South Carolina schools may teach gun safety and training

[zeke]

Hm. Is it racist to about a baby because he is black?

No. But it is racist for whites like you to complain that the black baby you didn't want to see aborted is now being fed and cared for by the governments welfare system. And people like you hate that this occurs regularly and complain bitterly about those blacks having babies that they can't care for.

Are you a racist? Or do you love all black babies that can't be cared for by the parent(s)?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Gun Safety eh?
Cop Who Shot Off Finger With Loaded Weapon Sues Gun Store VIDEO

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The better idea, especially for kids, is Just Say No. Clear? No child needs to know how to handle a gun because no child should be touching a gun, ever. It is unnecessary.

Wow, that's exactly what religious radicals say about sex-ed. You are a certified moron, to be sure.

No, it's what they say about teenagers having sex, and they're correct in that the safest sex for teens is no sex. That's not gonna happen but it's true, just like the safest way for teens to handle guns is don't.

 

[candycorn]

Seriously, this is where liberalism turns nutty. I would ask my fellow liberals to look at the larger picture.

I concede that such training is possibly (if not likely) to have some bad consequences down the road. The kid who gets picked on in 3rd period by Jeff or Jill, will have access to a firearm in 6th period where Jeff or Jill may be in the same class. I further concede that with our cartoonish society and the volumes of mis-information on the web about the consequences of serious actions are characterized as everything from nominal to downright cool, it's probably not the gold of ideas to bring weapons into the schools with a seal of approval from the administration.

All that is conceded. What wins the day however are the facts that we live in a dangerous society so learning about the weapons that contribute to that danger is identical to girls learning about barrier contraception. Its really a matter of self defense. On the same theme as self defense, purchasing a gun and not knowing the first thing on how to use/maintain it maybe more dangerous in some cases for the owner than an intruder breaking into their residence. So why not? Thirdly, when your choices are other topics such as Clothing and Textiles, Pottery, or Football, there is some currency to learning real-world lessons; harsh though they may be.

I can think of a lot of things that I'd rather have taught in school but this isn't a loser of an idea out of the gate. Execution is, as always, the most important thing.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Seriously, this is where liberalism turns nutty. I would ask my fellow liberals to look at the larger picture.

I concede that such training is possibly (if not likely) to have some bad consequences down the road. The kid who gets picked on in 3rd period by Jeff or Jill, will have access to a firearm in 6th period where Jeff or Jill may be in the same class. I further concede that with our cartoonish society and the volumes of mis-information on the web about the consequences of serious actions are characterized as everything from nominal to downright cool, it's probably not the gold of ideas to bring weapons into the schools with a seal of approval from the administration.

All that is conceded. What wins the day however are the facts that we live in a dangerous society so learning about the weapons that contribute to that danger is identical to girls learning about barrier contraception. Its really a matter of self defense. On the same theme as self defense, purchasing a gun and not knowing the first thing on how to use/maintain it maybe more dangerous in some cases for the owner than an intruder breaking into their residence. So why not? Thirdly, when your choices are other topics such as Clothing and Textiles, Pottery, or Football, there is some currency to learning real-world lessons; harsh though they may be.

I can think of a lot of things that I'd rather have taught in school but this isn't a loser of an idea out of the gate. Execution is, as always, the most important thing.

Guns aren't for defense. If you want to teach self-defense by all means do. Guns are for killing things, period.

 

[candycorn]

Seriously, this is where liberalism turns nutty. I would ask my fellow liberals to look at the larger picture.

I concede that such training is possibly (if not likely) to have some bad consequences down the road. The kid who gets picked on in 3rd period by Jeff or Jill, will have access to a firearm in 6th period where Jeff or Jill may be in the same class. I further concede that with our cartoonish society and the volumes of mis-information on the web about the consequences of serious actions are characterized as everything from nominal to downright cool, it's probably not the gold of ideas to bring weapons into the schools with a seal of approval from the administration.

All that is conceded. What wins the day however are the facts that we live in a dangerous society so learning about the weapons that contribute to that danger is identical to girls learning about barrier contraception. Its really a matter of self defense. On the same theme as self defense, purchasing a gun and not knowing the first thing on how to use/maintain it maybe more dangerous in some cases for the owner than an intruder breaking into their residence. So why not? Thirdly, when your choices are other topics such as Clothing and Textiles, Pottery, or Football, there is some currency to learning real-world lessons; harsh though they may be.

I can think of a lot of things that I'd rather have taught in school but this isn't a loser of an idea out of the gate. Execution is, as always, the most important thing.

Guns aren't for defense. If you want to teach self-defense by all means do. Guns are for killing things, period.

