• 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!

Arming teachers

What consequences should this teacher face?

  • This teacher is a hero, no consequences.

    Votes: 12 19.0%

  • This teacher should be arrested and tried for murder or something similar

    Votes: 3 4.8%

  • This teacher should face financial consequences from the victims families

    Votes: 2 3.2%

  • This teacher is not a hero but should not face consequences

    Votes: 24 38.1%

  • Something else.

    Votes: 22 34.9%
  • Total voters
    63
Vox said:
Unfortunately for that statement, there is no such client or business relationship.
Click to expand...

So what did the NRA get $75 million from gun manufacturers for? Nothing at all? Where can I apply to receive $75 million from gun manufacturers for doing nothing at all?
 
Kreton said:
I don't know. Thus this conversation I started. I am curious to see how people reply. There is no question that if someone stops a shooter in his tracks and saves lives that they are a hero. But what about when it doesn't happen as planned. It is an interesting question.
Click to expand...

What if a cop does the same thing?
 
Vox said:
No, there is not a chance in hell that the teacher would be charged with anything. The guilt belongs to the perpetrator who caused the gunfight to start by attacking the school.

That's the law in most places and just common sense anywhere it's actually not in statute.
Click to expand...

Of course the perp is guilty and should be charged, but that wasn't the question..... "What consequences should this teacher face"
 
Superfly said:
View attachment 67229106
Click to expand...

LOL!

LOOK at the heading......that's to a JUDICIAL CANDIDATE, that's a political hopeful who wants to get elected, not an ordinary person.

That's a letter that goes to all politicians to offer NRA support.

Please.......let's try to stay honest.
 
beancounter said:
Of course the perp is guilty and should be charged, but that wasn't the question..... "What consequences should this teacher face"
Click to expand...

And the answer provided is that there is not a chance in hell that the teacher would be charged with anything. The guilt belongs to the perpetrator who caused the gunfight to start by attacking the school.

If you try to rob or kill people.......any deaths resulting from your crime are attributed to YOU.

That's the law in most places and just common sense anywhere it's actually not in statute.
 
JasperL said:
I haven't seen an actual proposal. How much of a pay increase? Who pays? Feds or local? How much training is required?

And it's a stupid idea to tie pay to carrying a firearm to your place of work. If people honestly assessed themselves, few would carry a weapon because they'd correctly determine they aren't SWAT and can't reliably and effectively respond to an active shooter situation because they don't have the training/personality/skills. So lots of people deciding to go armed will be incompetent or oblivious to their own incompetence, but want the easy money. It's boneheaded.

And if the teachers are required to pass an actually significant test, similar to what an LEO would face, then pay for teachers is dependent on how well they are suited to be....cops!

As to the OP, it correctly addresses the problem of putting guns in the hands of teachers, who aren't cops or SWAT. Unless they're highly trained to deal with active shooter situations, then they shouldn't have the opportunity to make the kind of mistakes. But if you agree to arm them, the consequences to the teacher cannot depend on how well they respond to the threat. People mentioned "shooting with eyes closed" etc. Well, arm incompetents and that's what the feds or local school board should EXPECT to happen - teachers responding recklessly and incompetently, and the people giving them permission to carry weapons damn sure better have a lot of insurance to cover the possible 7 or more figure lawsuits.
Click to expand...

I trust my fellow citizens to try to make the best choices they can inside that dire circumstance. You can't rely on authorities in these situations... they are 10 minutes away.

I think teachers have a right to defend themselves with a firearm just like any other adult in this country.
 
Vox said:
LOL!

LOOK at the heading......that's to a JUDICIAL CANDIDATE, that's a political hopeful who wants to get elected, not an ordinary person.

That's a letter that goes to all politicians to offer NRA support.

Please.......let's try to stay honest.
Click to expand...

You said, "They contain NO "threatening" statements like the one you made up."

I just proved to you that they do send out letters with threatening statements. It doesn't matter who it is to. What matters is yes, the NRA does send out threatening letters.

Please.... let's try to stay honest.
 
Cardinal said:
So what did the NRA get $75 million from gun manufacturers for? Nothing at all? Where can I apply to receive $75 million from gun manufacturers for doing nothing at all?
Click to expand...

So cite your source so we can see if it was part of a business relationship as you CLAIMED.
 
Vox said:
So cite your source so we can see if it was part of a business relationship as you CLAIMED.
Click to expand...

What part are you finding to be implausible? That the NRA has received $75 million from arms manufacturers?
 
Superfly said:
You said, "They contain NO "threatening" statements like the one you made up."

I just proved to you that they do send out letters with threatening statements. It doesn't matter who it is to. What matters is yes, the NRA does send out threatening letters.
Click to expand...

First of all, it wasn't a threatening statement. It said if the politician failed to respond they would get a (?) designation which could cause voters not to support them.

Rather than a threat, that's helpful to the candidate so he or she can understand that failing to provide the information could cost them votes.

