Should We Arm Our Teachers?

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Truthfully?
Because most teachers are the people who went to college and couldn't cut it in a REAL degree, they are the lowest of our college educated. The MAIN requirement to earn a teaching degree is the ability to sit still for 4 years.That's a fact.
PLUS they aren't exactly responsible adults, should we discuss how many of them can't even be trusted to you know not have sex with students?
Or would you like to discuss the ones who have ASSAULTED children physically when they've became upset?
I BARELY trust our police officers with guns, let alone teachers.

OK... and rather than argue the stereotype...
How would you characterize those teachers that have taken it upon themselves to go to the steps necessary to get a CCW and think seriously enough of their position, the added responsibilities inherent in carrying a gun while in that position, and the safety of their kids to make the decision to carry at a school?

I may have said this before you joined the thread , but it bears repeating.
I have NO problem with a few select teachers being properly screened and trained to carry guns at a school.
My problem lies with those who wish to just entirely do away with the no gun one surrounding schools

I don't recall anyone suggesting that teachers should be allowed to carry by removing the plenary restriction against guns in schools.

Should We Arm Our Teachers Page 16 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

I didn't realize RKM penned legislation. for the 50 states.

Technically, at the state level, as allowed buy federal law, you have to do away with the plenary prohibition and replace it with a conditional prohibition. Nothing necessitates removing EVERY sort of prohibion.

I would, of course, dispute the federal prohibition on 10th amendment grounds, but that's another story.

You'd lose that argument based on the fact that the federal government at least partly funds local schools and have been ceded partial control by the states

You'd have a much better argument if you argued that the second amendment prohibits ANY infringement, but I think you'd lose that one to.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You'd lose that argument based on the fact that the federal government at least partly funds local schools and have been ceded partial control by the states

That doesn't give the federal government the power to prohibit possess of firearms in ALL schools regardless of funding.

The federal government has leverage to get the states/schools to create this prohibition themselves, as a condition to get federal money, like the strings it attached to money for rads (55mph speed limit, drinking age), but that's not the power to create that prohibition directly thru federal law. In fact, nothing in the constitution gives the federal government the power to do anything regarding education, least of all to make it a federal crime to knowingly carry a gun into one.

And that's why its a 10th amendment issue.

 

[RKMBrown]

OK... and rather than argue the stereotype...
How would you characterize those teachers that have taken it upon themselves to go to the steps necessary to get a CCW and think seriously enough of their position, the added responsibilities inherent in carrying a gun while in that position, and the safety of their kids to make the decision to carry at a school?

I may have said this before you joined the thread , but it bears repeating.

I have NO problem with a few select teachers being properly screened and trained to carry guns at a school.

My problem lies with those who wish to just entirely do away with the no gun one surrounding schools

You have to remove the no gun zone thing before licensed to carry folks can carry. Not sure what your point is.

of course you do not . Don't you ever get tired of me educating you?

Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The Gun-Free School Zones Act (GFSZA) is a federal United States law that prohibits any unauthorized individual from knowingly possessing a firearm at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone as defined by 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(25).

the law allows states to authorize whom they may.

Please show me where the 2nd amendment says shall not be restricted if authorized. But thanks for the link specifying that the states may authorize everyone and anyone if they so choose.

Of course states may authorize anyone and everyone if they choose. No state is that stupid though.

As for the second amendment , please show me where in the first amendment it says that the government may ban yelling bomb in an airport.

The first amendment is list of restriction against the federal government. I'm not aware of any federal restrictions abridging the freedom of speech. Not saying there isn't one. I'm just not aware of one. Not since the SCOTUS kicked out McCain's first amendment attack act. Maybe you could provide a link to the federal statute banning the yelling of bomb in an airport.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

You'd lose that argument based on the fact that the federal government at least partly funds local schools and have been ceded partial control by the states

That doesn't give the federal government the power to prohibit possess of firearms in ALL schools regardless of funding.

The federal government has leverage to get the states/schools to create this prohibition themselves, as a condition to get federal money, like the strings it attached to money for rads (55mph speed limit, drinking age), but that's not the power to create that prohibition directly thru federal law. In fact, nothing in the constitution gives the federal government the power to do anything regarding education, least of all to make it a federal crime to knowingly carry a gun into one.

And that's why its a 10th amendment issue.

Again, states have CEDED , at least partly, education to the federal government. YOU have no standing to claim a 10th amendment violation (you personally I mean, as a citizen of a state, of course you have the right to petition your state to sue)

The states have in effect granted the right to make rules concerning education to the government

Guns in schools is NOT a 10th Amendment issue, and no case would even survive summary judgement.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

I may have said this before you joined the thread , but it bears repeating.

I have NO problem with a few select teachers being properly screened and trained to carry guns at a school.

My problem lies with those who wish to just entirely do away with the no gun one surrounding schools

You have to remove the no gun zone thing before licensed to carry folks can carry. Not sure what your point is.

of course you do not . Don't you ever get tired of me educating you?

Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The Gun-Free School Zones Act (GFSZA) is a federal United States law that prohibits any unauthorized individual from knowingly possessing a firearm at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone as defined by 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(25).

the law allows states to authorize whom they may.

Please show me where the 2nd amendment says shall not be restricted if authorized. But thanks for the link specifying that the states may authorize everyone and anyone if they so choose.

Of course states may authorize anyone and everyone if they choose. No state is that stupid though.

As for the second amendment , please show me where in the first amendment it says that the government may ban yelling bomb in an airport.

The first amendment is list of restriction against the federal government. I'm not aware of any federal restrictions abridging the freedom of speech. Not say there isn't one. I'm just not aware of one. Maybe you could provide a link to the federal statute banning the yelling of bomb in an airport.

49ers linebacker arrested for yelling 8216 bomb 8217 at airport police New York Post

 

[M14 Shooter]

You'd lose that argument based on the fact that the federal government at least partly funds local schools and have been ceded partial control by the states

That doesn't give the federal government the power to prohibit possess of firearms in ALL schools regardless of funding.

The federal government has leverage to get the states/schools to create this prohibition themselves, as a condition to get federal money, like the strings it attached to money for rads (55mph speed limit, drinking age), but that's not the power to create that prohibition directly thru federal law. In fact, nothing in the constitution gives the federal government the power to do anything regarding education, least of all to make it a federal crime to knowingly carry a gun into one.
And that's why its a 10th amendment issue.

Again, states have CEDED , at least partly, education to the federal government
The states have in effect granted the right to make rules concerning education to the government

I must have missed that amendment to the constitution. Which one?
And, what about private schools that receive no federal or state money?

YOU have no standing to claim a 10th amendment violation (you personally I mean, as a citizen of a state, of course you have the right to petition your state to sue)

Irrelevant to my argument.

Guns in schools is NOT a 10th Amendment issue, and no case would even survive summary judgement.

Your opinion, nothing more.

 

[RKMBrown]

Here's one 18 U.S.C. § 871. Apparently it's illegal to hate the president.

 

[RKMBrown]

You have to remove the no gun zone thing before licensed to carry folks can carry. Not sure what your point is.

of course you do not . Don't you ever get tired of me educating you?

Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The Gun-Free School Zones Act (GFSZA) is a federal United States law that prohibits any unauthorized individual from knowingly possessing a firearm at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone as defined by 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(25).

the law allows states to authorize whom they may.

Please show me where the 2nd amendment says shall not be restricted if authorized. But thanks for the link specifying that the states may authorize everyone and anyone if they so choose.

Of course states may authorize anyone and everyone if they choose. No state is that stupid though.

As for the second amendment , please show me where in the first amendment it says that the government may ban yelling bomb in an airport.

The first amendment is list of restriction against the federal government. I'm not aware of any federal restrictions abridging the freedom of speech. Not say there isn't one. I'm just not aware of one. Maybe you could provide a link to the federal statute banning the yelling of bomb in an airport.

49ers linebacker arrested for yelling 8216 bomb 8217 at airport police New York Post

Ok, the first amendment does not protect slander or doing injury to others such as financial ruin by standing outside someone's place of business and yelling bomb. That's not the same as you yelling I hate teachers take their guns cause teachers rape children.

 

[BULLDOG]

16 hours and you think you're qualified to enter a combat situation? That is perhaps the best argument I have yet heard for why it is such a horrible idea.

I guess you don't read the sites, thearmedcitizen, thetruthaboutguns or gunssavelives....they have hundreds of stories of people with even less training using guns to defend themsleves against violent attackers...usually, they never fire a shot, and simply hold the criminal until the police arrive....of course....of the 1.6 million times a year that law abiding citizens, on average, use guns to stop violent crimes and save lives....not all of them are Navy Seals.....

a lot of the time it is smaller, weaker or out numbered citizens fighting off much larger, more agressive or more numerous criminals and armed criminals....with a gun....and they win....

guns are not that complicated and good people do not tend to spray and pray since they actually don't want to shoot or kill anyone to start with....

I've read some of those stories about untrained people saving the day with a gun. I've also heard of people with no flight training landing a plane after the pilot was incapacitated. That doesn't mean I want the person in seat 3B to pilot my next cross country trip.

 

[westwall]

Some states and local jurisdictions are considering or have already passed laws allowing teachers, faculty and other campus staff to carry firearms on campus. Additionally, the NRA is recommending this as a step to improve school security.
Supporters claim it means tragic massacres of students could be avoided if teachers could defend themselves against armed fanatics to the same degree.

But is this a good idea?

Yes. Those who wish to be armed. And are trained in the use of firearms, by all means should be armed.

 

[2aguy]

Overall accidental discharge rate is the wrong standard as it encompasses all people under all circumstances.
What's the rate of accidental discharges by people with a CCW permit while carrying their gun?

A fair and valid point , and I'd be interested in seeing the data, BUT my hunch is that it higher than the school shooting rate.

And while I agree that it is unlikely for any given child to be the victim of a school shooting, it is almost certain that another school shooting will take place where a child WILL be a victim -- and so, the chance of any given child being a victim is an invalid standard as well.

It would be an invalid standard if I were saying "hey it's unlikely, so no precautions should be taken" , but that is NOT what I have said.
What I HAVE said is that we should not take "precautions" which put a child at a greater risk of being shot than the very situation we are trying to prevent.

And that's the question: can it be demonstrated that allowing teachers w/a CCW to carry while in school puts kids at a greater risk than they face from school shootings?

We already have one accident with a teacher and at least five accidental discharges by police officers at schools in the last three years or so. But since we have not yet begun to insert a lot of loaded and unsecured weapons into schools it hasn't been tested. Do you think using children as guinea pigs is a good idea? If a kid gets shot because his teacher left her gun in her purse and he thought it was a toy, do we say "ah well, it was worth a try" or "it was in a good cause"?

But we have tested no guns for teachers...and gun free zones...and when a killer starts shooting up a school, a lot more people have been killed than have accidentally fired weapons in schools.....

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

You'd lose that argument based on the fact that the federal government at least partly funds local schools and have been ceded partial control by the states

That doesn't give the federal government the power to prohibit possess of firearms in ALL schools regardless of funding.

The federal government has leverage to get the states/schools to create this prohibition themselves, as a condition to get federal money, like the strings it attached to money for rads (55mph speed limit, drinking age), but that's not the power to create that prohibition directly thru federal law. In fact, nothing in the constitution gives the federal government the power to do anything regarding education, least of all to make it a federal crime to knowingly carry a gun into one.
And that's why its a 10th amendment issue.

Again, states have CEDED , at least partly, education to the federal government
The states have in effect granted the right to make rules concerning education to the government

I must have missed that amendment to the constitution. Which one?
And, what about private schools that receive no federal or state money?

YOU have no standing to claim a 10th amendment violation (you personally I mean, as a citizen of a state, of course you have the right to petition your state to sue)

Irrelevant to my argument.

Guns in schools is NOT a 10th Amendment issue, and no case would even survive summary judgement.

Your opinion, nothing more.

LOL you know prior to this thread, I really hadn't considered this issue. Wasn't too worried about it, but since this thread i've bee doing some reading, you dorks should REALLY educate yourself before bitching about a law. Especially when I'm here to make you look stupid every time you don't.

Found this

B. License to Carry


Another exception to the school zone provision of the U.S. Code is if the person possessing the firearm is Licensed by the state in which the school zone is located.


However this applies as long as the laws related to licensing require that, before an individual obtains such a License, the law enforcement authorities of the state verify that the person is qualified under law to receive the license (i.e., “proper person,” “good character and reputation,” and “proper reason”) and the general prohibition rule does not apply to possession of a firearm.


As a word of caution, some states that issue permits and have reciprocity agreements do not recognize a CCP as valid for carry on a school premises, with limitations. If that is the case, You are committing a criminal act, even though Congress has allowed states to make this exception.


Also, “schools” may be more broadly or defined differently under state law, with differing penal scope and regulation.

Gun Laws By State

well lookie there, all yalls whining and wailing and gnashing of teeth, and it turns out that if you have a concealed carry permit that has been approved by a LEO in your state you are cleared to concealed carry on school property under federal law (state laws may vary)

 

[rdean]

This is how it works for the right wing:

1. Take away teacher's right to bargain.

2. Take away job security.

3. Cut their salary.

4. Cut their days off.

5. Call them stupid leeches

6. Take away their health care

7. Arm them.

8. Give them your kids.

This is how it works for the left wing:

1. Take away parents right to pick a school.

2. Take away teacher's responsibility to do the job they are being paid to do.

3. Give teachers more money than they are worth.

4. Give teachers months of vacation time.

5. Call teachers brilliant even when they are stupid leeches

6. Give teachers more money for health care than the private sector gets.

7. Disarm them.

8. Then force parents to hand their kids over to them and become victims of mass murders.

Disarm them? They were already armed?

 

[rdean]

This is how it works for the right wing:
1. Take away teacher's right to bargain.
2. Take away job security.
3. Cut their salary.
4. Cut their days off.
5. Call them stupid leeches
6. Take away their health care
7. Arm them.
8. Give them your kids.

Here's how it works for rdean:
1: Lie
2: GOTO 1

Why yall don't put him on ignore and go on is beyond me. I never see his posts.

Too bad. There is so much you could have learned and didn't. Pity.

 

[rdean]

This is how it works for the right wing:
1. Take away teacher's right to bargain.
2. Take away job security.
3. Cut their salary.
4. Cut their days off.
5. Call them stupid leeches
6. Take away their health care
7. Arm them.
8. Give them your kids.

Here's how it works for rdean:
1: Lie
2: GOTO 1

Haven't been keeping up with the news, have you?

 

[PratchettFan]

A fair and valid point , and I'd be interested in seeing the data, BUT my hunch is that it higher than the school shooting rate.

And while I agree that it is unlikely for any given child to be the victim of a school shooting, it is almost certain that another school shooting will take place where a child WILL be a victim -- and so, the chance of any given child being a victim is an invalid standard as well.

It would be an invalid standard if I were saying "hey it's unlikely, so no precautions should be taken" , but that is NOT what I have said.
What I HAVE said is that we should not take "precautions" which put a child at a greater risk of being shot than the very situation we are trying to prevent.

And that's the question: can it be demonstrated that allowing teachers w/a CCW to carry while in school puts kids at a greater risk than they face from school shootings?

We already have one accident with a teacher and at least five accidental discharges by police officers at schools in the last three years or so. But since we have not yet begun to insert a lot of loaded and unsecured weapons into schools it hasn't been tested. Do you think using children as guinea pigs is a good idea? If a kid gets shot because his teacher left her gun in her purse and he thought it was a toy, do we say "ah well, it was worth a try" or "it was in a good cause"?

But we have tested no guns for teachers...and gun free zones...and when a killer starts shooting up a school, a lot more people have been killed than have accidentally fired weapons in schools.....

We've also tested not hanging vials of acid from the ceilings of elementary schools that can be dropped on intruders and that hasn't stopped it either. That doesn't mean it isn't a stupid idea. So again, the idea is to introduce weapons into schools and just see what happens. Because we know from experience outside of schools that CC folks never make mistakes. So no need to even consider doing a true study because, hey, what could go wrong?

I do carry and have for years. I'm as pro-gun as you're going to find. But this is a stupid idea. It's like pouring gasoline on your lawn to stop the gophers from killing the grass.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You'd lose that argument based on the fact that the federal government at least partly funds local schools and have been ceded partial control by the states

That doesn't give the federal government the power to prohibit possess of firearms in ALL schools regardless of funding.

The federal government has leverage to get the states/schools to create this prohibition themselves, as a condition to get federal money, like the strings it attached to money for rads (55mph speed limit, drinking age), but that's not the power to create that prohibition directly thru federal law. In fact, nothing in the constitution gives the federal government the power to do anything regarding education, least of all to make it a federal crime to knowingly carry a gun into one.
And that's why its a 10th amendment issue.

Again, states have CEDED , at least partly, education to the federal government
The states have in effect granted the right to make rules concerning education to the government

I must have missed that amendment to the constitution. Which one?
And, what about private schools that receive no federal or state money?

YOU have no standing to claim a 10th amendment violation (you personally I mean, as a citizen of a state, of course you have the right to petition your state to sue)

Irrelevant to my argument.

Guns in schools is NOT a 10th Amendment issue, and no case would even survive summary judgement.

Your opinion, nothing more.

LOL you know prior to this thread, I really hadn't considered this issue. Wasn't too worried about it, but since this thread i've bee doing some reading, you dorks should REALLY educate yourself before bitching about a law. Especially when I'm here to make you look stupid every time you don't.

Found this

B. License to Carry

Another exception to the school zone provision of the U.S. Code is if the person possessing the firearm is Licensed by the state in which the school zone is located.

However this applies as long as the laws related to licensing require that, before an individual obtains such a License, the law enforcement authorities of the state verify that the person is qualified under law to receive the license (i.e., “proper person,” “good character and reputation,” and “proper reason”) and the general prohibition rule does not apply to possession of a firearm.

As a word of caution, some states that issue permits and have reciprocity agreements do not recognize a CCP as valid for carry on a school premises, with limitations. If that is the case, You are committing a criminal act, even though Congress has allowed states to make this exception.

Also, “schools” may be more broadly or defined differently under state law, with differing penal scope and regulation.
Gun Laws By State

well lookie there, all yalls whining and wailing and gnashing of teeth, and it turns out that if you have a concealed carry permit that has been approved by a LEO in your state you are cleared to concealed carry on school property under federal law (state laws may vary)

Funny how none of this addresses the issue I raised, the question of where the federal government draws the power to ban guns in both public and private schools across all 50 states.

 

[M14 Shooter]

This is how it works for the right wing:
1. Take away teacher's right to bargain.
2. Take away job security.
3. Cut their salary.
4. Cut their days off.
5. Call them stupid leeches
6. Take away their health care
7. Arm them.
8. Give them your kids.

Here's how it works for rdean:
1: Lie
2: GOTO 1

Haven't been keeping up with the news, have you?

The news that you lie and then lie some more and then finish it up wit another lie?
That's not news.

 

[RKMBrown]

You'd lose that argument based on the fact that the federal government at least partly funds local schools and have been ceded partial control by the states

That doesn't give the federal government the power to prohibit possess of firearms in ALL schools regardless of funding.

The federal government has leverage to get the states/schools to create this prohibition themselves, as a condition to get federal money, like the strings it attached to money for rads (55mph speed limit, drinking age), but that's not the power to create that prohibition directly thru federal law. In fact, nothing in the constitution gives the federal government the power to do anything regarding education, least of all to make it a federal crime to knowingly carry a gun into one.
And that's why its a 10th amendment issue.

Again, states have CEDED , at least partly, education to the federal government
The states have in effect granted the right to make rules concerning education to the government

I must have missed that amendment to the constitution. Which one?
And, what about private schools that receive no federal or state money?

YOU have no standing to claim a 10th amendment violation (you personally I mean, as a citizen of a state, of course you have the right to petition your state to sue)

Irrelevant to my argument.

Guns in schools is NOT a 10th Amendment issue, and no case would even survive summary judgement.