Conceded....using a gun to kill an attacker is self defense...no?

 

[WinterBorn]

Seriously, this is where liberalism turns nutty. I would ask my fellow liberals to look at the larger picture.

I concede that such training is possibly (if not likely) to have some bad consequences down the road. The kid who gets picked on in 3rd period by Jeff or Jill, will have access to a firearm in 6th period where Jeff or Jill may be in the same class. I further concede that with our cartoonish society and the volumes of mis-information on the web about the consequences of serious actions are characterized as everything from nominal to downright cool, it's probably not the gold of ideas to bring weapons into the schools with a seal of approval from the administration.

All that is conceded. What wins the day however are the facts that we live in a dangerous society so learning about the weapons that contribute to that danger is identical to girls learning about barrier contraception. Its really a matter of self defense. On the same theme as self defense, purchasing a gun and not knowing the first thing on how to use/maintain it maybe more dangerous in some cases for the owner than an intruder breaking into their residence. So why not? Thirdly, when your choices are other topics such as Clothing and Textiles, Pottery, or Football, there is some currency to learning real-world lessons; harsh though they may be.

I can think of a lot of things that I'd rather have taught in school but this isn't a loser of an idea out of the gate. Execution is, as always, the most important thing.

Guns aren't for defense. If you want to teach self-defense by all means do. Guns are for killing things, period.

And I will use the deadly force of a firearm to defend my home and family. To say they aren't for defense is blatantly ignorant or simply lying.

 

[WinterBorn]

Gun Safety eh?
Cop Who Shot Off Finger With Loaded Weapon Sues Gun Store VIDEO

Once again, if you follow all the safety rules you will not injury or kill anyone by accident.

 

[candycorn]

Gun Safety eh?
Cop Who Shot Off Finger With Loaded Weapon Sues Gun Store VIDEO

Once again, if you follow all the safety rules you will not injury or kill anyone by accident.

So, in other words, if you are 100% infallible, you will do well or you won't be so lucky. All you've got to do is follow the same procedure every time and you'll be fine...

Unless you're Cal Ripken, you're running a risk of losing a finger or a loved one.

 

[Ellipsis]

The better idea, especially for kids, is Just Say No. Clear? No child needs to know how to handle a gun because no child should be touching a gun, ever. It is unnecessary.

Wow, that's exactly what religious radicals say about sex-ed. You are a certified moron, to be sure.

No, it's what they say about teenagers having sex, and they're correct in that the safest sex for teens is no sex. That's not gonna happen but it's true, just like the safest way for teens to handle guns is don't.

Even if you never handle a gun you can still be injured by someone else's carelessness, just as you can abstain from sex yet still contract an std.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Gun Safety eh?
Cop Who Shot Off Finger With Loaded Weapon Sues Gun Store VIDEO

Once again, if you follow all the safety rules you will not injury or kill anyone by accident.

Well if the cops can't handle a gun I'm not sure who can?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The better idea, especially for kids, is Just Say No. Clear? No child needs to know how to handle a gun because no child should be touching a gun, ever. It is unnecessary.

Wow, that's exactly what religious radicals say about sex-ed. You are a certified moron, to be sure.

No, it's what they say about teenagers having sex, and they're correct in that the safest sex for teens is no sex. That's not gonna happen but it's true, just like the safest way for teens to handle guns is don't.

Even if you never handle a gun you can still be injured by someone else's carelessness, just as you can abstain from sex yet still contract an std.

It's pretty damn hard to get an Sexually Transmitted Disease without the Sexually part. And yeah, you can be killed by someone else with a gun, quite easily in fact. It allows even toddlers to kill, but then again, that's all a gun is for.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Seriously, this is where liberalism turns nutty. I would ask my fellow liberals to look at the larger picture.

I concede that such training is possibly (if not likely) to have some bad consequences down the road. The kid who gets picked on in 3rd period by Jeff or Jill, will have access to a firearm in 6th period where Jeff or Jill may be in the same class. I further concede that with our cartoonish society and the volumes of mis-information on the web about the consequences of serious actions are characterized as everything from nominal to downright cool, it's probably not the gold of ideas to bring weapons into the schools with a seal of approval from the administration.

All that is conceded. What wins the day however are the facts that we live in a dangerous society so learning about the weapons that contribute to that danger is identical to girls learning about barrier contraception. Its really a matter of self defense. On the same theme as self defense, purchasing a gun and not knowing the first thing on how to use/maintain it maybe more dangerous in some cases for the owner than an intruder breaking into their residence. So why not? Thirdly, when your choices are other topics such as Clothing and Textiles, Pottery, or Football, there is some currency to learning real-world lessons; harsh though they may be.

I can think of a lot of things that I'd rather have taught in school but this isn't a loser of an idea out of the gate. Execution is, as always, the most important thing.

Guns aren't for defense. If you want to teach self-defense by all means do. Guns are for killing things, period.

And I will use the deadly force of a firearm to defend my home and family. To say they aren't for defense is blatantly ignorant or simply lying.

Deadly force to protect your house from what, an attacking foreign army? A band of roaming terrorists? Exactly what is going to come after you that you would need to kill? The kid next door or the drug addict looking for cash and jewelry? Do tell John Wayne.

 

[WinterBorn]

Gun Safety eh?
Cop Who Shot Off Finger With Loaded Weapon Sues Gun Store VIDEO

Once again, if you follow all the safety rules you will not injury or kill anyone by accident.

Well if the cops can't handle a gun I'm not sure who can?

The question is not whether a cop can handle a gun or not. The question is whether you can kill or injury someone by accident when you follow all the safety rules.

 

[WinterBorn]

Seriously, this is where liberalism turns nutty. I would ask my fellow liberals to look at the larger picture.

I concede that such training is possibly (if not likely) to have some bad consequences down the road. The kid who gets picked on in 3rd period by Jeff or Jill, will have access to a firearm in 6th period where Jeff or Jill may be in the same class. I further concede that with our cartoonish society and the volumes of mis-information on the web about the consequences of serious actions are characterized as everything from nominal to downright cool, it's probably not the gold of ideas to bring weapons into the schools with a seal of approval from the administration.

All that is conceded. What wins the day however are the facts that we live in a dangerous society so learning about the weapons that contribute to that danger is identical to girls learning about barrier contraception. Its really a matter of self defense. On the same theme as self defense, purchasing a gun and not knowing the first thing on how to use/maintain it maybe more dangerous in some cases for the owner than an intruder breaking into their residence. So why not? Thirdly, when your choices are other topics such as Clothing and Textiles, Pottery, or Football, there is some currency to learning real-world lessons; harsh though they may be.

I can think of a lot of things that I'd rather have taught in school but this isn't a loser of an idea out of the gate. Execution is, as always, the most important thing.

Guns aren't for defense. If you want to teach self-defense by all means do. Guns are for killing things, period.

And I will use the deadly force of a firearm to defend my home and family. To say they aren't for defense is blatantly ignorant or simply lying.

Deadly force to protect your house from what, an attacking foreign army? A band of roaming terrorists? Exactly what is going to come after you that you would need to kill? The kid next door or the drug addict looking for cash and jewelry? Do tell John Wayne.

If the meth head comes into my house when I and my family are there, you betcha!! I will not risk the lives of my loved ones on the hope that he will not harm us.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Gun Safety eh?
Cop Who Shot Off Finger With Loaded Weapon Sues Gun Store VIDEO

Once again, if you follow all the safety rules you will not injury or kill anyone by accident.

Well if the cops can't handle a gun I'm not sure who can?

The question is not whether a cop can handle a gun or not. The question is whether you can kill or injury someone by accident when you follow all the safety rules.

And I have already proven that you can. You seem to think that there is some magical way to handle a firearm so that it never points at a living thing, and there isn't.

 

[WinterBorn]

Seriously, this is where liberalism turns nutty. I would ask my fellow liberals to look at the larger picture.

I concede that such training is possibly (if not likely) to have some bad consequences down the road. The kid who gets picked on in 3rd period by Jeff or Jill, will have access to a firearm in 6th period where Jeff or Jill may be in the same class. I further concede that with our cartoonish society and the volumes of mis-information on the web about the consequences of serious actions are characterized as everything from nominal to downright cool, it's probably not the gold of ideas to bring weapons into the schools with a seal of approval from the administration.

All that is conceded. What wins the day however are the facts that we live in a dangerous society so learning about the weapons that contribute to that danger is identical to girls learning about barrier contraception. Its really a matter of self defense. On the same theme as self defense, purchasing a gun and not knowing the first thing on how to use/maintain it maybe more dangerous in some cases for the owner than an intruder breaking into their residence. So why not? Thirdly, when your choices are other topics such as Clothing and Textiles, Pottery, or Football, there is some currency to learning real-world lessons; harsh though they may be.

I can think of a lot of things that I'd rather have taught in school but this isn't a loser of an idea out of the gate. Execution is, as always, the most important thing.

Guns aren't for defense. If you want to teach self-defense by all means do. Guns are for killing things, period.

