On 2/26/18 10:52 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/26/2018 10:22 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 2/26/18 9:14 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/26/2018 9:01 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
True North wrote:
How long will it be before the first teacher accidently shoots a
student.
It will happen considering how gun crazy people are south of the
border.


Bet on it. Dumbest idea ever.



You have (or had) a concealed carry permit.
I have a concealed carry permit.
Many people have a concealed carry permit.

What's the purpose of a concealed carry permit?

Last resort self-defense for yourself and/or others.Â* Correct?

What's so different about a teacher who wants a concealed carry permit
(or already has one) ?

The difference is the teacher unions.Â* Special authorization would be
required to be armed on public school property.



1. It is difficult if not impossible for a skilled, motivated shooter
with a handgun to face down a ****ed-off shooter with a high-powered
semi-auto rifle. Most school shooters are using AR-type rifles. A
teacher with a handgun likely will not have a lot of experience
shooting and is likely going to be cut down in short order.

2. When the police enter a building in which there is an active
shooter, they tend to identify the shooter as the person holding and
perhaps shooting the firearm. More dead teachers.

3. Where is the teacher supposed to keep the firearm? Will it be
stolen? Or will a kid, especially a little kid, grab the firearm to
play with it and accidentally shoot himself or a buddy or the teacher?

4. Lawsuits. Lots of lawsuits. You can imagine the variety.


The answer is to harden the entry to schools, watch closely who
enters, have bulletproof doors to classrooms, do what is possible to
cut down on the number and sorts of firearms available to the general
public, provide a higher level of counseling to students, raise the
age limit for obtaining a rifle, have better background checks, and
treat the NRA for what it is...a trade association that exists mostly
to promote the sale of firearms and ammo and lobbies for more and more
firearms.


I guess your logic and arguments support the Florida cop's decision not
to engage Cruz because he had an AR-15.Â*Â*Â* Oh, well.Â* 17 dead.

(That whole issue, the numerous prior contacts and tips police had about
Cruz and the FBI's failure to followup on tips really needs to be
thoroughly investigated).

The proposal for teachers having guns includes having them in a secure,
locked safe. No reason for kids or anyone to know they exist.Â* May take
a little time to retrieve a firearm but would probably beat the time
required for police to arrive.

I understand the confusion that could occur regarding police showing up
and facing an armed teacher.Â* That problem needs to be resolved however
if law enforcement already knows that good guys may be armed,
precautions can be taken. Good guy/bad guy training is part of some
police training courses.Â* Maybe an instant alarm signal to the police?

Again, nobody is talking about arming teachers against their will. It is
an idea only for those who feel compelled to volunteer.



I can only imagine the lawsuits that will result from armed teachers.
Oh, teachers aren't always in the same classrooms...or maybe they are in
the cafeteria...or coaching...or the lock on the mini gun safe won't open.

Arming teachers is not the answer.

On 2/26/2018 10:23 AM, 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.

Too bad Cruz didn't think so. Or maybe he thought that was good.

Ran across this. Never realized so many states allow school staff to be
armed:

"In about two dozen states, including California, schools can allow
staff to carry guns on campus, although some require concealed-carry
licenses, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures."

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-texas-school-armed-20180222-story.html

On Mon, 26 Feb 2018 10:52:41 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 2/26/2018 10:22 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 2/26/18 9:14 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/26/2018 9:01 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
True North wrote:
How long will it be before the first teacher accidently shoots a
student.
It will happen considering how gun crazy people are south of the
border.


Bet on it. Dumbest idea ever.



You have (or had) a concealed carry permit.
I have a concealed carry permit.
Many people have a concealed carry permit.

What's the purpose of a concealed carry permit?

Last resort self-defense for yourself and/or others.* Correct?

What's so different about a teacher who wants a concealed carry permit
(or already has one) ?

The difference is the teacher unions.* Special authorization would be
required to be armed on public school property.



1. It is difficult if not impossible for a skilled, motivated shooter
with a handgun to face down a ****ed-off shooter with a high-powered
semi-auto rifle. Most school shooters are using AR-type rifles. A
teacher with a handgun likely will not have a lot of experience shooting
and is likely going to be cut down in short order.

2. When the police enter a building in which there is an active shooter,
they tend to identify the shooter as the person holding and perhaps
shooting the firearm. More dead teachers.

3. Where is the teacher supposed to keep the firearm? Will it be stolen?
Or will a kid, especially a little kid, grab the firearm to play with it
and accidentally shoot himself or a buddy or the teacher?

4. Lawsuits. Lots of lawsuits. You can imagine the variety.


The answer is to harden the entry to schools, watch closely who enters,
have bulletproof doors to classrooms, do what is possible to cut down on
the number and sorts of firearms available to the general public,
provide a higher level of counseling to students, raise the age limit
for obtaining a rifle, have better background checks, and treat the NRA
for what it is...a trade association that exists mostly to promote the
sale of firearms and ammo and lobbies for more and more firearms.


I guess your logic and arguments support the Florida cop's decision not
to engage Cruz because he had an AR-15. Oh, well. 17 dead.

(That whole issue, the numerous prior contacts and tips police had about
Cruz and the FBI's failure to followup on tips really needs to be
thoroughly investigated).

The proposal for teachers having guns includes having them in a secure,
locked safe. No reason for kids or anyone to know they exist. May take
a little time to retrieve a firearm but would probably beat the time
required for police to arrive.

I understand the confusion that could occur regarding police showing up
and facing an armed teacher. That problem needs to be resolved however
if law enforcement already knows that good guys may be armed,
precautions can be taken. Good guy/bad guy training is part of some
police training courses. Maybe an instant alarm signal to the police?

Again, nobody is talking about arming teachers against their will. It is
an idea only for those who feel compelled to volunteer.


Harry's 'logic' is to argue against the NRA.

Having safes for firearm storage is OK, but I'd prefer concealed carry.

The rationale for teachers being armed is the response time of the cops. By the time they arrive an
armed teacher may have solved the problem. Actually, I think the knowledge that teachers may be
armed would be a significant deterrent to a deviant.

On 2/26/2018 10:55 AM, 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.

Can you possibly consider that if two or three people in the immediate
vicinity of Cruz happened to get a lucky shot off that the total dead
might be lower? Or are you adopting the philosophy you accuse Greg of
having that, "Nothing can be done".

On 2/26/18 11:07 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/26/2018 10:55 AM, 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.

Can you possibly consider that if two or three people in the immediate
vicinity of Cruz happened to get a lucky shot off that the total dead
might be lower?Â*Â* Or are you adopting the philosophy you accuse Greg of
having that, "Nothing can be done".



I suggested an approach:

The answer is to harden the entry to schools, watch closely who enters,
have bulletproof doors to classrooms, do what is possible to cut down on
the number and sorts of firearms available to the general public,
provide a higher level of counseling to students, raise the age limit
for obtaining a rifle, have better background checks, and treat the NRA
for what it is...a trade association that exists mostly to promote the
sale of firearms and ammo and lobbies for more and more firearms.

On 2/26/2018 10:57 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 2/26/18 10:52 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/26/2018 10:22 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 2/26/18 9:14 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/26/2018 9:01 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
True North wrote:
How long will it be before the first teacher accidently shoots a
student.
It will happen considering how gun crazy people are south of the
border.


Bet on it. Dumbest idea ever.



You have (or had) a concealed carry permit.
I have a concealed carry permit.
Many people have a concealed carry permit.

What's the purpose of a concealed carry permit?

Last resort self-defense for yourself and/or others.Â* Correct?

What's so different about a teacher who wants a concealed carry permit
(or already has one) ?

The difference is the teacher unions.Â* Special authorization would be
required to be armed on public school property.



1. It is difficult if not impossible for a skilled, motivated shooter
with a handgun to face down a ****ed-off shooter with a high-powered
semi-auto rifle. Most school shooters are using AR-type rifles. A
teacher with a handgun likely will not have a lot of experience
shooting and is likely going to be cut down in short order.

2. When the police enter a building in which there is an active
shooter, they tend to identify the shooter as the person holding and
perhaps shooting the firearm. More dead teachers.

3. Where is the teacher supposed to keep the firearm? Will it be
stolen? Or will a kid, especially a little kid, grab the firearm to
play with it and accidentally shoot himself or a buddy or the teacher?

4. Lawsuits. Lots of lawsuits. You can imagine the variety.


The answer is to harden the entry to schools, watch closely who
enters, have bulletproof doors to classrooms, do what is possible to
cut down on the number and sorts of firearms available to the general
public, provide a higher level of counseling to students, raise the
age limit for obtaining a rifle, have better background checks, and
treat the NRA for what it is...a trade association that exists mostly
to promote the sale of firearms and ammo and lobbies for more and
more firearms.


I guess your logic and arguments support the Florida cop's decision
not to engage Cruz because he had an AR-15.Â*Â*Â* Oh, well.Â* 17 dead.

(That whole issue, the numerous prior contacts and tips police had
about Cruz and the FBI's failure to followup on tips really needs to
be thoroughly investigated).

The proposal for teachers having guns includes having them in a
secure, locked safe. No reason for kids or anyone to know they exist.
May take a little time to retrieve a firearm but would probably beat
the time required for police to arrive.

I understand the confusion that could occur regarding police showing up
and facing an armed teacher.Â* That problem needs to be resolved however
if law enforcement already knows that good guys may be armed,
precautions can be taken. Good guy/bad guy training is part of some
police training courses.Â* Maybe an instant alarm signal to the police?

Again, nobody is talking about arming teachers against their will. It
is an idea only for those who feel compelled to volunteer.