Your opinion, nothing more.

LOL you know prior to this thread, I really hadn't considered this issue. Wasn't too worried about it, but since this thread i've bee doing some reading, you dorks should REALLY educate yourself before bitching about a law. Especially when I'm here to make you look stupid every time you don't.

Found this

B. License to Carry

Another exception to the school zone provision of the U.S. Code is if the person possessing the firearm is Licensed by the state in which the school zone is located.

However this applies as long as the laws related to licensing require that, before an individual obtains such a License, the law enforcement authorities of the state verify that the person is qualified under law to receive the license (i.e., “proper person,” “good character and reputation,” and “proper reason”) and the general prohibition rule does not apply to possession of a firearm.

As a word of caution, some states that issue permits and have reciprocity agreements do not recognize a CCP as valid for carry on a school premises, with limitations. If that is the case, You are committing a criminal act, even though Congress has allowed states to make this exception.

Also, “schools” may be more broadly or defined differently under state law, with differing penal scope and regulation.
Gun Laws By State

well lookie there, all yalls whining and wailing and gnashing of teeth, and it turns out that if you have a concealed carry permit that has been approved by a LEO in your state you are cleared to concealed carry on school property under federal law (state laws may vary)

Funny how none of this addresses the issue I raised, the question of where the federal government draws the power to ban guns in both public and private schools across all 50 states.

I think he's trying to say there is no such power, and that the feds are merely bowing to the tenth amendment. But not sure why he thinks showing us state power to restrict the second amendment is embarrassing us.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

That doesn't give the federal government the power to prohibit possess of firearms in ALL schools regardless of funding.

The federal government has leverage to get the states/schools to create this prohibition themselves, as a condition to get federal money, like the strings it attached to money for rads (55mph speed limit, drinking age), but that's not the power to create that prohibition directly thru federal law. In fact, nothing in the constitution gives the federal government the power to do anything regarding education, least of all to make it a federal crime to knowingly carry a gun into one.
And that's why its a 10th amendment issue.

Again, states have CEDED , at least partly, education to the federal government
The states have in effect granted the right to make rules concerning education to the government

I must have missed that amendment to the constitution. Which one?
And, what about private schools that receive no federal or state money?

YOU have no standing to claim a 10th amendment violation (you personally I mean, as a citizen of a state, of course you have the right to petition your state to sue)

Irrelevant to my argument.

Guns in schools is NOT a 10th Amendment issue, and no case would even survive summary judgement.

Your opinion, nothing more.

LOL you know prior to this thread, I really hadn't considered this issue. Wasn't too worried about it, but since this thread i've bee doing some reading, you dorks should REALLY educate yourself before bitching about a law. Especially when I'm here to make you look stupid every time you don't.

Found this

B. License to Carry

Another exception to the school zone provision of the U.S. Code is if the person possessing the firearm is Licensed by the state in which the school zone is located.

However this applies as long as the laws related to licensing require that, before an individual obtains such a License, the law enforcement authorities of the state verify that the person is qualified under law to receive the license (i.e., “proper person,” “good character and reputation,” and “proper reason”) and the general prohibition rule does not apply to possession of a firearm.

As a word of caution, some states that issue permits and have reciprocity agreements do not recognize a CCP as valid for carry on a school premises, with limitations. If that is the case, You are committing a criminal act, even though Congress has allowed states to make this exception.

Also, “schools” may be more broadly or defined differently under state law, with differing penal scope and regulation.
Gun Laws By State

well lookie there, all yalls whining and wailing and gnashing of teeth, and it turns out that if you have a concealed carry permit that has been approved by a LEO in your state you are cleared to concealed carry on school property under federal law (state laws may vary)

Funny how none of this addresses the issue I raised, the question of where the federal government draws the power to ban guns in both public and private schools across all 50 states.

I think he's trying to say there is no such power, and that the feds are merely bowing to the tenth amendment. But not sure why he thinks showing us state power to restrict the second amendment is embarrassing us.

You should be embarrassed that you are bitching that the federal government won't let you carry on school property if you have a concealed carry permit, when in fact the law says that you can if you're state allows it.