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

NRA unveils plan for armed guards in schools it says 'will save lives'

I think often times those who rage against gun ownership are raging against their own inadequacies
 
TurtleDude said:
Slyfox-your long winded posts turn lots of people off. and we get the fact you are afraid of guns and don't know much, if anything, about the use of defensive weapons or the mythical changing dynamic you bray about premised apparently on a faith-based myth that comes from the anti gunner's book of hysteria.

How are kids going to know who is packing. Tell me your many years of experience carrying a firearm concealed.
Click to expand...

Yes! We don't need to know your life story or all about your "relationships" with your students, just the relevant data please.
 
ChrisL said:
Yes! We don't need to know your life story or all about your "relationships" with your students, just the relevant data please.
Click to expand...

quantity substituting for quality is a common trait among the anti gunners
 
TurtleDude said:
I think often times those who rage against gun ownership are raging against their own inadequacies
Click to expand...

Or they're just like frightened children who are afraid of an inanimate object instead of the lunatic wielding it. :roll:

I wonder why Slyfox thinks that teachers are so inadequate and too irresponsible to carry and use a weapon properly?
 
ChrisL said:
Or they're just like frightened children who are afraid of an inanimate object instead of the lunatic wielding it. :roll:

I wonder why Slyfox thinks that teachers are so inadequate and too irresponsible to carry and use a weapon properly?
Click to expand...


according to snyder and others, its projection. They see everyone else as terrified and incompetent with weapons as they are so they want laws to keep people LIKE THEM from being armed

the relationship between a student and teacher argument was one of the most idiotic bits of psychobabble I have ever seen on this board
 
Slyfox696 said:
In the educational way. As I've said. Additionally, do not forget my police officers.
Click to expand...
Here in SD we've had a very successful Resource Officer program for 43 years, and now we're also arming district employees.

Slyfox696 said:
Okay...I have once before, but I will again, in more detail....
Click to expand...
And no one's going to force you to carry if you don't want to.

Slyfox696 said:
By then, it becomes a game of telephone, and suddenly most in the community know.
Click to expand...
I'm ok with everyone knowing I carry. I only carry concealed because the stereotypes you subscribe to compel you to hysteria. I'd rather carry openly since it's more comfortable, open-carry holsters have a higher retention rating, and I can carry a full-size.

Slyfox696 said:
But, for arguments sake, let's say none of those people say anything, an unlikely scenario, but we'll address it. Where is a teacher going to keep the gun? Obviously not on his hip, because there's no way that could stay concealed.
Click to expand...
That's the primary way I carry concealed. When I really don't want anyone to know, I carry a sub-compact in the pocket. I've never been 'made'.

In fact, The Men's Warehouse here is quite adept at tailoring their product to make your firearm invisible; and yes The Men's Warehouse sells more than suits...much more.
 
Last edited:
ChrisL said:
I think you misunderstood my question. I'm asking how is throwing books and attacking an armed person MORE safe and effective than having someone armed who can actually shoot back and probably even kill the attacker.
Click to expand...
And I'm not saying it is more effective, what I'm saying is it doesn't disrupt the educational process the way armed teachers will. But training the students to be aggressive in that situation IS probably more safe than just relying on a teacher to carry a gun. If our only two options (and I know it's not, but I'm just making this comparison) are to teach students to aggressively react when a shooter is in their presence or just rely on a teacher carrying a gun for safety, teaching the students is probably a safer way to go. Like I said, the teacher is likely the first person to be shot in a situation like that, and if you're not teaching students to react, then they are sitting ducks.

That is different than what we are discussing.
Click to expand...
It is, but that doesn't mean the requirements would be.

Besides, I believe that varies from state to state.
Click to expand...
As would arming the teachers.

No, actually I don't see that happening at all. Why would you think that?
Click to expand...
Because of people like you and your buddies in this thread, who will then argue whatever restrictions were in place would be too restrictive of teachers who want to carry, and how it is an infringement upon their 2nd Amendment rights.

