Teachers with guns ?

[arora]

And no security guards with guns either I take it based on the article you posted. Surely you are not saying we should rely on police? I mean you pointed out how bezerkoid they can be, and I posted an article where they left an assault rifle on the trunk lid of a car and drove around town?

 

[Bye Ya]

The point of the article was to show a possibility where something could happen. The arguments in this thread for CCP teachers suggest that because they have the permit, there is no danger that anything could happen, which is what I find ridiculous.

 

[Zenith]

The arguments in this thread for CCP teachers suggest that because they have the permit, there is no danger that anything could happen, which is what I find ridiculous.

Show me. Quote them.

We've gone to the trouble of showing you all of your ridiculous arguments. Why don't you return the favor?

This should be good...

 

[arora]

The point of the article was to show a possibility where something could happen. The arguments in this thread for CCP teachers suggest that because they have the permit, there is no danger that anything could happen, which is what I find ridiculous.

There is always a danger, guns or not. If your stance is no changes or at least drastic measures be taken I can respect that. I'm wondering though, if you do believe something has to change, what is that exactly?

Also back to the point, you don't mind ccp owners being around large groups of kids as long as that owner is not a teacher on duty right? Seems trivial at best, how about a zoo keeper for instance?

I'm glad you are a gun owner btw, mind sharing your stash?

 

[Bye Ya]

Show me. Quote them.

We've gone to the trouble of showing you all of your ridiculous arguments. Why don't you return the favor?

This should be good...

Are you really asking for that? I suggested in the very beginning of this argument that EVENTUALLY a teacher would lose it and shoot a student(s), for whatever reason, and I have since been treated as some kind of zealot for saying so. Find any of the responses you'd like in the past few pages.

 

[Zenith]

Huh. I don't see any quotes.

The arguments in this thread for CCP teachers suggest that because they have the permit, there is no danger that anything could happen, which is what I find ridiculous.

Find me quotes where I, or anyone who has been arguing against you, say this.

I'm obviously far too dumb to find the responses by myself, you'll have to humor me for a whole post and show me the posts you're talking about.

Feigning surprise and disbelief is not an accepted substitute.

 

[Bye Ya]

Also back to the point, you don't mind ccp owners being around large groups of kids as long as that owner is not a teacher on duty right? Seems trivial at best, how about a zoo keeper for instance?

It's not trivial though, is it? Why are we having this discussion? Because 30+ zoos haven't been shot up since Columbine, but schools have. Why? Because schools are very sensitive social areas for many of the students, and that can carry over to their relationships with their teachers. Those relationships can cause students or teachers to lose it under the right circumstances.

I'm obviously far too dumb to find the responses by myself, you'll have to humor me for a whole post and show me the posts you're talking about.

I'm done humoring you.

 

[Zenith]

No, you're really not.

 

[arora]

It's not trivial though, is it? Why are we having this discussion? Because 30+ zoos haven't been shot up since Columbine, but schools have. Why? Because schools are very sensitive social areas for many of the students, and that can carry over to their relationships with their teachers. Those relationships can cause students or teachers to lose it under the right circumstances.

Probably because most zoos aren't' gun free zones.

sensitive social areas, I wonder why. I've never seen a story where a crazed teacher brings a gun to school and starts a spree but feel free to show me, these shooting have been perpetrated by students or ex students no? I've never seen a teacher shooting spree so, why are you against them being able to protect themselves?

Btw I'm noticing a pattern where you dodge the more important questions. A less important one I'd really like to know is what fire arms you own?

 

[Grand Prix]

Even if they weren't allowed to carry, a maniac teacher could still just bring a gun to the school and start shooting his least favorite students if he really wanted to. Now, if other teachers in the school were allowed to carry to defend against this example...

 

[FoolKiller]

Because schools are very sensitive social areas for many of the students, and that can carry over to their relationships with their teachers. Those relationships can cause students or teachers to lose it under the right circumstances.

See this is the issue right here. You make it sound like you are saying that a teacher with concealed carry at school is somehow a special situation compared to, say, you owning guns and have a concealed carry permit.

If, as you say, "schools are very sensitive social areas for many of the students, and that can carry over to their relationships with their teachers. Those relationships can cause students or teachers to lose it under the right circumstances," and that makes a teacher with a gun a threat to be very concerned about there should be a history of these kinds of issues arising that didn't involve the teacher using a gun, but still losing it in a violent way. Because as a gun owner, I am sure you are aware that whether a socially sensitive situation causes someone to lose it or not has zero to do with the presence of a gun.

All we have been asking for is a case history of teachers losing it, that shows it is a big enough threat to be concerned about.

Or you could meet at a compromise point and say that it is, and would continue to be, a very rare occurrence. Concede to that point and you will have just agreed with everyone you seem to think is treating you "like a zealot." Then you follow that up with the conditional statement that even that small amount of risk is too great in your mind.

If all you did is say that we would be discussing whether the minuscule risk of a teacher shooting a student is better or worse than the miniscule risk of another mad man having a minimum of 4 minutes to shoot multiple kids with no resistance. Or if you think there is a better alternative to increasing security, perhaps you would share that.

 

[Azuremen]

The post is related to the discussion.

Not really seeing how this thread is about teachers carrying.

I love how you ignore the pages where I clarified very specifically my position on a number of occasions and yet you continue to post about what equates to absolutely nothing, straw man.

You mean the many times I quoted your own posts where you stated your views and concerns and you denied them based on the use of the word "whim," followed by you flip-flopping on what you "meant" to say?

Yeah, that is what I thought.

It is funny, actually. I post something, you say that I'm saying 'x'. I say, no that's not what I meant (for about 3 pages), and you all say, "yes you did."

Because, despite what your claims of clarifying yourself after we apparently misunderstood a very simple post from you, no-one seems to understand what your view is. At least, this is what you keep telling everyone in here.

Later clarifies position several times >> clarification ignored, and continues to spout the same thing on repeat. Very interesting place indeed.

Again, none of us have apparently figured out what is you are trying to say, since you keep repeating concerns that a teacher will snap and kill a student if they carry. Unless you've flipped-flopped on that again because you realized you had very little, if any, evidence to support such a claim.

Honestly, you just keep repeating yourself without saying anything new or meaningful. And I'm not alone in feeling this way about your posts, so I suggest you more carefully consider the words you use.

 

[Bye Ya]

Probably because most zoos aren't' gun free zones.

sensitive social areas, I wonder why. I've never seen a story where a crazed teacher brings a gun to school and starts a spree but feel free to show me, these shooting have been perpetrated by students or ex students no? I've never seen a teacher shooting spree so, why are you against them being able to protect themselves?

Btw I'm noticing a pattern where you dodge the more important questions. A less important one I'd really like to know is what fire arms you own?

My argument is that the social situation is sensitive, and while there hasn't been a teacher on a shooting rampage as of yet, having the gun always around the classroom in the currently evolving, sensitive school setting, the chances could be different.

I have guns for hunting. Auto 5, 1187, .22 rifles, muzzleloader for elk, etc. My cousin works for Remington, designed the muzzleloader himself, and has designed other ammunition for them.

See this is the issue right here. You make it sound like you are saying that a teacher with concealed carry at school is somehow a special situation compared to, say, you owning guns and have a concealed carry permit.

I think the school setting is different.

All we have been asking for is a case history of teachers losing it, that shows it is a big enough threat to be concerned about.

There doesn't have to be a history for a new one to begin, that's my point. They don't stop being human beings, and human beings do have that track record. There's plenty of examples of people who don't have depression developing it later, or turning to violence later, etc.

Or you could meet at a compromise point and say that it is, and would continue to be, a very rare occurrence.

Please show me one post where I suggested it would be a common occurrence. It doesn't have to be. All it takes is that one time.

 

[MarcoM]

I do understand Bye Ya's viewpoint. So that is not no-one.

It is hard to find evidence for teachers losing it. But it is just as hard to find evidence teachers not losing it.

 

[Zenith]

It is hard to find evidence for teachers losing it. But it is just as hard to find evidence teachers not losing it.

I'm guessing we can put the vast majority of teachers (such as the ones who manage to go through their careers without attempting to murder a student) into the category of "Didn't lose it."

 

[MarcoM]

You guess what you want. You cannot predict the effect concealed cary will have.

 

[Zenith]

We actually can. We use these things called reasoning and evidence.

And wow, change your argument much?

 

[MarcoM]

I call it guessing because there is no solid data available where teachers suddenly became concealed cariers.

 

[Zenith]

As Keef pointed out in the first page of this thread, teachers have a right to defend themselves in their workplace. This is logic.

We also know that concealed carry permit holders don't have a track record of using their permits to murder people, in fact they commit violent crimes a fraction of the rate of the general population. We know that teachers hardly ever become suddenly murderous to a point where having a concealed weapon would pose a significant risk. Nobody has provided evidence that people carrying concealed weapons have a habit of leaving loaded guns within reach of children and nobody has provided a case where a student has wrestled a gun from a holster in order to shoot up a school. We also know that teachers are not radically different people from those who concealed carry. I'm sure that there are plenty of school teachers who carry guns and manage not to murder people. Basically we can hypothesize that teachers carrying a weapon concealed would not pose a safety hazard.

We know that almost all of these mass killings occur in places where the targets are prohibited from having weapons. We can also look at any shooting scenario to predict with a good degree of certainty that armed victims are significantly more likely to deter or even fend off an attacker. We can hypothesize that teachers carrying concealed weapons would make these mass shootings at schools occur less often.

 

[hogger129]

I call it guessing because there is no solid data available where teachers suddenly became concealed cariers.

... Or you could look at US states where concealed carry is legal and compare that to the amount of concealed carry permit holders who "lost it."

Teachers who are US citizens still have Second Amendment rights and should therefore be allowed to protect themselves.

I seriously doubt some nut is going to get very far if there's a bunch of people packing heat.


This entire fight is all about the government not wanting people to be able to arm themselves.

 

[hogger129]

As Keef pointed out in the first page of this thread, teachers have a right to defend themselves in their workplace. This is logic.

We also know that concealed carry permit holders don't have a track record of using their permits to murder people, in fact they commit violent crimes a fraction of the rate of the general population. We know that teachers hardly ever become suddenly murderous to a point where having a concealed weapon would pose a significant risk. Nobody has provided evidence that people carrying concealed weapons have a habit of leaving loaded guns within reach of children and nobody has provided a case where a student has wrestled a gun from a holster in order to shoot up a school. We also know that teachers are not radically different people from those who concealed carry. I'm sure that there are plenty of school teachers who carry guns and manage not to murder people. Basically we can hypothesize that teachers carrying a weapon concealed would not pose a safety hazard.

We know that almost all of these mass killings occur in places where the targets are prohibited from having weapons. We can also look at any shooting scenario to predict with a good degree of certainty that armed victims are significantly more likely to deter or even fend off an attacker. We can hypothesize that teachers carrying concealed weapons would make these mass shootings at schools occur less often.

+1


I'm surprised this is coming from someone who lives in the "Bay Area" of California.

 

[arora]

I'm surprised this is coming from someone who lives in the "Bay Area" of California.

I'm not, he's probably getting really tired of these left wingnuts trying to micro manage every aspect of his life. Now they are trying to tell him he doesn't need to protect himself or his children because they will do that for him as well.

 

[Azuremen]

I call it guessing because there is no solid data available where teachers suddenly became concealed cariers.

Because guessing is the best way to go about making decisions, right?

 

[arora]

My argument is that the social situation is sensitive, and while there hasn't been a teacher on a shooting rampage as of yet, having the gun always around the classroom in the currently evolving, sensitive school setting, the chances could be different.

Hogwash, lots of things may change in this country over time, but our rights should not be forfeit in the process.

I have guns for hunting. Auto 5, 1187, .22 rifles, muzzleloader for elk, etc. My cousin works for Remington, designed the muzzleloader himself, and has designed other ammunition for them.

I've seen this 'hunting' mantra on all the tv morning news shows for weeks on end now, to paraphrase "It's going to take all you responsible hunters and gun owners out there to explain to your peers, there is no need for these other violent weapons not designed for hunting". No offense but that is utter crap.

On the other hand, a custom made muzzle loader? I'd love to see that I'm guessing it's based on a 700 or some sort? Bolt action, 50cal, is the barrel fast twist?

 

[Nicksfix]

I love how you ignore the pages where I clarified very specifically my position on a number of occasions

I love how you ignore the numerous times you have been asked to supply as much as 1 shred of evidence to comply with your claim of teachers losing it and shooting a student.

Back it up please, other than that, it's just your plain assumption.

The point of the article was to show a possibility where something could happen. The arguments in this thread for CCP teachers suggest that because they have the permit, there is no danger that anything could happen, which is what I find ridiculous.

Find 1 post in this thread where anyone has said that there could be no danger of anything happening please.

Are you really asking for that? I suggested in the very beginning of this argument that EVENTUALLY a teacher would lose it and shoot a student(s), for whatever reason, and I have since been treated as some kind of zealot for saying so. Find any of the responses you'd like in the past few pages.

Wonder why ! Uuuum, probably because you have been asked by numerous members in here to back up your said claim and you just cannot do it.

Why? Because schools are very sensitive social areas for many of the students

You ask why ? Here is why, because schools are referred to as a soft target. Gun free zones = soft targets, right ?

My argument is that the social situation is sensitive, and while there hasn't been a teacher on a shooting rampage as of yet

I think the school setting is different.

Ahhh, you said the key word ... yet. Backtracking are we ? Can't supply that link that eveyone has been askin you for ?

The school setting is different indeed. You put teachers with CCP in the classrooms and it sure would be different. Different as to the safety of themselves and the students.

