• 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!

Should There Be Any Regulations To 2nd Amnendment Rights?

Are ANY government regulations of the 2nd Amendment acceptable?


  • Total voters
    70
You created an absurd scenario out of what he said.


That's your opinion & you have a right to be wrong. (which you are now exercising);)

I like to add a little humorous exaggeration to make my point. (not everything is devoid of humor. You should try it sometime.)
 
Last edited:
That's your opinion & you have a right to be wrong. (which you are now exercising);)

I like to add a little humorous exaggeration to make my point. (not everything is devoid of humor. You should try it sometime.)

:roll:

I knew it couldn't last. 10-4.
 
Wasn't this your quote?

Why yes, yes it was...But what in that quote suggests the scenario you outlined? I suggested armed teachers, not commandos teaching.
 
Why yes, yes it was...But what in that quote suggests the scenario you outlined? I suggested armed teachers, not commandos teaching.

I would suggest that a teacher carrying an M-60 around would be considered WELL armed!:lol:
(obvious exaggeration to lighten the topic a bit but quite accurate as well)
 
Do we collectively (the government) have a right to regulate/control a law abiding citizen's 2nd Amendment Rights?

The 2nd discusses both a Colective and an Individual Right to bear Arms... Some regulation/control is needed.
 
Originally Posted by Ikari
You shouldn't be able to buy guns with cash? People who wish to infringe upon the rights and liberties of the People are complete and total idiots. All there is to it.

I think that exact opposite... since people came up with the Rights, it is people that can void or change the Rights.
Anybody who does not understand this concept needs to be seriously ignored.
 
I would suggest that a teacher carrying an M-60 around would be considered WELL armed!:lol:
(obvious exaggeration to lighten the topic a bit but quite accurate as well)

"WELL armed" indeed.

While I don't mind a bit of light-hearted fun, I disagree with the "quite accurate as well" bit. In no remotely rational world could I see teachers toting M-60s. Nor, in fact, anything remotely close to such. Thus, I did not imagine that someone would suggest they would.
 
"WELL armed" indeed.

While I don't mind a bit of light-hearted fun, I disagree with the "quite accurate as well" bit. In no remotely rational world could I see teachers toting M-60s. Nor, in fact, anything remotely close to such. Thus, I did not imagine that someone would suggest they would.

The dilemma (of course) is where do you draw the line & who draws it?

Is a 38 revolver enough?
Maybe a 44 magnum?
Do you force teachers to carry weapons?
What ammo type? FMJ?...Hollow Point?...Wad Cutter?
Police need very regular training to stay proficient with their weapons. Where would a teacher get the extra time?
Who pays them the extra training time money?
Would an armed teacher just be a ready target for a suicidal student to take her gun away & kill classmates?


There is no end to these questions & arming teachers is a horrible idea in terms of the safety our our kids, imo.
 
Last edited:
I think that exact opposite... since people came up with the Rights, it is people that can void or change the Rights.
Anybody who does not understand this concept needs to be seriously ignored.

While the option to change "rights" as enshrined in our laws is always there (and, in fact, enshrined in said laws as well), I believe that the laws enshrined in the Constitution and its Amendments are enshrined in that way precisely to prevent casual changes. Only with a major agreement on the part of congress should any changes be made.

Only with a vast majority agreement on the part of the citizens of the country should any Amendments be removed/altered/added.

Even with the current crop of politicians we have in power I doubt a major change of that sort could be passed.
 
The dilemma (of course) is where do you draw the line & who draws it?

Is a 38 revolver enough?
Maybe a 44 magnum?
Do you force teachers to carry weapons?
Police need very regular training to stay proficient with their weapons. Where would a teacher get the extra time?
Would an armed teacher just be a ready target for a suicidal student to take her gun away & kill classmates?

There is no end to these questions & arming teachers is a horrible idea in terms of the safety our our kids, imo.

Perhaps.

As stated when I introduced this topic, it was one possible partial solution.

And it could be implemented successfully, IMO.
 
Perhaps.

As stated when I introduced this topic, it was one possible partial solution.

And it could be implemented successfully, IMO.

We'll just agree to disagree.
Personally, I can;'t think of a profession LESS LIKELY to be trainable to safely use lethal weapons around young children than school teachers.
Shoot-Don't Shoot situations require a full time, police/military mindset that can't be safely learned on a part-time basis.
 
