Arming Teachers in the Classroom - Another Perspective
Jun 17, 2019 10:57:57 #
chrisscholbe wrote:
I did not say that and neither did she.
There are many many other options than the alternative you suggest.
It may be hard for you to understand....but....not everyone is prepared to take another's life.
There are many many other options than the alternative you suggest.
It may be hard for you to understand....but....not everyone is prepared to take another's life.
I agree not everyone is prepared to take another's life or at least that's what many think. I use to think that way but after Vietnam I came to the realization that we may think that way when there is no eminent threat but when confronted with the situation of kill or be killed, the biggest percentage will go into the "save your ass mode" and do what seems to come naturally at that moment.
Jun 17, 2019 11:27:07 #
Texcaster wrote:
One of the normal ones. I would think the real keen volunteers to be the real worry.
Here's a crazy idea. Severely regulate who can bear semi-auto weapons. Just think of it as a tricky way to reduce the carnage one man inflict. That still leaves plenty of options for the good guys to whip on the bad guys.
I await the NRA conditioned responses.
Here's a crazy idea. Severely regulate who can bear semi-auto weapons. Just think of it as a tricky way to reduce the carnage one man inflict. That still leaves plenty of options for the good guys to whip on the bad guys.
I await the NRA conditioned responses.
Why? we already know all of the socialist communist propaganda that will be in reply, get some new material beta boy.
Jun 17, 2019 11:35:28 #
In my opinion one of the dumbest laws regarding guns that was ever proposed and voted in was no carry zones like the schools. History has proven that most mass shooters usually pick a place like that to do their killings. You don't have to be an Einstein to understand why. That law should be repealed immediately.
Jun 17, 2019 12:06:41 #
Elaine2025
Loc: Seattle, Wa
Huey Driver wrote:
In my opinion one of the dumbest laws regarding guns that was ever proposed and voted in was no carry zones like the schools. History has proven that most mass shooters usually pick a place like that to do their killings. You don't have to be an Einstein to understand why. That law should be repealed immediately.
Jun 17, 2019 16:19:46 #
Texcaster wrote:
I did, pages ago. Just sayin'
No you didn’t......just sayin’.
Jun 17, 2019 16:20:15 #
Texcaster wrote:
Too funny. You act like you're still bossing around convicts.
Well.....he did direct it at Australia, yes?
Jun 17, 2019 16:21:45 #
chrisscholbe wrote:
All of the teachers I know pay for various supplies out of their own pocket because the school doesn't have enough money.
Not a debate.
I believe what they tell me.
Not a debate.
I believe what they tell me.
So?
As others have pointed out, it’s just another example of bad to mediocre parenting as THEY s/b ensuring their own kids have the basics.
Seriously....how much does a pencil and chalk cost?
Jun 17, 2019 16:22:52 #
WNYShooter wrote:
Maybe they need top stop buying supplies and force the districts to buy them. Their union is useless if they are paying for basic supplies out of their pockets.
THAT is how you fix a problem.....don’t cover it up, make it obvious so it has to be fixed!
Of course, that’s a capitalist solution to a problem being promoted by socialists.
Jun 17, 2019 16:23:31 #
Elaine2025 wrote:
The do understand the concept of VOLUNTARY down under don't they? Volunteer, be trained and stop making schools zones where shooters know that no one is going to shoot back.
Socialists and communists absolutely do NOT understand the concept of volunteering!
Jun 17, 2019 16:26:26 #
Elaine2025 wrote:
Does your brain engage? So, the shooter is in the cafeteria with a semi automatic, a hand gun, what ever it is. There are also 2 armed teachers in the cafeteria.
They draw their gun and fire. IT ONLY TAKES ONE BULLET TO TAKE HIM DOWN. What is it that prevents you liberals from thinking?
They draw their gun and fire. IT ONLY TAKES ONE BULLET TO TAKE HIM DOWN. What is it that prevents you liberals from thinking?
Elaine,
It’s hard to explain math, facts of life and realities to the fascist progressives.
In their world of everything being broken down to the lowest common denominator (thus giving us Baltimore Detroit, and Chiraq, as examples), they cannot fathom your scenario as a single child could, in fact, be killed in it.
The fact that the “good guy/girl with a gun” could prevent 2, 18, 50 more being killed doesn’t compute in their little Commodore 64 minds,
Jun 17, 2019 16:31:53 #
chrisscholbe wrote:
I did not say that and neither did she.
There are many many other options than the alternative you suggest.
It may be hard for you to understand....but....not everyone is prepared to take another's life.
There are many many other options than the alternative you suggest.
It may be hard for you to understand....but....not everyone is prepared to take another's life.
..and even less are prepared to just roll over and give theirs when there actually is a simple short term solution.
You make a false argument, which is kinda the point of much of the debate on this thread. There were earlier memes and comments about some school that suggested kids carry a rock.....man, was it planned by the fascists here. However, even a rock, especially in a strong arm, is better than going fetal and just praying the killer has mercy!
The meme is a false argument as no one is asking, or wants, teachers who don’t want to be trained and armed to do so. The simple, short term solution IS to allow those who want to, and can, to do so.
I would disagree...the current alternative to the meme is going fetal and hoping the killer has mercy.
Dying is not a strategy, a tactic, or a solution.
Jun 17, 2019 16:42:33 #
Elaine2025
Loc: Seattle, Wa
Cykdelic wrote:
Elaine,
It’s hard to explain math, facts of life and realities to the fascist progressives.
In their world of everything being broken down to the lowest common denominator (thus giving us Baltimore Detroit, and Chiraq, as examples), they cannot fathom your scenario as a single child could, in fact, be killed in it.
The fact that the “good guy/girl with a gun” could prevent 2, 18, 50 more being killed doesn’t compute in their little Commodore 64 minds,
It’s hard to explain math, facts of life and realities to the fascist progressives.
In their world of everything being broken down to the lowest common denominator (thus giving us Baltimore Detroit, and Chiraq, as examples), they cannot fathom your scenario as a single child could, in fact, be killed in it.
The fact that the “good guy/girl with a gun” could prevent 2, 18, 50 more being killed doesn’t compute in their little Commodore 64 minds,
Liberalism is a mental disorder.
Jun 17, 2019 16:54:00 #
Cykdelic wrote:
Elaine,
It’s hard to explain math, facts of life and realities to the fascist progressives.
In their world of everything being broken down to the lowest common denominator (thus giving us Baltimore Detroit, and Chiraq, as examples), they cannot fathom your scenario as a single child could, in fact, be killed in it.
The fact that the “good guy/girl with a gun” could prevent 2, 18, 50 more being killed doesn’t compute in their little Commodore 64 minds,
It’s hard to explain math, facts of life and realities to the fascist progressives.
In their world of everything being broken down to the lowest common denominator (thus giving us Baltimore Detroit, and Chiraq, as examples), they cannot fathom your scenario as a single child could, in fact, be killed in it.
The fact that the “good guy/girl with a gun” could prevent 2, 18, 50 more being killed doesn’t compute in their little Commodore 64 minds,
VIC 20 is more like it.
Jun 17, 2019 16:55:14 #
Elaine2025 wrote:
Liberalism is a mental disorder.
Liberalism is a Religon,
Jun 17, 2019 17:15:39 #
You guys and your second amendment are a joke.
First of all, to believe it is your god-given right to bear arms (something many gunslingers like to claim) is foolhardy; the right is given by the second amendment, and God had nothing to do with it... other than to say in #5, "Thou shalt not kill."
Second, it is an "amendment"... get it? An "Amendment" to the Constitution. That means it is not carved in stone and can be amended yet again... to something sensible.
Third, sometimes one has to take options to extremes to understand the impact of a decision. Pro-NRA folks like to argue that more guns make things safer because they allow you to defend yourself against an armed idiot. In other words, if everyone packed a sidearm (like in the wild wild west) there would be fewer "gun fights" and killings (like in the wild wild west). Yeah, right!!! Anti-gun folks would argue that if ALL guns were illegal then there would not be weapons available to kill people (and my point is on guns, not knives or baseball bats or cars, or whatever else... guns). This is also not realistically achievable, but to me it seems to be more in the right direction.
Now, the bad bozos will always have access to guns, but if there were fewer of them produced and if it were harder to get them, then there would be fewer weapons in the hands of thieves, maniacs, etc.
So other than creating the situation of a standoff where EVERYONE pulls out their weapon and aims it at EVERYONE else (y'know, like in the good guys/bad guys movies), please explain how more guns make your country safer.
First of all, to believe it is your god-given right to bear arms (something many gunslingers like to claim) is foolhardy; the right is given by the second amendment, and God had nothing to do with it... other than to say in #5, "Thou shalt not kill."
Second, it is an "amendment"... get it? An "Amendment" to the Constitution. That means it is not carved in stone and can be amended yet again... to something sensible.
Third, sometimes one has to take options to extremes to understand the impact of a decision. Pro-NRA folks like to argue that more guns make things safer because they allow you to defend yourself against an armed idiot. In other words, if everyone packed a sidearm (like in the wild wild west) there would be fewer "gun fights" and killings (like in the wild wild west). Yeah, right!!! Anti-gun folks would argue that if ALL guns were illegal then there would not be weapons available to kill people (and my point is on guns, not knives or baseball bats or cars, or whatever else... guns). This is also not realistically achievable, but to me it seems to be more in the right direction.
Now, the bad bozos will always have access to guns, but if there were fewer of them produced and if it were harder to get them, then there would be fewer weapons in the hands of thieves, maniacs, etc.
So other than creating the situation of a standoff where EVERYONE pulls out their weapon and aims it at EVERYONE else (y'know, like in the good guys/bad guys movies), please explain how more guns make your country safer.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.