minnesotahunter

I agree with your first sentence, which is why I would rather not have guns allowed in school. I don't really agree with your analogy, but hey, to each his own.

BareBack Jack

I don't think teachers should carry conceled weapons,they should were them in plain sight.If some of these school shooters new that their peers were pack'in they might be as bold.

Nomercy

I agree with Drift rider that we can't allow teachers to be armed because we know not what they'll do, however, I feel I must challenge this of his analogy...

Drift, you claim that we should judge people on what they have done, and not what we feel they might do...Why then, if I have never shot anyone, should I as a student not be allowed to carry a gun to school?

Moral of the story, using your own arguement, we should allow students to carry guns along with the teachers, based on the fact that none of them have a history of shooting anyone...

Why am I forced to drive 70mph on interstate? I MIGHT wreck and kill someone (myself included) if I were allowed to drive faster than that, even if I have no record of wrecks. Why am I prohibited from building a pipe bomb? Because I MIGHT use it in a malicious manner, even though I've no prior history of this manner.

Our legal system is based around preventing the bad things that citizens MIGHT do.

Allowing teachers to carry guns to school is going to encourage students to also carry guns. If you were headed somewhere where you knew your "Enemy" would be, and you knew that they'd be armed, I bet you take a gun.

Allowing firearms on school campus's promotes tension and detracts from the learning environment.

We can't allow our teachers to become prison guards with textbooks.

NJ-Bowhunter

...For all intents and purposes, you (the average law abiding citizen) cannot ever get a carry permit in NJ. Period.

driftrider

That's not my argument at all, and you've completely missed my point. I'm talking about the adult teachers, not the children who are students. If we were discussing CCW for a college level schools, then I'd say yes that college students who are old enough to possess a handgun ought to be allowed to carry it on campus. But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about schools for juveniles, and as such these juveniles fall under a different set of rules regarding what they ought to be free to do. Children are not held to the same standards of responsibility as adults and are reasonably not capable of or expected to possess the same level of judgement as their adult teachers do.

The point of my statement that we can never know what anyone will do is not meant to argue for disallowing teachers to carry in school. If you'd have read closely you'd see that it was meant to address the reality of living in a free society were liberty trumps safety. You would say that because we can't know for sure that a teacher would not do something violent that that is cause to restrict their right to protect themselves and their students by carrying a concealed handgun, but MY argument was that the lack of surety that a person , who has never committed a violent act or given anyone cause to believe they might, is not reason to prohibit them from exercising the right defend themselves and their duty to protect the students in their classroom.

If you are genuinely of the opinion that people cannot be trusted with firearms, then do you also support a complete ban on all guns? If you stand by the argument that the law ought to be written to prevent "...the bad things that citizens MIGHT do," then you must support the complete abolition of all freedom within our society, because to be free is to have the opportunity to abuse that freedom and cause harm to others. You must, by your own logic, support a complete ban on all firearms because ANYONE who has a gun can if they choose to wreak havok and kill people anywhere they wish. I could take my guns out right now and kill a dozen people or more if I wanted to, and there's no way anyone could predict that I would do that based on my legal history and character. But I COULD. Should I not be allowed to own guns because I MIGHT go kill someone? Your reasoning says yes. Mine says that despite the fact that I MIGHT go murder someone, since I have not harmed others in the past and have not given cause to make anyone reasonably believe that I might in the future, then I should be free to own them as long as I don't harm others.

Because excessive speed creates a condition were you or others around you may not be able to avoid an accident due to a lack of time to react to an unforseen circumstance, or the vehicles inability to maneuver to avoid a potential accident. In this case, limiting speeds doesn't have a reasonable and genuine effect on traffic safety. By having and enforcing traffic laws it ensures that everyone on the road is on the same sheet of music so to speak, which promotes the overall ability of everyone on the road to avoid accidents. A speed limit is very different than the subject at hand. It is more akin to a law that says that one may not target shoot in town. What we are discussing is a matter of fundamental freedom and the right of people to exercise that freedom.

Now if you'd have used the analogy that we should ban automobiles because people can drive them too fast and kill someone, then the argument would be similar.

This is false on its face. That's like saying that allowing a police office to run red lights encourages everyone else to run red lights. I would even argue that the possible presence of an armed teacher would DETER most students from bringing a gun to school. The students that would have never brought a gun to school in the first place would be no more likely to bring a gun to school should their teachers be allowed to arm themselves. For the students bringing a gun to school would be no less illegal than it was before, and the students who abilde by the law and by school rules and don't want to get into trouble are not going to break the rules just because their teachers can legally carry a gun. The students that are in question are those who had no reservation about illegally bringing a gun to school in the first place. I would say that allowing the teachers to be armed may discourage these students from taking a gun to school because they would risk not only detention, expulsion and arrest, but they could also lose their lives. I think that most kids bring weapons to school because it makes them feel powerful and makes everyone else helpless. If they knew their teachers were armed they may realize that despite the fact that they have a gun, they are not guaranteed to be in control.

Then there are the students, like Harris and Klebold, who will bring a firearm to school regardless of the consequences with the express intent to kill those around them at any cost. No amount of deterrance will stop people like this, but at least the teachers and administrators, if armed, would have a reasonable opportunity to actually defend themselves and the lives of their students should the situation come to that. Right now the teachers are literally as helpless as their students in the face of a gun toting student on a vendetta because they can do NOTHING but watch as they and their kids are slaughtered while they wait for the police to arrive.

I disagree wholeheartedly. That's the reason for CONCEALED weapons. Out of sight, out of mind. Secondly, which is more of a distraction, a teacher who is legally armed, or a deranged student who might be when everyone else is defenseless?

Mike

SD Shooter

Driftrider, your presentation was excellent and well stated. One item that should be emphasized is that we know that young people don't always make the best decisions, especially in a crisis. Therefore, most students in high school have not reached a maturity level to make such decisions and we should not expect them to. However, we would hope that teachers could. It has been demonstrated in Israel that armed teachers are a successful deterrent to terrorist attack. Of course, the teachers in Israel have been trained to accept that responsibility and they have embraced that responsibility. Do you suppose that the majority of teachers in our country could ever reach that level? Only if we the citizens and parents express our belief that they should.

Thanks again Driftrider for a great discussion. Keep up the good work.

Merry Christmas,

SD Shooter

speedgator

driftrider, just an observation: from reading these forums: it's a shame we can't express ourselves better. We have people that claim to be well versed in our Constitutional Rights and laws of our States but can't seem to spell correctly. How are we to affect laws? How are we to be taken seriously?
My ancestry is 95% Irish and last 3 generations are muddled at best. Grandfather married a French woman, then great-grandparents from Canary Isles off of the coast of Spain and my parents born in Cuba, I was born here in the good ol' U.S. of A. I spell , speak, write and read English better than 99.99% of the people I encounter, just the facts. How can you claim to represent Americans when you're not well versed in English!?
I played a lot of extremely competitive paintball in my day, when I wrote to sponsors to try and get their support, just the fact that I wrote well got my team attention because I was able to represent them appropriately.
Get mad at me, flame me, do what you want; it's cold, hard fact. When we write to our State Representatives and/or Senators please do so in proper fashion, we'll further our causes that much more. I'll get off my soapbox now, thanks to all that actually read and will take it to heart.

driftrider

speedgator,

I certainly hope that your post is not directed at me, as I believe that I write much better than most and I consider myself reasonably articulate with the written word. I try very hard to express myself in a clear and intelligent manner, although I can admittedly be somewhat verbose at times.

If you are referring to many of the others who post on this BBS, then I would tend to agree with you. Many of the people who do write poorly are not stupid, but either lack the written language skills or are too lazy to apply them. I, personally, think that there is no excuse for not at least writing and speaking up to the best of ones ability. People DO judge you not only by what you say, but also how you say it.

Mike

speedgator

I do not single you out, good sir. I merely point out that others on this site and many other sites that cater to our hobbies have those type of people and it is hard for us to be taken seriously when we cannot handle the language correctly. No offense intended towards anyone, just pointing something out matter-of-factly.
I have written my State Representative(s) and Senator(s) plenty of times and they have always replied with in-depth answers and well thought out letters. Just for grins and giggles I once addressed them with multiple, poorly written letters from a friends address. No replies at all. We will not have our collective voice(s) heard if we cannot communicate well, as you so pointed out.

JONES 1969

NO GUNS IN SCHOOLS BUT I THINK THE WAY TODAY IS MAYBE A LITTLE ADDED SECURITY