This Is Why You Allow Armed Teachers


I'll agree with throwing four more armed cops in every school FWIW. This is just an example of a bad decision.

On an individual level, I'd PROBABLY be able to do something heroic to try to save kids I didn't know. I THINK I would.

It would still be HEROIC though and not a common action. A fellow who pulls up lame shouldn't be a cop. Not sure how much I'd prosecute him though....maybe go after the pension saying, "when you signed up to be a cop, you signed up to be a hero, and you weren't so we're not paying out".

Its a tough line though. My kid, I save or die trying. Other kids, or lord knows an adult, I might not reach as far in front of the oncoming train to save.
 

I'll agree with throwing four more armed cops in every school FWIW. This is just an example of a bad decision.

On an individual level, I'd PROBABLY be able to do something heroic to try to save kids I didn't know. I THINK I would.

It would still be HEROIC though and not a common action. A fellow who pulls up lame shouldn't be a cop. Not sure how much I'd prosecute him though....maybe go after the pension saying, "when you signed up to be a cop, you signed up to be a hero, and you weren't so we're not paying out".

Its a tough line though. My kid, I save or die trying. Other kids, or lord knows an adult, I might not reach as far in front of the oncoming train to save.
Every mass shooting is against a soft (unarmed) target.

Having armed teachers changes the equation.
 

I'll agree with throwing four more armed cops in every school FWIW. This is just an example of a bad decision.

On an individual level, I'd PROBABLY be able to do something heroic to try to save kids I didn't know. I THINK I would.

It would still be HEROIC though and not a common action. A fellow who pulls up lame shouldn't be a cop. Not sure how much I'd prosecute him though....maybe go after the pension saying, "when you signed up to be a cop, you signed up to be a hero, and you weren't so we're not paying out".

Its a tough line though. My kid, I save or die trying. Other kids, or lord knows an adult, I might not reach as far in front of the oncoming train to save.
Every mass shooting is against a soft (unarmed) target.

Having armed teachers changes the equation.

Does having real security at the school not?

I've met a lot of teachers. Gals who were Education Majors seemed to take a liking to me, they like immature fellows maybe lol. I think we may be better just paying real professionals to guard these schools and make them hard targets instead of coping out and not taxing gun sales by expecting education majors to defend your children.
 
Once again showing that the police are under no obligation to protect you or your families.

Now, put your seat belt on or I'll write you a citation!


A federal judge says Broward schools and the Sheriff’s Office had no legal duty to protect students during the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.

U.S. District Judge Beth Bloom dismissed a suit filed by 15 students who claimed they were traumatized by the crisis in February. The suit named six defendants, including the Broward school district and the Broward Sheriff’s Office, as well as school deputy Scot Peterson and campus monitor Andrew Medina.

Cops and schools had no duty to shield students in Parkland shooting, says judge who tossed lawsuit



No2ServeProtec.jpg
 

I'll agree with throwing four more armed cops in every school FWIW. This is just an example of a bad decision.

On an individual level, I'd PROBABLY be able to do something heroic to try to save kids I didn't know. I THINK I would.

It would still be HEROIC though and not a common action. A fellow who pulls up lame shouldn't be a cop. Not sure how much I'd prosecute him though....maybe go after the pension saying, "when you signed up to be a cop, you signed up to be a hero, and you weren't so we're not paying out".

Its a tough line though. My kid, I save or die trying. Other kids, or lord knows an adult, I might not reach as far in front of the oncoming train to save.
Every mass shooting is against a soft (unarmed) target.

Having armed teachers changes the equation.

Does having real security at the school not?

I've met a lot of teachers. Gals who were Education Majors seemed to take a liking to me, they like immature fellows maybe lol. I think we may be better just paying real professionals to guard these schools and make them hard targets instead of coping out and not taxing gun sales by expecting education majors to defend your children.

Why were you talking to elementary school teachers?

What about the schools in my area where every teacher almost without exception is an avid hunter, females included?
 
Judge Bloom should hang her head in abject shame. Protecting people is not only the duty of the police, it is their number one reason for existence.

