CalebWilliams
Topic Author
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 9:48 pm

Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 12:41 am

South Dakota Law Will Allow Guns in Classrooms
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/09/us...ta-gun-law-classrooms.html?hp&_r=0

Quoting 'New York Times':

Gov. Dennis Daugaard of South Dakota on Friday signed into law a bill that would allow teachers to carry guns in the classroom.

While some other states have provisions in their gun laws that make it possible for teachers to be armed, South Dakota is believed to be the first state to pass a law that specifically allows teachers to carry firearms.

About two dozen states have proposed similar bills since the shootings in December at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., but all of them have stalled.

Supporters say that the measure signed by Mr. Daugaard, a Republican, is important in a rural state like South Dakota, where some schools are many miles away from emergency responders.

Opponents, which have included the state school board association and teachers association, say this is a rushed measure that does not make schools safer.

The law says that school districts may choose to allow a school employee, hired security officer or volunteer to serve as a “sentinel” who can carry a firearm in the school. The law does not require school districts to do this.

Mr. Daugaard said he was comfortable with the law because it gave school districts the right to choose whether they wanted armed individuals in schools, and that those who were armed would have to undergo firearms training similar to what law enforcement officers received.

“I think it does provide the same safety precautions that a citizen expects when a law enforcement officer enters onto a premises,” Mr. Daugaard said in an interview. But he added that he did not think that many school districts would end up taking advantage of the measure.


Don't worry gun-nuts, South Dakota will protect your right to bear arms.   
Caleb Williams MSP AUS STL AMS CPH LGW YYZ
 
Aeri28
Posts: 673
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2000 1:08 pm

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 1:12 am

I don't see an issue with it. Chances are many have already done so.

The Dakotas have always had an air of the old west.People in those places probably know a lot about guns and how to use and not to. I have family who live in Montana and in a very rural setting. They are mostly gun owners. That part of my family on my mothers side has always hunted and had 'protection' as well to protect property and family from animal and man in case.
 
fr8mech
Posts: 6672
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 1:16 am

Quoting CalebWilliams (Thread starter):
Don't worry gun-nuts,

There you go..start right off by being insulting. That will always garner support for any argument you may put forth.

This is basically what I've proposed, and I wish the NRA would have proposed instead of armed guards.

All this law does is allow the school districts involved the option to have an armed guard at the school. They don't have to have one if they choose not to.

Personally, I feel the repeal of the federal gun-free zone statute (18 USC 922(q)) will go a long way at making our schools safer places.

I think we can all agree that criminals or those that wish to do harm will just walk by the sign that declares the area a gun-free zone. Why not allow a parent or teacher or administrator that is legally allowed to carry a gun, to do so, if she or he chooses to do so?
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
TheCommodore
Posts: 3458
Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2007 2:14 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 2:24 am

Quoting CalebWilliams (Thread starter):
South Dakota Law Will Allow Guns in Classrooms

Sad that its come to this.  Wow!  Wow!  Wow!

Oh, what a world we live in !!


Quoting fr8mech (Reply 2):
and I wish the NRA would have proposed instead of armed guards.

Don't you think that teachers should teach and guards should guard ?
“At first, they'll only dislike what you say, but the more correct you start sounding the more they'll dislike you.”
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 3:26 am

Under very stringent and correct circumstances, I can see this being okay. But they need to do this carefully and safely...
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5638
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 3:41 am

The biggest problem in schools with guns is how to teachers keep them secured under lock and key or on their person all the time.

Teachers have learned that anything which has a high pawn or underground sale value isn't safe in schools. Too many kids lift things from their teachers in today's schools.

Several folks in Texas are pushing the same thing - including the governor.
 
seb146
Posts: 14058
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 4:16 am

Quoting CalebWilliams (Thread starter):
Don't worry gun-nuts, South Dakota will protect your right to bear arms.

The "right to bear arms" has nothing to do with carrying guns in school.

Studies have shown that more guns create more problems but fewer guns create fewer problems. I have no problem if people want to own guns. I do, however, care if people want to own multiple automatic weapons. What is one teacher with one gun going to do to stop one nut carrying an AR-15? Not only do teachers have to be psychologists and referees and parents as well as teachers but, now, they have to be police? And get no extra pay or benefits? What's wrong with this picture?
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 4:24 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 7):
I do, however, care if people want to own multiple automatic weapons.

1: do you even know what you're talking about when you say "automatic weapons" 2: what's wrong with more than one? If I had one and I occasionally maintained it, it would be as deadly as 50 automatic weapons... guns aren't something you can keep stacking one on top of another, you can really use only one... maybe if one jams, two, but the logic you're employing really doesn't make sense


I know you aren't barking up that tree... I see where you're going. Careful of what you say though, most people aren't going to get what you're saying and go a totally different direction, no fault of their own
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
Superfly
Posts: 37735
Joined: Thu May 11, 2000 8:01 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 4:30 am

Obama's children already go to school with armed guards. Their school had armed guards long before their dad was elected President. Not really sure why this is a big deal for some.
Bring back the Concorde
 
WestJet747
Posts: 1950
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2011 7:43 pm

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 4:52 am

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 3):
Don't you think that teachers should teach and guards should guard ?

I agree. I had many teachers in school who I wouldn't ever trust with a gun. If people in South Dakota really feel that they need protection in schools, they should hire someone to do it and let the teachers keep doing what they're doing.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 8):
If I had one and I occasionally maintained it, it would be as deadly as 50 automatic weapons... guns aren't something you can keep stacking one on top of another, you can really use only one... maybe if one jams, two, but the logic you're employing really doesn't make sense

Well, I guess if you had some serious forearm strength, you could have one in each hand   
Flying refined.
 
seb146
Posts: 14058
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 5:30 am

Quoting Superfly (Reply 8):
Their school had armed guards long before their dad was elected President. Not really sure why this is a big deal for some.

Private schools that can afford that sort of thing. But public schools that are constantly being de-funded by the right then given tons of guns? How can they suddenly afford firearms training but can not afford more teachers?

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 7):
I know you aren't barking up that tree... I see where you're going. Careful of what you say though, most people aren't going to get what you're saying and go a totally different direction, no fault of their own

Okay, then. What is the point of private citizens owning that many military grade weapons? To overthrow the government? I got news: They have been taking rights away by Patriot Act, among other bills. Why were the same people who were thrilled with Patriot Act now wanting to stockpile weapons and take arms against the government? These are the same people who said "Well, if you are doing nothing wrong, you should have no problem with them looking at your e-mail." What changed? Obama is in the White House.
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
Superfly
Posts: 37735
Joined: Thu May 11, 2000 8:01 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 5:53 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 10):
Private schools that can afford that sort of thing.