Now this is interesting. You say that any moron can shoot a gun, yet you seem to think that teachers must be less qualified than your average mentally insane mass murderer? Why would you think a teacher would be so incompetent?
Click to expand...
I've never said anything remotely close to that. What I've said is a teacher's job is to teach. If you want armed guards, then they need to be a member of the police force. A teacher in a situation like that would be more likely to engage in questionable tactics/decision.

By the way, a mentally insane mass murderer doesn't care if a random person gets shot. The person firing back has to. Big difference.

The teacher would still be educating. Why would you think otherwise?
Click to expand...
I'm not saying they wouldn't be teaching. You're beginning to sink to Jerry levels of misunderstanding.

LOL! Sure you did. Gotta say, that sounds very strange. I was never aware of the color or style of my teachers underwear. What kind of relationship did you have with your teachers anyway?
Click to expand...
A student/teacher relationship, just like millions of kids around the country. And we did know.

You must be joking.
Click to expand...
I think the same thing everytime you try to argue there's not a relationship between student and teacher.

I'm sorry you are so fearful of guns.
Click to expand...
It's not about me, it's about the kids, why is this so difficult for you people to understand?

Guns do NOT change relationships.
Click to expand...
Now I KNOW you must be joking.
How. Did you actually think I was going to let you get away with this as your explanation? And you call yourself a teacher? :lamo You get an F.
Click to expand...
I've already explained how. Do you realize how silly you sound here? The fact you're mocking me for your inability to read is quite humorous.

I think you have an attitude of arrogance, as if you know more about children...and relationships than anyone else here.
Click to expand...
I don't have an attitude of arrogance, I just can't stand stupidity, and I've encountered quite a bit of it. You deny a relationship exists between students and teachers, you keep asking me to explain something I've already explained (twice, I believe), I've had my argument completely misunderstood and attack based upon the misunderstanding.

Perhaps you should do a better job comprehending an argument. Maybe then I'll not come across quite so "arrogant".

Of course I had favorite teachers.
Click to expand...
Then you had a relationship with that teacher.

except for maybe a professional type of relationship, which is the way it SHOULD be.
Click to expand...
....what the heck do you think I've been talking about?

I don't think parents really want teachers to have "relationships" with their children. They want them to concentrate on the education part.
Click to expand...
That's exactly what I've been saying over and over. What did you think I was talking about?

See above. Obviously, your idea of relationship and mine are two different things.
Click to expand...
Clearly. It appears as if yours comes from your mind being in the gutter and being unaware of the full definition of the word.

No, and you have not even given an explanation as to how they would know.
Click to expand...
Yes, I did. Please read.

I disagree. I think you sound extremely fearful of guns.
Click to expand...
I'm not "extremely fearful" of guns. The fact you think this shows just how irrational you've become in this discussion. Just because I don't want to disrupt the educational process by arming teachers, as opposed to uniformed officers which I have supported, you've taken that to mean I'm extremely fearful of guns. That shows a complete irrationality on your part.

You should fear the people who want to go to schools and kill innocent people
Click to expand...
I do. Which is why I've mentioned uniformed officers. Which is why I've discussed the "react aggressively to an active shooter" training many schools are going through. Which is why I support making it more difficult for those people to get guns in the first place.

Have you paid attention at ALL in this thread?

Guns are not the problem.
Click to expand...
Oh, because these people are just as likely to come into the school and kill 26 people with a teddy bear? Or even one of those hammers the NRA drones always talk about?

You're just kidding yourself if you don't think guns are part of the problem. Are they the only problem? Of course not. But they are definitely part of the problem.
TurtleDude said:
I think often times those who rage against gun ownership are raging against their own inadequacies
Click to expand...
I often think those who buy guns do so to compensate for their own inadequacies. After all, everyone's always tougher with a gun, right?

See how stupid rhetoric can work both ways and accomplish nothing?
ChrisL said:
I wonder why Slyfox thinks that teachers are so inadequate and too irresponsible to carry and use a weapon properly?
Click to expand...
I wonder when you became as dishonest in this discussion as Jerry. I never said anything remotely close to this.
TurtleDude said:
the relationship between a student and teacher argument was one of the most idiotic bits of psychobabble I have ever seen on this board
Click to expand...
The fact you're arguing a relationship doesn't exist between a teacher and a student is easily "one of the most idiotic" things I've seen on an Internet forum. Though I wouldn't call it idiotic nearly as much as I'd call it ignorant.
 
Last edited:
Slyfox696 said:
And I'm not saying it is more effective, what I'm saying is it doesn't disrupt the educational process the way armed teachers will. But training the students to be aggressive in that situation IS probably more safe than just relying on a teacher to carry a gun. If our only two options (and I know it's not, but I'm just making this comparison) are to teach students to aggressively react when a shooter is in their presence or just rely on a teacher carrying a gun for safety, teaching the students is probably a safer way to go. Like I said, the teacher is likely the first person to be shot in a situation like that, and if you're not teaching students to react, then they are sitting ducks.
Click to expand...

You still have failed to explain how a teacher carrying concealed would disrupt the educational process. Until you can answer that question, this portion of your argument means nothing.

It is, but that doesn't mean the requirements would be. As would arming the teachers. Because of people like you and your buddies in this thread, who will then argue whatever restrictions were in place would be too restrictive of teachers who want to carry, and how it is an infringement upon their 2nd Amendment rights.
Click to expand...

:lol: No, obviously you don't understand the argument about the 2A and how it would be infringed. Requiring training in order to act as an armed guard would not be an infringement IMO.

I've never said anything remotely close to that. What I've said is a teacher's job is to teach. If you want armed guards, then they need to be a member of the police force. A teacher in a situation like that would be more likely to engage in questionable tactics/decision.
Click to expand...

Most communities could probably not afford to pay police officers to act as armed guards. Besides, school shootings are fairly rare, so that would be kind of overkill, and again I disagree with your assessment that a teacher would engage in questionable tactics. I don't understand why you think they would be incompetent in such a situation. They are perfectly capable of aiming a gun and pulling the trigger. Some training would give them even more confidence. Also, don't you think that maybe some teachers are already gun owners and may be experienced in shooting? Some teachers have been in the military, some could have some law enforcement background.

By the way, a mentally insane mass murderer doesn't care if a random person gets shot. The person firing back has to. Big difference.
Click to expand...

No kidding! :roll:


I'm not saying they wouldn't be teaching. You're beginning to sink to Jerry levels of misunderstanding. A student/teacher relationship, just like millions of kids around the country. And we did know. I think the same thing everytime you try to argue there's not a relationship between student and teacher. It's not about me, it's about the kids, why is this so difficult for you people to understand? Now I KNOW you must be joking. I've already explained how. Do you realize how silly you sound here? The fact you're mocking me for your inability to read is quite humorous.
Click to expand...

Here you go again with this relationship stuff. That has NOTHING to do with the discussion. And yes, you are obviously fearful of guns.

I don't have an attitude of arrogance, I just can't stand stupidity, and I've encountered quite a bit of it. You deny a relationship exists between students and teachers, you keep asking me to explain something I've already explained (twice, I believe), I've had my argument completely misunderstood and attack based upon the misunderstanding. Perhaps you should do a better job comprehending an argument. Maybe then I'll not come across quite so "arrogant".
Click to expand...

Ba,ha,ha. Not arrogant?

Then you had a relationship with that teacher. ....what the heck do you think I've been talking about? That's exactly what I've been saying over and over. What did you think I was talking about? Clearly. It appears as if yours comes from your mind being in the gutter and being unaware of the full definition of the word.
Click to expand...

Clearly you misunderstand . . . again. My mind is not in the gutter. I am just trying to get you to explain your correlation between a relationship with students and a teacher who is carrying a concealed weapon.

Yes, I did. Please read.
Click to expand...

They would just know, is NOT an answer. You have not given any valid reason as to how the children would know a teacher is carrying concealed.

I'm not "extremely fearful" of guns. The fact you think this shows just how irrational you've become in this discussion. Just because I don't want to disrupt the educational process by arming teachers, as opposed to uniformed officers which I have supported, you've taken that to mean I'm extremely fearful of guns. That shows a complete irrationality on your part.
Click to expand...

Ah, no, you are the one being irrational here. For some reason, you seem to think that only police officers are capable of shooting a gun. And yes, I believe that your posts reveal that you are extremely fearful of guns.

I do. Which is why I've mentioned uniformed officers. Which is why I've discussed the "react aggressively to an active shooter" training many schools are going through. Which is why I support making it more difficult for those people to get guns in the first place.
Click to expand...

So, you think that an armed loon will take out a teacher first, but not uniformed officers who are OBVIOUSLY armed? That doesn't even make sense.

Have you paid attention at ALL in this thread?
Click to expand...

Have you?

Oh, because these people are just as likely to come into the school and kill 26 people with a teddy bear? Or even one of those hammers the NRA drones always talk about? You're just kidding yourself if you don't think guns are part of the problem. Are they the only problem? Of course not. But they are definitely part of the problem.
Click to expand...

No, the problem is societal. It has nothing to do with guns. You act as if guns are a new invention. They have been around for much longer than you have.
 
I am still waiting for a valid explanation how a teacher carrying concealed (and for the arming of teachers to work their identity should not be known) will have his or her "relationship" with a student changed by that act. I suspect Slyfox has never carried concealed. As someone who has carried concealed on and off for years, I can say his claims are utter BS
 
TurtleDude said:
I am still waiting for a valid explanation how a teacher carrying concealed (and for the arming of teachers to work their identity should not be known) will have his or her "relationship" with a student changed by that act. I suspect Slyfox has never carried concealed. As someone who has carried concealed on and off for years, I can say his claims are utter BS
Click to expand...
0.jpg
 
Pilot said:
I definitely think all schools should have at least one person armed, but I have mixed feelings about whether teachers should be able to carry in class. What do you think?
Click to expand...
First let me say for background context that the Utah permit requires a 4hr accredited familiarity class, FBI fingerprints and daily federal NICS for entire life of the permit rather you buy a firearm or not. Teachers in Utah have been armed for 12 years. To the best of my knowledge there has never been a teacher involved gun accident or any incident of a student accessing a teacher's gun.



Bill McGee said:
We have two approaches here: We can either arm all of our teachers and bring guns closer to our children, or we can make laws will remove guns and pull guns further away from kids....
Click to expand...
The CT law against bringing a gun to school did not stop Adam Lansa or any other murderer in history, ever. This does not mean we have to "arm all the teachers". It's reasonable to allow every permit holder to make the choice for themselves, and even then those who choose to carry are typically a minority.

Bill McGee said:
If a teacher has access to a gun, then children have access to that gun.
Click to expand...
How many guns did the children of Sandy Hook "have access to" and how did that make the situation worse? Why aren't we hearing about Utah students getting a hold of their teacher's weapons?

Bill McGee said:
....[teachers] simply don't have the training needed to respond to a high-pressure situation in any kind of meaningful way, and if a scenario came up they [the teachers] are just going to compound the problem.
Click to expand...
So teachers can't respond to fires, medical emergencies, unarmed violent students, or a student coming to them with a report of abuse or rape? These things occur far more often then any shooting. If any school's teachers aren't trained to respond to a stressful situation in any meaningful way, then we have a much larger problem then Sandy Hook.

Bill McGee said:
[when asked about a federal ban against anyone having a gun at any school in the US]....I think we need to have consistency across this issue. Parents should feel comfortable regardless of where they live.
Click to expand...
I have children in the public school system and I'm more comfortable with an armed faculty then not in exactly the same way that I am more comfortable with a faculty trained in 1st Aid and CPR with a kit handy.

Bill McGee said:
Let's say, God forbid, there's a scenario where a teacher feels compelled to defend herself or the children, you've got the high-pressure environment, tunnel vision, inability to use your peripheral vision...all those things that happen in those kinds of scenarios, and you get children in between that teacher and whatever that perceived threat is and I think you've got a huge mess on your hands. The teachers aren't prepared and there's a huge liability issue and I don't want 'liability' to be one of my children.
Click to expand...
Please see this link:

Connecticut teachers were heroes in the face of death
By Ben Brumfield, CNN
updated 10:30 AM EST, Tue December 18, 2012

*click link for video*

Victoria Soto, 27, moved her first-grade students away from the classroom door. The gunman burst in and shot her, according to the father of a surviving student.


"She would not hesitate to think to save anyone else before herself and especially children," her mother, Donna Soto, told CNN's Piers Morgan.
Anne Marie Murphy's body was found in a classroom, slumped over young children killed in the shooting. The 52-year-old special education teacher was apparently attempting to shield them, her father told the newspaper Newsday.
Click to expand...
Mrs Soto thought to hide the children as the gunman approached, and lied to him saying the children were in the gym. Other teachers were busy expertly carrying out well rehearsed emergency plans, send children to pre-designated emergency locations such as the local firehouse, in line with heads down and hand on the person in front of them. Mrs. Murphy sacrificed herself in the face of certain death to protect the children in her class.

No sir, I have no problem with a gun in a teacher's hand.
 
It amazes me what little ability some of you seemingly possess to actually read, at least in this thread. The fact some of you are still asking for how it would disrupt the educational process/relationship with a student, despite me posting it twice and referring back to the specific post a couple of times, shows you all are not at all interested in debate, but rather regurgitate your own speaking points over and over, without taking anything else into consideration. I might as well be a rock you're yelling at, because you're not at all interested in hearing what is being posted in response, you're just interested in your own gun supporting agenda. The lack of reading comprehension has grown more annoying than I wish to deal with. Unlike the two or three of you, I read everything you post which is relevant to our debate (and there are two/three of you, and one of me) and I try to respond to each point. And I certainly don't ask you to explain something you've already explained.

You have ignored the fact I've argued for police officers, or in the case of ChrisL, you've told me our children's lives are not worth the cost of saving. And if you don't understand a relationship exists between a student and teacher, then you are completely ignorant to what teachers do and you are totally unqualified to have this discussion. And if you're incapable of reading something which has been posted numerous times, then I suggest you re-enroll in elementary school because it's a pretty serious hindrance to any quality discussion.

I likely won't be checking back into this thread, but if I do, please present an actual argument which shows you've actually read what I posted. I'd love to respond to an intelligent argument on this subject, and not just an argument from gun nuts who are only interested in spreading the very same gun culture responsible for the deaths in the first place.
 
Slyfox696 said:
It amazes me what little ability some of you seemingly possess to actually read, at least in this thread. The fact some of you are still asking for how it would disrupt the educational process/relationship with a student, despite me posting it twice and referring back to the specific post a couple of times, shows you all are not at all interested in debate, but rather regurgitate your own speaking points over and over, without taking anything else into consideration. I might as well be a rock you're yelling at, because you're not at all interested in hearing what is being posted in response, you're just interested in your own gun supporting agenda. The lack of reading comprehension has grown more annoying than I wish to deal with. Unlike the two or three of you, I read everything you post which is relevant to our debate (and there are two/three of you, and one of me) and I try to respond to each point. And I certainly don't ask you to explain something you've already explained.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but "because they will" is NOT an explanation, no matter how upset that makes you.

You have ignored the fact I've argued for police officers, or in the case of ChrisL, you've told me our children's lives are not worth the cost of saving. And if you don't understand a relationship exists between a student and teacher, then you are completely ignorant to what teachers do and you are totally unqualified to have this discussion. And if you're incapable of reading something which has been posted numerous times, then I suggest you re-enroll in elementary school because it's a pretty serious hindrance to any quality discussion.
Click to expand...

No, there is a difference between something being worth the cost and communities just not having the monetary funds to do something. YOU really need to work on your understanding of how things work.

As to the last part of this portion of your post, you have failed to explain how a concealed weapon would change the dynamic between student and teacher.

I likely won't be checking back into this thread, but if I do, please present an actual argument which shows you've actually read what I posted. I'd love to respond to an intelligent argument on this subject, and not just an argument from gun nuts who are only interested in spreading the very same gun culture responsible for the deaths in the first place.
Click to expand...

It's sad that you cannot back up your position with any kind of valid argument or evidence. I see that your "flight" response has kicked in.
 
Slyfox696 said:
...the very same gun culture responsible for the deaths in the first place.
Click to expand...

Well, you know that I've pretty much given up reading your blather and you know that your liberal debating tactics are the reason, but I have read some of your stuff because you sometimes include significant gems of insight into the core of your beliefs. The above is one such gem.

Now, I happen to disagree with you that our so-called "gun culture" is responsible for any deaths. I believe that people are responsible for gun-related deaths....just as I would believe people are responsible for car-related deaths, not some nebulous "car culture".

Do you agree that you would rather deal with the availability of guns than deal with the reasons why people kill other people?
 
Slyfox696 said:
It amazes me what little ability some of you seemingly possess to actually read, at least in this thread. The fact some of you are still asking for how it would disrupt the educational process/relationship with a student, despite me posting it twice and referring back to the specific post a couple of times, shows you all are not at all interested in debate, but rather regurgitate your own speaking points over and over, without taking anything else into consideration. I might as well be a rock you're yelling at, because you're not at all interested in hearing what is being posted in response, you're just interested in your own gun supporting agenda. The lack of reading comprehension has grown more annoying than I wish to deal with. Unlike the two or three of you, I read everything you post which is relevant to our debate (and there are two/three of you, and one of me) and I try to respond to each point. And I certainly don't ask you to explain something you've already explained.

You have ignored the fact I've argued for police officers, or in the case of ChrisL, you've told me our children's lives are not worth the cost of saving. And if you don't understand a relationship exists between a student and teacher, then you are completely ignorant to what teachers do and you are totally unqualified to have this discussion. And if you're incapable of reading something which has been posted numerous times, then I suggest you re-enroll in elementary school because it's a pretty serious hindrance to any quality discussion.

I likely won't be checking back into this thread, but if I do, please present an actual argument which shows you've actually read what I posted. I'd love to respond to an intelligent argument on this subject, and not just an argument from gun nuts who are only interested in spreading the very same gun culture responsible for the deaths in the first place.
Click to expand...
We're not going to believe or accept something just because you say it.

You have to provide evidence in support of your claims and also evidence countering the claims of others.

I don't see why you're amazed by this unless you didn't realize that this is a debate site and/or don't realize what debate is.

You need to explain yourself, and you need to provide evidence that what you say is true. So far you haven't don that.
 
Armed guards in school will only bolster 2nd amendment brainwashing.
children should not even know what a gun is till at least they reach the age of reason.
it's unfair to their growth
 
~Dr.Who~ said:
Armed guards in school will only bolster 2nd amendment brainwashing.
children should not even know what a gun is till at least they reach the age of reason.
it's unfair to their growth
Click to expand...

By age 7, both of my sons knew how to disassemble a .22 revolver, inspect it, clean it, reassemble it, load it and fire it safely. At age 9, they each received their own .22 rifle and became as proficient with it as they are with the revolver.

The funny thing is, though, they are both in their early 20's and neither of them have any interest in firearms. Heck, if I didn't service their rifles every now and then, nobody would have touched them in at least 10 years.

But I have a question for you: What do you consider "the age of reason"?
 
Mycroft said:
Well, I suspect you are trying to employ sarcasm, but it's hard to know for sure.
Click to expand...
well i find it repulsive that he would do such a thing to a child....and i also realize it is beyond anything i can say to make him see the light...

so yeah sarcasm with a punch of the truth
 
~Dr.Who~ said:
well i find it repulsive that he would do such a thing to a child....and i also realize it is beyond anything i can say to make him see the light...

so yeah sarcasm with a punch of the truth
Click to expand...

You find it repulsive that WHO would do WHAT to what child?
 
~Dr.Who~ said:
anyone teaching a child about guns is repulsive and abusive.
Click to expand...

Well, since you see fit to insult me with your idiocy, I guess I'm entitled to insult you in return.

I find that your attitude indicates you are a dumbass.
 
Mycroft said:
Well, since you see fit to insult me with your idiocy, I guess I'm entitled to insult you in return.

I find that your attitude indicates you are a dumbass.
Click to expand...
this is a defining moment for me...you don't really add much do you


anyway it's not an insult it's a fact...
people that would introduce guns to children and brag about are child abusers and repulsive..

it's inane to do so...

this is why America is not mature enough to have the 2nd amendment in their constitution...look at this instance of rape... a child's mind is not ready for guns.
no one's is but i guess thats moot here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom