• 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'

Higgins86 said:
lol except that gay people and minorities are fellow human beings where as a Gun is a weapon....
Click to expand...
All 3 are protected under the Constitution. That's why I see all such parents in the same light of bigotry.

You had asked me "what about them", and no you know "what about them". Parents who don't want their children attending a school where legally own guns are carried, are wrong, and should either correct their view of the world or move away.
 
Jerry said:
All 3 are protected under the Constitution. That's why I see all such parents in the same light of bigotry.
Click to expand...

being afraid that a student might get hold of a teachers weapon, the weapon might fire accidently or that it might intimidate their child is a lot different than hating someone because of the colour of their skin.
 
Higgins86 said:
being afraid that a student might get hold of a teachers weapon, the weapon might fire accidently or that it might intimidate their child is a lot different than hating someone because of the colour of their skin.
Click to expand...


The possibility exists... but we already have quite a few Universities that allow CCW on campus, and a few grade schools where teachers are armed, and so far these things have not been a problem.

Weapons don't generally fire accidentally, unless the person holding it is negligent. Spontaneous discharge is largely a myth.

IMHO, children who are intimidated by guns need to be suitably educated to cease from being intimidated... at least when the person with the gun is there to protect them, not harm them.

I realized the UK is a very different culture and all this might be a little hard for you to relate to...
 
Higgins86 said:
being afraid that a student might get hold of a teachers weapon, the weapon might fire accidently or that it might intimidate their child is a lot different than hating someone because of the colour of their skin.
Click to expand...
And there's people who think gays will convert their children to homosexuality, or that a gay teacher is necessarily a pedophile. Same ignorant bigotry.
 
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...

I don't think so. This is the gun corporations doing what they are doing worldwide...providing guns to both side of the war and gaining profits from doing it.
 
Muddy Creek said:
I don't think so. This is the gun corporations doing what they are doing worldwide...providing guns to both side of the war and gaining profits from doing it.
Click to expand...



Stuff and nonsense. This is citizens and parents desiring that the schools where their children spend so much time are properly equipped to protect them against nutters.
 
Goshin said:
Stuff and nonsense. This is citizens and parents desiring that the schools where their children spend so much time are properly equipped to protect them against nutters.
Click to expand...

NRA talking points. We don't need guns in public schools unless you are agreeing that the government needs to now use drones on the hate groups and gangs in this nation.
 
Muddy Creek said:
NRA talking points. We don't need guns in public schools unless you are agreeing that the government needs to now use drones on the hate groups and gangs in this nation.
Click to expand...


I was unaware that I was a spokesman for the NRA... I shall have to contact them about my back salary owed me in that case. :lamo:

Nor does drones and hate groups or gangs have anything to do with the discussion.

But this is no surprise, you rarely seem to be able to conjure up a coherent argument in these discussions...
 
Goshin said:
The possibility exists... but we already have quite a few Universities that allow CCW on campus, and a few grade schools where teachers are armed, and so far these things have not been a problem.

Weapons don't generally fire accidentally, unless the person holding it is negligent. Spontaneous discharge is largely a myth.

IMHO, children who are intimidated by guns need to be suitably educated to cease from being intimidated... at least when the person with the gun is there to protect them, not harm them.

I realized the UK is a very different culture and all this might be a little hard for you to relate to...
Click to expand...

"unless the person holding it is negligent" So a underpaid overworked teacher then? ;)

As for the intimidation aspect the idea of walking into a school past guards could easily spook a lot of younger kids and of course a teacher shouting at them whilst carrying could also scare a child or make a parent uneasy. I personally grew up on military bases so walking past armed guards was an everyday occurrence but that doesn't mean it wont spook out other people and given the fact public schools are paid for by the tax payer they do have the right to a say in the matter.
 
Higgins86 said:
"unless the person holding it is negligent" So a underpaid overworked teacher then? ;)

As for the intimidation aspect the idea of walking into a school past guards could easily spook a lot of younger kids and of course a teacher shouting at them whilst carrying could also scare a child or make a parent uneasy. I personally grew up on military bases so walking past armed guards was an everyday occurrence but that doesn't mean it wont spook out other people and given the fact public schools are paid for by the tax payer they do have the right to a say in the matter.
Click to expand...

So...you would discriminate against underpaid overworked teachers? Do you consider them a second class citizen whom you don't deem worthy of the protection of our 2nd Amendment?

What about overpaid underworked teachers? Should they be allowed to carry in the school?
 
Muddy Creek said:
NRA talking points. We don't need guns in public schools unless you are agreeing that the government needs to now use drones on the hate groups and gangs in this nation.
Click to expand...

There actually are parents from Newtown who think it would have been nice to have at least one armed person at his/her child's school on one particular day.
 
Higgins86 said:
"unless the person holding it is negligent" So a underpaid overworked teacher then? ;)

As for the intimidation aspect the idea of walking into a school past guards could easily spook a lot of younger kids and of course a teacher shouting at them whilst carrying could also scare a child or make a parent uneasy. I personally grew up on military bases so walking past armed guards was an everyday occurrence but that doesn't mean it wont spook out other people and given the fact public schools are paid for by the tax payer they do have the right to a say in the matter.
Click to expand...


We already have armed guards in many schools. My son's High School has one; an off-duty police Resource Officer. They don't seem overly intimidated by him... when I go by I often see students talking with him.

As for teachers, I would personally not advocate FORCING them to be armed... oh no, not at all. Only if they do so willingly, pass the course/test for a concealed carry permit, and possibly an additional class focused on safety issues they would be dealing with in schools. Then the teachers would be carrying CONCEALED.... which means the students don't know who is or is not armed... and that puts a lot of the intimidation factor out, among other things.
 