Last edited:
We'll just agree to disagree.
Personally, I can;'t think of a profession LESS LIKELY to be trainable to safely use lethal weapons around young children than school teachers.
Shoot-Don't Shoot situations require a full time, police/military mindset that can't be safely learned on a part-time basis.

A downside I can see is the potential for intimidation from armed teachers directed towards students.

Such would have to be watched carefully.

Personally, I think security at the entrances would be a far easier and less invasive method than arming teachers.

As to the "full-time vs. part-time" argument, assistants for teachers could help.

And I was not thinking of actually training teachers as law enforcement officers, just to the extent that they would be able to selectively target a threat, and defend themselves and their students. True, this would reduce the time they had to focus on teaching...

So while IMO arming teachers has merits, it has demerits as well. As with anything.
 
A downside I can see is the potential for intimidation from armed teachers directed towards students.

Such would have to be watched carefully.

Personally, I think security at the entrances would be a far easier and less invasive method than arming teachers.

As to the "full-time vs. part-time" argument, assistants for teachers could help.

And I was not thinking of actually training teachers as law enforcement officers, just to the extent that they would be able to selectively target a threat, and defend themselves and their students. True, this would reduce the time they had to focus on teaching...


You probably have no idea how difficult the actions you pose (above) are to actually do in the real world.

This is kinda long & from another forum where I explained a small portion of DEA's Special Agent firearms training.

I reprint it here to add some reality to the discussion:






Re: Gun Thread
By: Devil505 On: Wed Feb 06, 2008 12:43 pm
Kinda long here but I think it's worth reading if you own a gun



I own a S&W 9MM handgun & a Remingtlon 12 guage, pump action shotgun. I learned to fire rifles when I was a kid with a 22 cal rifle, shooting at targets while laying prone on an old, dirty mattress<G>
I had never fired a handgun until I went through the DEA Basic Agent course in the spring of 1974. At that time, the Justice Dept trained agents on & issued 38cal Police Special revolvers. Our firearms instructor was an incredible shot who had been a State Dept. Special Agent whose duty was to protect ambassadors, etc.
We were trained to fire the Combat Course, which consisted of left & right hand barricade firing positions, point-shoulder position & a bunch of other positions, but the main thing they wanted us to learn was to draw our weapons quickly & fire accurately from the waist as FBI statistics proved that most law enforcement involved shootings took place very quickly & at very close range.
While accuracy was obviously very important, judgement (as to when to shoot & when not too) is & is the most important thing for anyone with a firearm to master. To that end, the Justice Dept trains all its agents to keep their finger out of the trigger housing until they have made the decision to use deadly force......Keeping your finger off the trigger gives you that extra split-second to decide if you need to shoot, & prevents accidental discharges.
Part of our training (& I believe Justice still uses it) was in "Hogan's Alley." Hogan's Alley is now a very realistic, "Anytown USA" storefront community at Quantico VA (Now home to FBI & DEA academies) where agent trainees are put through very realistic shoot/Don't shoot scenarios.
When I went through training, we had no such fun sites! Our training was done in an old converted bank building in NW Washington with a gym (for PT) in the basement & firing ranges on the 2nd & 3rd floors. Our "Hogan's Alley" consisted of the following:
On the day we went through Hogan's Alley training, all of us trainees assembled in the basement gym, with unloaded weapons but wearing our blue coveralls that we always wore for firearms training to keep our clothes clean.
The instructors waited upstairs at the 2nd floor range. When they yelled your name (down the stairs) each trainee had to sling two 20lb weight bellts over their shoulders, do 20 quick push-ups & then start to run up the stairs where you had been instructeded to stop at the 2nd floor firing range. As you were bolting up the stairs, the instructors were yelling & throwing ash can covers & things down at you! As you made the 2nd floor landing, (while still being yelled at, etc) most of the instructors were pointing up the stairs & yelling for you to keep going. (we had been instructed to go to the 2nd floor range so I stopped & refused to run up to the 3rd floor...,.Thats was correct in that they just wanted to see if you would get flustered & not follow your instructions to stop at the 2nd floor range. Trust me, we had a number of trainees that did keep runing up to the 3rd floor<G>) As each trainee finished the exercise, he would join the instructors on the stairs in yelling & razzing the next trainee! (what a blast!) I'll never forget one trainee...from Hawaii I think.....who was running up the stairs & had a wild, crazed look in his eyes as he approached the 2nd floor landing. Just to be a wise guy I pointed to an open window & yelled for him to jump!! He scared the hell out of a bunch of us by trying to do just that!! (we had to grab him & steer him away from the window!)
It's hard to put yourself in the mindset of that exercise but it was very stressful! (Your livelyhood depended on your passing the course & we lost almost 1/2 of the trainees that started the course through being washed out)
(side note: DEA had a deliberatly dramatic way of washing a trainee out of the course.....We all had name plates & our books etc on our desks in the classroom. When you all took your lunchbreak & returned to class.....one desk would be vacant...No nameplate, no books...just gone! You couldn't ask any questions & when we got back to our hotel (they had us all stay at the Ramada Inn, NW Washington where we all had a roomate) the trainee's stuff was just gone a(s if he had never existed) & his roomate now had a private room!<G>
Sorry this is dragging but I'm having fun reminiscing.
Anyway, back to Hogan's Alley:
When you entered the 2nd floor firing range, the lead instructor handed you twelve 38cal rounds (six to load in the pistol & six for your pocket) as you were loading your weapon he explained what the "problem" was in the actual firing range (through a door) He said there are 3 hostages being held by an unknow number of bad guys. Your job was to kill he bad guys & free the hostages. When you enterd the actual range, you were in complete darkness. The light had been turned off & you had to feel your way to firing station 1. The lead insrtuctor's voice yelled out: "Are you ready?" When you yelled yes... suddenly the lights were thrown on & all hell broke loose! Instructors were screaming...:"shoot:"....Don't shoot" & swearing & throwing ash can covers at you! You noticed that the gate had been removed on firing point 1 allowing full access (for the first time) to the whole area downrange. There were paper (human shaped & painted) targets scattered about & mmediatley to your left was a bad guy with a shotgun so you spun around & shot him. (later you found out that there was a mother, holding a baby target a few feet behind the bad guy target so that your rounds went through the bad guy but then killed the mother & baby!)
There were a few other bad guys targets closeby that you killed pretty easily & then, after you had fired six rounds (& your revolver was empty) the lights snapped off again. I had seen a bad guy target on the far right, downrange, so I made use of the darkness to scramble to the right while I was reloading in the dark. When the lights snapped back on (probably about 15 seconds) I immediatley snapped off 2 rounds into the bad guy target . Suddenly a target started moving (on rails overhead) & as it got closer I could see it had a gun in its right hand aimed right at me! I snapped of 2 more rounds into him & as the target got closer I could see that in it's left hand (near its waist) it was holding a small but unmistakable DEA badge!! I had just killed a DEA agent!!
Those of us trainees that had killed our fellow "agent" (& that was almost everyone in the class) had to spend the afternoon writing letters to DEA headquarters, explaing the shooting & writing letters to the wife & kids of the "agent" we had killed.The intention of Hogan's Alley was/is not to turn basic agents into a group of proffesional , hostage saving commandos but rather to give you a realistic experience & realization as to what your unproffesional actions could result in. Most of us, in a few short moments, had managed to kill an innocent young mother, her baby & gunned down a fellow DEA agent!
It was a hard lesson but one that I'll never forget!

The moral we all learned that day, & one I think anyone owning a weapon needs to learn is....Keep your finger out of the trigger housing until you are sure & always be aware of your surroundings. (are you reading this Dick Cheney?....sorry, couldn't help myself<G>)
 
You probably have no idea how difficult the actions you pose (above) are to actually do in the real world.

This is kinda long & from another forum where I explained a small portion of DEA's Special Agent firearms training.

I reprint it here to add some reality to the discussion:

Re: Gun Thread
By: Devil505 On: Wed Feb 06, 2008 12:43 pm
Kinda long here but I think it's worth reading if you own a gun



I own a S&W 9MM handgun & a Remington 12 gauge, pump action shotgun. I learned to fire rifles when I was a kid with a 22 cal rifle, shooting at targets while laying prone on an old, dirty mattress<G>
I had never fired a handgun until...Wall of Text

A highly interesting and entertaining account.

I do not disagree that the potential for problems resulting from armed teachers exists.
However...

Perhaps a better route would be allowing teachers, if they so desired, to carry a handgun in school. They would have to pass rigorous tests to be allowed such. This would allow any former law enforcement/military officers or people who gained the skills required in their spare time the option to carry a defensive firearm while teaching.

And, obviously, it would be on a case-by-case basis, as some areas would not want armed teachers, and some might. Actually, is it not currently on a case-by-case basis?
 
The 2nd discusses both a Colective and an Individual Right to bear Arms... Some regulation/control is needed.

Don't know of anyone else who takes that interpretation.
 
While the option to change "rights" as enshrined in our laws is always there (and, in fact, enshrined in said laws as well), I believe that the laws enshrined in the Constitution and its Amendments are enshrined in that way precisely to prevent casual changes. Only with a major agreement on the part of congress should any changes be made.

Only with a vast majority agreement on the part of the citizens of the country should any Amendments be removed/altered/added.

Even with the current crop of politicians we have in power I doubt a major change of that sort could be passed.

I completely agree. There should be nothing casual about changing of any laws, let alone tinkering with the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights. They are excellent documents and should be treated with reverence.

Additionally, I don't think that the 2nd should be changed, I was simply pointing out that it could be, and that the poster to which I was responding was being rudely illogical.
 
Don't know of anyone else who takes that interpretation.

Me too, and that fact certainly does not make me incorrect either. ;)
 
The idea that citizens should be able to fight our own military, (with it thousands of nukes, SLBM's & the like) is just a ridiculous argument, imo.
The people who wrote that amendment had done that very thing just twenty years earlier. Clearly it wasn't too ridiculous to them.
 
The idea that anyone can buy a gun, anytime is a sad, sad prospect. For example, if someone hates you, and is a in a mental institute, he can get a gun, shoot and kill you, and he'll just go back to the crazy place. That concept, that anyone, including crazies and convicts can buy guns is a horrid concept. That is what you people want when you say no regulation. You'll only care about that when a convict shoots up a bus of people with an M-16, and one of your family members is dead.
Straw man and appeal to emotion.

Fail.
 
John Hinckley was nuts.
I don't think he was ever institutionalized for it, nor thought by any professional to be homicidal prior to his assassination attempt. I could be mistaken, though ...
 
Do you force teachers to carry weapons?

Always been my opinion that people who refuse to bear arms are unfit to. There's no good to be had from requiring teachers to pack heat, but there's certainly good to come of allowing them to.

Would an armed teacher just be a ready target for a suicidal student to take her gun away & kill classmates?

Seriously. Seriously. Everyone keeps using this argument as a reason that people can't use their own guns in self defense, but I have never heard of a single case where an armed citizen has been disarmed by their own assailant. I've never heard of a case where someone who is not already armed has just walked up to someone else and relieved them of their weapon. The idea of it staggers the imagination.

That's the realm of Lifetime made for TV movies, not real life.
 
If it were as easy to take a gun away from someone as certain people are prone to claim, the response would be: just take it back. After all, apparently it is SO easy to take guns from people. (/irony)

Currently CCW permits require weapons to be concealed. If your weapon is properly concealed, a person will not know you are packing. If they don't know you are packing, how will they take what they do not know you have?

If they suspect you are packing, first they have to figure out where your gun is hidden. Belt holster under a concealing garment? Left side, right side, small of back, appendix position? Pocket gun? Which pocket? Shoulder holster? Does the holster have a retention feature like a thumb-break strap?

I teach this stuff as an instructor: teach people how to take guns away from others, and how to prevent others from taking their gun. It isn't as remotely simon-simple as some people try to paint it.
 
Always been my opinion that people who refuse to bear arms are unfit to. There's no good to be had from requiring teachers to pack heat, but there's certainly good to come of allowing them to.



Seriously. Seriously. Everyone keeps using this argument as a reason that people can't use their own guns in self defense, but I have never heard of a single case where an armed citizen has been disarmed by their own assailant. I've never heard of a case where someone who is not already armed has just walked up to someone else and relieved them of their weapon. The idea of it staggers the imagination.

That's the realm of Lifetime made for TV movies, not real
life.

Not real??

Here are 3 incidences (2 involving cops having their gun taken away) that a 5 minute Google search found.
FBI would have statistics but it is not rare at all. (One of the agents in my group was shot in the hand with his own gun while struggling with someone)



New Orleans cop shot to death with her own gun - CNN.com

Florida Cop Shot With Own Gun In Drug Bust: Top News Stories at Officer.com

Police: Man Shot With Own Gun During Attempted Robbery - Pittsburgh News Story - WTAE Pittsburgh
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom