John H. Wrote in message:
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****.


If Nancy Pelosi put forth the proposal, Fat Harry and the rest of
her lemmings would be slobbering all over it.
--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/