I support "School Resource Officer" programs, such as the one at Great Mills High School in St. Mary's County (an exurb of Washington DC) which puts one LEO in each high school, plus two additional ones to split between the county's middle schools. Earlier this year, one of the SRO's - who also happens to be a SWAT team member - sprinted toward gunfire and exchanged fire with the shooter, who became the only casualty after he shot himself in response. That's how to protect kids, not to whimper in safety as shots ring out, only to later cower behind a nitwit judge's inane ruling.

If I could, I'd put SRO programs in every county. Here, read all about it:
5 things to know about Md. SRO Blaine Gaskill
 
Not required to protect people under fire yet many police organizations have come out for stringent gun control laws.
It's hard not to come to the realization that the police want you at their mercy, scared, defenseless and needy.
 
Judge Bloom should hang her head in abject shame. Protecting people is not only the duty of the police, it is their number one reason for existence.

I support "School Resource Officer" programs, such as the one at Great Mills High School in St. Mary's County (an exurb of Washington DC) which puts one LEO in each high school, plus two additional ones to split between the county's middle schools. Earlier this year, one of the SRO's - who also happens to be a SWAT team member - sprinted toward gunfire and exchanged fire with the shooter, who became the only casualty after he shot himself in response. That's how to protect kids, not to whimper in safety as shots ring out, only to later cower behind a nitwit judge's inane ruling.

If I could, I'd put SRO programs in every county. Here, read all about it:
5 things to know about Md. SRO Blaine Gaskill
Sorry to break it to you, but USSC has ruled that police are under no obligation to protect the people that they allegedly "serve and protect"....They're basically an armed revenue collection agency.

Police Have No Duty to Protect Individuals
 

I'll agree with throwing four more armed cops in every school FWIW. This is just an example of a bad decision.

On an individual level, I'd PROBABLY be able to do something heroic to try to save kids I didn't know. I THINK I would.

It would still be HEROIC though and not a common action. A fellow who pulls up lame shouldn't be a cop. Not sure how much I'd prosecute him though....maybe go after the pension saying, "when you signed up to be a cop, you signed up to be a hero, and you weren't so we're not paying out".

Its a tough line though. My kid, I save or die trying. Other kids, or lord knows an adult, I might not reach as far in front of the oncoming train to save.
Every mass shooting is against a soft (unarmed) target.

Having armed teachers changes the equation.

Does having real security at the school not?

I've met a lot of teachers. Gals who were Education Majors seemed to take a liking to me, they like immature fellows maybe lol. I think we may be better just paying real professionals to guard these schools and make them hard targets instead of coping out and not taxing gun sales by expecting education majors to defend your children.

14 states already allow armed teachers, and 16 states don't prohibit it.....we have actual experience in arming teachers and it works......
 
More guns, please.


Yes.....as more Americans own and carry guns over the last 25 years, our gun murder rate went down 49%, our gun crime rate went down 75%, our violent crime rate went down 72%......law abiding citizens carrying guns does not increase the crime rate and it doesn't cause mass public shootings. In fact, from actual research, armed citizens at the scene of mass public shootings are 94% effective at stopping the attack or at least limiting the injuries and deaths......

So yes..more guns in the hands of more good people.
 

I'll agree with throwing four more armed cops in every school FWIW. This is just an example of a bad decision.

On an individual level, I'd PROBABLY be able to do something heroic to try to save kids I didn't know. I THINK I would.

It would still be HEROIC though and not a common action. A fellow who pulls up lame shouldn't be a cop. Not sure how much I'd prosecute him though....maybe go after the pension saying, "when you signed up to be a cop, you signed up to be a hero, and you weren't so we're not paying out".

Its a tough line though. My kid, I save or die trying. Other kids, or lord knows an adult, I might not reach as far in front of the oncoming train to save.
Every mass shooting is against a soft (unarmed) target.

Having armed teachers changes the equation.

Does having real security at the school not?

I've met a lot of teachers. Gals who were Education Majors seemed to take a liking to me, they like immature fellows maybe lol. I think we may be better just paying real professionals to guard these schools and make them hard targets instead of coping out and not taxing gun sales by expecting education majors to defend your children.
Read the OP. Judge ruled Security has no legal obligation to protect the kids. So there is no such thing as a security force. So it’s up to each teacher interested in the safety of the kids and themselves.
 

Forum List

Back
Top