And I will use the deadly force of a firearm to defend my home and family. To say they aren't for defense is blatantly ignorant or simply lying.

Deadly force to protect your house from what, an attacking foreign army? A band of roaming terrorists? Exactly what is going to come after you that you would need to kill? The kid next door or the drug addict looking for cash and jewelry? Do tell John Wayne.

But this does not change anything about the fact that, contrary to your claim, a gun can be used for defense.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Seriously, this is where liberalism turns nutty. I would ask my fellow liberals to look at the larger picture.

I concede that such training is possibly (if not likely) to have some bad consequences down the road. The kid who gets picked on in 3rd period by Jeff or Jill, will have access to a firearm in 6th period where Jeff or Jill may be in the same class. I further concede that with our cartoonish society and the volumes of mis-information on the web about the consequences of serious actions are characterized as everything from nominal to downright cool, it's probably not the gold of ideas to bring weapons into the schools with a seal of approval from the administration.

All that is conceded. What wins the day however are the facts that we live in a dangerous society so learning about the weapons that contribute to that danger is identical to girls learning about barrier contraception. Its really a matter of self defense. On the same theme as self defense, purchasing a gun and not knowing the first thing on how to use/maintain it maybe more dangerous in some cases for the owner than an intruder breaking into their residence. So why not? Thirdly, when your choices are other topics such as Clothing and Textiles, Pottery, or Football, there is some currency to learning real-world lessons; harsh though they may be.

I can think of a lot of things that I'd rather have taught in school but this isn't a loser of an idea out of the gate. Execution is, as always, the most important thing.

Guns aren't for defense. If you want to teach self-defense by all means do. Guns are for killing things, period.

And I will use the deadly force of a firearm to defend my home and family. To say they aren't for defense is blatantly ignorant or simply lying.

Deadly force to protect your house from what, an attacking foreign army? A band of roaming terrorists? Exactly what is going to come after you that you would need to kill? The kid next door or the drug addict looking for cash and jewelry? Do tell John Wayne.

If the meth head comes into my house when I and my family are there, you betcha!! I will not risk the lives of my loved ones on the hope that he will not harm us.

Why would a drug addict harm you? He's looking for cash and shit to sell now isn't he? Is your shit worth a human life?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Seriously, this is where liberalism turns nutty. I would ask my fellow liberals to look at the larger picture.

I concede that such training is possibly (if not likely) to have some bad consequences down the road. The kid who gets picked on in 3rd period by Jeff or Jill, will have access to a firearm in 6th period where Jeff or Jill may be in the same class. I further concede that with our cartoonish society and the volumes of mis-information on the web about the consequences of serious actions are characterized as everything from nominal to downright cool, it's probably not the gold of ideas to bring weapons into the schools with a seal of approval from the administration.

All that is conceded. What wins the day however are the facts that we live in a dangerous society so learning about the weapons that contribute to that danger is identical to girls learning about barrier contraception. Its really a matter of self defense. On the same theme as self defense, purchasing a gun and not knowing the first thing on how to use/maintain it maybe more dangerous in some cases for the owner than an intruder breaking into their residence. So why not? Thirdly, when your choices are other topics such as Clothing and Textiles, Pottery, or Football, there is some currency to learning real-world lessons; harsh though they may be.

I can think of a lot of things that I'd rather have taught in school but this isn't a loser of an idea out of the gate. Execution is, as always, the most important thing.

Guns aren't for defense. If you want to teach self-defense by all means do. Guns are for killing things, period.

And I will use the deadly force of a firearm to defend my home and family. To say they aren't for defense is blatantly ignorant or simply lying.

Deadly force to protect your house from what, an attacking foreign army? A band of roaming terrorists? Exactly what is going to come after you that you would need to kill? The kid next door or the drug addict looking for cash and jewelry? Do tell John Wayne.

But this does not change anything about the fact that, contrary to your claim, a gun can be used for defense.

Who are you going to need to kill? The locks on the doors are for defense. The gun is for killing something. Don't mix the two up.

 

[WinterBorn]

Gun Safety eh?
Cop Who Shot Off Finger With Loaded Weapon Sues Gun Store VIDEO

Once again, if you follow all the safety rules you will not injury or kill anyone by accident.

Well if the cops can't handle a gun I'm not sure who can?

The question is not whether a cop can handle a gun or not. The question is whether you can kill or injury someone by accident when you follow all the safety rules.

And I have already proven that you can. You seem to think that there is some magical way to handle a firearm so that it never points at a living thing, and there isn't.

And if there is no round in the chamber, you have added another layer of safety.

As I said pages ago, the defective gun did not chamber the 1st round by itself.