Posted on 02/26/2018 3:18:40 PM PST by Kaslin
It would be interesting to do a U-Haul based study in a year to see if there is a net migration into the sane school districts around the country.
Gives me hope
My Mom neighbor heard on the radio that one school district some place is letting the local police dept have an office in the school. Now there is a good idea—house the police dept in the same building and you have live in security 24/7
Can we expect a straight answer from the libtards?
And there are some towns in Michigan which have voted in a no gunfree zones law of some kind.
It looks like Texas has the most school districts with armed school admins & teachers.
Some counties in Arkansas, esp. rural ones have sent their teachers to a 100-200 hour Law Enforcement course over the summer in order to become Part time I law enforcement officers (Auxiliary/Reserve Officers).
First, school boards have the ultimate responsibility to protect the children in my opinion. It's something that hasn't been addressed fully in the Coward County tragedy, but it will be done by folks like us. We already know they instituted this decriminalization of crime for the money. But what else did they do or not do to both educate and protect the children entrusted with them?
Second, I like the idea of school boards being proactive and in a sense taking legal responsibility for arming teachers/staff. Teachers will be acting with their express purmission and if some tragedy befalls someone, and that is alwyays a possibility, the school board is part of that decision.
Years ago, the SRO in one of our schools managed to take off her equipment belt in the bathroom and then stupidly walked out of the ladies room, leaving it hanging inside the bathroom stall. No harm was done when a student spotted it and reported it to a teacher and principal. But the red faced SRO was put on early retirement by the county. These sort of things will happen as more and more school staff are armed; we're all human.
>
Most teachers just use their body’s to shield kids from gunfire.
>
Unfort., it’s not the anit-gun teachers doing the shielding when necessary. They haven’t been ‘mugged by reality’. I don’t too many opinions of the bldg 12 teachers re: arming themselves vs. opinion(s) of bldg != 12
>
Liberals should be asked point blank why the lives of politicians, celebrities, banks and jewelry and diamond store employees are more important than our kids?
>
Please. LEFTISTS...not liberals.
One should ask if THEY would be held responsible for any deaths resulting from THEIR wish to remain ‘gun free’ (Oh, they LOVE the idea of making gun OWNERS be mandated to carry ‘insurance’).
Better yet, propose THIS solution: Split the school in 1/2. They can send ‘their angel’ to the *gun free* section as they want. If anything should happen, NOBODY on the other side can legally interfere to stop the shooter.
Have ‘em take their chance(s); let’s see if they’re willing to put THEIR child(ren)s life in the balance.
That photo warms my heart. Thank you.
The Left fears that arming teachers will provide non debatable empirical evidence that those schools are safer as thee will not be a shooting in any of the protected schools. Then the policy will sweep nationally, much to the dismay of Leftists as they lose their number one method (school shootings) to push for gun control.
I have never forgotten that tragedy. From my reading, Texas and Missouri allow trained armed teachers. Ohio, is now pushing legislation for the same. Sad to see our schools be fortified, but with all the debate, it seems to be the only choice.
We will never find all the plotting crazies nor potential snap crazies, even if the FBI and LE agencies started doing their job. The Fedgov,State,and municipalities will never confiscate the 10's of millions of weapons in America.
Who would have the resources? Yes, the military, but they are constrained by Posse Comitatus act. However, there is the States' National Guard, but that would take a Presidential order which would be over-ruled by many State Governors would just refuse to enforce it, not to mention the volume of lawsuits that would go on forever.
What would be the Fedgov's recourse if States refused their NG to confiscate weapons? The Fedgov couldn't send in the military because of the Posse Comitatus Act as mentioned above.
But then, Congress could pass a law that ALL guns need to be registered with a Grandfather clause. For those millions who ignore such law, again, how could it be enforced? How many would willing register their guns? Very few I suspect. Enforcement couldn't be without knocking on every door in America. It could be enforced within a current Law requiring registration, but would the ATF and other agencies actually have the resources to confiscate guns under a new law requiring registration? That why we fight tooth and nail to avoid registration
Let's follow Israel's example. Since they started arming their teachers and put up their wall, you never read about the daily bombing/shootings of innocents in Marketplaces, Weddings, Cafes, Busses, town squares, etc. anymore like back in the 1990's. Because of their profiling, they also don't have hi-jacked aircraft. This is a sliver of land surrounded by dedicated muslim killers who espouse every day how they want to kill Jewish people. Israel has it right and we can learn much from their experience and policies.
That's the way, uhhuh, I like it. It's simple commonsense. Don't advertise that you are defenseless. Tear down the stupid NO GUN ZONE signs and erect around the perimeter of the campus "Armed School Employees". Hell, even if the school can't get enough faculty to learn gun training and get a CCW, that would be better that what they have now.
President Trump, as usual, has the solution. I've known this since Columbine. Yes, it will be difficult for some lib/socialists to grasp the idea of some faculty being concealed armed, but why not just put up the sign as mentioned before? Who does it hurt, other than the Snowflakes who say guns are icky.
,
Do be honest even I can figure out this idiot didn't mean muzzle velocity but rate of fire. He was too dumb to state it correctly.
How he came to that conclusion escapes me because every TV show clearly demonstrates that full auto ARs users, who never hit anything, are always brought down by 9 mil hand gun users.
I remember when Faubus used the National Guard to stop Ike from integrating his schools. Oh wait.......
www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/lawrence-the-president-lives-in-a-fantasy-world-1168220227914
I believe it to be simple and to the point. If the students don't like it, the Principal can encourage a contest for a different color scheme, as long as they stick to the message.
O’Donnell claims 3200fps, when it is usually between 2300 and 2700fps. A Glock 34 is a little less than 1,400fps.
So, using the higher numbers for both, the bullet from the AR-15 takes 0.0111 seconds to travel 30 feet.
The bullet from the Glock 34 takes 0.0214 seconds, or about 1/100 of a second longer.
BTW, using the slower speed of 2300fps, the AR-15 takes 0.01314 sec.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.