Is the NRA going to pay for all these new guns and training training? Also for the extra teachers needed to cover for the teachers taken away from the classroom to be trained? Who pays for the time of the committees set up to select which guns are to be deployed, and where?
 
Manc Skipper said:
Is the NRA going to pay for all these new guns and training training? Also for the extra teachers needed to cover for the teachers taken away from the classroom to be trained? Who pays for the time of the committees set up to select which guns are to be deployed, and where?
Click to expand...

Let alone the insurance should the teacher shoot the wrong person and the school get sued.
 
Mycroft said:
There actually are parents from Newtown who think it would have been nice to have at least one armed person at his/her child's school on one particular day.
Click to expand...

Who? NRA talking point 2,999,999....
 
Mycroft said:
So...you would discriminate against underpaid overworked teachers? Do you consider them a second class citizen whom you don't deem worthy of the protection of our 2nd Amendment?

What about overpaid underworked teachers? Should they be allowed to carry in the school?
Click to expand...

Call me old fashioned I just teachers should teach kids and leave the Die Hard stuff to the paid professionals.
 
Higgins86 said:
Call me old fashioned I just teachers should teach kids and leave the Die Hard stuff to the paid professionals.
Click to expand...


Didn't you know? ALL red-blooded Americans are John McClaines at heart! :mrgreen:


As I say, it's different here. There's a lot of things we don't "leave to the paid professionals".
 
Higgins86 said:
Call me old fashioned I just teachers should teach kids and leave the Die Hard stuff to the paid professionals.
Click to expand...

And church-goers should just go to church instead of saving a hundred of their fellow worshipers. I understand.
 
Manc Skipper said:
Who? NRA talking point 2,999,999....
Click to expand...

Mr. Mark Mattioli, who lost his 6 year old son on that terrible day, for one. But, you would have known that if you had read the article in the OP's post.
 
Manc Skipper said:
Is the NRA going to pay for all these new guns and training training?
Click to expand...
No one is asking the government to pay for any of this. The gun owner pays all their own bills just like a car owner pays for all their own bills just like a home owner pays for all their own bills, etc.

Manc Skipper said:
Also for the extra teachers needed to cover for the teachers taken away from the classroom to be trained?
Click to expand...
Training occurs after hours and does not interfere with a teacher's duties.

Manc Skipper said:
Who pays for the time of the committees set up to select which guns are to be deployed, and where?
Click to expand...
No such planning occurs. Only small-arms are involved so there are no extenuating tactical considerations. This isn't like a squad who need to organise a linear ambush. These are the same normal people who are already carrying a gun around you and your family in other public places.
 
Muddy Creek said:
Let alone the insurance should the teacher shoot the wrong person and the school get sued.
Click to expand...
Any required personal insurance is likewise the gun owner's responsibility just like car insurance is the car owner's responsibility just like home-owner's/renter's insurance is the individual owner's responsibility.

I fully support a Federal Castle Doctrine law exempting any and all public and private property owners from liability.
 
Training takes time and costs money. The teacher is not the owner of the gun, so insurance is not their problem. The money should not be stolen from the childrens' education to pay for this NRA stunt.
 
WCH said:
Adam
Lanza chose Sandy Hook for several reasons. Familiarity with the layout and the fact it was a gun-free zone were the top two.

His actual goal was to be the most prolific killer in history [the highest score if you will] Having no one to even slow him down made this an easy task.

All these BS excuses of what 'might' happen (if teachers etc. are armed) only further endangers our children, families and friends.
Click to expand...

Regulating guns is more practical and less expensive then arming teachers and expecting an average person with a glock to kill somebody with a bushmaster. Most people went into to teaching for many reasons, but few envisioned defending the school till their death.
 
Manc Skipper said:
Training takes time and costs money. The teacher is not the owner of the gun, so insurance is not their problem. The money should not be stolen from the childrens' education to pay for this NRA stunt.
Click to expand...
Since when is the teacher not the owner of the gun?

I'm pointing to states which already allow adults to lealy carry a gun in schools as my real example. What example are you using?

I retoast this for reference:
Oregon Firearms Federation

Putting aside for a moment that Oregon does not issue "concealed weapons permits," this school just like every other public school in the state, has NO authority to forbid a person with a concealed handgun license from entering school property. While both Oregon and Federal law forbid people from being on school property with firearms, concealed handgun license holders are exempt from both laws.Oregon statute 166.370 forbids firearms in "public buildings" which schools are, but subsection B says "this section does not apply to:... (d) A person who is licensed under ORS 166.291 and 166.292 to carry a concealed handgun"

As we have said elsewhere, if you have a child you maycarry unto public school property.
Click to expand...

Everything is on the individual's dime. The taxpayer doesn't pay for any part of it.
 
Last edited:
Slyfox696 said:
I am
an educator and I cannot think of a worse idea than arming the teachers. It amazes me people actually think putting guns in the hands of teachers is safer than removing the most dangerous guns from the populace. Don't teachers already have enough to do without worrying about being the school security guard as well?

EDIT: This person did think of a worse idea (though I'm pretty certain the post was made tongue-in-cheek):
Click to expand...

Agreed. I am also glad that I don't have kids to worry about.

Going to school should be a positive experience. And for all the criticism our schools get and as much as we want to improve education, I don't see how remolding schools so they resemble bomb shelters is going to help. When I went to high school I did worry about shootings. That's a lot if damn stress.

Telling children as young as 5 that they are not safe in school seems damaging to me. Just regulate the most dangerous guns, and improve safety but don't send children the message that schools are death zones. This is America, not some worn torn third country. We shouldn't be worried about these shootings at all. It shouldn't be happening.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom