On 2/26/2018 4:00 PM, John H. wrote:
On Mon, 26 Feb 2018 15:37:57 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 2/26/2018 2:08 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 2/26/18 12:44 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/26/2018 12:35 PM, John H. wrote:
On Mon, 26 Feb 2018 12:22:38 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 2/26/2018 12:15 PM, John H. wrote:
On Mon, 26 Feb 2018 11:56:05 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 2/26/2018 11:33 AM, John H. wrote:
On Mon, 26 Feb 2018 08:19:23 -0800 (PST), Its Me
wrote:

On Monday, February 26, 2018 at 10:55:20 AM UTC-5, Keyser Soze
wrote:
On 2/26/18 10:30 AM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 2/26/18 9:35 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/26/2018 9:23 AM, John H. wrote:
On Mon, 26 Feb 2018 09:06:01 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 2/26/2018 8:55 AM, John H. wrote:
On Mon, 26 Feb 2018 08:31:32 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 2/26/2018 8:16 AM, John H. wrote:

I am not surprised at the stance of the teachers'
unions when it
comes to arming teachers. It's an
anti-Trump stance, and I'd expect nothing more.

I am surprised at the number of teachers being quoted
who use 'too
many responsibilities already' as
a reason for not arming teachers. It's true that
teachers have a
load of responsibilities. But, when
the shooting starts only one takes precedence -
protecting kids. I
don't think any unwilling teacher
would be asked to carry a gun. And, the simple act of
carrying a
gun does not add significantly to
the other duties of a teacher.


Trump's proposal calls only for teachers who volunteer
to be
trained and
armed.Â* It's certainly not mandatory.

Not as well reported is that hundreds of teachers have
responded to a
gun course instructor in Ohio who offered his course
free to teachers.
He initially planned on about 50 respondents but last I
heard now has
over 300 who want to attend.

Even NPR and CNN have quietly reported that many
teachers are in favor
of being trained and armed.



If the 'anti-Trump' politics were taken out of the
equation, I think
we'd see a lot more approval of
the idea. I am surprised that NBC and, I'll take your
word for it,
CNN are reporting anything
positive about it.

The idea that carrying would overload a teacher with too
many
responsibilities already is just
bull****.


CNN:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/24/us/armed-teachers-states-trnd/index.html



NPR:

https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2017/06/25/534230962/colorado-teachers-get-gun-training-as-first-responders





And, oh my gosh, a teacher's gun accidentally fired in a
restroom back
in 2014!

And comments like this from the NPR article, are simply
stupid: ""I
think all teachers would prefer
to be given the tools and resources to help our students,
as opposed
to being forced to shoot
them..."

It's that stupidity that the liberal news tends to quote.
More bull****.



What struck me was that both articles gloss over (in their
editorial
comments) the fact that teachers against being armed is not
universal.
Some *want* to be armed.Â* Don't they have the same rights?



Most Americans would prefer that firearms be kept out of
schools.


How did that work in parkland?


You think a teacher with a handgun would have stopped the
slaughter, eh?
Too funny. There would be another dead teacher.

You think *you* would be able to shoot a home invader.Â* Why do
you think you're so much better than everyone else?

Excellent point.

I suppose he thinks the home invader would be unarmed and as fat
as he is to make an easy target.



Have you seen this?Â* Just happened the other day. Mother and daughter
are damn lucky neither were shot.Â* Perp was arrested, taken to
hospital
in critical condition:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwiSl_zuSd4


Hadn't seen it. Agree that they were damn lucky. They both should
have taken some lessons in
shooting also! It seemed like they hit the guy several times, I
wonder what they were shooting.
Maybe .25 caliber?


I don't know. I think I recognized the mother's gun as being a .38
revolver but could be wrong.Â* Don't know what the daughter had.
I mentioned in a reply to Don that it took a while but eventually you
can see the robber starting to stumble due to being shot several times.


Yeah, the mother's looked like a .38 Chief's Special, which my wife
loves to shoot by the way.


I have one also.Â* My only revolver.Â* But after watching that video I
am thinking maybe a .357 revolver would be more appropriate.

Then again, it's not clear how many times the mother actually hit the
perp.Â* He was out of the camera range when she was firing the most
shots. She hit him once in the arm looks like. The daughter clearly
hit him a couple of times as well.






At any distance within this house, meaning in any room, hallway or
adjacent rooms, I can fling a .357 Mag Hornady Critical Defense round
into the chest of a home invader, if he is facing me, or into the side
of his upper body if he is standing at an angle. I've practiced those
shots hundreds and hundreds of times, from distances of 3' to 25' on
paper targets, blocks of ballistic gel, and two liter sodapop bottles
and empty sodapop and beer cans. Double action or single action, strong
or weak handed. This is no great accomplishment. You can do that the
same way you get to Carnegie Hall: practice, practice, practice.

It is unlikely the home invader will continue what he came to do after
being hit by a .357 Mag round.

I'm sure a well-placed 9mm round will do almost as well, but with a .357
Mag you have room for error.

As Greg pointed out the other day, the noise is horrendous.


I had a .357 Magnum revolver. It was the S&W 627 Performance Center
model. It was impressive but once I got over the "new-ness" of it, I
sorta lost interest in it. Just made a little larger hole in paper
targets with a lot more noise and greater expense per round. I've posted
the link to a YouTube video here in the past of shooting it at the range.

I am at the point where all I am interested in is something for home
defense in the improbable chance anyone tried to enter our house with
criminal intent and a small concealed carry pistol for the even rarer
times I carry .... which is only when we are going somewhere that could
represent a higher than normal risk. Doesn't happen often.

The little .38 Special and the Sig 226 will serve those purposes. May
not put someone big down but they will catch his attention.
Still debating about getting rid of the Walther though. It's a very
nice, accurate handgun, but a little too big for concealed carry purposes.

Guns don't fascinate me but as we get older we may need a fighting
chance if anything bad happens.


I didn't know you had a Sig 226. One of my retired-cop brothers told me it was his favorite weapon.
That was a few years back, but it's what prompted me to my mine. I love it. I can shoot better with
it than any other handgun.

I took some friends from the Navy Band to our local range. One of them had a Glock, and he'd done
quite a bit of shooting. At seven yards he was getting a 6-7" spread. I let him shoot the 226 and
his spread dropped to 3-4". He couldn't believe it.



I don't have a 226. I screwed up trying to remember the model from
memory. For some reason "226" came up.

I have the little guy ... the Sig P238. It's my "carry".
Looks just like this one:

https://topgunsupply.r.worldssl.net/images/P/p238-rosewood-detail-l.jpg