1620 instances of a "Mistake" happening

I'm inclined to offer a friendly challenge to you what you've posted here

As we've discussed in the prior posts, we're on the same page in terms of determining that teachers aren't going to be mentally or physically prepared to handle the crisis scenario...

...but, with that being said, I don't think you're numbers above are accurate with respect to what we know about the current gun accident rates in our country.

By your numbers above, you're coming up with the conclusion that 90,000 armed teachers for 180 days of the year could produce somewhere around 1620 potential accidents.

Or, roughly 1 accident per every 56 armed teachers.

In terms of gun accidents for gun owners, as a whole, in the US.
~500 accidental deaths per year
~6000 unintentional firearm injuries per year

There are about 60 million gun owners in the US. So based on that, it's 1 "mistake" for every ~9200 gun owner.

If we use proportions to adjust those numbers down to the 90,000 teachers...

It would actually be closer to 9 potential "mistakes" happening based on a full calendar year, and when you adjust for the fact that they're only there 180 days a year, that take it down to around 4-5 potential "mistakes" happening and not 1600.

...and that's based on 100% of teachers being armed which I doubt would be the case. If they did something like only 10% of teachers being armed, that drops to 0.4 "mistakes" per school year.


Now, obviously, as I said before, I don't believe that would stop a mass shooter scenario, but on the flip side, allowing the few teachers who may have CCW permits to carry while on the job probably isn't going to send the accident risk levels through the roof either. (sorry to go way off in the weeds on the math on this one lol)

While I agree with many gun control strengthening measures, the concept of the "Gun Free Zone" is one that I've never agreed with for statistical and practical reasons.

I don't think making teachers pack heat solves anything, but I don't necessarily think that denying ones who do have a permit from carrying really solves much or mitigates all that much risk either...

 

[GUANO]

This event was predicted several days ago on a conspiracy forum. Anonymous person named the date and the city! Very Interesting.

 

[Larniavc]

FYI: "Fixed that for you" is considered goading or something around here and will get you dinged by the mods.

Didn’t know that. Thanks for the advice.

 

[Larniavc]

This event was predicted several days ago on a conspiracy forum. Anonymous person named the date and the city! Very Interesting.

Very interesting. Got a link?

 

[GUANO]

Very interesting. Got a link?

I was trying to find it but this site blocks a LOT of IP Addresses and my corporate IP is blocked so I cannot view the page. I'll log into a proxy or something shortly and see if I can find it.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

This event was predicted several days ago on a conspiracy forum. Anonymous person named the date and the city! Very Interesting.

Very interesting. Got a link?

...I'd also be interested to know if you saw the post on the conspiracy forum after it had already happened, or if you viewed the page several days ago to confirm that post was, in fact, there prior to the event.

It's not uncommon for conspiracy forums to do that sort of trickery... people with some basic knowledge of PHP bulletin board software and MySQL can easily insert a post after the fact, and change the timestamps around behind the scenes so that it appears to have been from days prior, and then say "See, this was predicted before it happened"

 

[GUANO]

...I'd also be interested to know if you saw the post on the conspiracy forum after it had already happened, or if you viewed the page several days ago to confirm that post was, in fact, there prior to the event.

It's not uncommon for conspiracy forums to do that sort of trickery... people with some basic knowledge of PHP bulletin board software and MySQL can easily insert a post after the fact, and change the timestamps around behind the scenes so that it appears to have been from days prior, and then say "See, this was predicted before it happened"

Yeah I know their little dirty tricks.

But no, the story caught my eye because I live in southern California and it was in the headline. It was pinned and had a large number of responses for at least 2 days.

I still can't get to the site but you should find it on godlikeproductions.com

I imagine that the story is trending right now... It should be pinned on the front page...

 

[Goonie]

Yeah I know their little dirty tricks.

But no, the story caught my eye because I live in southern California and it was in the headline. It was pinned and had a large number of responses for at least 2 days.

I still can't get to the site but you should find it on godlikeproductions.com

I imagine that the story is trending right now... It should be pinned on the front page...

Another trick to false predictions is keeping the prediction general. After the last major school shooting with all the talk about arming teachers it is inevitable that the media will pick up incidents involving teachers and guns.

A friend of mine got himself into the news when he published a book 9 months before the discovery of the fake Hitler diaries about a fake Hitler diaries. He managed the same trick with secret talks with Russia, a nuclear accident in the Soviet Union, and a coup against Gorbachev in his next three books.
https://jimwilliamsbooks.com
Jim Williams (author) - Wikipedia

 

[ThatRobGuy]

But no, the story caught my eye because I live in southern California and it was in the headline. It was pinned and had a large number of responses for at least 2 days.

