Not the OP, but obviously it wasn't a metal detector, otherwise it would've detected all brands of laptops as weapons. It's probably an image based detector.
The problem is, if it has been that badly tested that it detects Lenovo laptops as weapons, there is a good chance that it doesn't properly detect actual weapons either.
It's stupid to bring yourself into a position where scanning kids for weapons is necessary. In this case we're already past that, so the stupidity is that the device isn't updated to not identify laptops as weapons. If that's not possible, then device is a mislabeled laptop detector.
A high school I worked at had a similar system in place called Evolv. It’s not a metal detector, but it did successfully catch a student with a loaded gun in his backpack. Granted, he didn’t mean to bring the gun to school. I think it’s stupid to believe that kids who want to bring a gun to school will arrive on time to school. They often arrive late when security procedures like bag scanning are not in place.
Guns are legal in almost every country - I think your problem is with countries that have almost no restriction on gun ownership. e.g. Here in the UK you can legally own a properly licensed rifle or shotgun and even a handgun in some places outside of Great Britain (e.g. Northern Ireland).
Just because something is technically legal, doesn't mean it's in any way common or part of UK culture to own a gun.
There hasn't been a school shooting in the UK for nearly 30 years. Handguns were banned after the last school shooting and there hasn't been one since.
There's already a UK ban on carrying knives in public unless you have an occupational need and they're wrapped up or at least not just sitting in your pocket.
Licensing wouldn't be worthwhile as almost every household would want knives for food preparation.
That is why I said that, as the comparison is pretty weak. The US' gun problem basically wouldn't be a topic of discussion if it was occurring at the rate mass stabbings do in the UK.
correct however the simple existence of a weapon does not automatically mean killing. Other factors exists like the obvious rampant poverty and mental illness which gets ignored because it's not as easy to solve and political polarizing than simply banning something.
Why do people say such unsubstantiated nonsense. Places with guns have more death. And it's obvious to see why guns are a tool for for killing, and they're pretty effective.
Exactly. It's not the legality of weapons, but the easy availability of them that causes the issues.
It seems to me like victim blaming for U.S. schools to have active shooter drills - it makes more sense to have much better training and screening of gun owners than trying to train the victims. However, given that the NRA is excessively powerful in U.S. politics, I can see why they are necessary, but it just seems easier to me to stop kids from being able to get hold of guns (e.g. have some rudimentary screening for gun purchases and require owners to keep them in locked cabinets when they are not in use).
If the US were a functional democracy, and continued letting unrestricted gun ownership be legal, you could argue that the US citizenry is being stupid. But the US is not a functional democracy, and meaningfully reforming anything is impossible, regardless of whether most people want it or whether it’s a good idea.
