0
   

Should kids be taught combat in schools

 
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Oct, 2006 10:05 pm
This group is the closest thing I've ever seen to a real world self defense concept which might actually do anybody any good dealing with real villains and criminals:

http://www.learntodefend.com

Learn2Defend has one of the world's best laboratories for developing such a science at their disposal (i.e. Baltimore Maryland) and they appear to have made good use of it. Anybody thinking about implementing such a program in a school should get in touch with them.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Oct, 2006 10:09 pm
edgarblythe wrote:
Intrepid wrote:
I wonder if those who advocate such things have children of their own.


Likely if they had any, they are now dead of gunshot wounds.


It's starting to look like the normal case any more is for everybody to be dead from stab sounds or bullet wounds one way or another. I'd like to at least go down fighting.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Oct, 2006 02:21 am
blacksmithn wrote:
Why am I not surprised that this is happening in Texas and that OSD is here waving his little flag?

The fact is that, despite all the media hype, schools are still among the safest places for kids. Perhaps because of that same media hype, we have this Chicken Little approach to the straw man issue of school safety.

Now he 's complaining that my FLAG is too small ?


We all know that schools r usually safe.
Did someone not know that before your post ?

The defensive measures r for when the safety
is violated, occassionally. We might have thought u 'd know that.
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Oct, 2006 03:04 am
Merry Andrew wrote:
Please don't confuse reasonablesness with cowardice. I certainly try not to confuse lunacy with grit.


I couldn't agree more, Andrew.

Sometimes I think some posters here have a fantasy of living in the wild west! Probably too much TV when they were little ....
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Oct, 2006 03:06 am
Merry Andrew wrote:
I don't know why I bother with you, David, why I allow myself to get drawn into these silly conversations. I've said it once, but, just to cover all bases, I'll say it again:

To teach kids self-defense measures is reasonable and worthwhile. I have no objection to teaching them marksmanship and firearm safety at an appropriate age (say, 14 and up?). But to suggest that a child who has not yet developed sound judgement about when it is appropriate or inappropriate to use deadly force as a form of self defense is not only self-defeating, it is criminal. I say self-defeating because now you are certainly running the risk of more shootouts between teenagers and -- in your scheme -- even pre-teens where in the past a simple school-yard scuffle would have sufficed. My objection to kids trying to rush an armed adult has the same ground -- the child's lack of good judgement. If you or I were faced with an armed adversary, we could probably make a pretty good judgement as to how to try and disarm him/her. (I'm giving you a lot of credit here, you'll notice. I'm not at all sure if I'm right in this.) We would be able to estimate at just what point it is safer to attack than to stand still as a target. I submit that persons of a certain age (under 18 or so) are not capable of making this fine distinction. They are simply too immature.

For the record, I am a gun-owner and no pacifist. As I recall, though, I was 14 or thereabouts before I was allowed to even handle a firearm, and then only under the strictest adult supervision. Good thing, too. I probably would have shot my own foot off without that supervision. I have served in the armed forces of the United States and, as an officer, have been responsible for training men in the use of all sorts of bang-bangs. I wouldn't hand a loaded gun to a pre-teen boy or girl any more than I would allow a suckling infant to play with a sharp scalpel.


Your post reveals naked prejudice against the minds
of children; as a result of your prejudice,
u 'd have them lay down their lives,
meekly to be slaughtered, in the discretion
of whatever homicidal maniac enters their school room.



For 5 years I lived in a neighborhood
where most of the kids were armed,
with no complaints of any person of any age
displaying bad manners with guns,
nor did the police have any occasion
to visit the area, to the fullest extent that I remember.

We went target shooting out on the desert,
with no ill effects. However, if it had ever been
necessary to defend our existence, we 'd have done so.

I propose a compromise:
Let the defensive classes be elective courses.

Those students who 'd prefer to opt to be DOCILE
in the face of murderous, armed aggression can freely do so,
and rely upon HOPE that the murderer will be
invested with a spirit of mercy ( contrary to prior experience ).

Those who are moven to rise to their own defense
shud drill for it, perhaps flanking out, to attack him from all sides,
or some can simply flee and evacuate the room,
in disregard of his orders to meekly remain seated,
awaiting death. Many hands make lite work... or some variation
on that theme.

Fighting back is really the innermost essence
of American philosophy, not submission to abuse;
better and more honorable to die fighting
than begging and grovelling.




I like shows about Nature n enjoy watching them
on my giant HDTV. I 've seen an incident
in which some starving lionesses attacked
a herd of water buffalo.
A large old bull rose to the defense;
a fight ensued in which he retreated.
There is no chance that a water buffalo
can outrun a lioness. I kept thinking
that his best choice was counterattacking them
with rear hooves to the lions' faces, or his horns and weight.
His choice to flee was a fatal error; he cud have won,
if he had chosen to fight instead.

Too many humans make that same error.

The folks in Texas think its time to STOP that
humble surrender to death:
THAY PROVE THAT THAY R TRUE AMERICANS,
not cowards, and this choice represents a better
chance to survive.
David
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Oct, 2006 03:09 am
<deep sigh>
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Oct, 2006 03:13 am
Why not just make it impossible for anyone to enter the schools?
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Oct, 2006 03:16 am
littlek wrote:
That's why I came into this fray - to make a point that Merry just made. Teach them self-defense. Teach them conflict reslution. Teach them to be kinder and more empathic with their peers and communities.

Do not teach them how to fight - it will instill fear and anxiety as well as provide food for brawls.

The function of a public school
is to dispense information,
such as the rules of math,
American history, English grammar,
geografy and fonetic spelling.

What u propose is BRAINWASHING
the citizens with the philosophy of YOUR choice.
That is an abuse.


Self defense is occasionally needed to sustain life
( the same as thay teach safe swimming ).
Have defensive classes ever instilled fear or anxiety ??
David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Oct, 2006 03:19 am
msolga wrote:
<deep sigh>

Those students who opt for docility
can SIGH DEEPLY while patiently waiting to be slaughtered.
I guess that 's OK ( probably liberals ).
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Oct, 2006 03:22 am
Where is all of this slaughter occurring? Have I been missing the news? Where are all of these killers of children? Do you have the numbers?
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Oct, 2006 05:05 am
Intrepid wrote:
Where is all of this slaughter occurring? Have I been missing the news? Where are all of these killers of children? Do you have the numbers?


Even if your entire exposure to the internet is A2K, newspapers still aren't that expensive. Most daily editions are still about 25 cents, which hasn't changed in several decades.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Oct, 2006 05:53 am
They could, of course, take all the gungas, davids and the like, and hire them to wear real police gear and guard the children for us. I would feel much safer with my grandkids in their capable hands. No hall pass? POW! Uncle here to pick up the nephew for a doctor appointment? Likely story. POW! Substitute teacher, eh? You don't like no teacher to me. POW! Life would be simpler then. Much simpler.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Oct, 2006 06:02 am
I've got a suggestion for Intrepid and a couple of others here and other places on the net who claim to be bothered by the exploding numbers of firearms in this country.

Want to reduce the number of firearms in America, or at least stop the growth in such numbers?

Here's the most effective way I can think of to do that: Refrain from electing any more psychopaths to the presidency of the United States.

Most Republicans and other normal people in America never had any real inkling of how seriously ****ed-up Slick KKKlinton was until somehwere around 1997. At that point, attendance at gun shows went totally insane.

Gunshows had long been the domain of small numbers of hunters, collectors, and affectionados, but the attendance tripled, quadrupled, quintupled, and then started increasing by factors of ten and 20 and 30 as ordinary people increasingly felt threatened by the KKKlinton regime and the likes of Janet Reno running our justice department. Sales of every sort of semiautomatic weapon went off the charts, and people who hunt but had never owned military style weapons started buying them in twos and threes. It got to where you couldn't find parking places within blocks of such events.

Now, after six years of having the national government back under adult supervision, that sort of activity is starting to fall off a bit, which I'd presume is the way most liberals would like it.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Oct, 2006 06:04 am
edgarblythe wrote:
They could, of course, take all the gungas, davids and the like, and hire them to wear real police gear and guard the children for us. I would feel much safer with my grandkids in their capable hands. No hall pass? POW! Uncle here to pick up the nephew for a doctor appointment? Likely story. POW! Substitute teacher, eh? You don't like no teacher to me. POW! Life would be simpler then. Much simpler.



You probably ought to drive up to Lancaster County Pa and tell that to the Amish people living there....
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Oct, 2006 07:16 am
I doubt seriously that the Amish will be teaching their children to rush a gunman any time soon.

But.

I think it might be the right thing to encourage children not to hide and wait to be slaughtered. I think about the things I've taught my children. I've taught them to scream, kick, and go for the eyes and genitals of anyone who grabs them and tries to get them into a car. I've told them to run into traffic if they have to. I've taught them to assume that if their attacker succeeds in getting them into a car, that they will be killed.

So what will I teach them about what to do in the case of an armed man (or possibly a woman, but that hasn't happened yet to my knowledge) in their school? Certainly, they should not rush an attacker if they are far enough away from him that he will just shoot them before they get close. And if I tell them to run no matter what, maybe he'll just pick them off as they scatter. All of this is to say that I'm not so convinced that this is a bad idea, yet.
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Oct, 2006 07:18 am
gungasnake wrote:
Intrepid wrote:
Where is all of this slaughter occurring? Have I been missing the news? Where are all of these killers of children? Do you have the numbers?


Even if your entire exposure to the internet is A2K, newspapers still aren't that expensive. Most daily editions are still about 25 cents, which hasn't changed in several decades.


You have not answered the question. What are the numbers? Is this how you answer when you don't have an answer?
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Oct, 2006 07:21 am
gungasnake wrote:
I've got a suggestion for Intrepid and a couple of others here and other places on the net who claim to be bothered by the exploding numbers of firearms in this country.

Want to reduce the number of firearms in America, or at least stop the growth in such numbers?

Here's the most effective way I can think of to do that: Refrain from electing any more psychopaths to the presidency of the United States.

Most Republicans and other normal people in America never had any real inkling of how seriously ****ed-up Slick KKKlinton was until somehwere around 1997. At that point, attendance at gun shows went totally insane.

Gunshows had long been the domain of small numbers of hunters, collectors, and affectionados, but the attendance tripled, quadrupled, quintupled, and then started increasing by factors of ten and 20 and 30 as ordinary people increasingly felt threatened by the KKKlinton regime and the likes of Janet Reno running our justice department. Sales of every sort of semiautomatic weapon went off the charts, and people who hunt but had never owned military style weapons started buying them in twos and threes. It got to where you couldn't find parking places within blocks of such events.

Now, after six years of having the national government back under adult supervision, that sort of activity is starting to fall off a bit, which I'd presume is the way most liberals would like it.


I have a suggestion for you. Get your head out of the sand and out of GWB's ass and get into the real world. Maybe everybody was getting military style weapons because they knew that America would be going to war. Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
blacksmithn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Oct, 2006 07:51 am
Numbers? Well there's this:

Schoolhouse Hype

This one appears to have more recent data:

Serious Violent Crimes in Schools
0 Replies
 
blacksmithn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Oct, 2006 07:55 am
Neither one of those, by the way, supports the hysterical, fear-driven approach to school safety as being enacted in Texas. But, given that this approach seems only destined to improve a shooter's kill ratios, maybe that's a good thing.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Oct, 2006 08:00 am
I say again for those looking for answers, the best I know of is this:

http://www.learntodefend.com
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/06/2022 at 06:13:09