My older daughter, a teacher, called me last night...

[Rustic]

.... uncharacteristically shaken after going through "shooter training" at school. She said all the female teachers were crying, a mess.

Shooter training.

"What it all boils down to, is that there's not much we can do, dad", she said. "They're going through and putting interior locks on classroom doors. Outside of that, you just have to hope the shooter doesn't find you."

I asked her about guns, and whether she supported the idea of giving teachers the option of having guns. "Hell yes," she said, and they had talked about that in training. She doesn't support it being mandatory, but definitely agreed that if some number of teachers did want to do it, it would help. She would do it.

So that was my Friday evening conversation with my daughter. They're usually a little different.
.

My guess is that the school will resist letting teachers arm themselves (those that actually own arms and are trained to use them) because lawyers have their heads up everyone's asses about fear of legal liability, even if they arm with the same ammo used by Marshalls aboard planes (won't go through walls) so as a result, NO ONE is willing to take action, take the initiative, or lead. If schools were smart, they would incorporate an intruder control system unknown to anyone but faculty that if a gunman enters the building, classrooms can be locked down and isolated while the intruder is restricted to a hallway, etc., long enough that he can be hit with a gas spray to immobilize or incapacitate him until authorities can arrive. It really isn't that hard if we can get the ******* lawyers out of everyone's asses.

One idea that the trainer brought up - so it must be circulating - was to have a gun in a locked safe in every classroom. The teachers shot that idea down (oops) for a variety of reasons, and I can understand that. But it seems to me that if there are a few employees willing to carry it could (could) make a difference.

It's insane that we're even having to talk about this, and it's indicative of a much larger problem.
.

The problem is the breakdown of the traditional American family, too late... we have already made the bed with fucked up political correctness/affirmative-action/socialism.

Unstable families is part of it. Too much emphasis on our RIGHTS but not the commensurate RESPONSIBILITIES to others is another part of it.

Progressives do not know the best way to approach the situation. And they will not compromise on anything short of all out firearm confiscation...

 

[OldLady]

Think about it, the Police were called to this kid's house 39 times, he was expelled from school, he posted a you tube where he claimed to be a future mass murderer and a tipster reported to the FBI in January that he was stockpiling weapons and planning mass murder. Nothing happened because the FBI was focused on a cover up of their illegal surveillance of the President.

And under what law would the FBI be able to confiscate his guns?

I heard about a law in four states allowing law enforcement to temporarily seize weapons in a case like this:
Seizure of weapons[edit]
Connecticut statutes allows police, after investigating and determining probable cause, to get a court warrant and seize guns from anyone posing an imminent risk of harming himself or someone else. A judge must hold a hearing within 14 days after the seizure and order the police to hold the guns for up to one year or return them. The judge (1) must, when assessing probable cause, consider recent acts of violence, threatening, or animal cruelty and (2) may, when assessing imminent risk, consider such factors as reckless gun use or display, violent threats, alcohol abuse, illegal drug use, and prior involuntary psychiatric confinement.[15] Connecticut's weapons seizure law does not require the individual to be compensated by authorities when weapons are permanently confiscated, as the seizure action falls within the purview of an "enforcement action," (and thus a civil forfeiture) rather than a "seizure of property for public benefit," thereby making the seizure outside of the scope of the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution requiring just compensation for property taken. Currently, only three other states (California, New York and Indiana) have weapons seizure laws similar to Connecticut's.
Gun laws in Connecticut - Wikipedia

IMO, this should be federal law.

 

[Rustic]

Think about it, the Police were called to this kid's house 39 times, he was expelled from school, he posted a you tube where he claimed to be a future mass murderer and a tipster reported to the FBI in January that he was stockpiling weapons and planning mass murder. Nothing happened because the FBI was focused on a cover up of their illegal surveillance of the President.

And under what law would the FBI be able to confiscate his guns?

Progressives do not know what’s best for the situation, they have no commonsense

 

[Rustic]

That you have to go with emotional language saying in "classrooms" shows that even you know how terrible your argument is. First, schools are more than just classrooms and administrators don't dwell in classrooms and teachers aren't there all the time. It's about schools, not just "classrooms."

Second, you're afraid teachers are going to start shooting kids who don't do their homework?

That when a kid is murdering 17 students and shooting dozens more your focus is working even harder to ensure his safety shows how sick you are.

They really need to get inner city liberals like you out of your secluded lofts and wine bars and into the rest of America where you can meet real Americans who own guns and you can cure your bigotry and ignorance about Americans

That is awesome. So much stupid in one post. You are fantastic.

You're the one fighting for the safety of people to go into schools and shoot people, and you're talking about someone else's post being "stupid?"

And obviously you picked the word "classrooms" rather than "schools" to appeal to emotion. Man up to it, Nancy

Man...you think you've hit on a big one, huh? A regular semantic Captain Ahab!

You know you're lying. You know you picked "classrooms" for a reason. Man up, Nancy

I am fighting for the safety of people who go into schools and shoot people? More awesome from you. You are on a roll, hot dog.

Yes, you want more laws. Psst, I have a secret, criminals don't obey laws, honest citizens do. Man, didn't see that coming, did you?

And again, explain how drug laws have eliminated drugs

I gave no particular forethought to the use of the word "classrooms", retard.

We aren't talking about drugs here, Spanky.

Yes, I want more laws. You nailed it.

More frivolous laws? Criminals love the idea of more frivolous gun laws...

 

[OldLady]

.... uncharacteristically shaken after going through "shooter training" at school. She said all the female teachers were crying, a mess.

Shooter training.

"What it all boils down to, is that there's not much we can do, dad", she said. "They're going through and putting interior locks on classroom doors. Outside of that, you just have to hope the shooter doesn't find you."

I asked her about guns, and whether she supported the idea of giving teachers the option of having guns. "Hell yes," she said, and they had talked about that in training. She doesn't support it being mandatory, but definitely agreed that if some number of teachers did want to do it, it would help. She would do it.

So that was my Friday evening conversation with my daughter. They're usually a little different.
.

My guess is that the school will resist letting teachers arm themselves (those that actually own arms and are trained to use them) because lawyers have their heads up everyone's asses about fear of legal liability, even if they arm with the same ammo used by Marshalls aboard planes (won't go through walls) so as a result, NO ONE is willing to take action, take the initiative, or lead. If schools were smart, they would incorporate an intruder control system unknown to anyone but faculty that if a gunman enters the building, classrooms can be locked down and isolated while the intruder is restricted to a hallway, etc., long enough that he can be hit with a gas spray to immobilize or incapacitate him until authorities can arrive. It really isn't that hard if we can get the ******* lawyers out of everyone's asses.

One idea that the trainer brought up - so it must be circulating - was to have a gun in a locked safe in every classroom. The teachers shot that idea down (oops) for a variety of reasons, and I can understand that. But it seems to me that if there are a few employees willing to carry it could (could) make a difference.

It's insane that we're even having to talk about this, and it's indicative of a much larger problem.
.

The problem is the breakdown of the traditional American family, too late... we have already made the bed with fucked up political correctness/affirmative-action/socialism.

Unstable families is part of it. Too much emphasis on our RIGHTS but not the commensurate RESPONSIBILITIES to others is another part of it.

Progressives do not know the best way to approach the situation. And they will not compromise on anything short of all out firearm confiscation...

When you are completely closed off to any solutions, you are unfortunately part of the problem. What you are positing is ridiculous.

 

[Brain357]

Countries with strong gun control sure have a lot less shootings.

I have yet to see anyone argue with the idea there would be less shootings if no one has a firearm ...
That's not really an argument ... The same as no other country with more strict gun laws is required to follow our Constitution.