I guess you didn't read the article. Sounds like you're implying that rich kids deserve to be protected but poor kids do not.   
You're also implying that if schools were flush with cash then you would support this idea. Yes? No?
Bring back the Concorde
 
Mudboy
Posts: 962
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 6:51 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 6:06 am

I will never understand why there are people in this country, that will not be happy, until we are back to the "Old West"? I believe in having a gun in your home and your car as an extension of your home, but if I wanted to live in a country where everyone walks around with guns, I would move to Yemen or Pakistan.

What is a Teacher going to do, wear it on their side or keep it locked up? Who is going to pay for the training, the qualifying and maintaining of proficiency and the bonding? What happens when a Teacher forgets to lock it up and the curious little kids, pull it out and want to see it and someone gets shot? Before you blast me, I have been a Paramedic for 20 years and I have worked a few accidental shootings, that happened just like that at home and it is never nice seeing a little kid shot.

The subject of EMS being armed has come up recently and it is the same thing, who is going to foot the bill for all the training, maintaining of proficiency and bonding? You can't just leave it up to the individual, because if someone gets shot, you better be able to show that they were trained up, proficient and insured. People seem to think it is as simple as just giving someone a gun and letting them have at it, because of the 2nd Amendment, but do you understand the amount of training LEOs and Military have to go through to not only carry a weapon, but be able to defend someone from taking it from them? Also, what is going to be the escalation of force, does it just begin and end with the gun?
 
Maverick623
Posts: 4640
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 9:13 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 8:06 am

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 3):
Sad that its come to this. Wow! Wow! Wow!

Oh, what a world we live in !!

You've clearly never been to South Dakota.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 10):
What is the point of private citizens owning that many military grade weapons?

Define "military grade".
"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
 
User avatar
pvjin
Posts: 3040
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:52 pm

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 9:14 am

That's interesting, I wonder when the first case of teacher going nuts and shooting his/her students happens.
"Optimism is the madness of insisting that all is well when we are miserable." - Voltaire
 
Aeri28
Posts: 673
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2000 1:08 pm

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 12:12 pm

Quoting pvjin (Reply 14):
That's interesting, I wonder when the first case of teacher going nuts and shooting his/her students happens.

You make it sound like having a gun in a Dakota classroom is something new... ? What makes you think a gun has not 'unofficially' been in classrooms already? Like I mentinoed in my post way above, it's probably already been done for decades. If you don't understand how life is led in many of the outreaches of the Dakotas and has been for decades, that comment sounds like those reactions vis a vis your views on gun controls in the US.


Again, those areas have a different view, history and appreciation of guns than most of us on this forum have. My view is fit the law to the environment. Personally I have a differnet view of guns in cities, large urban areas vs. those in far flung towns and counties with sparse populations. I think decisions should be a county (county not country) decision.

My mothers side of the family live on the Ft. Peck Indian Reservation in North eastern Montana. I don't think I'd even feel remotely safe if some uncle or auntie did not have a gun somewhere. Tribal police may not be responsive as one would like either. Again, fit the law to the circumstances I say.
 
cmf
Posts: 3120
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 11:22 pm

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 1:19 pm

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 2):
Personally, I feel the repeal of the federal gun-free zone statute (18 USC 922(q)) will go a long way at making our schools safer places.

Like promoting having sex to avoid pregnancy. Suggest motorcycle drivers don't use helmets to avoid head injury. Walking in the middle of the road to avoid cars hitting you on the sidewalk.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 2):
I think we can all agree that criminals or those that wish to do harm will just walk by the sign that declares the area a gun-free zone. Why not allow a parent or teacher or administrator that is legally allowed to carry a gun, to do so, if she or he chooses to do so?

Your logic makes several assumptions that you need to prove

* You suggest criminals do not care about an area being gun free zone. That the risk of standing out with a weapon doesn't have an effect.

* You suggest (in other threads) an area being gun free makes it attractive to those committing crimes. When it is very likely they reason they choose that place is the same reason why the area became a gun free zone.

* You suggest "good armed people" will reduce damages from "bad armed people" more than they will create damages from accidents.

In short, you suggest gun free zones cause there to be more shootings. Provide the stats that the balance is on that side.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 5):
Teachers have learned that anything which has a high pawn or underground sale value isn't safe in schools. Too many kids lift things from their teachers in today's schools.

  

Then add the unavoidable accidents.

Quoting Superfly (Reply 8):
Obama's children already go to school with armed guards

Obama's kids can't run down to the public playground because some people make them their target for their hate of Obama...
Don’t repeat earlier generations mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
 
fr8mech
Posts: 6672
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 2:12 pm

Quoting seb146 (Reply 6):
What is one teacher with one gun going to do to stop one nut carrying an AR-15?


That one teacher may well interrupt a delay the asshole and save lives in the process. Otherwise, that one teacher may just sit and be a victim.

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 3):
Don't you think that teachers should teach and guards should guard ?


Yes, I do. But, I would rather have a dozen armed teachers and/or administers and visiting parents than one or two guards walking around. Don't get me wrong, there is a deterrent factor there, but, if someone decides to shoot up a school, those visible guards may well be the first to go.

Quoting Mudboy (Reply 12):
Who is going to pay for the training, the qualifying and maintaining of proficiency and the bonding?


That's assuming the school districts hire these people and puts them on the payroll as guards in addition to being teachers. I say lift the restrictions and if someone wants to carry, let them, assuming they are eligible to carry under state law. I will submit that any teacher carrying be required to inform the appropriate administrator that he is carrying and a reasonable, responsible storage/carry plan be implemented.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 14):
I wonder when the first case of teacher going nuts and shooting his/her students happens


There is the assumption that gun carrying people are a crappy Happy Meal away from shooting the place up. What's to prevent that very same teacher from bringing the gun to school today and shooting the place up?

Quoting cmf (Reply 16):
* You suggest criminals do not care about an area being gun free zone. That the risk of standing out with a weapon doesn't have an effect.


Sandy Elementary. The Century Movie Theatre in Aurora. Virginia Tech. Amish School in Nickel Mines, PA. Fort Hood, TX. Hartford Distributors, CT. Any US Post Office shooting.

All these places were gun-free zones by statue or policy. Didn't seem slow these guys down.

Quoting cmf (Reply 16):
In short, you suggest gun free zones cause there to be more shootings. Provide the stats that the balance is on that side.

Actually, I don't suggest that. I suggest that the shooters have an easier time of it in gun-free zones.

Quoting cmf (Reply 16):
* You suggest "good armed people" will reduce damages from "bad armed people" more than they will create damages from accidents.


You're right, I do suggest that. Accidents happen when firearms are handled (or mishandled). A properly holstered firearm is about as dangerous as a brick. My suggestion is that an asshole intent on killing several people is confronted by someone with a gun that asshole's attention will be shifted to the armed person. It's my position that when that attention shifts, innocent lives are saved and the clock ticks closer to an armed response by police.