It is hard to find evidence for teachers losing it. But it is just as hard to find evidence teachers not losing it.

On the contrary, it is quite easy to find evidence of teachers not losing it. With every passing day in a school ..... this becomes evidence of teachers who do not lose it. Another day in the books and no shooting took place.

This entire fight is all about the government not wanting people to be able to arm themselves.

Why does the name Diane Feinstein come to the top of my head ?

 

[Bye Ya]

Wonder why ! Uuuum, probably because you have been asked by numerous members in here to back up your said claim and you just cannot do it.

Humor me, just once. Please state what you think my claim is. Don't quote anything. I'd like to hear your own words and interpretation.

 

[Nicksfix]

Everyone in this thread, including myself has read what your claim is ... You have stated that eventually a teacher could lose it and shoot a kid. You are also claiming that some members are implying that there is no danger that anything could happen if a teacher is a CCW. Once again I challenge you to go find 1 post in this thread where anyone has claimed that no such danger could exist.

Satisfied ?

 

[Bye Ya]

Everyone in this thread, including myself has read what your claim is ... You have stated that eventually a teacher could lose it and shoot a kid. You are also claiming that some members are implying that there is no danger that anything could happen if a teacher is a CCW. Once again I challenge you to go find 1 post in this thread where anyone has claimed that no such danger could exist.

Satisfied ?

Almost. Specifically, my position is that a teacher would lose it, because of the social situation and current atmosphere surrounding school shootings, and because they are human. I specifically used the wording "human condition". There is a vast amount of evidence surrounding what I am speaking of, people losing it, developing depression or violence, and acting upon it. You act as if there is no evidence of this? That is my position. I don't care if you disagree with it, but there is a ton of evidence for violent crimes that are the result of social situations and mental instability. I shouldn't have to look it up for you.

 

[FoolKiller]

I think the school setting is different.

Then shouldn't the school setting have a high rate of teacher-caused violence now, just not involving guns? Show the setting is different. Show that it has a higher rate of causing problems than any other workplace. If the school setting is the difference then there should be a history of problems that don't involve guns and would just be worse if a gun was present.

There doesn't have to be a history for a new one to begin, that's my point. They don't stop being human beings, and human beings do have that track record. There's plenty of examples of people who don't have depression developing it later, or turning to violence later, etc.

I think you didn't understand me. If teachers face a situation where they may be likely to develop depression and turn to violence that is different from any other place where a gun is allowed, that makes you think "think the school setting is different" then there should be a history to show that. Otherwise, your argument against allowing a teacher to have a gun should equally apply to you.

Please show me one post where I suggested it would be a common occurrence. It doesn't have to be. All it takes is that one time.

Is the school setting a special situation that makes the likelihood higher than any other, thus necessitating concern, or is it as equally unlikely to occur as anywhere else? Because none of those disagreeing with you think it is more likely than any other conceal carry situation and present the lack of concealed carry related violence as their evidence. If you dispute that evidence or think a school is different you need to back it up.

BTW, if you would have just said this bit here, that one is too much I'd have dropped it and you would just be defending that against a security argument. But you started this response to me by saying a school is different, which is what people want proof of.

 

[Bye Ya]

Then shouldn't the school setting have a high rate of teacher-caused violence now, just not involving guns? Show the setting is different. Show that it has a higher rate of causing problems than any other workplace. If the school setting is the difference then there should be a history of problems that don't involve guns and would just be worse if a gun was present.

It doesn't require a higher rate of violence by teachers. Remember, I said "eventually", not "often". And there is a history of violence in schools. I personally witnessed more than one student get put into the hospital because of fights in the school, and things can get physical when teachers step in to break it up. Did the teacher cause the fight? No, but it is a place where violence does happen, and my guess is that there have been a number of un-journalized events where teachers stepped in and went to far in the process.

I think you didn't understand me. If teachers face a situation where they may be likely to develop depression and turn to violence that is different from any other place where a gun is allowed, that makes you think "think the school setting is different" then there should be a history to show that. Otherwise, your argument against allowing a teacher to have a gun should equally apply to you.

Again I think this is a case where you are asking for "often", and I'm not suggesting that. If I were a parent I just would not want to risk any chance whatsoever of a teacher abusing their power with a firearm, or developing some mental condition that rendered them unfit to wield it in a classroom setting. The difference for me is that this is where kids are for 6-7 hours every day.

BTW, if you would have just said this bit here, that one is too much I'd have dropped it and you would just be defending that against a security argument. But you started this response to me by saying a school is different, which is what people want proof of.

Hopefully you'll understand me better after this response.