If you DON’T think armed teachers is the solution to school shootings then you are ignorant

[iceberg]

take a look at all the school shootings pre-1990 and maybe, it's because of what a school represents in our lives it becomes a target moreso than whether or not there's a ghostbuster symbol on a gun on the front door.

That’s another great point. Data has shown that just having a sign in one’s yard that they have an alarm system reduces break-in’s. It’s just a fact. So simply removing the ban of firearms on school grounds and putting up a sign indicating the staff is armed (even if they really weren’t) is proven to be a major deterrent. Criminals don’t want a fair fight and they don’t like the unknown. They won’t risk it if they don’t know.

but they never knew before. the whole "gun free" zone was reactionary and while i agree it didn't work, it also doesn't make it *substantially* more of a target. they target schools because that's where they go every day. that is who they know. if kids still hung out at the food court in shopping malls that would be next.

they target fellow students due to their "treatment" in life and that makes schools and clubs and so forth targets.

i'm fine with adding police substations and or retired vets into schools and arming them but not the teachers. i just don't think that's right to ask of a teacher to have to potentially kill a student they care a lot about.

Arm the male teachers who already possess firearms and shoot in their off hours.
Then get them some training. As far as shooting a student they love? That love goes out the window when the kids starts shooting up the place.

doesn't make it any easier i wouldn't think.

i'd rather see us step up real security than ask a teacher to take on even more.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

take a look at all the school shootings pre-1990 and maybe, it's because of what a school represents in our lives it becomes a target moreso than whether or not there's a ghostbuster symbol on a gun on the front door.

That’s another great point. Data has shown that just having a sign in one’s yard that they have an alarm system reduces break-in’s. It’s just a fact. So simply removing the ban of firearms on school grounds and putting up a sign indicating the staff is armed (even if they really weren’t) is proven to be a major deterrent. Criminals don’t want a fair fight and they don’t like the unknown. They won’t risk it if they don’t know.

but they never knew before. the whole "gun free" zone was reactionary and while i agree it didn't work, it also doesn't make it *substantially* more of a target. they target schools because that's where they go every day. that is who they know. if kids still hung out at the food court in shopping malls that would be next.

they target fellow students due to their "treatment" in life and that makes schools and clubs and so forth targets.

i'm fine with adding police substations and or retired vets into schools and arming them but not the teachers. i just don't think that's right to ask of a teacher to have to potentially kill a student they care a lot about.

Arm the male teachers who already possess firearms and shoot in their off hours.
Then get them some training. As far as shooting a student they love? That love goes out the window when the kids starts shooting up the place.

More like the teacher gets shot by the cop !

Did you not read the article about the Oklahoma school?
It clearly states the police know which teachers are armed.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

We need to focus on why anyone needs to have this type of military weaponry in our society in the first place. We got along fine without them, until morons started overdosing on Rambo movies.

We need them for obvious reasons.

What obvious reasons ? Name them.

So you're telling me you've never read the 2nd amendment?
Why am I not surprised.

 

[GHook93]

Why do schools that teach Politician kids never get hit? That is because they have armed guards active at ever school.

If you arm the right teachers, then the schools are even more secure. Teachers that go through training, mental health exam and teacher that volunteer.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Timmy]

We need to focus on why anyone needs to have this type of military weaponry in our society in the first place. We got along fine without them, until morons started overdosing on Rambo movies.

We need them for obvious reasons.

What obvious reasons ? Name them.

So you're telling me you've never read the 2nd amendment?
Why am I not surprised.

I’ve read it . I realize nutters like you like to skip the whole milita part .

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

The Florida school had an armed cop!

Specious reasoning by the way. Just because a school has a teacher wh a gun doesn’t mean that’s the reason they haven’t had a shooting . 99.9% of schools haven’t had a shooting .

Than why ban guns if the problem is so miniscule?

Our overall gun problems are not minuscule.

You just said 99.9% of schools dont have shootings.
So why go after the AR when pistols are used far more often?
Think hard now.....

Why do we fight terrorism when it’s such a small fraction of a % of crime ?

Well Timothy it should be obvious even to one such as yourself.
We are not fighting to disarm terrorist,we want to kill them.
I'm pretty sure Americans would be against gunning down kids who havent as of yet done anything.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

take a look at all the school shootings pre-1990 and maybe, it's because of what a school represents in our lives it becomes a target moreso than whether or not there's a ghostbuster symbol on a gun on the front door.

That’s another great point. Data has shown that just having a sign in one’s yard that they have an alarm system reduces break-in’s. It’s just a fact. So simply removing the ban of firearms on school grounds and putting up a sign indicating the staff is armed (even if they really weren’t) is proven to be a major deterrent. Criminals don’t want a fair fight and they don’t like the unknown. They won’t risk it if they don’t know.

but they never knew before. the whole "gun free" zone was reactionary and while i agree it didn't work, it also doesn't make it *substantially* more of a target. they target schools because that's where they go every day. that is who they know. if kids still hung out at the food court in shopping malls that would be next.

they target fellow students due to their "treatment" in life and that makes schools and clubs and so forth targets.

i'm fine with adding police substations and or retired vets into schools and arming them but not the teachers. i just don't think that's right to ask of a teacher to have to potentially kill a student they care a lot about.

Arm the male teachers who already possess firearms and shoot in their off hours.
Then get them some training. As far as shooting a student they love? That love goes out the window when the kids starts shooting up the place.

doesn't make it any easier i wouldn't think.

i'd rather see us step up real security than ask a teacher to take on even more.

I'm good with either solution.
The advantage of having armed teachers is no one knows which teachers are armed,while the guards would be obvious.

 

[Timmy]

take a look at all the school shootings pre-1990 and maybe, it's because of what a school represents in our lives it becomes a target moreso than whether or not there's a ghostbuster symbol on a gun on the front door.

That’s another great point. Data has shown that just having a sign in one’s yard that they have an alarm system reduces break-in’s. It’s just a fact. So simply removing the ban of firearms on school grounds and putting up a sign indicating the staff is armed (even if they really weren’t) is proven to be a major deterrent. Criminals don’t want a fair fight and they don’t like the unknown. They won’t risk it if they don’t know.

but they never knew before. the whole "gun free" zone was reactionary and while i agree it didn't work, it also doesn't make it *substantially* more of a target. they target schools because that's where they go every day. that is who they know. if kids still hung out at the food court in shopping malls that would be next.

they target fellow students due to their "treatment" in life and that makes schools and clubs and so forth targets.

i'm fine with adding police substations and or retired vets into schools and arming them but not the teachers. i just don't think that's right to ask of a teacher to have to potentially kill a student they care a lot about.

Arm the male teachers who already possess firearms and shoot in their off hours.
Then get them some training. As far as shooting a student they love? That love goes out the window when the kids starts shooting up the place.

More like the teacher gets shot by the cop !

Did you not read the article about the Oklahoma school?
It clearly states the police know which teachers are armed.

Maybe in some empty hick town with a handful of teachers and cops you can pull that off. No so much wh Big schools and Big police departments .

 

[iceberg]

take a look at all the school shootings pre-1990 and maybe, it's because of what a school represents in our lives it becomes a target moreso than whether or not there's a ghostbuster symbol on a gun on the front door.

That’s another great point. Data has shown that just having a sign in one’s yard that they have an alarm system reduces break-in’s. It’s just a fact. So simply removing the ban of firearms on school grounds and putting up a sign indicating the staff is armed (even if they really weren’t) is proven to be a major deterrent. Criminals don’t want a fair fight and they don’t like the unknown. They won’t risk it if they don’t know.

but they never knew before. the whole "gun free" zone was reactionary and while i agree it didn't work, it also doesn't make it *substantially* more of a target. they target schools because that's where they go every day. that is who they know. if kids still hung out at the food court in shopping malls that would be next.

they target fellow students due to their "treatment" in life and that makes schools and clubs and so forth targets.

i'm fine with adding police substations and or retired vets into schools and arming them but not the teachers. i just don't think that's right to ask of a teacher to have to potentially kill a student they care a lot about.

Arm the male teachers who already possess firearms and shoot in their off hours.
Then get them some training. As far as shooting a student they love? That love goes out the window when the kids starts shooting up the place.

doesn't make it any easier i wouldn't think.

i'd rather see us step up real security than ask a teacher to take on even more.

I'm good with either solution.
The advantage of having armed teachers is no one knows which teachers are armed,while the guards would be obvious.

i would think the students would know. it would be big news at the school and hard to keep a secret.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

We need to focus on why anyone needs to have this type of military weaponry in our society in the first place. We got along fine without them, until morons started overdosing on Rambo movies.

We need them for obvious reasons.

What obvious reasons ? Name them.

So you're telling me you've never read the 2nd amendment?
Why am I not surprised.

I’ve read it . I realize nutters like you like to skip the whole milita part .

This is where people way smarter than you explain the 2nd.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

That’s another great point. Data has shown that just having a sign in one’s yard that they have an alarm system reduces break-in’s. It’s just a fact. So simply removing the ban of firearms on school grounds and putting up a sign indicating the staff is armed (even if they really weren’t) is proven to be a major deterrent. Criminals don’t want a fair fight and they don’t like the unknown. They won’t risk it if they don’t know.

but they never knew before. the whole "gun free" zone was reactionary and while i agree it didn't work, it also doesn't make it *substantially* more of a target. they target schools because that's where they go every day. that is who they know. if kids still hung out at the food court in shopping malls that would be next.

they target fellow students due to their "treatment" in life and that makes schools and clubs and so forth targets.

i'm fine with adding police substations and or retired vets into schools and arming them but not the teachers. i just don't think that's right to ask of a teacher to have to potentially kill a student they care a lot about.

Arm the male teachers who already possess firearms and shoot in their off hours.
Then get them some training. As far as shooting a student they love? That love goes out the window when the kids starts shooting up the place.

More like the teacher gets shot by the cop !

Did you not read the article about the Oklahoma school?
It clearly states the police know which teachers are armed.

Maybe in some empty hick town with a handful of teachers and cops you can pull that off. No so much wh Big schools and Big police departments .

So you dont think protocols could be enacted where the first thing the cops do when they show up on scene is to get a list of the armed teachers?
And as we all know it takes twenty minutes for the cops to show up and the shooting would most likely be over one way or another.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

That’s another great point. Data has shown that just having a sign in one’s yard that they have an alarm system reduces break-in’s. It’s just a fact. So simply removing the ban of firearms on school grounds and putting up a sign indicating the staff is armed (even if they really weren’t) is proven to be a major deterrent. Criminals don’t want a fair fight and they don’t like the unknown. They won’t risk it if they don’t know.

but they never knew before. the whole "gun free" zone was reactionary and while i agree it didn't work, it also doesn't make it *substantially* more of a target. they target schools because that's where they go every day. that is who they know. if kids still hung out at the food court in shopping malls that would be next.

they target fellow students due to their "treatment" in life and that makes schools and clubs and so forth targets.

i'm fine with adding police substations and or retired vets into schools and arming them but not the teachers. i just don't think that's right to ask of a teacher to have to potentially kill a student they care a lot about.

Arm the male teachers who already possess firearms and shoot in their off hours.
Then get them some training. As far as shooting a student they love? That love goes out the window when the kids starts shooting up the place.

doesn't make it any easier i wouldn't think.

i'd rather see us step up real security than ask a teacher to take on even more.

I'm good with either solution.
The advantage of having armed teachers is no one knows which teachers are armed,while the guards would be obvious.

i would think the students would know. it would be big news at the school and hard to keep a secret.

It's a lot easier to keep that pistol hidden than you might think.
Shitloads of people carry in Texas and I've never been able to tell which ones.

 

[mudwhistle]

We’ve done it the failed left-wing way for almost 3 decades now. It’s time we ignore the ignorant and immature idealists and instead start listening to the experts...

The Crime Prevention Research Center found that from the 1950s through July 10, 2016, 98.4% of mass shootings have happened in gun-free zones, The Blaze reported.

When you create victim zones, you will get victims. The left has caused the unnecessary death of hundreds of children. This is an easy problem to solve that doesn’t require tyranny or the shredding of the U.S. Constitution. It just requires us to do what all successful solutions do - ignore the left.

Lawmaker Says Repealing Gun-Free Zone Act Would Make Schools Safer

The only reason we haven't improved security in our schools yet is because the left needs more mass-shootings.

 

[Avatar4321]

We used to teach students in school how to use firearms

Can anyone name a single mass shooting that occurred when we did?

 

[mudwhistle]

Arming teachers is a bad idea.
Most teachers are crazy liberals who become a problem for the police in an active shooter scenario.

 

[BlindBoo]

If you think that is the only solution then you suffer the fate you accuse other of.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The gun nuts don't want to mandate arming teachers, so in reality they are proposing doing nothing.

 

[P@triot]

You don’t think a school is worried about an accident with a gun happening on campus ? That’s an insurance nightmare .

No snowflake. Because many schools all across the nation are already doing it and have been for decades. You are a prime example of why people who know nothing about firearms should never jump in a conversation about firearms.

As for logistics . How does it work? Does teach wear a holster ?

A. Yes
B. That’s not “logistics”

What happens if there is a lockdown situation?

Nothing “happens”. The school is locked down. Are you really this confused or is this an act?

Teacher leaves her class to go have a gun battle ?

Yep. Lives are saved. Shooter goes down. Another good day.

Not for nothing snowflake - but there won’t be a shooting situation when the teachers are armed.

If you are walking around a school in a shooting situation and the cops see you with a gun, who do you think they are shooting ?

They won’t be shooting the teachers, you nitwit.

 

[P@triot]

The gun nuts don't want to mandate arming teachers, so in reality they are proposing doing nothing.

Yeah...conservatives don’t “mandate”. We’re not totalitarians like you progressives. We’re simply giving educators the opportunity to defend themselves and their students if they want.

Choice. Imagine. What a concept.

 

[P@triot]

Thank God this man had a constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

A man’s violent crime rampage ended when an armed civilian held him at gunpoint until police arrived

Every single day in this nation, crime is prevented by an armed citizen. And unlike the coward in the Parklamd Sheriff’s Department, citizens engage to save lives.

Armed civilian in Texas halts man’s violent crime spree