Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: stevie_d_64

It’s the same justification that was used to get CHL passed initially - ‘same training as the police’. Remember that? The only way they were able to pass it over the whingers’ objections was by saying “CHL holders will get the same training as the police do in the use of their pistols.” Same thing applies here. IIRC, the 80 hour requirement is the same as the firearms training that air marshals get.

Also, this doesn’t preclude schools from allowing teachers with CHLs to carry if they want. A school can have both.


20 posted on 05/26/2013 4:12:28 AM PDT by Spktyr (Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]


To: Spktyr

I believe the local school diustricts would utilize what already works in the state regarding this issue...One in particular has and is always pointed out after one of these soft targets is hit...

My wife’s boss is a fantastic administrator, and if the opportunity arose, I bet I could make a good case to her about this issue...She would probably not have a problem with parent who have current CHL’s and staff to do so,now that this bill is in play...

But I’ll wait to see how this all plays out first...

I’m sure the liberal teachers will pitch a bitch about it if it is ever brought up...


25 posted on 05/26/2013 5:10:51 AM PDT by stevie_d_64 (It's not the color of one's skin that offends people...it's how thin it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson