View Single Post
  #10 (permalink)  
Old September 21st, 2007
ChamberedRound's Avatar
ChamberedRound ChamberedRound is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location:
Pennsylvania
(Berks County)
Age: 35
Posts: 4,043
Rep Power: 422
ChamberedRound has a reputation beyond reputeChamberedRound has a reputation beyond reputeChamberedRound has a reputation beyond reputeChamberedRound has a reputation beyond reputeChamberedRound has a reputation beyond reputeChamberedRound has a reputation beyond reputeChamberedRound has a reputation beyond reputeChamberedRound has a reputation beyond reputeChamberedRound has a reputation beyond reputeChamberedRound has a reputation beyond reputeChamberedRound has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Oregon teacher fights to take gun to class

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan77 View Post
What if a shot is fired in a school....misses it's intended mark and kills a student.............Now what ????


A school is no place for a gun....I work in a school, have a carry permit, but not allowed to have a gun on school property or in my truck on school property.
I strongly disagree. I agree that children with guns in school is a problem, but there should be nothing wrong with school staff or faculty responsibly carrying a firearm for the protection of everyone in the school. Preventing guns in school isn't going to stop a BG from bringing a gun to school. It's that simple. In fact, BGs are more likely to target a school because they know no one is armed.

Take a look at this report, for example:
http://www.pafoa.org/forum/general-2...n-control.html

I'm paraphrasing, but the report states that the mere presence of a gun can prevent a crime. The report also shows criminals stating that they're going to carry a weapon regardless of the law; after all, that's why they're CRIMINALS. Also listen to the part about the Appalachian School of Law; a crime was stopped by a law abiding citizen carrying a weapon. This is especially import to this discussion as it shows that weapons in schools aren't necessarily a risk or danger.

In addition to the above video, read the following article by Massad Ayoob, a US citizen, retired policeman, and someone at the forefront of firearms training and self-defense. In particular, read the section "When Homeland Security Hits Home". It describes an incident of an Israeli class which was defended from a terrorist attack by a group of armed teachers and volunteer parents.

If someone wishes to do harm to anyone in a school, they're going to try and do so regardless of the rules in place; it's going to happen whether the administration of the school likes it or not. Given that simple truth, one would think that the school and the employees of a school would want to be prepared for ANY possibility. Our schools have a nurse to prepare for the inevitability that someone will get sick. They have first aid kids and in some cases, defibrillators to prepare for the possibility that someone will get hurt. Why do they not allow faculty and staff to have weapons to prepare for the possibility that someone outside the school's (and even the law's) influence may try to do them harm?
__________________
"[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."
-James Madison, Federalist Papers, No. 46.

"America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy." [sic]
-John Quincy Adams

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies."
-Thomas Jefferson

Μολών λαβέ!
-King Leonidas

Last edited by ChamberedRound; September 21st, 2007 at 10:04 AM.
Reply With Quote