Posted on 04/26/2014 6:33:41 PM PDT by lbryce
Eric Dietz, Ph.D., the former director of Homeland Security for the state of Indiana and 22-year Army veteran, says he is only interested in one thing when it comes to the debate over stationing armed personnel and teachers in America’s schools: saving lives.
Now a professor at Purdue University and director of the school’s Homeland Security Institute, Dietz could be the guy who — once and for all — destroys the left’s argument against putting more guns in schools. And it’s all based on numbers and facts.
That research? More guns in schools equal fewer deaths during active shooter situations.
At the 2014 National Rifle Association convention in Indianapolis on Friday, Dietz told TheBlaze that he set out to determine what realistic measures could be taken to reduce deaths during school shootings. Using an “agent-based modeling” method that he says is as straight forward as it gets, Dietz and the university were able to conclude that the “introduction of a minimal (10%) armed faculty in conjunction with [a] resource officer” could reduce overall casualties in school-related shootings by roughly 70 percent.
Since the 1950s, all but two mass shootings have occurred in locations where victims were restricted from carrying weapons for self-defense, his work says. This stunning statistic led the university to question the effectiveness of so-called “gun free zones.”
(Excerpt) Read more at theblaze.com ...
First of all, the inclusion of the word "gun", "second amendment" into any attempt to debate a left-wing ideologue renders them even more unreasonable, irrational, unresponsive to logic and facts then they usually tend to be. Taking guns away from so called gun nuts is not about the safety of society because if that were the case they would have relented a long time ago being that the possession of guns diminish crime. That's a fact. No, gun-rights opponents are against guns because it's something that jut irks them, people having guns, it's simply a power/control issue that has them all foaming at the mouth about the mere fact that people have the right to own guns.
Facts don’t matter to the hoplophobes. It’s all about emotion.
More over the top rhetoric from the Blaze.
Sure, the gun-grabbers will give up after they see his study./s
Our Lord Jesus Christ himself could come back, perform some indisputable miracles, declare that gun control is an idiotic scam that kills more people than it saves and is forever more against God’s law, documenting it in 200 point type on the side of the United Nations building, and the second he left they would declare it a hoax, he didn’t really mean that, and on, and on, and on.
Self ping for later reading.
When has the left ever given up on anything?
Your suggestion as well-intentioned as it may be, would actually be counter-productive. Religion, especially anything related to Jesus Christ makes them even more insane. Now, combine Jesus Christ with that of being a second amendment advocate and you’ve got more asylum inmates than you could ever handle.
Guns in schools ping.
> When has the left ever given up on anything?
To be fair, they ARE brainwashed from age 4 - 22 so what else would you expect?...: )
When has the left ever given up on anything?
-=0=-
When they cease drawing breath
!
He would be declared a racist...
This guy needs to get into a debate with Cynthia Tucker, the Pulitzer Prize winning commentator/anti-gun blogger...
Do it just like Wayne LsPierre schooled Rebeccca Peters from IANSA a few years ago...
I would pay money to see that trouncing...
I bet just about anyone could make that racist, feminist, man-hating bump-on-a-log cry in less than 30 second...
And you wouldn’t even have to raise a hand to her...
BTW, “lbryce” gun control (and those that breath at it’s alter) is not a reasonable position, mentally stable condition...
They are like a pesky little gnat that needs to be squashed, destroyed, before they get too much father in breeding the backup plan for protecting our freedoms and liberties that we are so desperately trying to save...
But I wouldn’t mind a few entertaining debates in the process, it keeps a few people who are on the fence to pay attention...
I would put up any one of us on this website, if La Pierre didn’t have the time to take care of this trash...
It is a chore I would do with a smile on my face and love in my heart...
I had heard that (in the past) it was generally thought as a sign of respect, clear intent (in a good way) that when you sat down to have a pointed discussion with someone at a table, you’d both un-holster your sidearm, place it on the table between the two of you and conduct whatever business you needed to get done...
I would do that sitting across from any anti-gunner, as a sign of the seriousness of my purpose, clear intent, and general respect for the process of debate...I ma not feel that way about the person sitting across from me, but the ability to see them squirm would be worth the price of admission to that table...
;-)
Just my opinions...
The committed anti-second amendment types are a small minority in this country. They are likely on the order of 1 percent or less. They gain strength through the media, who inform maybe 40-50 percent of the population that “guns are bad” and more guns= more bad.
Studies such as this chip away at the misinformed 40-50 percent as we have been steadily doing for the last 50 years.
If we reduce that number by another 5% (we have dropped it 25% through education in the last 40 years) we win overwhelmingly. We are wining now, and the Internet is speeding up the education process.
I would also surmise that at the end of the day, regardless of how irritating and how successful the gun control agenda is...
I’ll bet you a dollar to a donut hole that we still have our guns...
We are a pretty clever lot of the population in this here Republic!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.