Tell me; why have police departments shifted to an active shooter protocol or Immediate Action Rapid Deployment techniques. Because they know that the sooner a shooter is disrupted, the lower likely-hood of high casualties.

[Edited 2013-03-09 06:19:13]
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5638
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 3:44 pm

Quoting seb146 (Reply 6):
What is one teacher with one gun going to do to stop one nut carrying an AR-15?

Lets use Columbine and Sandy Hook as contrasting examples.

Columbine had a full time armed police officer on the campus. Five minutes after the shooting started there were already two dead and ten wounded when the officer was able to reach the scene, but was outside the building. The officer exchanged shots with one of the shooters, who ducked back into the building without either one being hit.

Four minutes later the first external police officers arrived on the scene. There had been another brief exchange of fire between the school based deputy who was by his car in the parking lot and one of the shooters in the building.

A teacher (coach) was shot about this time as he approached the gunmen. Would him having a weapon allowed him to possible take down one or both of the shooters? We will never know. We do know he was shot and died later in the afternoon.

The armed SWAT team and many more officers arrived on the scene quickly.

The school resource officer and the majority of the officers arriving on the scene did not enter the school building because they had no protective armor/ vests.

The SWAT team did not enter the building until at least a half-hour after the last exchange of gunfire - and all the student victims were dead or had been shot. The gunmen committed suicide, apparently based on their plan, two minutes after the SWAT team entered the building, but were not in contact with the SWAT team. There is no indication they knew the police had entered the building.

-----------------------------

Sandy Hook

The shooter used his AR-15 to shoot out a locked glass door and enter the school. The school principal and the school psychologist heard the gun shots, apparently recognized them and charged to confront the gunman. They were both killed. Would they have been able to hit the gunman if they had weapons? Likely, but we will never know.

The first two police officers arriving at Sandy Hook entered the school without protective vests and saw the gunman. He ducked into a room before they could fire, and shot himself.

-----------------------------

I'm not saying I like the idea of armed teachers, but teachers/ school staff confronted both gunmen very early in the shooting. Any armed person confronting the gunman/men in either instance could have gotten off a couple shots even if the person had an AR-15 configured for full automatic. They might have hit the gunman.

It takes a LOT of practice to be even partially accurate with an automatic weapon. Even the military teaches people to not fire on full automatic - because you cannot reliably hit anything. Fire three shot bursts.

All the TV and movie firing of weapons you see on automatic is pure BS. The weapons rise when fired. Even Arnold in his prime could not have held a Thompson sub-machine gun on target on full automatic. You use full automatic to make the other people duck. Not to hit anyone.

Full automatic is also a great opportunity for the person trying to take down the person firing on full automatic. Because you will know when the magazine is empty and you will have 5 to 15 seconds to aim and carefully place a killing shot.

In the Columbine case, the coach/teacher saw the gunmen were shooting. In the Sandy Hook case, the principal and psychologist had heard shots and literally saw an armed man holding a smoking gun.

Would they have fired if they had a weapon? I think so.

Would they have been effective? In Columbine - I really doubt it. They were too well prepared. At Sandy Hook with two school staff against one shooter - probably they could have stopped the murders of the children.

But that is just my guess.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 6):
Not only do teachers have to be psychologists and referees and parents as well as teachers but, now, they have to be police?

I don't see anything requiring them to be police. It looks like the Texas proposed law - allowing those who choose to do so to have weapons.

Personally, I see armed teachers as a greater risk to students than unarmed teachers.

The teachers will literally have to carry the guns with them at all times, and that won't happen.
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 4:27 pm

Quoting seb146 (Reply 10):
Okay, then. What is the point of private citizens owning that many military grade weapons? To overthrow the government? I got news: They have been taking rights away by Patriot Act, among other bills. Why were the same people who were thrilled with Patriot Act now wanting to stockpile weapons and take arms against the government? These are the same people who said "Well, if you are doing nothing wrong, you should have no problem with them looking at your e-mail." What changed? Obama is in the White House.

I don't really know where you are going with this, I can ask where the people against Gitmo and the Patriot Act went, and "What changed? Obama is in the White House." goes the other way. Did you protest Gitmo and the Patriot Act? If you did, why did you stop?

About stockpiling, I don't know any of the survivalist types, I'm sure there are nuts out there, but I have a few just because I like to collect them and shoot them and that is what my friends do too. Why have more than one? IDK why collect anything?

Minus David Koresh and a few other notable examples, the people that have a bunch of scary assault weapons aren't the ones you should be concerned about... it is the common thug or angry Joe that has a single handgun. They do most of the shooting. When my friends with a bunch of 'assault rifles' get pissed, they don't arm a mob and go shooting up a place... not too sure where you keep going with the stockpiling

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 18):
It takes a LOT of practice to be even partially accurate with an automatic weapon. Even the military teaches people to not fire on full automatic - because you cannot reliably hit anything. Fire three shot bursts.

Partially true. The reason they don't teach fully auto M-16/M-4 shooting is because the ones we have now aren't designed for fully auto, 3 round burst isn't actually holding the trigger down and stopping after 3 rounds have gone off.

And there is plenty of fully auto training with M249s, M240Bs, and M2s. The methodology isn't spray and pray, it's a lot more controlled

I don't know why we're even talking about fully automatic, they are very rare even in the US and it's not easy to convert. There are simple ways to do it that usually result in killing yourself or have a gun that doesn't stop firing until the magazine is empty (even if you let your finger off the trigger) but no practical way

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 18):
5 to 15 seconds

??
Even a novice can change a magazine quicker than that. Release mag button, grab a new one, insert it, slide release, ready

Sorry rfields5421, probably being a bit too nitpicky today

[Edited 2013-03-09 08:27:31]
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19821
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 5:21 pm

Within a couple of years, a teacher will have some sort of break and kill a classroom full of kids.

And the gun advocates will claim that more guns are the solution.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
CalebWilliams
Topic Author
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 9:48 pm

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 5:25 pm

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 2):
There you go..start right off by being insulting. That will always garner support for any argument you may put forth.

I wasn't talking you. You have the ability to actually a make a competent argument for your point of view. I was referring to those that can't: real gun "nuts."

Your opinions may be more extreme than mine, but you can make a solid defense for those opinions, using facts and such.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 5):

The biggest problem in schools with guns is how to teachers keep them secured under lock and key or on their person all the time.

Teachers have learned that anything which has a high pawn or underground sale value isn't safe in schools. Too many kids lift things from their teachers in today's schools.

We had a hard enough time in high school keeping the city bus tokens safe. Let alone a gun.

[Edited 2013-03-09 09:35:48]
Caleb Williams MSP AUS STL AMS CPH LGW YYZ
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5638
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 5:44 pm

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 19):
d there is plenty of fully auto training with M249s, M240Bs, and M2s.

Yes, I've had that training. But those are tripod/ bi-pod machine guns, not suitable for a mobile shooter carrying his weapon as we've seen in school shootings.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 19):
Even a novice can change a magazine quicker than that.

Sure in a training situation.

However in first high pressure situation in a combat mode - not likely. I've personally seen trained US Marines take longer than that to change magazines in combat the first time. When my son was in Iraq in 2003, close to 1/3 of his army unit expended zero rounds in their first firefight.

Both the Columbine shooters were observed to be fumbling while changing magazines early in the shooting. That allowed several of the wounded to get to safety. They were the best prepared of all the school shooters.

But the point is that there is a chance to take down the shooter if one has training.

I doubt any of the teachers could have done so, but it was possible.

There is a mental requirement to be able to fire at another person immediately and without question. In these school shootings, verbal warnings, warning shots, etc would have only put the teacher in greater danger.

Not many people have the ability to shoot to kill the first time they encounter a dangerous situation. (I actually think the principal might have been able to do so - the mother protecting her cubs instinct - but we don't really know.)

I really think the only thing that guns in the classroom will do besides allowing more guns to be stolen is ensure that the teachers are killed first while they hesitate to fire.
 
fr8mech
Posts: 6672
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 6:38 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 20):
Within a couple of years, a teacher will have some sort of break and kill a classroom full of kids.

What prevents that from happening now? What is keeping a teacher from bringing a gun to school now? A sign? A law?

Quoting CalebWilliams (Reply 21):
I wasn't talking you.

But, you can see where your statement was a blanket statement aimed at gun owners in general. I'm a fan of civil debate and do my damndest to keep from calling people names. Though, in these threads I do call the killers "assholes". I will refrain from doing that.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 18):
The teachers will literally have to carry the guns with them at all times, and that won't happen.


I agree, there is risk here, but I think allowing a teacher and the school administrators to jointly make the risk/benefit analysis is the right way to go. They know their school and students better than anyone else. If they decide to that allowing a teacher to be armed in class isn't worth the risk, that's fine...but let them make the call.

Further, allowing parents and visitors to the school that have already been granted a carry license from their state of residence to come on school grounds allows an extra layer of defense that may just tip the balance against the attacker.

[Edited 2013-03-09 10:50:37]

[Edited 2013-03-09 10:51:42]
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5638
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 7:13 pm

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 23):
Further, allowing parents and visitors to the school that have already been granted a carry license from their state of residence to come on school grounds allows an extra layer of defense that may just tip the balance against the attacker.

I strongly disagree with this idea.

The school, and the police responding to any incident need to know exactly who has weapons on the school property.

Parents have never been involved in any of the school shootings to my knowledge - if they have, please let me know.

Any parents inside a school with a weapon are likely to be taken down by police as they will be mistaken as the shooter by police. At the very best, any parents with weapons in the school are going to delay police from confronting the shooter because they will have to be identified and moved out of the area.

And I don't think anyone can come up with a worse case scenario than parents hear of an incident at their children's school and respond with their weapons.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 10022
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 7:25 pm

I can't see how this is going to make any difference? Dude walks into a classroom and starts shooting, the teacher will probably be target no. 1, they'd have to have the gun in their hands or on the desk to make it of any use in this situation. Same deal with armed guards in the school the guard has to be at the right place at the right time to make any difference.

IMO the only way to really make schools safe is to make them look like prisons, only 1 way in, students pass through metal detectors and body scanners, simple but costly.
 
fr8mech
Posts: 6672
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 7:45 pm

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 24):
And I don't think anyone can come up with a worse case scenario than parents hear of an incident at their children's school and respond with their weapons.


Who said anything about a parent responding? Ideally, by the time some incident hits the news, the event will be over.

At my kids' school there are always parents around. I'm there a minimum of twice a week because my shift allows me to have lunch with my kids and to help out in the computer lab and teach Junior Achievement sessions. My wife is a school board member. There are parents in the building(s) all the time.

My point is, that if someone confronts and engages the shooter as soon as possible, the incident ends before the police even get there. Of course, that scenario would be the ideal ending but, I certainly understand that it may not end that way.

There is no easy answer to this. There is no panacea.

Quoting kiwirob (Reply 25):
IMO the only way to really make schools safe is to make them look like prisons, only 1 way in, students pass through metal detectors and body scanners, simple but costly.


And what would prevent a shooter from blasting his way in?
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19821
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 8:02 pm

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 23):
What prevents that from happening now? What is keeping a teacher from bringing a gun to school now? A sign? A law?

Yes. The fact that they are not absolutely deranged and wouldn't bring a firearm into their classrooms for fear of discovery.

But when the firearm is there and that same unstable personality that hovers on the precipice of rationality and irrationality suddenly has a weapon within easy reach, it raises the probability that such a tragedy will happen.

It's no different than safety regulations in aircraft. It is layer upon layer of safety that allows us to fly fragile aluminum tubes through the air at high-subsonic speeds with such awesome success rates. In almost every accident, layer upon layer of protection has been eaten away at until a crash occurred.

By arming every teacher, you are increasing the probability that a "quick break" could lead to murder.

And when my fears come true, you will be out there leading the parade to arm every student with a firearm, won't you?
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 8:04 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 27):
But when the firearm is there and that same unstable personality that hovers on the precipice of rationality and irrationality suddenly has a weapon within easy reach, it raises the probability that such a tragedy will happen.

I agree with this. That is why I think that registration wouldn't be pointless... people say criminals wouldn't register guns. But a lot of times, the people that would end up registering a gun would indeed use it in a crime. Doesn't make sense but a lot of stuff people do doesn't make sense
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
fr8mech
Posts: 6672
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 8:16 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 27):
By arming every teacher, you are increasing the probability that a "quick break" could lead to murder.


Again, who said every teacher? Those that are licensed and choose to carry, with the blessing of the administrator. We allow it on the flight deck, don't we? Should we put together a Federal (or State) Classroom Officer program for further vetting?
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
Geezer
Posts: 1413
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:37 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 8:32 pm

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 2):
There you go..start right off by being insulting. That will always garner support for any argument you may put forth.

The very first thing we hear out of anyone on the left who are all so "terrified" by guns, is ALWAYS........anyone who owns a gun is a "nut".

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 3):
Don't you think that teachers should teach and guards should guard ?

What I really think is, people in Australia should should be MORE concerned about things happening in Australia, and much LESS concerned about things happening in the U.S.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 5):
Teachers have learned that anything which has a high pawn or underground sale value isn't safe in schools. Too many kids lift things from their teachers in today's schools.

I don't think anyone will disagree with that, Chief; and the exact same thing holds true every time you park your car anyplace in public.......if you leave anything of value in it, not only does it have a very high likelihood of being stolen, but you are also very likely to have a VERY substantial repair bill to replace the broken windows in your car; and I might mention, being fully aware of this, I NEVER leave things of value, ( especially a weapon ), in an un-attended car.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 6):
What is one teacher with one gun going to do to stop one nut carrying an AR-15?

No one (other than you) has said anything about "one teacher"; as far as the rest of your question..........I'm sure anyone attempting to answer it would have better luck explaining their "views" to a tree.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 10):
Private schools that can afford that sort of thing. But public schools that are constantly being de-funded by the right then given tons of guns? How can they suddenly afford firearms training but can not afford more teachers?

why is it that you seem to think "public schools are constantly being "de-funded" by "the right" ? and please give us an example of anyone being given "tons of guns".............( other than the Mexican drug cartels, by "you know who" ! And DON'T try blame THAT on GWB, because he had NOTHING to do with it, (unlike Eric Holder)

Quoting seb146 (Reply 10):
Okay, then. What is the point of private citizens owning that many military grade weapons? To overthrow the government?

You have THAT exactly backwards ! The "private citizens" you are referring to, have no plans what-so-ever to "over-throw" the government; unfortunately, I'm afraid the same cannot be said about "the government". (let's try to keep this discussion on the original topic)

Quoting Mudboy (Reply 12):
What is a Teacher going to do, wear it on their side or keep it locked up? Who is going to pay for the training, the qualifying and maintaining of proficiency and the bonding? What happens when a Teacher forgets to lock it up and the curious little kids, pull it out and want to see it and someone gets shot? Before you blast me, I have been a Paramedic for 20 years and I have worked a few accidental shootings, that happened just like that at home and it is never nice seeing a little kid shot.

You're asking many questions; then, you're attempting to "suggest" that the "inevitable" will always happen....a "curious little kid" will cause someone to get shot. and don't worry.....I'm not going to "blast you"; your obvious concern is a valid one; I've thought of it myself. And it's partly why I don't advocate teachers, (or anyone else), keeping loaded weapons in desk drawers in class rooms. There is obviously only ONE safe place to "keep" weapons in a school, and I have no intention of going into the "specifics" of CC on a forum with 85% being against weapons being carried by anyone, outside of "law enforcement".

Quoting Mudboy (Reply 12):
People seem to think it is as simple as just giving someone a gun and letting them have at it, because of the 2nd Amendment, but do you understand the amount of training LEOs and Military have to go through to not only carry a weapon, but be able to defend someone from taki

Not knowing you, never having met you, I really have no idea about your knowledge regarding the proper training and safe handling of weapons, nor do I believe you have any about mine; what I AM absolutely positive of is though, we are ALL living in a society that has changed considerably (for the worse), over the past few decades. People on both sides of the political spectrum have suggested solutions; so far, I have not seen ANY from "the left" that have any chance what ever of improving the problem; at the same time, all suggestions from "the right" are immediately dismissed, mostly by people who I seriously doubt have ever held a hand gun, much less fired one. My question is, why are we even having this discussion ? I think about everyone on A.net who has followed the Non-Av forum for any time, knows by this time who is "for" and who is "against";

Some seem to believe that..."teachers don't know anything about guns, and should only "teach"; I can easily show anyone willing to listen, that a lot of "teachers" don't know anything about "teaching" either, and their "results" PROVE it!
It could even be accurately stated that........many police officers would be hard pressed to "hit a large barn" with their weapon; and at the same time, I can SHOW you HUNDREDS of "ordinary civilians" who can "out shoot" many LEOs.
It all depends on which civilian and which LEO you're talking about.

The "left" has advocated placing "gun free zone" signs on schools and such; why not put them on banks and liquor stores as well ? Many large banks have had armed guards since I was a child; may I suggest you contact the F.B.I. and request "statistics" on bank robberies over the last 50 or so years ? Every suggestion having even the slightest chance of lessoning gun violence is met with one more idiotic response from the left; "put a sign at the entrance; NO GUNS ALLOWED !" If that's what you really believe, please explain this;

The state of Illinois: most restrictive gun laws in the U.S. Chicago; ditto; no guns allowed by anyone except LE; yet Chicago's murder rate and victims of gun-shot wounds coming to hospitals far exceeds any other city in the U.S.
every time this is pointed out, we always hear more far-fetched "schemes" for getting "all the guns" out of the hands of......the law abiding people who haven't broken any law !

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 18):
The teachers will literally have to carry the guns with them at all times, and that won't happen.

I really don't think "removing the 100,000,000 or so guns from all the "private citizens" is going to "happen" any time soon either.

Charley
Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
 
Mudboy
Posts: 962
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 6:51 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 8:47 pm

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 17):
That's assuming the school districts hire these people and puts them on the payroll as guards in addition to being teachers. I say lift the restrictions and if someone wants to carry, let them, assuming they are eligible to carry under state law. I will submit that any teacher carrying be required to inform the appropriate administrator that he is carrying and a reasonable, responsible storage/carry plan be implemented.

Every person that carries a gun as a LEO or an Armed Security Guard has to be bonded, it is not as simple as allowing a person to carry a firearm. You have to show accountability in training, proficiency and you must be bonded.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 30):
Not knowing you, never having met you, I really have no idea about your knowledge regarding the proper training and safe handling of weapons, nor do I believe you have any about mine; what I AM absolutely positive of is though, we are ALL living in a society that has changed considerably (for the worse), over the past few decades. People on both sides of the political spectrum have suggested solutions; so far, I have not seen ANY from "the left" that have any chance what ever of improving the problem; at the same time, all suggestions from "the right" are immediately dismissed, mostly by people who I seriously doubt have ever held a hand gun, much less fired one. My question is, why are we even having this discussion ? I think about everyone on A.net who has followed the Non-Av forum for any time, knows by this time who is "for" and who is "against";

I was a Tactical Medic on SWAT prior to becoming a full time Flight Paramedic/RN. I am proficient on M9, M4, M249, M203, Shotgun and AK47 as I had to be, prior to deploying to Iraq and Afghanistan.

[Edited 2013-03-09 12:50:01]

[Edited 2013-03-09 13:00:54]
 
fr8mech
Posts: 6672
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 9:08 pm

Quoting Mudboy (Reply 31):
Every person that carries a gun as a LEO or an Armed Security Guard has to be bonded, it is not as simple as allowing a person to carry a firearm. You have to show accountability in training, proficiency and you must be bonded

In that case, I would assume the school district would assume the cost. From the article:

The law says that school districts may choose to allow a school employee, a hired security officer or a volunteer to serve as a “sentinel” who can carry a firearm in the school. The school district must receive the permission of its local law enforcement agency before carrying out the program. The law requires the sentinels to undergo training similar to what law enforcement officers receive.

My suggestion, the repeal of the various School Gun Free zones doesn't entail those problems. It's just a private citizen going about his business.

I agree, that if the teacher or administrator is tagged with an additional duty as "sentinel" as defined by the statue, then yes, the district will have a duty to provide training and anything else that carrying a gun as part of the job requires.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
Mudboy
Posts: 962
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 6:51 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 9:47 pm

Quoting Geezer (Reply 30):
Not knowing you, never having met you, I really have no idea about your knowledge regarding the proper training and safe handling of weapons, nor do I believe you have any about mine; what I AM absolutely positive of is though, we are ALL living in a society that has changed considerably (for the worse), over the past few decades. People on both sides of the political spectrum have suggested solutions; so far, I have not seen ANY from "the left" that have any chance what ever of improving the problem; at the same time, all suggestions from "the right" are immediately dismissed, mostly by people who I seriously doubt have ever held a hand gun, much less fired one. My question is, why are we even having this discussion ? I think about everyone on A.net who has followed the Non-Av forum for any time, knows by this time who is "for" and who is "against";

For the record, I am not nor ever will be, "on the left". I only have my opinion on this because of what I have seen in my career. I am only trying to point out that allowing someone to be armed in their line of work, takes a lot more accountability, than just allowing someone to carry, because they have a CC permit. Carrying a deadly weapon is a huge responsibility and before I want anyone to be around our children with a gun, there better be some stringent rules and regulations in place. I think we all agree that in the end, we all want a safe environment, for our children to go to school in.
 
cmf
Posts: 3120
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 11:22 pm

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sat Mar 09, 2013 11:16 pm

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 17):
All these places were gun-free zones by statue or policy. Didn't seem slow these guys down.

By listing those events you suggest they would not have happened if it wasn't for the gun free zone. Love to see evedince for that theory.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 17):
Actually, I don't suggest that. I suggest that the shooters have an easier time of it in gun-free zones

Do they? Do most shootings happen in gun-free zones or not?

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 17):
You're right, I do suggest that.

Provide evidence to support that statement. Not just an isolated NRA sponsored paper but solid peer-reviewed documents.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 17):
Accidents happen when firearms are handled (or mishandled). A properly holstered firearm is about as dangerous as a brick.

I am not aware of any person who keep their weapon holstered 24/7. The number of accidents are directly related to exposure.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 17):
Tell me; why have police departments shifted to an active shooter protocol or Immediate Action Rapid Deployment techniques. Because they know that the sooner a shooter is disrupted, the lower likely-hood of high casualties.

You don't want to pay for an alarm on your gun safe but you want us to have teachers trained to the level of police officers. Alternatively you send lambs to slaughter.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 18):
I'm not saying I like the idea of armed teachers, but teachers/ school staff confronted both gunmen very early in the shooting. Any armed person confronting the gunman/men in either instance could have gotten off a couple shots even if the person had an AR-15 configured for full automatic. They might have hit the gunman.

They might have hit him. However, if his mother had not provided access to the weapons they probably would not have had to confront anyone.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 18):
Personally, I see armed teachers as a greater risk to students than unarmed teachers.

Hard to argue with that.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 22):
That allowed several of the wounded to get to safety.

The main reason for limiting magazines.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 23):
What prevents that from happening now? What is keeping a teacher from bringing a gun to school now? A sign? A law?

Time, is the important difference. There is a big difference between unholster a weapon you have on you and having to go home, pick up the weapon, drive back to school and then decide to carry on the shooting.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 27):
But when the firearm is there and that same unstable personality that hovers on the precipice of rationality and irrationality suddenly has a weapon within easy reach, it raises the probability that such a tragedy will happen.
Quoting Geezer (Reply 30):
What I really think is, people in Australia should should be MORE concerned about things happening in Australia, and much LESS concerned about things happening in the U.S.

You're missing that Australia had a very similar situation. Each state having their own laws, a lot of people used to have semi-automatic weapons, etc. The big difference is that they dealt with it, very successfully. There was a short upswing of violent crime but only for about a year. Horrors of horrors,it wasn't done by the left.

Quoting Mudboy (Reply 31):
Every person that carries a gun as a LEO or an Armed Security Guard has to be bonded, it is not as simple as allowing a person to carry a firearm. You have to show accountability in training, proficiency and you must be bonded.

  
Don’t repeat earlier generations mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
 
WestJet747
Posts: 1950
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2011 7:43 pm

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:18 am

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 22):
Both the Columbine shooters were observed to be fumbling while changing magazines early in the shooting. That allowed several of the wounded to get to safety. They were the best prepared of all the school shooters.

But the Columbine shooters weren't trained whatsoever, were they? (or is that the point you're trying to make?)

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 23):
Further, allowing parents and visitors to the school that have already been granted a carry license from their state of residence to come on school grounds allows an extra layer of defense that may just tip the balance against the attacker.

I agree with rfields in his response to this. I'd be more worried about those parents in this situation. What if the police are able to respond right away, and they mistake the parent for the intruder because they see them holding a weapon. It would be horrible if the police accidentally shot someone who was only trying to help.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 26):
And what would prevent a shooter from blasting his way in?

If there's a single entrance with armed guards, and the shooter can blast there way through that, then I'm not sure what else can stop them. If multiple trained guards can't stop a shooter, what is a teacher going to do?

Quoting Geezer (Reply 30):
What I really think is, people in Australia should should be MORE concerned about things happening in Australia, and much LESS concerned about things happening in the U.S.

Last time I checked, Charley, the 'A' in 'A-net' stood for 'Airliners', not 'American'. This is an international forum, open to people from any country who are allowed to freely express their opinions on any range of topics. If you don't like it, then go start another forum where only Americans are allowed to post. The fact that the mods allow you to make these intolerant statements should be an example to you to not berate others because the flag next to their name isn't the same as yours.

Quoting Mudboy (Reply 33):
I only have my opinion on this because of what I have seen in my career. I am only trying to point out that allowing someone to be armed in their line of work, takes a lot more accountability, than just allowing someone to carry, because they have a CC permit. Carrying a deadly weapon is a huge responsibility and before I want anyone to be around our children with a gun, there better be some stringent rules and regulations in place. I think we all agree that in the end, we all want a safe environment, for our children to go to school in.

Very well said, Mudboy.
Flying refined.
 
CalebWilliams
Topic Author
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 9:48 pm

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sun Mar 10, 2013 3:09 pm

Quoting Geezer (Reply 30):
The state of Illinois: most restrictive gun laws in the U.S. Chicago; ditto; no guns allowed by anyone except LE; yet Chicago's murder rate and victims of gun-shot wounds coming to hospitals far exceeds any other city in the U.S. every time this is pointed out, we always hear more far-fetched "schemes" for getting "all the guns" out of the hands of......the law abiding people who haven't broken any law !

Again, as posed in the other thread: can you prove that restricting guns leads to more violence or rather does the existing violence lead to more restrictions?

Can someone please answer this question?

Thanks,
Caleb Williams MSP AUS STL AMS CPH LGW YYZ
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sun Mar 10, 2013 4:21 pm

Quoting CalebWilliams (Reply 36):
Again, as posed in the other thread: can you prove that restricting guns leads to more violence or rather does the existing violence lead to more restrictions?

Can someone please answer this question?

No one can because the answer is way more complex than more guns = less crime or less guns = more crime. If the answer was black and white there wouldn't be much controversy.

For example, put 20 guns in the school (more guns) carried by kids... most likely more deaths
Now put 20 guns in the school (more guns) carried by cops... most likely, less deaths

^It's a simplistic, stupid example but it clearly shows that "more guns" can either increase or decrease deaths, so there is way more to the equation than this.


I'm mostly in agreement with Mudboy. I don't outright think this is a bad idea, but I think you're gonna need more than a carry permit to pull this off safely. I'm leaning towards administrators and a very few teachers, perhaps ex-military or LEO, and they need to be going through very proficient, regular training. And no, don't keep the gun in the desk. I don't think anyone is advocating that. Have it concealed, and don't let the kids know about it
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
Geezer
Posts: 1413
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:37 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sun Mar 10, 2013 6:00 pm

Quoting cmf (Reply 34):
You're missing that Australia had a very similar situation. Each state having their own laws, a lot of people used to have semi-automatic weapons, etc. The big difference is that they dealt with it, very successfully. There was a short upswing of violent crime but only for about a year. Horrors of horrors,it wasn't done by the left.

No, I'm not missing anything; and nothing in the above has the slightest bearing on what I said; I have ZERO interest in what happens in Australia; I have always had the greatest respect for the people of Australia; especially since I bought my saw mill; it was "invented" and built in Australia; and anyone clever enough to come up with that thing, is pretty clever in my book; but I STILL don't care how they "run" THEIR country, nor do I think they need to be worrying about how "we" run "ours".

Quoting CalebWilliams (Reply 36):
Again, as posed in the other thread: can you prove that restricting guns leads to more violence or rather does the existing violence lead to more restrictions?

Well, for starters, I read the Chicago Tribune everyday, online, and I keep fairly "abreast " of the gun / crime "situation" in and around Chicago; if all of that doesn't meet "your" criteria, perhaps you may want to "present" YOUR "better idea";
(and sorry, I won't be holding my breath)

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 37):
. And no, don't keep the gun in the desk. I don't think anyone is advocating that. Have it concealed, and don't let the kids know about it

First rational reply since #32 & 33

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 35):
Last time I checked, Charley, the 'A' in 'A-net' stood for 'Airliners', not 'American'. This is an international forum, open to people from any country who are allowed to freely express their opinions on any range of topics. If you don't like it, then go start another forum where only Americans are allowed to post. The fact that the mods allow you to make these intolerant statements should be an example to you to not berate others because the flag next to their name isn't the same as yours.

That sounds like almost an exact copy of the last person who attempted to "justify" people from being so "concerned" about the internal affairs of other countries. Tell me WJ 747, can you show me ANY examples of people flying American flags, trying to nit-pick all of the silly laws in any other country ? Would you care to use that "rationale" with the leaders of, say, "Mainland China" and see how far it gets you ? Or perhaps you could send an email to Mr. V. Putin, telling him how you "strenuously disagree" with his "policies" ? (And please be sure to let us know how that "works out" ?)


This may be a bit "off topic", but it addresses an issue from this thread, so I really don't think it IS "off topic".........

I could search back through previous threads and find hundreds of examples of people who regularly make reply after reply on almost any topic concerning politics, who ALWAYS challenge anyone whose "views" don't agree with their views, and who ALWAYS insist on "sources", and who ALWAYS go off on a tirade after any mention of Fox News, but at the same time, NEVER seem to have ANY credible "sources" of their own; I rather think your attempting to belittle me, because I'm a firm believer in the old adage, "when in Rome, do as the Romans do"; ( and forget about trying to tell the Romans HOW to "do it".)

Charley
Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
 
CalebWilliams
Topic Author
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 9:48 pm

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sun Mar 10, 2013 7:15 pm

Quoting Geezer (Reply 38):
Well, for starters, I read the Chicago Tribune everyday, online, and I keep fairly "abreast " of the gun / crime "situation" in and around Chicago; if all of that doesn't meet "your" criteria, perhaps you may want to "present" YOUR "better idea";
(and sorry, I won't be holding my breath)

That's great that you're well informed, but please prove your assertion that gun restrictions lead to higher gun crime.
Caleb Williams MSP AUS STL AMS CPH LGW YYZ
 
cmf
Posts: 3120
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 11:22 pm

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sun Mar 10, 2013 7:52 pm

Quoting Geezer (Reply 38):
I have ZERO interest in what happens in Australia;

Some people just need to reinvent the wheel over and over. Other learn from what others have done.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 38):
when in Rome, do as the Romans do

In this Rome the rule is that you must respect the opinions of others. It is the rule 1a. When in Rome...
Don’t repeat earlier generations mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
 
CalebWilliams
Topic Author
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 9:48 pm

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sun Mar 10, 2013 8:16 pm

Quoting cmf (Reply 40):
Some people just need to reinvent the wheel over and over. Other learn from what others have done.

We Americans are a stubborn bunch.
Caleb Williams MSP AUS STL AMS CPH LGW YYZ
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 7701
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sun Mar 10, 2013 8:21 pm

When a gunfight occurs, even policemen end up shooting bystanders in the US (I don't know about my own country, except that gunfights are avoided if possible, let the criminals go and catch them later is the usual practice), so I'm not sure what kind of training is suggested here ?

Several posters have mentioned the problem of possible accidents, and guns being stolen, but I'd be more worried about a teen attacking a professor directly, the gun showing up and ending up in the wrong ends during the fight. When you already have teachers being beaten or stabbed, it's not much of a stretch.

As for the correlation between gun laws and violence in the US, it's pretty much meaningless since you can drive from state to state freely, and most laws are local. Look at countries like the UK where strict gun laws were imposed from one day to the next all over the country and results are clear, it worked.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
seb146
Posts: 14058
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sun Mar 10, 2013 10:37 pm

Quoting Geezer (Reply 30):
why is it that you seem to think "public schools are constantly being "de-funded" by "the right" ?

The "voucher systems" for "education" always trying to be "implimented" by the "right" is a "good start".

Quoting Geezer (Reply 30):
and please give us an example of anyone being given "tons of guns"

People who attend "gun shows" and "straw purchases" by "questionable" people. As far as "schools" go, one gun on a "campus" by anyone is "too many" guns.
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
TheCommodore
Posts: 3458
Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2007 2:14 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sun Mar 10, 2013 10:39 pm

Quoting Geezer (Reply 30):
What I really think is, people in Australia should should be MORE concerned about things happening in Australia, and much LESS concerned about things happening in the U.S.

And this, coming from an American !

Have you checked what your countries foreign polices are lately ?

Have a GOOD look at All the meddling the US engages in All over the world, starting never ending conflicts that drag in the rest of us.

Perhaps the US should be a little more concerned about its own back yard and get your own house in order before you start telling others, in an international forum, about what they should be "concerned with"

Man, you should practice what you preach !

Quoting Geezer (Reply 38):
I have ZERO interest in what happens in Australia; I have always had the greatest respect for the people of Australia;

So Geezer, you say you have "zero interest" in what happens in Australia, yet in the same breath, you say you have the "greatest of respect for Australians.......

If that is true, then how could you have respect for a nation of people, when you have "zero" interest in what happens there ?

Strange ideology indeed. But I shouldn't be surprised of the drivel coming from someone so "insular"

Quoting Geezer (Reply 38):
That sounds like almost an exact copy of the last person who attempted to "justify" people from being so "concerned" about the internal affairs of other countries.

Well, there you go again. You simply cant take any criticism at all can you ?

But its perfectly OK for the US to influence and be "concerned" about the internal politics of MANY countries.

The hypocrisy is staggering.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 38):
can you show me ANY examples of people flying American flags, trying to nit-pick all of the silly laws in any other country ?

Rubbish !

Posts listed and started by your fellow US countrymen, ALL about "other" countries ! (non-aviation)

1) Swiss Approve Law On Bosse's Pay.
2) Iceland Wants To Ban Online Porn.
3) Woman In Argentina Marries Killer Of Twin Sister

I can go on and on .........

[Edited 2013-03-10 15:51:37]
“At first, they'll only dislike what you say, but the more correct you start sounding the more they'll dislike you.”
 
User avatar
GSPFlyer
Posts: 272
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 3:15 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Sun Mar 10, 2013 11:39 pm

I agree with this law, as long as the teachers are required to have training, and to keep their gun on their person to reduce the chance of a student getting their hands on it. I feel like we need to repeal the law that makes schools "gun free" zones. My sister lives in Utah, and according to what she learned in her CWP class, teachers there are allowed to have a gun in the classroom, provided that it is legally concealed and they have a permit. They have never had a school shooting, nor a case of a teacher going crazy and shooting a student.

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 35):
What if the police are able to respond right away, and they mistake the parent for the intruder because they see them holding a weapon. It would be horrible if the police accidentally shot someone who was only trying to help.

In South Carolina Concealed Weapons training, we are taught that in the event that you shoot someone in self defense, immediately dial 9-1-1, stay on the phone with dispatch, tell them where your are, and give them a description of yourself (clothing, etc.), they will relay this information to police. When the police do arrive, either holster your weapon, or place it on the ground and step away from it.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 6):
What is one teacher with one gun going to do to stop one nut carrying an AR-15?

Doesn't matter what kind of gun he/she has, one bullet in the right place will stop them. It's no different than stopping someone who is trying to use a 9MM to steal your car.
 
fr8mech
Posts: 6672
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Mon Mar 11, 2013 11:55 am

Quoting cmf (Reply 34):
By listing those events you suggest they would not have happened if it wasn't for the gun free zone.


I'm not suggesting they wouldn't have happened. I'm suggesting they may have ended sooner, and with lower casualty counts, had folks that are deemed responsible by the state been allowed to carry a gun.

Quoting cmf (Reply 34):
Do they? Do most shootings happen in gun-free zones or not?


No, they don't. But, the ones that garner national attention and lead to "call for action" by the gun-grabbers tend to happen in gun free zones.

Quoting cmf (Reply 34):
I am not aware of any person who keep their weapon holstered 24/7.


No one said 24/7. I would presume that if you carry a gun, it is carried in a holster that protects the trigger. It doesn't have to be on your hip to preform that simple task. In fact, I would support legislation to that effect. Now, depending on your situation, you may also want a holster that has a retention quality to it. By the way, each of my handguns is always stored in such a way that the trigger is protected by a holster or a case.

Quoting cmf (Reply 34):
You don't want to pay for an alarm on your gun safe but you want us to have teachers trained to the level of police officers.


Again, where have I said I want to train teachers to be police officers. All I want is for a teacher, an administrator or a visiting adult to be allowed to carry a firearm (that they are licensed to carry) to be allowed to do so without legal jeopardy.

Quoting CalebWilliams (Reply 36):
Can someone please answer this question?
Quoting CalebWilliams (Reply 39):
That's great that you're well informed, but please prove your assertion that gun restrictions lead to higher gun crime.


Maybe not gun crime, but this Harvard (that bastion of conservative thought  ) study suggests that more gun restriction equal more crime.
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/...pp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
User avatar
KaiGywer
Crew
Posts: 11182
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 9:59 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Mon Mar 11, 2013 4:31 pm

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 46):
No one said 24/7. I would presume that if you carry a gun, it is carried in a holster that protects the trigger. It doesn't have to be on your hip to preform that simple task. In fact, I would support legislation to that effect. Now, depending on your situation, you may also want a holster that has a retention quality to it.

I agree with retention. While my duty holster is a triple retention holster, my off duty holster still has a single retention.
“Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, an
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Mon Mar 11, 2013 4:53 pm

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 46):
Quoting cmf (Reply 34):
By listing those events you suggest they would not have happened if it wasn't for the gun free zone.


I'm not suggesting they wouldn't have happened. I'm suggesting they may have ended sooner, and with lower casualty counts, had folks that are deemed responsible by the state been allowed to carry a gun.

This is really the question here. Will the deaths that may be prevented here with this legislation outweigh the deaths of a teacher(s) going postal?

I think it can be done, but I want to lean on the side of safety. We don't see school resource officers shooting kids, so we know that a gun in a school in the right hands can be helpful, so if guns are introduced, they need to be introduced under very similar circumstances. I'm leaning towards administrators and very select teachers (ex-military or LEO perhaps) and the training must be a lot more than usual CCW classes
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
fr8mech
Posts: 6672
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: Opposite Of Conn.? Classroom Guns In S. Dakota

Mon Mar 11, 2013 6:07 pm

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 48):
I'm leaning towards administrators and very select teachers (ex-military or LEO perhaps) and the training must be a lot more than usual CCW classes

While I'm not opposed to addtional training or requirements, I do have one concern that is echoed by Mudboy, among others. When you lay on additional training requirements are you changing the job description of the teacher? Does the school now have to provide bonding? Extra-pay? Training? Does the school have to provide secure storage?

Again, not opposed to it, but it adds extra levels of complexity and more closely follows the NRA's thinking on the matter.

Personally, I prefer the repeal of the various gun-free zone laws and allowing the individual schools or school districts to make the determination as to whether to allow a licensed person on the property while armed.

As an aside, do you realize that even police officers that are out of their home state are not protected from prosecution under the federal Gun Free School Zone Act? Ridiculous, isn't it?
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aesma and 9 guests