Second, it was not the normal NRA contact to ordinary people as you claimed.

Get real. These transparent attempts to sully the name of the NRA are just silly.
 
MrWonka said:
Hmmm... Depends.... is the teacher white and the student black?
Click to expand...

racecard.jpg
 
Cardinal said:
What part are you finding to be implausible? That the NRA has received $75 million from arms manufacturers?
Click to expand...

Just cite your source. You are claiming the NRA is in a business relationship as a client of the gun manufacturers. So back up your claim.
 
Vox said:
Just cite your source. You are claiming the NRA is in a business relationship as a client of the gun manufacturers. So back up your claim.
Click to expand...

First tell me if what you're finding implausible is that the NRA received $75 million from arms manufacturers.
 
Cardinal said:
First tell me if what you're finding implausible is that the NRA received $75 million from arms manufacturers.
Click to expand...

So you can't back up your claim? Fine. That identifies you.
 
Kreton said:
Quick scenario

A teacher is in a state that allows teachers to carry a firearm into a school. This teacher does all the training, has their concealed carry permit, and legally can have a gun in the classroom. During a crisis the teacher shoots at a suspect with nothing but good intentions, trying to save lives, but hits some students, possibly killing some.

Is this teacher a hero for at least trying to help?
Should this teacher be charged for shooting innocent children despite their good intentions?
Click to expand...

The teacher is an idiot, like the policy and should be charged.
 
WillyPete said:
Regarding the OP, they wouldn't be heroes, but wouldn't deserve consequences. Anything else would have a chilling effect.

I'm not opposed outright, but I would ask that these teachers training be coordinated by the actual security staff that schools clearly need. Certainly their time would be compensated, but I'd expect regular drills and plans for how they would respond in the event.

It's absolutely insane that we protect our malls and empty sports arenas better than our schools, and yet cry our eyes out and shriek about what could have been done every time.
Click to expand...

We protect our malls and sports arenas with trained security professionals or police officers. We don't arm the cashier at the gap or the football players and expect them to provide security.
 
Vox said:
So you can't back up your claim? Fine. That identifies you.
Click to expand...

I have a source that I'm ready to share right now. But first I want to make sure it addresses whatever argument you actually have. Is it your position that gun manufacturers didn't give the NRA $73.5 million dollars? (My memory of the figure was off by $1.5 million).
 
celticwar17 said:
I trust my fellow citizens to try to make the best choices they can inside that dire circumstance. You can't rely on authorities in these situations... they are 10 minutes away.

I think teachers have a right to defend themselves with a firearm just like any other adult in this country.
Click to expand...

OK, you're not addressing any of my comments so I'll quit here. We disagree I guess.
 
wolfsgirl said:
We protect our malls and sports arenas with trained security professionals or police officers. We don't arm the cashier at the gap or the football players and expect them to provide security.
Click to expand...

No argument from me. At most, I think arming teachers should be in addition to dedicated security staff, not a replacement for that staff.

My main point was that we apparently don't think children are worth defending, or we would make more resources available to do that.

And yet we all so upset when tragedy strikes.

These children died because as a society we are too cheap to defend them, but we don't want to feel bad about that so let's just get really emotional for two weeks every time there's a tragedy.

It's the most cost effective solution.

As a society, we are the worst sort of hypocrites.
 
SirGareth said:
Why would any SANE parent send their kid to government schools where teachers unions own the guns ?

This is pure NUTS

Pull your kids out of these government kid kennels and send them to schools that are careful as to who they allow to attend.
Click to expand...

Now who can argue with that? In red type, even. Have to admit, "government kid kennels" is a great phrase, as it combines a bit of paranoia, demeaning of entire professions and populations with no realistic solution.
 
WillyPete said:
No argument from me. At most, I think arming teachers should be in addition to dedicated security staff, not a replacement for that staff.

My main point was that we apparently don't think children are worth defending, or we would make more resources available to do that.

And yet we all so upset when tragedy strikes.

These children died because as a society we are too cheap to defend them, but we don't want to feel bad about that so let's just get really emotional for two weeks every time there's a tragedy.

It's the most cost effective solution.

As a society, we are the worst sort of hypocrites.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. Technology exists to rapidly secure students though electronic and electromagnetic means. Technology exists to ensure no one enters the school with a gun. These solutions come at a cost that people won't pay.
 
Cardinal said:
I have a source that I'm ready to share right now. But first I want to make sure it addresses whatever argument you actually have. Is it your position that gun manufacturers didn't give the NRA $73.5 million dollars? (My memory of the figure was off by $1.5 million).
Click to expand...

Save your breath. I've already corrected him, showed him proof, and even used his own link as proof. He is not interested in anything that may shatter his notion that the NRA's cares about him. I believe his ultimate declaration was "I AM the NRA!" You may as well try to convince the Pope that God is fictitious.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom