Arming teachers bad cus in Parkand a singlular example exists of a cowardly RO not doing job, WTF?

[XponentialChaos]

Arming teachers is bad because it's a bad idea, not because of one particular incident.

Even some conservatives think it's a dumb idea.

Rubio breaks with Trump, doesn't support arming teachers

Look, suppose we arm a bunch of teachers. They're carrying out their class, trying to teach a bunch of kids, while carrying a firearm. What do you think is more likely to happen?

A) A psychotic shooter comes in. Teacher steps in, shoots the intruder and saves the day.
B) The gun is discharged accidentally.

This isn't going to go over like some Hollywood movie of a Language Arts teacher going commando and, against all odds, taking out the Colombine assholes. This is just going to result in a lot of really, really dumb and unnecessary accidents. These are TEACHERS. Not SWAT officers. I honestly think you're just going to compound the problem.

Gun-trained teacher accidentally discharges firearm in Calif. classroom, injuring student

Have you noticed, or have you not noticed that all of these mass shootere pick out soft targets?

Simple question....


You think that is a factor? Or do you think that is a mere coincidence?

IF teachers are armed and students who would plan a mass shooting. Do you think those people would choose a target knowing it is protected and not a soft target?

That is the issue you liberals don't seem to get. Its easy for most of you wealthy white bread lefties living in private gated communities and private schools cause you know in all likelihood you have nothing to worry about.

The question is out there. Do you think these shooters consider their targets based on whether or not they are soft targets (gun free zones?)

Or

Is it just a coincidence that they just so happen to choose gun free zones to commit mass murder?

This topic always seems to turn into "gun free zones". Ok fine, let's talk about them.

What exactly would you consider a gun free zone? Is it locations with no guns at all, or is it a location where citizens (other than security) aren't allowed to be armed?

If you're saying that a gun-free zone is no guns at all: Well, Parkland had an armed resource officer. There was a gun there. A "good guy with a gun" was stationed there. Not all schools have an armed resource officer. So why wouldn't this kid choose a SOFTER target to go after? Isn't that your whole point? That the shooter will take the defense of the target into consideration before committing mass murder? Because that's easily disproven by the amount of schools without armed security. The Parkland shooter selected Parkland because he...used to go to Parkland.

If you're saying that a gun-free zone is having no armed citizens (other than security): Then you're arguing that we should have MORE people armed instead of just relying entirely on security. As we saw in this instance, the resource officer was basically useless. So you want armed school personnel as extra deterrents. You think that more guns in the hands of responsible people makes it more safe. Well then maybe you can answer a simple question:

Why were people not allowed to be armed during Trump's NRA convention speech? Why do you think we should have many loaded firearms in crowded schools, but no firearms at NRA convention speeches? Why the inconsistency? If you can address it, then you will have your answer regarding what we should do in schools.

Parkland had one armed guard for over 3,100 students and 12 buildings on campus...that is not a gun free zone......and if he had actually engaged the shooter, since he was at that building, lives would have been saved.

Killing one man before anyone can react is a different threat situation than someone attacking the entire crowd....and if you had done any actual research you would know that the rest of the NRA convention, and the Republican convention that year allowed carrying guns.....and there wasn't one shooting there...was there?

Also.....we know....this is fact....that mass public shooters target gun free zones ....we know this from their notes and from actual confessions from the ones who live after the attacks..

You don't know what you are talking about.....

You guys seriously need to get your stories straight here. The other poster was saying that this happened because this school was a gun-free zone. You're telling me that it's not a gun-free zone. Make up your minds and then get back to me.

So there weren't shootings there before, but when Pence comes in, they say that no guns are allowed. Why is that? What's the reasoning behind that decision? Do guns make locations safer or not? If they do make places safer, as was the case with this location never having a shooting incident, then why would they stop allowing them there while Pence was giving a speech?

 

[XponentialChaos]

Arming teachers is bad because it's a bad idea, not because of one particular incident.

Even some conservatives think it's a dumb idea.

Rubio breaks with Trump, doesn't support arming teachers

Look, suppose we arm a bunch of teachers. They're carrying out their class, trying to teach a bunch of kids, while carrying a firearm. What do you think is more likely to happen?

A) A psychotic shooter comes in. Teacher steps in, shoots the intruder and saves the day.
B) The gun is discharged accidentally.

This isn't going to go over like some Hollywood movie of a Language Arts teacher going commando and, against all odds, taking out the Colombine assholes. This is just going to result in a lot of really, really dumb and unnecessary accidents. These are TEACHERS. Not SWAT officers. I honestly think you're just going to compound the problem.

Gun-trained teacher accidentally discharges firearm in Calif. classroom, injuring student

Have you noticed, or have you not noticed that all of these mass shootere pick out soft targets?

Simple question....


You think that is a factor? Or do you think that is a mere coincidence?

IF teachers are armed and students who would plan a mass shooting. Do you think those people would choose a target knowing it is protected and not a soft target?

That is the issue you liberals don't seem to get. Its easy for most of you wealthy white bread lefties living in private gated communities and private schools cause you know in all likelihood you have nothing to worry about.

The question is out there. Do you think these shooters consider their targets based on whether or not they are soft targets (gun free zones?)

Or

Is it just a coincidence that they just so happen to choose gun free zones to commit mass murder?

This topic always seems to turn into "gun free zones". Ok fine, let's talk about them.

What exactly would you consider a gun free zone? Is it locations with no guns at all, or is it a location where citizens (other than security) aren't allowed to be armed?

If you're saying that a gun-free zone is no guns at all: Well, Parkland had an armed resource officer. There was a gun there. A "good guy with a gun" was stationed there. Not all schools have an armed resource officer. So why wouldn't this kid choose a SOFTER target to go after? Isn't that your whole point? That the shooter will take the defense of the target into consideration before committing mass murder? Because that's easily disproven by the amount of schools without armed security. The Parkland shooter selected Parkland because he...used to go to Parkland.

If you're saying that a gun-free zone is having no armed citizens (other than security): Then you're arguing that we should have MORE people armed instead of just relying entirely on security. As we saw in this instance, the resource officer was basically useless. So you want armed school personnel as extra deterrents. You think that more guns in the hands of responsible people makes it more safe. Well then maybe you can answer a simple question:

Why were people not allowed to be armed during Trump's NRA convention speech? Why do you think we should have many loaded firearms in crowded schools, but no firearms at NRA convention speeches? Why the inconsistency? If you can address it, then you will have your answer regarding what we should do

in schools.

In Ohio, we give our vendors the right to restrict guns. All they need to do is post a "NO FIREARMS ALLOWED" on the entrances to their establishment and no guns are allowed including the owner. The Quicken Loans Arena is one of the few places we could host such an event, however they have always been gun-free since we passed our CCW laws in Ohio.

While you focus on one event, most all mass shootings happen in gun-free zones across the country. That doesn't happen by accident.

You think gun-free zones are less safe. Yet there were no guns allowed at a Pence/NRA convention held in Dallas a few months ago.

Explain this.

You are wrong...again.....the Republican convention allowed people to carry guns...the NRA convention also allowed people to carry guns....please do some basic research instead of just posting off the top of your head.

No Guns Allowed During NRA Convention Speech By Trump, Pence

 

[XponentialChaos]

Have you noticed, or have you not noticed that all of these mass shootere pick out soft targets?

Simple question....


You think that is a factor? Or do you think that is a mere coincidence?

IF teachers are armed and students who would plan a mass shooting. Do you think those people would choose a target knowing it is protected and not a soft target?

That is the issue you liberals don't seem to get. Its easy for most of you wealthy white bread lefties living in private gated communities and private schools cause you know in all likelihood you have nothing to worry about.

The question is out there. Do you think these shooters consider their targets based on whether or not they are soft targets (gun free zones?)

Or

Is it just a coincidence that they just so happen to choose gun free zones to commit mass murder?

This topic always seems to turn into "gun free zones". Ok fine, let's talk about them.

What exactly would you consider a gun free zone? Is it locations with no guns at all, or is it a location where citizens (other than security) aren't allowed to be armed?

If you're saying that a gun-free zone is no guns at all: Well, Parkland had an armed resource officer. There was a gun there. A "good guy with a gun" was stationed there. Not all schools have an armed resource officer. So why wouldn't this kid choose a SOFTER target to go after? Isn't that your whole point? That the shooter will take the defense of the target into consideration before committing mass murder? Because that's easily disproven by the amount of schools without armed security. The Parkland shooter selected Parkland because he...used to go to Parkland.

If you're saying that a gun-free zone is having no armed citizens (other than security): Then you're arguing that we should have MORE people armed instead of just relying entirely on security. As we saw in this instance, the resource officer was basically useless. So you want armed school personnel as extra deterrents. You think that more guns in the hands of responsible people makes it more safe. Well then maybe you can answer a simple question:

Why were people not allowed to be armed during Trump's NRA convention speech? Why do you think we should have many loaded firearms in crowded schools, but no firearms at NRA convention speeches? Why the inconsistency? If you can address it, then you will have your answer regarding what we should do

in schools.

In Ohio, we give our vendors the right to restrict guns. All they need to do is post a "NO FIREARMS ALLOWED" on the entrances to their establishment and no guns are allowed including the owner. The Quicken Loans Arena is one of the few places we could host such an event, however they have always been gun-free since we passed our CCW laws in Ohio.

While you focus on one event, most all mass shootings happen in gun-free zones across the country. That doesn't happen by accident.

You think gun-free zones are less safe. Yet there were no guns allowed at a Pence/NRA convention held in Dallas a few months ago.

Explain this.

You are wrong...again.....the Republican convention allowed people to carry guns...the NRA convention also allowed people to carry guns....please do some basic research instead of just posting off the top of your head.

Besides, the idiot missed the whole point. Most soft targets are not going to be attacked.

However if a person is committed to murdering on mass scale, they will choose a soft target over one that is well armed.

Unless it is an amazing coincidence that they just so happen to choose soft targets.

1) The Parkland shooter could have easily selected a softer target - a school without an armed resource officer.
2) If soft targets are so bad, then why did the Pence/NRA convention in Dallas not allow guns?

 

[XponentialChaos]

I believe I said that it's more likely that the gun is accidentally discharged than it is for a teacher to save the day by shooting a bad guy.

Do you believe this applies to all people who are screened, trained and licensed to carry a firearm? Or just teachers?

"A teacher who is also a reserve police officer trained in firearm use ‘accidentally’ discharged a gun Tuesday at Seaside High School in Monterey County, Calif., during a class devoted to public safety, school officials said in a statement. A male student was reported to have sustained non-life-threatening injuries."

Gun-trained teacher accidentally discharges firearm in Calif. classroom, injuring student

This guy was trained and licensed and he still messed up and could have caused a tragedy. It could happen to anyone - but especially to someone in a profession that doesn't regularly use firearms.

 

[francoHFW]

In an interview with Variety Parkland gun control activist Emma Gonzalez suggested arming teachers is a bad idea because her school had “a resource officer and he didn’t do jack sh*t.”
The resource officer referenced by Gonzalez is former Broward County deputy Scot Peterson, who arrived outside the scene of the Parkland attack roughly 90 seconds after it began and stayed outside until it was over, instead of going in to confront the gunman.

Lost on Gonzalez is the fact that armed teachers are there as a last resort. They are there to shoot the attacker if the deputy will not go in or in the event that the deputy cannot go in.

Are the anti 2Aers so simple minded as to think that the almighty 'Nanny State' is the best defense against unleashed homicidal terror. Is the notion of 'Personal Responsibility' so repugnant that it extends to the very lives of their children. What the F, If the principle tells a parent that he has an AR locked up in his office I would expect parents to be thrilled, wouldn't U!

Emma Gonzalez: Don't Arm Teachers, 'We Had a Resource Officer and He Didn't Do Jack Sh*t' | Breitbart

Having a highly armed populace is a bad idea in itself. Thanks GOP NRA.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Why does the teacher have to carry the firearm? You are making a gross assumption. Why can't the gun be locked away in the classroom?

Also, many teachers are veterans and others have experience with firearms.

I am a veteran with extensive training. When we did active shooter training, the principal even told the entire faculty he would be staying with me where he knew he would be safe. My assistant principal at one of the schools where I worked was a deputy sheriff before he became a teacher.

Try coming into my school if I and my fellow teachers were armed and see how long you last. I give you two minutes of walking around checking locked classroom doors before you bleed out on the floor.

Yea? Well the link that you accused me of not reading said that the person who accidentally discharged their gun happened to also be a reserve police officer trained in firearm use.

What happened there? Why was the gun not locked away in a non-emergency situation? Was that teacher more likely to kill a school shooter or an innocent student?

Is an unarmed teacher likely to kill a school shooter or get killed along with the students if they have no gun at all?

Unlike your supposition, mine has an almost 100% certainty, whereas your scenario has a microscopic chance of occurring.

Teachers are armed.

A) A psychotic shooter comes in. Teacher steps in, shoots the intruder and saves the day.
B) The gun is discharged accidentally.

Which is more likely to happen?

Teacher steps in and saves the day.

Let's change your scenario to real life.

Teachers are not armed:

A) A psychotic shooter comes in. Teacher without a gun dies valiantly trying to defend students who are all killed anyway.
B) There is no other option. Teacher without a gun dies and students are all killed anyway.

Ok. What exactly makes you think that A is more likely? What are you basing that on exactly?

Past history. Why are you so dense?

 

[Skull Pilot]

All I know is that I'm in a partial 'fight of flight' mode anytime I'm in a gun free zone without a security presence. I wouldn't be surprised if some, otherwise law abiding, CC citizens defied the rules on occasion in the interest of sanity and self preservation, just saying...

I ignore the no guns allowed signs

If there aren't metal detectors and frisks I keep my gun on my hip

 

[SweetSue92]

Arming teachers is bad because it's a bad idea, not because of one particular incident.

Even some conservatives think it's a dumb idea.

Rubio breaks with Trump, doesn't support arming teachers

Look, suppose we arm a bunch of teachers. They're carrying out their class, trying to teach a bunch of kids, while carrying a firearm. What do you think is more likely to happen?

A) A psychotic shooter comes in. Teacher steps in, shoots the intruder and saves the day.
B) The gun is discharged accidentally.

This isn't going to go over like some Hollywood movie of a Language Arts teacher going commando and, against all odds, taking out the Colombine assholes. This is just going to result in a lot of really, really dumb and unnecessary accidents. These are TEACHERS. Not SWAT officers. I honestly think you're just going to compound the problem.

Gun-trained teacher accidentally discharges firearm in Calif. classroom, injuring student

Why does the teacher have to carry the firearm? You are making a gross assumption. Why can't the gun be locked away in the classroom?

Also, many teachers are veterans and others have experience with firearms.

I am a veteran with extensive training. When we did active shooter training, the principal even told the entire faculty he would be staying with me where he knew he would be safe. My assistant principal at one of the schools where I worked was a deputy sheriff before he became a teacher.

Try coming into my school if I and my fellow teachers were armed and see how long you last. I give you two minutes of walking around checking locked classroom doors before you bleed out on the floor.

I'm a public school teacher....this.

I don't want to be armed, though I'm firmly for the 2A. I'm not comfortable with most of my colleagues being armed, because I think it's just one MORE thing for all of us to be worried about: guns in the classroom.

However, I would feel BETTER than fine knowing a highly trained teacher or two did have access to gun(s) should the need arise. That seems like a wise plan. We too have a vet in the building. Would love knowing he could get to his arms if we had a Sandy Hook situation.

 

[Sahba]

Tks, again for you post & link...

`
Idiot. I didn't post that article. I used one example from it in my reply which a person had asked to see.Think before you comment.

Don't take your being on the rag out on me sistahh, honest mistake; Deal w/ it, lol.

 

[miketx]

Arming teachers is bad because it's a bad idea, not because of one particular incident.

Even some conservatives think it's a dumb idea.

Rubio breaks with Trump, doesn't support arming teachers

Look, suppose we arm a bunch of teachers. They're carrying out their class, trying to teach a bunch of kids, while carrying a firearm. What do you think is more likely to happen?

A) A psychotic shooter comes in. Teacher steps in, shoots the intruder and saves the day.
B) The gun is discharged accidentally.

This isn't going to go over like some Hollywood movie of a Language Arts teacher going commando and, against all odds, taking out the Colombine assholes. This is just going to result in a lot of really, really dumb and unnecessary accidents. These are TEACHERS. Not SWAT officers. I honestly think you're just going to compound the problem.

Gun-trained teacher accidentally discharges firearm in Calif. classroom, injuring student

I see, you want them to keep getting murdered in school. Why is that?

 

[Windparadox]

Don't take your being on the rag out on me sistahh, honest mistake; Deal w/ it, lol.

`
I will admit, calling you an idiot was stupid of me. I apologize.

 

[KissMy]

Dear Clueless Retard: Mass school shootings are so rare, that far more will be killed by the million armed teachers guns.

Real Life Goes Like This!!!:

A) Psychotic student grabs Teachers gun & shoots 15 students & teachers. Tax Payers & School Liable!
B) The gun is discharged accidentally killing a student. Tax Payers & School Liable!
C) Teacher steps in to break up a fight, shoots an unarmed student. Tax Payers & School Liable!
D) Riots break out from teacher shooting student. Many are killed, Town looted & burnt!!!
E) A psychotic shooter comes in. Teacher runs away, 30 people massacred!
F) The gun is discharged accidentally shooting teacher, who will now live off tax payers on disability.
G) Psychotic student grabs Teachers gun & shoots 15 students & teachers. Tax Payers & School Liable!
H) The gun is discharged accidentally.
I) Psychotic shooter comes in. Teachers get shot before they can get their guns out.
J) Parent Teacher meeting gets heated, Teacher shoots Parent. Tax Payers & School Liable!
K) Psychotic shooter comes in. Teacher steps in, shoots innocent people. Tax Payers & School Liable!
L) The gun is discharged accidentally, striking student. Tax Payers & School Liable!
M) A psychotic shooter comes in. Teacher can't get to gun, many get shot.
N) Psychotic student grabs Teachers gun & shoots 15 students & teachers. Tax Payers & School Liable!
O) Teacher tried to break up a fight, student grabs teachers gun, shoots people. Tax Payers & School Liable
P) The gun is discharged accidental killing teacher, who's family will now live off tax payers for life.
Q) Parent Teacher meeting gets heated, Teacher shoots Parent. Tax Payers & School Liable!
R) The gun is discharged accidentally.
S) Teacher tried to break up a fight, student grabs teachers gun, shoots people. Tax Payers & School Liable!
T) The gun is discharged accidentally shooting teacher, who will now live off tax payers on disability.
U) Teacher tried to break up a fight, student grabs teachers gun, shoots people. Tax Payers & School Liable
V) The gun is discharged accidentally, striking student. Tax Payers & School Liable!
W) A Teacher snaps from excess pressure, shoots 15 students. Tax Payers & School Liable!
X) The gun is discharged accidentally, striking student. Tax Payers & School Liable!
Y) Parent Teacher meeting gets heated, Fight, Gun comes lose, Teacher killed. Tax Payers & School Liable!
Z) A psychotic shooter comes in. Teacher steps in, shoots the intruder and for once saves the day.

Making things up is really silly......there are 14 states that already allow armed teachers....and nothing in your A-Z myth making has happened.....but please....keep typing...you can use the eye hand coordination practice...

So......outside of the fact that nothing you posted is actually happening in the 14 states that actually allow teachers to be armed...what else to you have?

Here’s all the states where teachers already carry guns in the classroom

Florida is on the verge of becoming the 15th state to arm teachers after Gov. Rick Scott signed an omnibus bill Friday allowing school staff to undergo law enforcement training to carry guns in the classroom.

Although the notion may seem radical, at least 14 states already arm teachers, according to a VICE News review of state laws and interviews with education department officials and school board associations around the country. Those states are Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Idaho, Indiana, Missouri, Montana, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and Washington.


Another 16 states give local school boards the authority to decide whether school staff can carry guns, either explicitly or through legal loopholes, but officials said they didn’t know of any instances of armed teachers in those states.

Really??? There are already over 3 accidental school shootings a week!!!

Three students in a high school were injured when a teacher fired a gun inside of a classroom.....

"Last Friday, a student in Kentucky accidentally shot himself with a handgun at Frederick Douglass High School in Lexington and sustained injuries that were not life-threatening. According to student reports, the student was playing around with a gun in a classroom when he accidentally shot himself in the hand. Two days earlier, a 17-year-old female student was killed and a 17-year-old male was injured in a shooting at Huffman High School in Birmingham, Alabama. Officials have also deemed that shooting an accident."

"Teacher at Dalton high school just blockaded his door and proceeded to shoot," a 16-year-old student named Chondi Chastain tweeted at the National Rifle Assn., earning more than 17,000 retweets. "We had to run out The back of the school in the rain. Students were being trampled and screaming. I dare you to tell me arming teachers will make us safe."....

A teacher accidentally discharged a firearm while teaching a public safety class, injuring one student ....

Yes....and 17.25 million Americans carry guns without problems...... 14 states allow teachers to carry guns.....and you find the few examples ....and the Dalton High school teacher...is he the one who was the anti gun activist who shot himself as some sort of protest?

LOL!!! - Over 100,000 US Citizens get shot every year & you say there is no problem, move along, nothing to see here.

70-80% of them are criminals.....and that is far less than the 1.1 million times Americans use guns to stop violent rape, robbery and murder...

Okay, genius....tell the class...... would you rather a woman be violently raped in an alley, or that she be able to carry a gun to stop it? Please...the class is waiting.

If anything you say were true St. Louis would not have the highest shooting rate in the nation!!!

 

[there4eyeM]

Arming teachers is bad because it's a bad idea, not because of one particular incident.

Even some conservatives think it's a dumb idea.

Rubio breaks with Trump, doesn't support arming teachers

Look, suppose we arm a bunch of teachers. They're carrying out their class, trying to teach a bunch of kids, while carrying a firearm. What do you think is more likely to happen?

A) A psychotic shooter comes in. Teacher steps in, shoots the intruder and saves the day.
B) The gun is discharged accidentally.

This isn't going to go over like some Hollywood movie of a Language Arts teacher going commando and, against all odds, taking out the Colombine assholes. This is just going to result in a lot of really, really dumb and unnecessary accidents. These are TEACHERS. Not SWAT officers. I honestly think you're just going to compound the problem.

Gun-trained teacher accidentally discharges firearm in Calif. classroom, injuring student

Sutherland, Texas shooter....stopped by a "private citizen" armed with an AR-15.
Private citizens armed with AR-15's have stopped criminals in their own homes.
Hundreds of thousands of armed private citizens have stopped criminals armed with stolen firearms.
As for schools, all a teacher with no firearms training needs is a safety class and some regular practice at the range.

That's right! All that is required is that all these good guys with lots of guns do their patriotic, militia duty and patrol to protect schools. It isn't just their right, it is their obligation.

 

[2aguy]

Making things up is really silly......there are 14 states that already allow armed teachers....and nothing in your A-Z myth making has happened.....but please....keep typing...you can use the eye hand coordination practice...

So......outside of the fact that nothing you posted is actually happening in the 14 states that actually allow teachers to be armed...what else to you have?

Here’s all the states where teachers already carry guns in the classroom

Florida is on the verge of becoming the 15th state to arm teachers after Gov. Rick Scott signed an omnibus bill Friday allowing school staff to undergo law enforcement training to carry guns in the classroom.

Although the notion may seem radical, at least 14 states already arm teachers, according to a VICE News review of state laws and interviews with education department officials and school board associations around the country. Those states are Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Idaho, Indiana, Missouri, Montana, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and Washington.


Another 16 states give local school boards the authority to decide whether school staff can carry guns, either explicitly or through legal loopholes, but officials said they didn’t know of any instances of armed teachers in those states.

Really??? There are already over 3 accidental school shootings a week!!!

Three students in a high school were injured when a teacher fired a gun inside of a classroom.....

"Last Friday, a student in Kentucky accidentally shot himself with a handgun at Frederick Douglass High School in Lexington and sustained injuries that were not life-threatening. According to student reports, the student was playing around with a gun in a classroom when he accidentally shot himself in the hand. Two days earlier, a 17-year-old female student was killed and a 17-year-old male was injured in a shooting at Huffman High School in Birmingham, Alabama. Officials have also deemed that shooting an accident."

"Teacher at Dalton high school just blockaded his door and proceeded to shoot," a 16-year-old student named Chondi Chastain tweeted at the National Rifle Assn., earning more than 17,000 retweets. "We had to run out The back of the school in the rain. Students were being trampled and screaming. I dare you to tell me arming teachers will make us safe."....

A teacher accidentally discharged a firearm while teaching a public safety class, injuring one student ....

Yes....and 17.25 million Americans carry guns without problems...... 14 states allow teachers to carry guns.....and you find the few examples ....and the Dalton High school teacher...is he the one who was the anti gun activist who shot himself as some sort of protest?

LOL!!! - Over 100,000 US Citizens get shot every year & you say there is no problem, move along, nothing to see here.

70-80% of them are criminals.....and that is far less than the 1.1 million times Americans use guns to stop violent rape, robbery and murder...

Okay, genius....tell the class...... would you rather a woman be violently raped in an alley, or that she be able to carry a gun to stop it? Please...the class is waiting.

If anything you say were true St. Louis would not have the highest shooting rate in the nation!!!

Moron....St. Louis has a high gun murder rate because democrat politicians have controlled the city for decades...and they let known, violent, repeat gun offenders out of jail over and over again...normal gun owners with their legal guns aren't shooting people...which you would know if you did a little research...

Here...educate yourself on why letting violent gun offenders out of jail is a bad thing...and keep in mind, doofus.....as more law abiding Americans own and carry guns, our gun murder rate went down 49%, our gun crime rate went down 75%, our violent crime rate went down 72%....

Lock up actual gun criminals, that is how you stop gun crime.

Rise in Murders Has St. Louis Debating Why

Jennifer M. Joyce, the city’s circuit attorney, or prosecutor, an elected position, complains that in St. Louis, the illegal possession of a gun is too often “a crime without a consequence,” making it difficult to stop confrontation from turning lethal.

At the same time, deeper social roots of violence such as addiction and unemployment continue unchecked. And city officials also cite what they call a “Ferguson effect,” an increase in crime last year as police officers were diverted to control protests after a white officer shot and killed Michael Brown, an unarmed black teenager in the nearby suburb on Aug. 9.

-----------

Now, an overstretched department is forced to pick one neighborhood at a time to flood with officers. Last month, Chief Dotson even asked the state highway patrol if it could lend a dozen men to help watch downtown streets; the agency declined.
----
When the police discover a gun in a car with several passengers, including some with felony records, but no one admits to owning the gun, criminal charges are often impossible, Mr. Rosenfeld said.

In addition, according to a 2014 study by Mr. Rosenfeld and his colleagues, a majority of those who are convicted of illegally possessing a gun but not caught using it in a crime receive probation rather than jail time. Gun laws and enforcement are stiffer in many other cities.

 

[2aguy]

Arming teachers is bad because it's a bad idea, not because of one particular incident.

Even some conservatives think it's a dumb idea.

Rubio breaks with Trump, doesn't support arming teachers

Look, suppose we arm a bunch of teachers. They're carrying out their class, trying to teach a bunch of kids, while carrying a firearm. What do you think is more likely to happen?

A) A psychotic shooter comes in. Teacher steps in, shoots the intruder and saves the day.
B) The gun is discharged accidentally.

This isn't going to go over like some Hollywood movie of a Language Arts teacher going commando and, against all odds, taking out the Colombine assholes. This is just going to result in a lot of really, really dumb and unnecessary accidents. These are TEACHERS. Not SWAT officers. I honestly think you're just going to compound the problem.

Gun-trained teacher accidentally discharges firearm in Calif. classroom, injuring student

Have you noticed, or have you not noticed that all of these mass shootere pick out soft targets?

Simple question....


You think that is a factor? Or do you think that is a mere coincidence?

IF teachers are armed and students who would plan a mass shooting. Do you think those people would choose a target knowing it is protected and not a soft target?

That is the issue you liberals don't seem to get. Its easy for most of you wealthy white bread lefties living in private gated communities and private schools cause you know in all likelihood you have nothing to worry about.

The question is out there. Do you think these shooters consider their targets based on whether or not they are soft targets (gun free zones?)

Or

Is it just a coincidence that they just so happen to choose gun free zones to commit mass murder?

This topic always seems to turn into "gun free zones". Ok fine, let's talk about them.

What exactly would you consider a gun free zone? Is it locations with no guns at all, or is it a location where citizens (other than security) aren't allowed to be armed?

If you're saying that a gun-free zone is no guns at all: Well, Parkland had an armed resource officer. There was a gun there. A "good guy with a gun" was stationed there. Not all schools have an armed resource officer. So why wouldn't this kid choose a SOFTER target to go after? Isn't that your whole point? That the shooter will take the defense of the target into consideration before committing mass murder? Because that's easily disproven by the amount of schools without armed security. The Parkland shooter selected Parkland because he...used to go to Parkland.

If you're saying that a gun-free zone is having no armed citizens (other than security): Then you're arguing that we should have MORE people armed instead of just relying entirely on security. As we saw in this instance, the resource officer was basically useless. So you want armed school personnel as extra deterrents. You think that more guns in the hands of responsible people makes it more safe. Well then maybe you can answer a simple question:

Why were people not allowed to be armed during Trump's NRA convention speech? Why do you think we should have many loaded firearms in crowded schools, but no firearms at NRA convention speeches? Why the inconsistency? If you can address it, then you will have your answer regarding what we should do in schools.

Parkland had one armed guard for over 3,100 students and 12 buildings on campus...that is not a gun free zone......and if he had actually engaged the shooter, since he was at that building, lives would have been saved.

Killing one man before anyone can react is a different threat situation than someone attacking the entire crowd....and if you had done any actual research you would know that the rest of the NRA convention, and the Republican convention that year allowed carrying guns.....and there wasn't one shooting there...was there?

Also.....we know....this is fact....that mass public shooters target gun free zones ....we know this from their notes and from actual confessions from the ones who live after the attacks..

You don't know what you are talking about.....

You guys seriously need to get your stories straight here. The other poster was saying that this happened because this school was a gun-free zone. You're telling me that it's not a gun-free zone. Make up your minds and then get back to me.

So there weren't shootings there before, but when Pence comes in, they say that no guns are allowed. Why is that? What's the reasoning behind that decision? Do guns make locations safer or not? If they do make places safer, as was the case with this location never having a shooting incident, then why would they stop allowing them there while Pence was giving a speech?

Moron, one armed guard for a population of over 3,100 students, not including staff and 12 actual buildings on campus is not a place protected by guns.


And the threat against one man by one armed man before the secret service can react is completely different from someone shooting randomly into a crowd..... the fact that the NRA did allow people to carry guns at their convention is something you now have to ignore..since it makes your point pretty stupid....

 

[2aguy]

Arming teachers is bad because it's a bad idea, not because of one particular incident.

Even some conservatives think it's a dumb idea.

Rubio breaks with Trump, doesn't support arming teachers

Look, suppose we arm a bunch of teachers. They're carrying out their class, trying to teach a bunch of kids, while carrying a firearm. What do you think is more likely to happen?

A) A psychotic shooter comes in. Teacher steps in, shoots the intruder and saves the day.
B) The gun is discharged accidentally.

This isn't going to go over like some Hollywood movie of a Language Arts teacher going commando and, against all odds, taking out the Colombine assholes. This is just going to result in a lot of really, really dumb and unnecessary accidents. These are TEACHERS. Not SWAT officers. I honestly think you're just going to compound the problem.

Gun-trained teacher accidentally discharges firearm in Calif. classroom, injuring student

Why does the teacher have to carry the firearm? You are making a gross assumption. Why can't the gun be locked away in the classroom?

Also, many teachers are veterans and others have experience with firearms.

I am a veteran with extensive training. When we did active shooter training, the principal even told the entire faculty he would be staying with me where he knew he would be safe. My assistant principal at one of the schools where I worked was a deputy sheriff before he became a teacher.

Try coming into my school if I and my fellow teachers were armed and see how long you last. I give you two minutes of walking around checking locked classroom doors before you bleed out on the floor.

I'm a public school teacher....this.

I don't want to be armed, though I'm firmly for the 2A. I'm not comfortable with most of my colleagues being armed, because I think it's just one MORE thing for all of us to be worried about: guns in the classroom.

However, I would feel BETTER than fine knowing a highly trained teacher or two did have access to gun(s) should the need arise. That seems like a wise plan. We too have a vet in the building. Would love knowing he could get to his arms if we had a Sandy Hook situation.

What the anti gunners want to do is make it seem as if all teachers would be carrying...when in fact, very few would. In fact, the mere act of stating that the school was no longer vulnerable because it is no longer a gun free zone would drive away mass shooters, since they are not looking for a gun fight, but a gun free killing field. The anti gunners are lying to you. There are already 14 states that do this, and they don't have a problem...with another 16 that allow it.....it is already being done....without problems.

 

[2aguy]

Have you noticed, or have you not noticed that all of these mass shootere pick out soft targets?

Simple question....


You think that is a factor? Or do you think that is a mere coincidence?

IF teachers are armed and students who would plan a mass shooting. Do you think those people would choose a target knowing it is protected and not a soft target?

That is the issue you liberals don't seem to get. Its easy for most of you wealthy white bread lefties living in private gated communities and private schools cause you know in all likelihood you have nothing to worry about.

The question is out there. Do you think these shooters consider their targets based on whether or not they are soft targets (gun free zones?)

Or

Is it just a coincidence that they just so happen to choose gun free zones to commit mass murder?

This topic always seems to turn into "gun free zones". Ok fine, let's talk about them.

What exactly would you consider a gun free zone? Is it locations with no guns at all, or is it a location where citizens (other than security) aren't allowed to be armed?

If you're saying that a gun-free zone is no guns at all: Well, Parkland had an armed resource officer. There was a gun there. A "good guy with a gun" was stationed there. Not all schools have an armed resource officer. So why wouldn't this kid choose a SOFTER target to go after? Isn't that your whole point? That the shooter will take the defense of the target into consideration before committing mass murder? Because that's easily disproven by the amount of schools without armed security. The Parkland shooter selected Parkland because he...used to go to Parkland.

If you're saying that a gun-free zone is having no armed citizens (other than security): Then you're arguing that we should have MORE people armed instead of just relying entirely on security. As we saw in this instance, the resource officer was basically useless. So you want armed school personnel as extra deterrents. You think that more guns in the hands of responsible people makes it more safe. Well then maybe you can answer a simple question:

Why were people not allowed to be armed during Trump's NRA convention speech? Why do you think we should have many loaded firearms in crowded schools, but no firearms at NRA convention speeches? Why the inconsistency? If you can address it, then you will have your answer regarding what we should do

in schools.

In Ohio, we give our vendors the right to restrict guns. All they need to do is post a "NO FIREARMS ALLOWED" on the entrances to their establishment and no guns are allowed including the owner. The Quicken Loans Arena is one of the few places we could host such an event, however they have always been gun-free since we passed our CCW laws in Ohio.

While you focus on one event, most all mass shootings happen in gun-free zones across the country. That doesn't happen by accident.

You think gun-free zones are less safe. Yet there were no guns allowed at a Pence/NRA convention held in Dallas a few months ago.

Explain this.

You are wrong...again.....the Republican convention allowed people to carry guns...the NRA convention also allowed people to carry guns....please do some basic research instead of just posting off the top of your head.

No Guns Allowed During NRA Convention Speech By Trump, Pence

Yes...moron, because the Secret Service was in control at that moment...the rest of the convention time concealed and open carry were allowed.... the threat of one man being targeted for murder is different from a mass shooter attacking a crowd....different threats, different measures....and again, the rest of the time NRA members walked around carrying their legal guns without a problem....

You really should stop taking those Stupid Pills....they aren't helping you....

 

[2aguy]

This topic always seems to turn into "gun free zones". Ok fine, let's talk about them.

What exactly would you consider a gun free zone? Is it locations with no guns at all, or is it a location where citizens (other than security) aren't allowed to be armed?

If you're saying that a gun-free zone is no guns at all: Well, Parkland had an armed resource officer. There was a gun there. A "good guy with a gun" was stationed there. Not all schools have an armed resource officer. So why wouldn't this kid choose a SOFTER target to go after? Isn't that your whole point? That the shooter will take the defense of the target into consideration before committing mass murder? Because that's easily disproven by the amount of schools without armed security. The Parkland shooter selected Parkland because he...used to go to Parkland.

If you're saying that a gun-free zone is having no armed citizens (other than security): Then you're arguing that we should have MORE people armed instead of just relying entirely on security. As we saw in this instance, the resource officer was basically useless. So you want armed school personnel as extra deterrents. You think that more guns in the hands of responsible people makes it more safe. Well then maybe you can answer a simple question:

Why were people not allowed to be armed during Trump's NRA convention speech? Why do you think we should have many loaded firearms in crowded schools, but no firearms at NRA convention speeches? Why the inconsistency? If you can address it, then you will have your answer regarding what we should do

in schools.

In Ohio, we give our vendors the right to restrict guns. All they need to do is post a "NO FIREARMS ALLOWED" on the entrances to their establishment and no guns are allowed including the owner. The Quicken Loans Arena is one of the few places we could host such an event, however they have always been gun-free since we passed our CCW laws in Ohio.

While you focus on one event, most all mass shootings happen in gun-free zones across the country. That doesn't happen by accident.

You think gun-free zones are less safe. Yet there were no guns allowed at a Pence/NRA convention held in Dallas a few months ago.

Explain this.

You are wrong...again.....the Republican convention allowed people to carry guns...the NRA convention also allowed people to carry guns....please do some basic research instead of just posting off the top of your head.

Besides, the idiot missed the whole point. Most soft targets are not going to be attacked.

However if a person is committed to murdering on mass scale, they will choose a soft target over one that is well armed.

Unless it is an amazing coincidence that they just so happen to choose soft targets.

1) The Parkland shooter could have easily selected a softer target - a school without an armed resource officer.
2) If soft targets are so bad, then why did the Pence/NRA convention in Dallas not allow guns?

1) There was one armed officer for 12 buildings.....making it a gun free zone 99% of the time and in 99% of the locations....

2) The NRA did allow guns.....

 

[2aguy]

I believe I said that it's more likely that the gun is accidentally discharged than it is for a teacher to save the day by shooting a bad guy.

Do you believe this applies to all people who are screened, trained and licensed to carry a firearm? Or just teachers?

"A teacher who is also a reserve police officer trained in firearm use ‘accidentally’ discharged a gun Tuesday at Seaside High School in Monterey County, Calif., during a class devoted to public safety, school officials said in a statement. A male student was reported to have sustained non-life-threatening injuries."

Gun-trained teacher accidentally discharges firearm in Calif. classroom, injuring student

This guy was trained and licensed and he still messed up and could have caused a tragedy. It could happen to anyone - but especially to someone in a profession that doesn't regularly use firearms.

You guys are going to wear out the one story you have....... the fact is 14 states already allow teachers and staff to carry guns...and they don't have a problem....and another 16 also allow it.....you have no basis for your extremism....

 

[2aguy]

In an interview with Variety Parkland gun control activist Emma Gonzalez suggested arming teachers is a bad idea because her school had “a resource officer and he didn’t do jack sh*t.”
The resource officer referenced by Gonzalez is former Broward County deputy Scot Peterson, who arrived outside the scene of the Parkland attack roughly 90 seconds after it began and stayed outside until it was over, instead of going in to confront the gunman.

Lost on Gonzalez is the fact that armed teachers are there as a last resort. They are there to shoot the attacker if the deputy will not go in or in the event that the deputy cannot go in.

Are the anti 2Aers so simple minded as to think that the almighty 'Nanny State' is the best defense against unleashed homicidal terror. Is the notion of 'Personal Responsibility' so repugnant that it extends to the very lives of their children. What the F, If the principle tells a parent that he has an AR locked up in his office I would expect parents to be thrilled, wouldn't U!

Emma Gonzalez: Don't Arm Teachers, 'We Had a Resource Officer and He Didn't Do Jack Sh*t' | Breitbart

Having a highly armed populace is a bad idea in itself. Thanks GOP NRA.

Tell that to the unarmed people of Europe...the 12 million sent to the gas chambers by their governments... they would disagree with you...