Should students be armed with cans?

[stodg73]

Instead of in the Funny Pictures Thread, I thought we might be able to have the discussion here.

When you think about it, a can of soup may distract the shooter enough to be tackled, knocked out, put in pain, etc.

Has anyone tried to shoot accurately while someone is throwing something at you?



The normal human response is to duck, cover the head, etc.

Have you tried to throw something at someone who's shooting at you?

This is an irresponsibly ridiculous idea from liberals who once again are using the "it's for the children" platitude. If it was really "for the children" they'd have armed staff to protect them rather than expecting middle-schoolers to take on an armed gunman.

Oh, yeah...the canned food items are also kept under lock. Lotta freaking good that's gonna do when the shooting starts. "Quick...someone get the canned peas!"

ETA: I meant to also say how ironic it is that these liberal administrators will keep the "canned food weapons" locked up so they aren't misused by the kids...but they expect the kids to be responsible and mature enough to not only get the locked-up items from the locker but to engage a gunman with them. Stupidity of liberal thought never ceases to amaze me.

With your answer, you are assuming that there is only you and the bad guy, how about adding more people/students to the mix?

Now please remember, there are an average of about 21 people in a classroom at one time, in most schools. Since this is hypothetical, the gunman comes in and takes out the teacher, several students run out, now the gunman has 15 students left. The protector is gone, the concealed weapon on the teacher is useless, the students have nothing to do but get shot or fight with whatever they can use.

Now, since the students have a can of peas, they have a chance to protect themselves, because the gunman can ONLY engage one target at a time, giving a few precious seconds for someone to hurt/distract/knock out the gunman. This also gives time for more students to get out of the kill zone.



Lets discuss this topic civilly, no name calling, no bad mouthing, etc. Keep it clean and open.

[RblDiver]

I think the risk would outweigh the benefit. Sure it's *possible* you delay the gunman, or maybe even get in a super lucky shot, but I suspect that it would more just piss them off and make you more of a target. If you have nothing else and they're killing everyone as they go, sure having something is better than not, but again, if they're looking for certain targets, by fighting back you just draw their attention.

I suspect most people would miss with their cans, or they wouldn't hit hard enough (I think only high schoolers would have any chance whatsoever of having enough strength to use them potentially effectively, and again, it's a crapshoot whether they do or not).

[bobbyfairbanks]

Sam colt didn't make all men equal the green giant did dummy.



Seriously, if this is the thought process being established for the defense of kids in our public schools god help us it's stupid.

[Guylee]

It goes along with the "warning shot" or "shoot the gun out of his hand theory." It works great in la-la-fairy land, but your weakness here is that this is reality.

[ray1970]

We could save the government a crap ton of money. Let's quit buying Kevlar and all of that bullet proof gear and get them chicken noodle soup instead.

[cstone]

Sounds like a fun one for the shoot house. Bring a bin of commonly available items found in a classroom. The items can be randomly scattered around the room. 21 on 1 seems fair if only the aggressor has a firearm and the aggressor gets to choose the time to attack while the 21 perform meaningless tasks over a half hour period.

My guess is the most successful option would depend on how quickly the defenders recognize the threat and whether they gang rush the aggressor quickly enough to limit the damage.

I would think the video from the exercise would look like French police storming a super market with similar results.

Be safe.

[ray1970]

If someone threw a can of soup at me I'd shoot them in the face. Bet they wouldn't do it again.

[Colorado_Outback]

Not to mention your average students reaction is probably going to be flight, not fight.

[Sawin]

Not to mention your average students reaction is probably going to be flight, not fight.

Bingo. If a kid has a second thought about running for their life and getting away from the threat, in order to throw a can of food, there are going to be more dead kids....

[encorehunter]

I'm sorry, but I guess I would like to have something that I could try and defend myself with. I think we are having a difference of culture here. I'm was country kid, not a city kid. I think there is a big difference there. I was brought up to take care of myself. I agree the younger the kids get, the less likely they could throw hard or açurately. When you get to 9-10 years old, a country kid has thrown a lot of rocks. If they understood when to throw the cans at the attacker would be another question. Don't throw unless you can't escape or evade.