The one I'm seeing on there wasn't created until last night, and the content of the actual post looks very vague, and it appears as if someone changed the thread name after the fact to include the city, state, and circumstances.

The original post was (found thanks to a Wayback/caching service that caches pages as they were originally):

HERE WE GO! HUGE NEWS TOMORROW to make Trumps idea look bad
It was only a matter of time...

WHY HAS THIS NOT HAPPENED UNTIL NOW????????????????

However, what's on there today is:

HERE WE GO! HUGE NEWS TOMORROW to make Trumps idea look bad - teacher discharges weapon during class in Seaside, California
It was only a matter of time...

WHY HAS THIS NOT HAPPENED UNTIL NOW????????????????

Basically, the content of the original post is very vague and can be misconstrued to mean just about anything "huge news to make Trump's idea look bad" could be applied to a number of different things...the "teacher discharges in seaside" bit was added to the thread title after the fact.


Or is there a different thread in there you were referring to? I have access to a paid Wayback/caching service that can show me archived versions of pages so I can see what they were previously.

 

[GUANO]

The one I'm seeing on there wasn't created until last night, and the content of the actual post looks very vague, and it appears as if someone changed the thread name after the fact to include the city, state, and circumstances.

The original post was (found thanks to a Wayback/caching service that caches pages as they were originally):




However, what's on there today is:



Basically, the content of the original post is very vague and can be misconstrued to mean just about anything "huge news to make Trump's idea look bad" could be applied to a number of different things...the "teacher discharges in seaside" bit was added to the thread title after the fact.


Or is there a different thread in there you were referring to? I have access to a paid Wayback/caching service that can show me archived versions of pages so I can see what they were previously.

I believe that post is the one I'm referring to. Thanks for looking that up and good synopsis. People do that crap all the time on sites like that I just wanted to take a look myself but couldn't get to the site so thanks for that.

Really could have sworn I saw the city and state and "teacher discharge firearm" last night or the night before but I guess not! doh!

 

[Larniavc]

I'd also be interested to know if you saw the post on the conspiracy forum after it had already happened, or if you viewed the page several days ago to confirm that post was, in fact, there prior to the event.

And a link to each and every similar prognosticating that did not happen around that time.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Anyone know the extent of the kids injuries, or is that being played up when it was little more than some Sheetrock dust in his eye?

 

[com7fy8]

I overheard a church minister saying how hard it is to become able to use a handgun . . . much harder than a rifle. And I suppose ones can take shortcuts in training people. They might be told a thing or two and pass a written thingy, and they are paying. And if there is an attitude of entitlement in the mix, this might help ones to rush the process.

Lobbyists, for all we know, have interfered with standards being too high for them.

If your going to allow for armed teachers, the guns need to always be on safety, and be smart only usable by the owner.

I think it is a good idea to have smart guns, and smarter handlers.

It is VERY rare for people to be killed with a gun. Usually it is the bullet that gets them.

There is a lot of red tape to go through, though, before a bullet can kill someone.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I overheard a church minister saying how hard it is to become able to use a handgun . . . much harder than a rifle. And I suppose ones can take shortcuts in training people. They might be told a thing or two and pass a written thingy, and they are paying. And if there is an attitude of entitlement in the mix, this might help ones to rush the process.

Perhaps it differs based on state, but speaking for Ohio, the only difference is that you need to be 21 instead of 18 for a handgun. If you're purchasing from a large retailer that has full time people on staff running background checks (Like a Kames or Fin Feather & Fur), the process for buying either only takes about 5-10 minutes.

Even in terms of the training requirements for a CCW, most states are pretty lax. In Ohio, it's just a 12 hour course that you can knock out in a day. Other states are so laid back that you can do the whole process through the mail.

Even though I'm a gun guy and a CCW holder, I think the training requirements need to be boosted up a bit. I, at my own expense, have taken 200+ hours of firearm training with qualified instructors...as it's a right/privilege that I take seriously (both the benefits and risks/responsibilities). I don't think most people with guns or permits take it as seriously as I do which is unfortunate.

 

[Yonny Costopoulis]

Murphy's Law, if anything else.
But one accident does not a trend make.

No. But there is the correlation between more guns and more deaths.
The Correlation Between Guns and Homicide Rate
More Guns Equal More Deaths, Study Finds

This makes sense when we understand that guns were created to cause death and have worked exceptionally well in doing this. I do not think there is an army in the world that does not have guns as part of their arms.

 

[Zoii]

Why on earth would you bring guns into a classroom. What on earth !!!!