People have a tendency to get shot when other people have firearms.
So you are really dealing with people who exercise their Constitutional right to own firearms ... And your desire to remove that right.

I don't think they are going to agree with you ... You might have to change the Constitution, or at least elect some more creative tyrants.

.

The second has limits.
Antonin Scalia says 2nd Amendment has its limits

 

[Rustic]

Think about it, the Police were called to this kid's house 39 times, he was expelled from school, he posted a you tube where he claimed to be a future mass murderer and a tipster reported to the FBI in January that he was stockpiling weapons and planning mass murder. Nothing happened because the FBI was focused on a cover up of their illegal surveillance of the President.

And under what law would the FBI be able to confiscate his guns?

I heard about a law in four states allowing law enforcement to temporarily seize weapons in a case like this:
Seizure of weapons[edit]
Connecticut statutes allows police, after investigating and determining probable cause, to get a court warrant and seize guns from anyone posing an imminent risk of harming himself or someone else. A judge must hold a hearing within 14 days after the seizure and order the police to hold the guns for up to one year or return them. The judge (1) must, when assessing probable cause, consider recent acts of violence, threatening, or animal cruelty and (2) may, when assessing imminent risk, consider such factors as reckless gun use or display, violent threats, alcohol abuse, illegal drug use, and prior involuntary psychiatric confinement.[15] Connecticut's weapons seizure law does not require the individual to be compensated by authorities when weapons are permanently confiscated, as the seizure action falls within the purview of an "enforcement action," (and thus a civil forfeiture) rather than a "seizure of property for public benefit," thereby making the seizure outside of the scope of the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution requiring just compensation for property taken. Currently, only three other states (California, New York and Indiana) have weapons seizure laws similar to Connecticut's.
Gun laws in Connecticut - Wikipedia

IMO, this should be federal law.

**** that law, You have no understanding of the rural America.

 

[Brain357]

That is awesome. So much stupid in one post. You are fantastic.

You're the one fighting for the safety of people to go into schools and shoot people, and you're talking about someone else's post being "stupid?"

And obviously you picked the word "classrooms" rather than "schools" to appeal to emotion. Man up to it, Nancy

Man...you think you've hit on a big one, huh? A regular semantic Captain Ahab!

You know you're lying. You know you picked "classrooms" for a reason. Man up, Nancy

I am fighting for the safety of people who go into schools and shoot people? More awesome from you. You are on a roll, hot dog.

Yes, you want more laws. Psst, I have a secret, criminals don't obey laws, honest citizens do. Man, didn't see that coming, did you?

And again, explain how drug laws have eliminated drugs

I gave no particular forethought to the use of the word "classrooms", retard.

We aren't talking about drugs here, Spanky.

Yes, I want more laws. You nailed it.

More frivolous laws? Criminals love the idea of more frivolous gun laws...

Yes gun laws like in countries where they don't have mass shootings. I hardly call that frivolous.

 

[LoneLaugher]

That is awesome. So much stupid in one post. You are fantastic.

You're the one fighting for the safety of people to go into schools and shoot people, and you're talking about someone else's post being "stupid?"

And obviously you picked the word "classrooms" rather than "schools" to appeal to emotion. Man up to it, Nancy

Man...you think you've hit on a big one, huh? A regular semantic Captain Ahab!

You know you're lying. You know you picked "classrooms" for a reason. Man up, Nancy

I am fighting for the safety of people who go into schools and shoot people? More awesome from you. You are on a roll, hot dog.

Yes, you want more laws. Psst, I have a secret, criminals don't obey laws, honest citizens do. Man, didn't see that coming, did you?

And again, explain how drug laws have eliminated drugs

I gave no particular forethought to the use of the word "classrooms", retard.

Sit and admit to yourself you lied. No one was using the emotional word "classrooms" until you did. You're such a shallow liar, it's pathetic

We aren't talking about drugs here, Spanky.

Yes, I want more laws. You nailed it.

Right, we're talking about laws. Drug laws don't work, they don't work at all. Yet you're claiming a cosmic magic wave will envelope the country and make laws to remove guns suddenly work.

Explain how that makes any sense even in your feeble mind

You have never witnessed me lying, fool. You never will.

We are talking about ways to restrict access to some weapons. You are unable to do that effectively, so you want to talk about something else.

Stupid.

By the way, kaz no fewer than THREE people, including the OP, used the word "classroom" in this thread before I did. You are wrong and stupid. Damn....how much more will you eat shit in this thread.

 

[Rustic]

My guess is that the school will resist letting teachers arm themselves (those that actually own arms and are trained to use them) because lawyers have their heads up everyone's asses about fear of legal liability, even if they arm with the same ammo used by Marshalls aboard planes (won't go through walls) so as a result, NO ONE is willing to take action, take the initiative, or lead. If schools were smart, they would incorporate an intruder control system unknown to anyone but faculty that if a gunman enters the building, classrooms can be locked down and isolated while the intruder is restricted to a hallway, etc., long enough that he can be hit with a gas spray to immobilize or incapacitate him until authorities can arrive. It really isn't that hard if we can get the ******* lawyers out of everyone's asses.

One idea that the trainer brought up - so it must be circulating - was to have a gun in a locked safe in every classroom. The teachers shot that idea down (oops) for a variety of reasons, and I can understand that. But it seems to me that if there are a few employees willing to carry it could (could) make a difference.

It's insane that we're even having to talk about this, and it's indicative of a much larger problem.
.

The problem is the breakdown of the traditional American family, too late... we have already made the bed with fucked up political correctness/affirmative-action/socialism.

Unstable families is part of it. Too much emphasis on our RIGHTS but not the commensurate RESPONSIBILITIES to others is another part of it.

Progressives do not know the best way to approach the situation. And they will not compromise on anything short of all out firearm confiscation...

When you are completely closed off to any solutions, you are unfortunately part of the problem. What you are positing is ridiculous.

You do realize progressives are all about the slippery slope...
The shit stain obama was proof...

 

[Rustic]

You're the one fighting for the safety of people to go into schools and shoot people, and you're talking about someone else's post being "stupid?"

And obviously you picked the word "classrooms" rather than "schools" to appeal to emotion. Man up to it, Nancy

Man...you think you've hit on a big one, huh? A regular semantic Captain Ahab!

You know you're lying. You know you picked "classrooms" for a reason. Man up, Nancy

I am fighting for the safety of people who go into schools and shoot people? More awesome from you. You are on a roll, hot dog.

Yes, you want more laws. Psst, I have a secret, criminals don't obey laws, honest citizens do. Man, didn't see that coming, did you?

And again, explain how drug laws have eliminated drugs

I gave no particular forethought to the use of the word "classrooms", retard.

We aren't talking about drugs here, Spanky.

Yes, I want more laws. You nailed it.

More frivolous laws? Criminals love the idea of more frivolous gun laws...

Yes gun laws like in countries where they don't have mass shootings. I hardly call that frivolous.

You have no credibility on the matter

 

[BlackSand]

The second has limits.
Antonin Scalia says 2nd Amendment has its limits

You cannot elect Antonin Scalia as your preferred tyrant ... He has since passed away.

.

 

[OldLady]

Think about it, the Police were called to this kid's house 39 times, he was expelled from school, he posted a you tube where he claimed to be a future mass murderer and a tipster reported to the FBI in January that he was stockpiling weapons and planning mass murder. Nothing happened because the FBI was focused on a cover up of their illegal surveillance of the President.

And under what law would the FBI be able to confiscate his guns?

I heard about a law in four states allowing law enforcement to temporarily seize weapons in a case like this:
Seizure of weapons[edit]
Connecticut statutes allows police, after investigating and determining probable cause, to get a court warrant and seize guns from anyone posing an imminent risk of harming himself or someone else. A judge must hold a hearing within 14 days after the seizure and order the police to hold the guns for up to one year or return them. The judge (1) must, when assessing probable cause, consider recent acts of violence, threatening, or animal cruelty and (2) may, when assessing imminent risk, consider such factors as reckless gun use or display, violent threats, alcohol abuse, illegal drug use, and prior involuntary psychiatric confinement.[15] Connecticut's weapons seizure law does not require the individual to be compensated by authorities when weapons are permanently confiscated, as the seizure action falls within the purview of an "enforcement action," (and thus a civil forfeiture) rather than a "seizure of property for public benefit," thereby making the seizure outside of the scope of the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution requiring just compensation for property taken. Currently, only three other states (California, New York and Indiana) have weapons seizure laws similar to Connecticut's.
Gun laws in Connecticut - Wikipedia

IMO, this should be federal law.

**** that law, You have no understanding of the rural America.

I live in rural America. I was raised by rural Americans. That law should be in place in all 50 states. Real rural Americans don't want crazies carrying guns either.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

So you had one kid that turned out well despite your negative influence.
One out of two ain’t bad.

.....or perhaps you could live up to your user name instead of indulging in this utterly puerile cowboys and Indians nonsense.

 

[Rustic]

You're the one fighting for the safety of people to go into schools and shoot people, and you're talking about someone else's post being "stupid?"

And obviously you picked the word "classrooms" rather than "schools" to appeal to emotion. Man up to it, Nancy

Man...you think you've hit on a big one, huh? A regular semantic Captain Ahab!

You know you're lying. You know you picked "classrooms" for a reason. Man up, Nancy

I am fighting for the safety of people who go into schools and shoot people? More awesome from you. You are on a roll, hot dog.

Yes, you want more laws. Psst, I have a secret, criminals don't obey laws, honest citizens do. Man, didn't see that coming, did you?

And again, explain how drug laws have eliminated drugs

I gave no particular forethought to the use of the word "classrooms", retard.

Sit and admit to yourself you lied. No one was using the emotional word "classrooms" until you did. You're such a shallow liar, it's pathetic

We aren't talking about drugs here, Spanky.

Yes, I want more laws. You nailed it.

Right, we're talking about laws. Drug laws don't work, they don't work at all. Yet you're claiming a cosmic magic wave will envelope the country and make laws to remove guns suddenly work.

Explain how that makes any sense even in your feeble mind

You have never witnessed me lying, fool. You never will.

We are talking about ways to restrict access to some weapons. You are unable to do that effectively, so you want to talk about something else.

Stupid.

Just like prohibition, firearm confiscation will never work like progressives think it will. Gun free zones are killing fields waiting to happen, a bunch of dead kids is proof of that...

 

[Flash]

My wife has 30 years experience teaching.

She is a strong supporter of the right to keep and bear arms.

She also thinks that as long as we have nutcases in this country that will do evil thing like kill children then it is silly to have schools be gun free zones.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Got a link pumpkin?

I just wanted to go on record, here, as indicating I do not want to see a pic of his ass, since that is surely where he pulled it from.

Plus, such a pic would probably run a foul in regards to the presentation of underage material.

 

[80zephyr]

.... uncharacteristically shaken after going through "shooter training" at school. She said all the female teachers were crying, a mess.

Shooter training.

"What it all boils down to, is that there's not much we can do, dad", she said. "They're going through and putting interior locks on classroom doors. Outside of that, you just have to hope the shooter doesn't find you."

I asked her about guns, and whether she supported the idea of giving teachers the option of having guns. "Hell yes," she said, and they had talked about that in training. She doesn't support it being mandatory, but definitely agreed that if some number of teachers did want to do it, it would help. She would do it.

So that was my Friday evening conversation with my daughter. They're usually a little different.
.

Your daughter sounds clearheaded and reasonable.

I retired from the school system more than 10 years ago. Even then we had 'intruder' (shooter) drills, weather drills and fire drills. Don't recall any teachers crying or shaking in fear. It was what we had to know to try to keep the children safe. When I was a child we huddled in school basements during nuclear blast drills or under our desks if the school didn't have a basement. We evacuated schools because of bomb threats. We had fire drills, some of the alarms were pulled as pranks.

Teachers were not armed with fire extinguishers, or ballistic missiles or trained to disarm a bomb. The teachers sole responsibility was to react calmly and swiftly to a threat and lead the students to a safe place. We all knew there was no hiding from a nuclear bomb, but we all practiced it anyway.

I can understand the reasoning that a teacher who has a carry permit should be allowed to have a gun at school. On the other hand - realistically a hand gun, especially wielded by someone with minimal training, cannot compete with even the smallest caliber of hunting rifle for distance and accuracy.

It doesn't have to. All it has to do is draw the attention of the shooter away from the students to the threat being leveled at him.

He cannot create mass carnage if he has to worry about being shot, so he has to try to end the threat.

Mark

 

[Rustic]

Think about it, the Police were called to this kid's house 39 times, he was expelled from school, he posted a you tube where he claimed to be a future mass murderer and a tipster reported to the FBI in January that he was stockpiling weapons and planning mass murder. Nothing happened because the FBI was focused on a cover up of their illegal surveillance of the President.

And under what law would the FBI be able to confiscate his guns?

I heard about a law in four states allowing law enforcement to temporarily seize weapons in a case like this:
Seizure of weapons[edit]
Connecticut statutes allows police, after investigating and determining probable cause, to get a court warrant and seize guns from anyone posing an imminent risk of harming himself or someone else. A judge must hold a hearing within 14 days after the seizure and order the police to hold the guns for up to one year or return them. The judge (1) must, when assessing probable cause, consider recent acts of violence, threatening, or animal cruelty and (2) may, when assessing imminent risk, consider such factors as reckless gun use or display, violent threats, alcohol abuse, illegal drug use, and prior involuntary psychiatric confinement.[15] Connecticut's weapons seizure law does not require the individual to be compensated by authorities when weapons are permanently confiscated, as the seizure action falls within the purview of an "enforcement action," (and thus a civil forfeiture) rather than a "seizure of property for public benefit," thereby making the seizure outside of the scope of the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution requiring just compensation for property taken. Currently, only three other states (California, New York and Indiana) have weapons seizure laws similar to Connecticut's.
Gun laws in Connecticut - Wikipedia

IMO, this should be federal law.

**** that law, You have no understanding of the rural America.

I live in rural America. I was raised by rural Americans. That law should be in place in all 50 states. Real rural Americans don't want crazies carrying guns either.

Na, Rural America is overwhelmingly pro second amendment, They are in no way in favor of firearm confiscation.
In the red areas of this country they do not agree with you in the least... That is a fact

That is why Donald Trump is president because progressive anti-gun nutters like yourself overstepped during the Obama administration...

Donald Trump will most likely be able to nominate two maybe three more Supreme Court justices, and they will be pro second amendment.

 

[OldLady]

Mike Ropiness, a NRA spokesman, proposed the idea this morning as part of a plea to schools across America. His hope is to be encourage learning institutes to abandon regular subjects from the curriculum, such as science and history, in favour of classes teaching basic bullet avoiding techniques.

Mr. Ropiness poses the question to media outlets, “How many innocent lives could have been saved if kids knew how to run in a zig zag? How many children could have been saved if they’d just been taught how to do a sweet bullet dodge like Neo from the Matrix? Don’t we owe it to our youth to make sure they have the weapons in their mental arsenal to out run unpreventable bullets?”
Teaching children to Zig Zag best way to avoid school shooting fatalities, say NRA - The Rochdale Herald

Did I just get transported to Satire?
Is this real?