I think that is what you hire police for. I think when you are around hundreds of kids, in a building devoted to their education and well-being, certain exceptions have to be made about who and what is allowed in the building.
those same police that maintain a perimeter and stand by, protecting themselves from harm, while the rampage continues ??? as in columbine.
Or those same cops, that voluntarily disarm before going into a school, on 'official' business or not ???
Im sure that there are some educators that have the whole SHTF scenario played out in their minds, about how to get to their guns, locked away in the car, off property, to stop an assault, in the victim disarmament zones known as 'schools' ...
Anyone know CrackingHam? Hasnt responded to his own post yet and is a newbie. By the stupid title of the article im liable to think troll.
I didn't post and run from anything. I stand by what I said. I intended to say nothing else on this forum because frankly the responses come accross as demeaning and less then constructive.
You and others continue going back to the example of one incident. What you and others who continuously cite Columbine conveiniently leave out is that there was an armed security guard posted within the school and that he exchanged fire with the two students before any SWAT arrived. But because they used assault weapons the guard was overwhelmed with fire, ran out of ammo, and was not able to kill them. So your argument that a lone teacher with a small to medium caliber concealed pistol would probably have stopped two assault weapons-armed students is not really tenable in my view.
And you and others also cite the police response. Well I happen TO AGREE THAT THE COLUMBINE P.D. DID NOT RESPOND VIGOROUSLY ENOUGH. But again you also conveiniently leave out the fact that the SWAT had gotten word that the place was rigged to blow. So frankly I think their hesitation, if certainly NOT EXCUSABLE, is understandable. And the notion that I suggested in any way that a person is not responsible for themselves or not responsible for self-defense, is just plain daft.
I never knew any police "voluntarily disarmed" before entering a school. Now that is something that could be changed. I would suggest stationing a policeman at every school with a certain attendance or higher. That's my opinion. A policeman wears body armor, has a radio for instant communication, and is thoroughly trained in firing small arms. He also acts as a deterrent. And I never said a teacher couldn't keep a gun in their car.
If you want to argue, intellegently and respectfully, then by all means please do, but don't misrepresent what I say, dimiss my arguments as having "serious problems," and then complain when I leave the thread because I am being ridiculed for not falling into lock-step with you.