It’s Not Just the Police – The Feds are Also Militarizing Public Schools with Grenade Launchers, M16s and Tanks "Guess this is what freedom looks like"

http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2014/09...16s-and-tanks/



Army sees 'megacities' as the future battlefield &...

Why does a school district need an armored vehicle? Phoenix program, anyone?

To protect the poor unarmed schoolchildren.

CoG, have you been to a public school lately?

http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2014/09...16s-and-tanks/



Army sees 'megacities' as the future battlefield &... Originally Posted by SEE3772

The article is a bull shit scare tactic. The asshole....I mean author, plays fast and loose with the truth. He repeatedly says these weapons are going to the schools and implies they will be under control of the schools themselves. In Texas school police forces are a branch/part of the city police force. It's members are fully qualified police officers. No public school has an arms room not controlled by cops. And just because he doesn't understand why rifles with scopes are trained on innocent people doesn't mean shit. It's one way of finding out they're innocent people

That being said, I don/t understand how the police having weapons of the same basic level as our open carry wack-jobs can raise concerns when open carry or ownership of semi-auto matic versions of military firearms doesn't. If somebody is going to have m 16s vs ar15s, I'd rather it was the cops instead of the open carry morons The grenade launchers, if present at all are for tear gas. We see that used on a daily basis, right? Right? Same for the armored cars/not a tanks. We all see convoys of those every day, right? Sometimes they need them.

The article is a bull shit scare tactic. The asshole....I mean author, plays fast and loose with the truth. He repeatedly says these weapons are going to the schools and implies they will be under control of the schools themselves. In Texas school police forces are a branch/part of the city police force. It's members are fully qualified police officers. No public school has an arms room not controlled by cops. And just because he doesn't understand why rifles with scopes are trained on innocent people doesn't mean shit. It's one way of finding out they're innocent people

That being said, I don/t understand how the police having weapons of the same basic level as our open carry wack-jobs can raise concerns when open carry or ownership of semi-auto matic versions of military firearms doesn't. If somebody is going to have m 16s vs ar15s, I'd rather it was the cops instead of the open carry morons The grenade launchers, if present at all are for tear gas. We see that used on a daily basis, right? Right? Same for the armored cars/not a tanks. We all see convoys of those every day, right? Sometimes they need them. Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Cops having the same weapons as the "wack-jobs". You've gotten it turned around, it is the citizens having almost the same weapons as the police. As for training telescopic, automatic weapons on citizens....didn't a cop in Ferguson, MO do just that and lost his job as result? You can check it out but he did.
And where exactly did open carry people come up in this conversation in the first place? They didn't until you brought it up. That is called a straw man argument. It is invalid. Of course, if you want to protect the schools then give the teachers the right to arm themselves instead of crouching in a locked down classroom waiting for some loony to show up at the door.

Of course, if you want to protect the schools then give the teachers the right to arm themselves instead of crouching in a locked down classroom waiting for some loony to show up at the door. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Of course, give "some (disgruntled) loony" an opportunity to steal "the teachers" protection and then open fire on the classroom, while "the teachers" back is turned.

That makes lots of sense!

Of course, give "some (disgruntled) loony" an opportunity to steal "the teachers" protection and then open fire on the classroom, while "the teachers" back is turned.

That makes lots of sense! Originally Posted by bigtex

That "logic" would justify the DISARMING of the entire populous of the U.S.

My concern would be that "the teachers" would follow "the lead" of YOUR MAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE and hand over their "protection" to the "loony" to appease him or her so he or she would not attack the teacher with it.

That "logic" would justify the DISARMING of the entire populous of the U.S.

My concern would be that "the teachers" would follow "the lead" of YOUR MAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE and hand over their "protection" to the "loony" to appease him or her so he or she would not attack the teacher with it. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Are you "stalking" me again?

Are you "stalking" me again? Originally Posted by bigtex

No. I keep telling you. Following a Stalker is not "stalking"!

Actually, I was commenting on your "logic" (or lack thereof)!

Cops having the same weapons as the "wack-jobs". You've gotten it turned around, it is the citizens having almost the same weapons as the police. As for training telescopic, automatic weapons on citizens....didn't a cop in Ferguson, MO do just that and lost his job as result? You can check it out but he did.
And where exactly did open carry people come up in this conversation in the first place? They didn't until you brought it up. That is called a straw man argument. It is invalid. Of course, if you want to protect the schools then give the teachers the right to arm themselves instead of crouching in a locked down classroom waiting for some loony to show up at the door. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I didn't stutter. The every day cop on the street is not as well armed as the wack-jobs. SWAT teams are. Patrol cops aren't.

Yes, I brought the open carry douche-bags into my post. It's my post and you and your Nazi ilk may try to suppress my freedom of speech. You will fail as you do in most of your endeavors. They are another example of fear mongering assholes. Certainly not straw men for the purpose of making a point although they almost certainly are straw men in real life. I used the open carry douche-bags as an example or reason (a reason, not "the" reason) why the police (the original subject) may need more than a shotgun or a side arm. Since I didn't use them refute an argument or replace the original subjects you have shown you know as much about what a straw man argument is as you about things in general.
Not much.

We have open carry douche-bags here in Texas.
Who do they make feel safer? Themselves? Of course. They're playing real life Texas Rangers. Do they make others feel safer? Not somebody who knows a small percentage of them have any formal or applicable training to be in a live fire situation. For the sake of the argument you'll raise, let's say 50% are veteran combat infantry trained. That means 50% aren't. Which one will show up to "help"? That stat might not bother someone who has the same percentage of his wits (you know, a halfwit), but it bothers most of the rest of us.

Who do they actually make it safer for? Since that 50% is going to be much lower and probably in the single digits not many people.
Arming the teachers without the proper training actually increases the odds you will die in a school shooting. Odds that are already much smaller than dying in a plane crash. By arming our teachers you have saved fewer students than die by lightening strikes. Well done educator. Next "take aim" at those who die choking on those little lick-em gold stars. Wait. Self adhesives did that.
Think of your own.
Who will pay for the training? When would they receive it? How often would they need to practice and requalify? Who would pay for that?

Cops having the same weapons as the "wack-jobs". You've gotten it turned around, it is the citizens having almost the same weapons as the police. As for training telescopic, automatic weapons on citizens....didn't a cop in Ferguson, MO do just that and lost his job as result? You can check it out but he did.
And where exactly did open carry people come up in this conversation in the first place? They didn't until you brought it up. That is called a straw man argument. It is invalid. Of course, if you want to protect the schools then give the teachers the right to arm themselves instead of crouching in a locked down classroom waiting for some loony to show up at the door. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

It's completely relevant and directly on point: try to think. If the OP was arguing that it was a citizen that shouldn't be allowed to own, carry and deploy an assault rifle, or to own a tank or an MRAP, you and SEESAW and the rest of the whacks would be stomping your feet and quacking about the 2nd Amendment.

Let's take it a step further and imagine a scenario where a group of terrorists show up at a school armed to the teeth and start killing teachers and students and taking hostages. Who would be the first motherfuckers bleating about how it was the government's fault for not properly arming the police or having adequate armed security available? That would be you and the rest of your merry band of idiots. On the one hand you argue that the solution to stopping school shooters is more guns, arming teachers, more security, etc etc etc. Now, when the discussion shifts to making sure those charged with the responsibility of keeping folks safe have the tools they need to accomplish that, we are back to the "evil dangerous government" bullshit.

Make up your fucking minds.

Who will pay for the training? When would they receive it? How often would they need to practice and requalify? Who would pay for that? Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Of course JD would not pay for it, just mandate it! "All Teachers must carry guns to save our children!"

These fucking Tea'bllies bitch about the debt and seem to be the main cause of it!



.

Of course, give "some (disgruntled) loony" an opportunity to steal "the teachers" protection and then open fire on the classroom, while "the teachers" back is turned.

That makes lots of sense! Originally Posted by bigtex

There you go people, proof postive that mental illness runs in Tampon's family...and stupidity too. You can make that same argument for every cop, every soldier, every anything moron.

I didn't stutter. The every day cop on the street is not as well armed as the wack-jobs. SWAT teams are. Patrol cops aren't.

Yes, I brought the open carry douche-bags into my post. It's my post and you and your Nazi ilk may try to suppress my freedom of speech. You will fail as you do in most of your endeavors. They are another example of fear mongering assholes. Certainly not straw men for the purpose of making a point although they almost certainly are straw men in real life. I used the open carry douche-bags as an example or reason (a reason, not "the" reason) why the police (the original subject) may need more than a shotgun or a side arm. Since I didn't use them refute an argument or replace the original subjects you have shown you know as much about what a straw man argument is as you about things in general.
Not much.

We have open carry douche-bags here in Texas.
Who do they make feel safer? Themselves? Of course. They're playing real life Texas Rangers. Do they make others feel safer? Not somebody who knows a small percentage of them have any formal or applicable training to be in a live fire situation. For the sake of the argument you'll raise, let's say 50% are veteran combat infantry trained. That means 50% aren't. Which one will show up to "help"? That stat might not bother someone who has the same percentage of his wits (you know, a halfwit), but it bothers most of the rest of us.

Who do they actually make it safer for? Since that 50% is going to be much lower and probably in the single digits not many people.
Arming the teachers without the proper training actually increases the odds you will die in a school shooting. Odds that are already much smaller than dying in a plane crash. By arming our teachers you have saved fewer students than die by lightening strikes. Well done educator. Next "take aim" at those who die choking on those little lick-em gold stars. Wait. Self adhesives did that.
Think of your own.
Who will pay for the training? When would they receive it? How often would they need to practice and requalify? Who would pay for that? Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Lets go at this in reverse; who will pay for the training? That is up to the school and community isn't it? The Missouri legislature just passed a bill that allows schools to allow a teacher to arm themselves. It doesn't say who pays for what. Maybe the teacher already has concealed carry or maybe cares enough to pay for the training (which is about $120). Maybe the school will pay for it if the parents allow it.

As for the idea that putting armed teachers in the classroom will increase the likelihood of a shooting....where the fuck did you get that statistic? A box of Crackerjacks? There is no evidence of such a thing either through statistical analysis or real life. It is just a lie plain and simple.

What's the difference between an armed citizen with training and a cop with training? Just a uniform. The only thing that makes any difference is experience. A combat soldier has something that most cops will never have. Does that mean we should disarm any cop that does not have combat experience? That is what your "logic" suggests. Of course is an unarmed cop meets an armed aggressor then they will get that experience....brieftly before they're killed. You have to trust that someone with training will take it seriously and make the right decision under stress. Seems to work pretty good so far as the FBI crime statistics show that cops make mistakes more often than civilians when it comes to identifying and shooting perps.

You bring up open carry again for no apparent reason other than I think it scares you. The simple truth, the vast majority of people do not open carry. Those who do practice open carry, the vast majority of them do not use their weapon. You're scared of less than 1% of the population and I would like to you to produce a list of people who are open carry (do not try to count career criminals) people that have gone on to commit mayhem.

As far as Nazis, we've already ascertained that your friend EVA is a Nazi for wanting to deny free speech rights, his racist anti-semitism, and his habit of wearing black.