I can only imagine the lawsuits that will result from armed teachers.
Oh, teachers aren't always in the same classrooms...or maybe they are in
the cafeteria...or coaching...or the lock on the mini gun safe won't open.

Arming teachers is not the answer.


Guess you're right. Nothing can be done. We'll just have to live with it.

And please don't give me the "lock up the school like a safe" BS. Many
or maybe even most schools do that now-a-days yet these nut-cases still
find a way to get in. Or, maybe they'll have to revert to sitting
outside waiting for the kiddies to exit to the school buses before he
mows them down.

No plan is absolute. It just seems to me that a response that is faster
than the police arriving may save some lives.

On 2/26/2018 11:08 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 2/26/18 11:07 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/26/2018 10:55 AM, 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.

Can you possibly consider that if two or three people in the immediate
vicinity of Cruz happened to get a lucky shot off that the total dead
might be lower?Â*Â* Or are you adopting the philosophy you accuse Greg
of having that, "Nothing can be done".



I suggested an approach:

The answer is to harden the entry to schools, watch closely who enters,
have bulletproof doors to classrooms, do what is possible to cut down on
the number and sorts of firearms available to the general public,
provide a higher level of counseling to students, raise the age limit
for obtaining a rifle, have better background checks, and treat the NRA
for what it is...a trade association that exists mostly to promote the
sale of firearms and ammo and lobbies for more and more firearms.



I am all for all of your suggestions. It's really a shame that we have
to design and consider schools in the same way we consider prisons and I
am wondering what kind of affect that has on little kids.

"Mommy, why are all the doors locked in my school?"

"So you won't get shot and killed".

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. Why do you think you're so much better than everyone else?

On 2/26/2018 11:02 AM, John H. wrote:
On Mon, 26 Feb 2018 10:52:41 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 2/26/2018 10:22 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 2/26/18 9:14 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/26/2018 9:01 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
True North wrote:
How long will it be before the first teacher accidently shoots a
student.
It will happen considering how gun crazy people are south of the
border.


Bet on it. Dumbest idea ever.



You have (or had) a concealed carry permit.
I have a concealed carry permit.
Many people have a concealed carry permit.

What's the purpose of a concealed carry permit?

Last resort self-defense for yourself and/or others.Â* Correct?

What's so different about a teacher who wants a concealed carry permit
(or already has one) ?

The difference is the teacher unions.Â* Special authorization would be
required to be armed on public school property.



1. It is difficult if not impossible for a skilled, motivated shooter
with a handgun to face down a ****ed-off shooter with a high-powered
semi-auto rifle. Most school shooters are using AR-type rifles. A
teacher with a handgun likely will not have a lot of experience shooting
and is likely going to be cut down in short order.

2. When the police enter a building in which there is an active shooter,
they tend to identify the shooter as the person holding and perhaps
shooting the firearm. More dead teachers.

3. Where is the teacher supposed to keep the firearm? Will it be stolen?
Or will a kid, especially a little kid, grab the firearm to play with it
and accidentally shoot himself or a buddy or the teacher?

4. Lawsuits. Lots of lawsuits. You can imagine the variety.


The answer is to harden the entry to schools, watch closely who enters,
have bulletproof doors to classrooms, do what is possible to cut down on
the number and sorts of firearms available to the general public,
provide a higher level of counseling to students, raise the age limit
for obtaining a rifle, have better background checks, and treat the NRA
for what it is...a trade association that exists mostly to promote the
sale of firearms and ammo and lobbies for more and more firearms.


I guess your logic and arguments support the Florida cop's decision not
to engage Cruz because he had an AR-15. Oh, well. 17 dead.

(That whole issue, the numerous prior contacts and tips police had about
Cruz and the FBI's failure to followup on tips really needs to be
thoroughly investigated).

The proposal for teachers having guns includes having them in a secure,
locked safe. No reason for kids or anyone to know they exist. May take
a little time to retrieve a firearm but would probably beat the time
required for police to arrive.

I understand the confusion that could occur regarding police showing up
and facing an armed teacher. That problem needs to be resolved however
if law enforcement already knows that good guys may be armed,
precautions can be taken. Good guy/bad guy training is part of some
police training courses. Maybe an instant alarm signal to the police?

Again, nobody is talking about arming teachers against their will. It is
an idea only for those who feel compelled to volunteer.


Harry's 'logic' is to argue against the NRA.

Having safes for firearm storage is OK, but I'd prefer concealed carry.

The rationale for teachers being armed is the response time of the cops. By the time they arrive an
armed teacher may have solved the problem. Actually, I think the knowledge that teachers may be
armed would be a significant deterrent to a deviant.



Yup. Well, there are many arguments for and against. Hopefully
something will emerge out of all this that is effective in saving lives.
I doubt we can afford to sit around waiting for WashDC blowhards to come
up with anything though.

On Mon, 26 Feb 2018 10:55:16 -0500, 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.* 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.* 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.

A couple rounds in his general direction may have had him leaving the school. Better that the kids
got killed?