• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

I'm a teacher. I carry a gun to school everyday.

All you've done is straw man one of my arguments and then remark on how I refuse to discuss the topic. Learn what a ****ing straw man is and adjust your commentary. It would be stupid to discuss the topic with you while you are misrepresenting my premise. It would be like saying, yeah I said that, that way you just made up for the convenience of your own argument. Let me take this weaker position and defend it as my own .

Learn what a straw man is...

LOL Learn that continually posting 'straw man' instead of discussing the topic is a clear sign of "I dont have an argument here but I dont want to lose face".

Please, go salve your ego elsewhere if you cant discuss the issue.
 
The thought that you think a few months of training means **** and you're willing to bet childrens lives on it, is what scares me...

Ok, so the most effective tactic to defeating my argument is by coloring me as a blanket enemy. Someone who is anti gun, afraid of guns. So forth and so on.

When in fact, I'm an avid hunter, who owns many fire arms.

I have four rams on my wall, and a grizzly mounted. As well as Elk, Moose, Deer, and Buffalo.

I haven't had beef in over 5 years, because I keep my freezer full of Elk and Moose.

I do that with a gun.

I'm not anti gun.

I'm anti stupid.

You aren't completely anti-stupid given your posts on this subject.
 
Please...by all means. Show the statistic that proves armed teachers have made schools more dangerous. I have provided evidence of 27 separate cases in the last 20 years of armed citizens or non-police security personnel stopping mass shootings. Please show where 27+ armed teachers have created incidents of mass shootings.

See...your unhinged hatred causes you to mistake and assume far too much. Some of us HAVE called for rather severe penalties on gun owners that dont secure their firearms appropriately when there are children in the home. Some of us HAVE indicated gun owners should be held accountable for their actions. Just as we have also held that those that provide firearms to people that commit murders should be held accountable as accessories and subject to mandatory minimum sentencing laws along with those that commit violent crimes.

No one wants to see children die. Cant fathom your loss regardless of the circumstance, nor would I cheapen it by trying. But what we have is people that differ on solutions. You have turned that into a "**** you **** you I hate you **** you **** you!!!" fest with your "dumb as a ****ing box of hammers" arguments and your imposition of hatred and bias where reason should be applied.

****ing Straw men.

you have mistaken my comment that all statistics and logic point toward that being the case, as an assertion that there is a weirdly specific statistic on armed teachers. There are none.

There are however statistics on accidental gun deaths, and how most of them involve children and unsecured fire arms.

There are statistics on home invasions ending in accidental gunshots hitting neighbors.

there are statistics on home invasions ending in accidental gunshots of homeowners shooting themselves and their children accidentally. There are even statistics on which of those were trained and had concealed carry permits.

There are statistics on how many mass shootings were stopped in action by anyone at all. And they are depressingly low.

And there are statistics on how school shooters gain access to fire arms.

And then comes the next part of that comment I made. Logic. The part that identifies the commonality in all those statistics. Improper fire arm storage.

The reason other armed nations don't have school shooting problems, is because they are not negligent with their fire arms and ignorantly protest any attempt to add consequences to their negligence as a violation of rights.

That's the real deal problem here.

Face it.
 
LOL Learn that continually posting 'straw man' instead of discussing the topic is a clear sign of "I dont have an argument here but I dont want to lose face".

Please, go salve your ego elsewhere if you cant discuss the issue.

Learn what it is...

I'm engaging with all these other people, calling them stupid, point by point breaking their arguments down. Why not you?

Ask yourself, is it because I've raised such a sterling point that can't be argued?

No.

Is it because I misrepresented his argument and am ignorantly trying to declare victory in his refusal to acknowledge my representation of his argument as valid.

Yes.

For the love of god, learn what a straw man is...
 
The reason other armed nations don't have school shooting problems, is because they are not negligent with their fire arms and ignorantly protest any attempt to add consequences to their negligence as a violation of rights.

That's the real deal problem here.

Face it.

Other nations do have school shootings; negligence with firearms is a real problem; other nations don't actually have the individual right to keep and bear arms.
 
I guess ;)

I don't see how this genuinely improves anyone's security. Let's start with the mundane: Are you worried that you will get mugged or carjacked while on your way to school? I'm going to assume that the odds of that happening are quite low. I'd further say that the evidence shows that firearms rarely stop crimes (e.g. http://vpc.org/studies/justifiable15.pdf).

I can see how rural residents might find firearms more useful, as police response times in those areas are surely much lower. At the same time, crime rates are also generally much lower in rural areas, meaning there is less need. In fact, death from accidents is a much bigger issue in rural areas than crime, and owning a firearm obviously increases the chance of a major accident. Similarly, simply bringing a gun into the school obviously risks a gun-related accident -- and yes, those kinds of accidents definitely happen in schools where staff can carry firearms. On the whole, it's probably not worth it.


Moving on to the less mundane -- i.e. extremely rare -- school shooting scenario, a firearm seems like, well, the kind of macho thing that will cause more problems than it solves. To start with, chances are you'd have to pull the trigger on a student you know, while other students might be running around and into the line of fire. While being a badass may seem easy in your imagination, I suspect it's going to be incredibly difficult in the moment. In which case, you are making yourself a big target.

Even without that particular quirk, it is very very rare for an armed civilian to stop a mass shooting in progress; in most of those cases, the civilian is actually an off-duty or retired police office.

I suspect that much of the reason, as already hinted in this thread, is due to training. At the risk of stereotyping ;) most librarians I know have not had extensive training in live fire situations. Schools and states, as far as I know, don't have a solid training program either. (Even if you did have training, a) you'd need to constantly refresh your skills and b) training is not the same thing as actual experience.) It certainly isn't part of the Library Science curriculum....

This is why the expert advice for mass shootings is "Run, Hide, Fight." What you should be doing is either getting the students to flee the school, or helping them hide. (Obviously, if your school has a policy, Taking on the attacker should be your last resort, and having a gun in your hand may tempt you to think "Fight, Fight, Fight."

Another consideration is that you can get yourself into trouble. On the mundane side: Obviously, if school policy doesn't allow you to have a concealed firearm, that's a big issue. If for any reason you put your firearm down, that can cause an accident. Or, in what is admittedly a rare circumstance, you might be tempted to brandish your firearm in a situation that doesn't require it (e.g. a confrontation with a student).

And if there is a shooting -- again, that is extremely rare, and not happening at higher rates than in the past -- when the police eventually arrive, they aren't necessarily going to know that you are a Good Guy With A Gun. To put it mildly, this will complicate things during and after the shooting episode.


Overall, I don't think it enhances anyone's safety. I'd pass.

According to Dr. Langman, body counts are lower when potential victims fight back.

 
****ing Straw men.

you have mistaken my comment that all statistics and logic point toward that being the case, as an assertion that there is a weirdly specific statistic on armed teachers. There are none.

There are however statistics on accidental gun deaths, and how most of them involve children and unsecured fire arms.

There are statistics on home invasions ending in accidental gunshots hitting neighbors.

there are statistics on home invasions ending in accidental gunshots of homeowners shooting themselves and their children accidentally. There are even statistics on which of those were trained and had concealed carry permits.

There are statistics on how many mass shootings were stopped in action by anyone at all. And they are depressingly low.

And there are statistics on how school shooters gain access to fire arms.

And then comes the next part of that comment I made. Logic. The part that identifies the commonality in all those statistics. Improper fire arm storage.

The reason other armed nations don't have school shooting problems, is because they are not negligent with their fire arms and ignorantly protest any attempt to add consequences to their negligence as a violation of rights.

That's the real deal problem here.

Face it.

What normally happens to an active shooter once they are engaged with armed vs. unarmed persons?
 
So you carry a gun, unsure what type of discussion you are expecting. As long as you are abiding by your States gun laws why should we care ?

A valid opinion. I'm thinking this is more of a red state/blue state issue. Whatever your beliefs this should be decided at the state and local level.
 
What normally happens to an active shooter once they are engaged with armed vs. unarmed persons?

Did ya not see the whole rant about obvious gotcha questions?

I swear to god, it's like pulling the ****ing string on one of those the Cow says...

You premise rests on the assumption that should there be an armed individual present to engage the active shooter, that person will perform better than that active shooter because of good will...

In reality, a teacher in the most stressful moment of their lives, faced with the dilemma of killing a kid is not going to be served by a ****ty training course ran by macho gun nuts who have just to much faith in their own abilities.

It's like a natural disaster, the teacher should be focused on controlling the students not on a murder rampage, hiding, putting barriers up around the children. And then fighting back with other means, like surprise. Facing an armed person in a gun fight in the middle of a school is stupid.

Why can't anyone else see that. You shoot at the shooter, you miss, where does the bullet go? Does it stop? He shoots at you, he misses, what ammo does he have? Does it stop? Where are you standing, is next the rest of the kids? have left them unattended?

There are roles to be played in these scenarios, and a teacher has an important role that is not aided by a weapon.

And society is best served by teachers that don't have to mentally prepare themselves to kill their own students.

All because we don't want to lock up our guns. **** that.
 
Did ya not see the whole rant about obvious gotcha questions?

I swear to god, it's like pulling the ****ing string on one of those the Cow says...

You premise rests on the assumption that should there be an armed individual present to engage the active shooter, that person will perform better than that active shooter because of good will...

In reality, a teacher in the most stressful moment of their lives, faced with the dilemma of killing a kid is not going to be served by a ****ty training course ran by macho gun nuts who have just to much faith in their own abilities.

It's like a natural disaster, the teacher should be focused on controlling the students not on a murder rampage, hiding, putting barriers up around the children. And then fighting back with other means, like surprise. Facing an armed person in a gun fight in the middle of a school is stupid.

Why can't anyone else see that. You shoot at the shooter, you miss, where does the bullet go? Does it stop? He shoots at you, he misses, what ammo does he have? Does it stop? Where are you standing, is next the rest of the kids? have left them unattended?

There are roles to be played in these scenarios, and a teacher has an important role that is not aided by a weapon.

And society is best served by teachers that don't have to mentally prepare themselves to kill their own students.

All because we don't want to lock up our guns. **** that.

complete nonsense. You want active shooters to have plenty of time to kill as many people as possible before armed police response arrives. And locking guns up is not going to change active shooters.
 
Is it legal in your state to do so?

Yes, and I'm just one of several teachers and office personnel to do so in my school district. It's part of a program involving training and licensing by the state.
 
I'm something of a rarity. I'm a middle school Library Media Specialist. I carry a gun to school everyday. Wanna' discuss this issue?

Sure.

1. CC or OC?
2. Do the students ever ask about it?
3. Does faculty or staff ever ask about it?
 
****ing Straw men.

you have mistaken my comment that all statistics and logic point toward that being the case, as an assertion that there is a weirdly specific statistic on armed teachers. There are none.

There are however statistics on accidental gun deaths, and how most of them involve children and unsecured fire arms.

There are statistics on home invasions ending in accidental gunshots hitting neighbors.

there are statistics on home invasions ending in accidental gunshots of homeowners shooting themselves and their children accidentally. There are even statistics on which of those were trained and had concealed carry permits.

There are statistics on how many mass shootings were stopped in action by anyone at all. And they are depressingly low.

And there are statistics on how school shooters gain access to fire arms.

And then comes the next part of that comment I made. Logic. The part that identifies the commonality in all those statistics. Improper fire arm storage.

The reason other armed nations don't have school shooting problems, is because they are not negligent with their fire arms and ignorantly protest any attempt to add consequences to their negligence as a violation of rights.

That's the real deal problem here.

Face it.
:lamo

So I take it thats a no...and that your comment about statistics regarding teachers making the situation more dangerous was just bull****. You would have more credibility if you would just admit it. As for the statistcs regarding accidental injuries of bystanders regarding home invasions...please...feel free to post those since the stats claim about teachers was bull****.
But your comments are very telling. Even home invasions...you would rather people just be good little victims and wait for the police to save you?
Yes...there are stats on how many mass shootings are stopped 'at all'. In the US since 1997 there have been 88 mass shootings. 27 mass shootings were prevented/stopped by armed citizens.
Stats on how shooters (kids) get their firearms. Yes...there are. I suggest you read the Mother Jones database...it details all of the recorded shootings going back to 1982. The Columbine shooters got their guns illegally...from friends. Jeffrey Weise killed his grandfather (a cop) and used his guns. Mitchell Johnson and Andrew Douglas stole their weapons from a grandparents house. Kip Kinkell killed his parents to get their guns. So did Adam Lanza. 5 incidents...3 involving guns improperly secured by parents at home.

Its funny because you cite 1 line as 'logic' which I would say about fairly sums up your entire diatribes here...1 line worth of logical discussion. And on that we agree. There should be a greater push for responsible ownership of firearms and parents should be held accountable. On that 1 line, we agree. But SINCE the other 101 of 106 mass shootings, approx 18 of which involve schools have shooters getting their weapons by means OTHER than their parents unsecured or improperly secured firearms (Kinkels father kept the ammunition separate from the gun but he managed to gain access anyway, and Lanza killed his mother to access the safe), we still have a problem, dont we?
 
I'm something of a rarity. I'm a middle school Library Media Specialist. I carry a gun to school everyday. Wanna' discuss this issue?

OMG, I am horrified.

What a sad situation the wingnuts, our Taliban has bought to this once great country.

No joke, this really bothers me. I would move our of district out of state if need be to get away from people like you.
 
complete nonsense. You want active shooters to have plenty of time to kill as many people as possible before armed police response arrives. And locking guns up is not going to change active shooters.

I was wondering when you'd show up.

I don't want active shooters to have anything, how dare you accuse me of that.

And no locking guns up is not going to change an active shooter. That's a gross oversimplification.

But, as you and I both know, as soon as crazy person (even a kid) decides to take others life, all that remains for them is the selection of the tool. Where does a teenager get their gun? From Dad or Grandpa's gun collection. If it's secure, they can't just magically go out and create a gun from thin air. Normal people wouldn't sell a gun to a kid either, whether privately or commercially. So you've dropped the chances of this kid shooting up the school drastically. These kids aren't too smart. They are easy to spot after the fact, putting a mental health expert in every school will make it possible to spot them before the fact. Having Grandpa put his damn guns away removes the easy button for them.

This is not complicated. And you can't tell me Turtle, you can't, that teachers are the kind of people that can be prepared enough to offset the risks of their own incompetence. You just can't.

Military school, yes, all day long. Not PS 1104 in downtown ****ing where ever.
 
So you carry a gun, unsure what type of discussion you are expecting. As long as you are abiding by your States gun laws why should we care ?

Because it's one God damned country which was thought to be civilized.
 
Did ya not see the whole rant about obvious gotcha questions?

I swear to god, it's like pulling the ****ing string on one of those the Cow says...

You premise rests on the assumption that should there be an armed individual present to engage the active shooter, that person will perform better than that active shooter because of good will...

In reality, a teacher in the most stressful moment of their lives, faced with the dilemma of killing a kid is not going to be served by a ****ty training course ran by macho gun nuts who have just to much faith in their own abilities.

It's like a natural disaster, the teacher should be focused on controlling the students not on a murder rampage, hiding, putting barriers up around the children. And then fighting back with other means, like surprise. Facing an armed person in a gun fight in the middle of a school is stupid.

Why can't anyone else see that. You shoot at the shooter, you miss, where does the bullet go? Does it stop? He shoots at you, he misses, what ammo does he have? Does it stop? Where are you standing, is next the rest of the kids? have left them unattended?

There are roles to be played in these scenarios, and a teacher has an important role that is not aided by a weapon.

And society is best served by teachers that don't have to mentally prepare themselves to kill their own students.

All because we don't want to lock up our guns. **** that.

Rant rant rant rant.... Paragraphs where a single sentence would do.

tl:dr:dc

The question is germane to the OP.

What normally happens once an active shooter faces armed vs. unarmed persons?
 
I feel the very same way about the English.

131219-beheading-tease_wdwyhw
You know what was really sad about that incident...even their officers arent all armed so they all had to wait not just for the cops to arrive but for an armed cop to arrive. Pretty despicable a group of people watching a man saw a soldiers head of on the streets in broad daylight.

And its gotten worse. The stabbings alone in London are so bad they are calling for a ban on kitchen knives. And forget about free speech if you posted what you just posted in England, you would be subject to arrest for hate speech.

The loyal kneeling subjects gave up their rights a long time ago. Its tragic.
 
Rant rant rant rant.... Paragraphs where a single sentence would do.

tl:dr:dc

The question is germane to the OP.

What normally happens once an active shooter faces armed vs. unarmed persons?

translation: be more dumb so my dumb gotcha question will work, jeeze...
 
I was wondering when you'd show up.

I don't want active shooters to have anything, how dare you accuse me of that.

And no locking guns up is not going to change an active shooter. That's a gross oversimplification.

But, as you and I both know, as soon as crazy person (even a kid) decides to take others life, all that remains for them is the selection of the tool. Where does a teenager get their gun? From Dad or Grandpa's gun collection. If it's secure, they can't just magically go out and create a gun from thin air. Normal people wouldn't sell a gun to a kid either, whether privately or commercially. So you've dropped the chances of this kid shooting up the school drastically. These kids aren't too smart. They are easy to spot after the fact, putting a mental health expert in every school will make it possible to spot them before the fact. Having Grandpa put his damn guns away removes the easy button for them.

This is not complicated. And you can't tell me Turtle, you can't, that teachers are the kind of people that can be prepared enough to offset the risks of their own incompetence. You just can't.

Military school, yes, all day long. Not PS 1104 in downtown ****ing where ever.
You have been presented evidence of armed citizens that are far more capable than you give them credit for, yet INSIST on clinging to this unfounded mantra that citizens are incapable of handling an armed response.

Why do you avoid the FACTS while clinging to your ridiculous and completely disproved dogma?
 
Hey look. A cowardly non answer.

Please fail again.

It is amusing.

I'm respond to a post, in which you actually say your words are to long, I didn't read them. Now you're saying another non answer. You didn't even read the first answer.

Yeah, it's good to laugh in a thread about school shootings when you're position is it's best to be prepared when the little bastards try something gotta gun em down like Eastwood...

Real knee slapper.
 
You know what was really sad about that incident...even their officers arent all armed so they all had to wait not just for the cops to arrive but for an armed cop to arrive. Pretty despicable a group of people watching a man saw a soldiers head of on the streets in broad daylight.

And its gotten worse. The stabbings alone in London are so bad they are calling for a ban on kitchen knives. And forget about free speech if you posted what you just posted in England, you would be subject to arrest for hate speech.

The loyal kneeling subjects gave up their rights a long time ago. Its tragic.

It's their country. My people left there long ago. I care little what they do.
 
Because it's one God damned country which was thought to be civilized.
The parts of the country that are most lacking in civility (IE high crime, violence, and murder rates) all tend to be liberal strongholds that have suffered under decades of democrat leadership...IE...the places YOU cherish. And yet here you are bleating about law abiding citizens responsibly taking safe and extraordinary means to prevent extremely rare instances while you ignore the ****piles your ideology has created.
 
It's their country. My people left there long ago. I care little what they do.
Personally...I agree. I also find it amusing so many of them after sacrificing their own rights now feel compelled to involve themselves in US affairs.
 
Back
Top Bottom