Keep them out of schools. Why didn't anybody ever think of that before?
https://mises.org/wire/shootings-why-dont-schools-have-better-security
https://mises.org/wire/shootings-why-dont-schools-have-better-security
You see wrong.So you’re off the anarchy wagon then, I see.
You see wrong.
I’m missing your point. Are you thinking an anarchist is opposed to security for himself and others?“For some odd reason, however, there continues to be resistance to the idea of developing serious, meaningful security strategies that directly address the situations that lead to deaths in areas such as schools, nightclubs, and hotels. ”
“
For example, while spending on "security" at schools has increased considerably in recent years, most of that money is spend on cheap quick-fixes like security cameras. Some spending is done on controlling access, but little is spent on competent on-site personnel and other strategies. The conclusion to draw from these fact, though, is not that money spent on security is necessarily wasted. It's just being spent badly.
Even worse is the dismissal of security measures because they conflict with someone's (usually incorrect) notions of what things were like in the good old days. "My grandpa never had security at hisschool" is a common thought. Well, maybe grandpa should have had some security, since data suggests homicide rates in the 1920s and early 30s were considerably higher than they are today.“
“until enhanced security becomes something that is truly demanded by both voters and consumers, we won't see much of it. People, apparently prefer what security experts call the "security roller coaster": panic, forget, repeat. ”
He has no point. He never does. That's what an adult with a toddler brain looks like when it has access to the internet.I’m missing your point. Are you thinking an anarchist is opposed to security for himself and others?
I’m missing your point. Are you thinking an anarchist is opposed to security for himself and others?
Still missing your point. A stateless society does not mean a society unable to protect itself. Thanks for the lesson on what anarchism is. I’ve spent about 50 years studying the philosophy. I must have missed the part you supplied. (Sorry for the sarcasm. I couldn’t help myself.)That’s what anarchism is, PD. Self-governance is a key component of anarchism
“Anarchism is a political philosophy that advocates self-governed societies based on voluntary institutions. These are often described as stateless societies,[1][2][3][4] although several authors have defined them more specifically as institutions based on non-hierarchical or free associations.[5][6][7][8] Anarchism holds the stateto be undesirable, unnecessary and harmful.[9][10]
While opposition to the state is central,[11]anarchism specifically entails opposing authority or hierarchical organisation in the conduct of all human relations.”
Carry on
Still missing your point. A stateless society does not mean a society unable to protect itself.
OK, I give up.But in a stateless society, the state provides no measure of safety and security for individuals, who are left to protect themselves. You’re welcome on the actual definition of anarchism
Signs. Lots of signs.
Cheap, too. What could possibly go wrong?
![]()
OK, I give up.
I stole Clinton's "Carry on" sign off on the Corral because it enhances the illusion that you can take pot shots and seemingly stay above the fray.
I like it.
Carry on.