So You Want to "Arm" Teachers?

Ino regards to government controlling the right to bear arms, you said the government, which I'm assuming you meant the federal government does not but that it was the states, also assuming you meant state government.

Armory no. Militia yes. And that wee pee-wee as you affectionately call it is enough to choke you I bet.
The Government does not give or take you right to bear arms. The states are in control of that.
Maybe you should take a closer look at what the inspiration of the second amendment was.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin...tion_of_Rights

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...Bill_of_Rights


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_Rights_1689 Originally Posted by MT Pockets

You're the one that claimed that all they needed to do was set up a security check point at THE door oblivious to the fact that there are dozens of doors and no fence! Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Now you're just making up shit .... did you wait for the "page" to turn before you started MISQUOTING and MISSTATING what I posted.

Are are you so mentally impaired you can't comprehend what I posted? Apparently you have "tunnel vision" on this topic. The more you banter about "school security" the more I get concerned about whether you are actually "in the classroom" teaching or you have been pretending you've been in the classroom teaching.

Speaking of "average high schools" ...

I wish I could post a pic of the hallway of an "average high school" when the bell rings between classes without getting dinked for a posting violation by a mod. Most teachers won't even stand outside of their classrooms to monitor NORMAL HALL TRAFFIC for whatever reason they have .... and you expect them to run out into the hall with their "school gun" drawn to confront a shooter and stop him/her from killing students passing between classes!

(or leaving the building because a fire alarm was sounded!) "Friendly Fire"!

Give me a fucking break!

We don't agree. You feel that citizens would be out gunned by the federal government should we decide to rise up, and that we would be overcome.

I say that as long as we have the ability to arm ourselves, that will not be the case.

Still like being wrong, do you?

I didn't know you asked me a question that was worth answering.
I bet you feel stupid now knowing we agree. LOL!

Normally I would apologize, but you're not "normal"!
Why fuck no I am not normal what ever made you think I wanted to be? Originally Posted by LexusLover

I already knew the answer anyway dipshit. Even a blind squirrel such as you can find an acorn now and then.
I see IB is giving you a dose of your own medicine. that is you all are either too stupid to read plain English or you simply edit the content and reply with some halfbaked comment.

I already knew the answer anyway dipshit. Originally Posted by MT Pockets

Now you know why I didn't answer your stupid, useless question!

But keep pretending the Government gives you the right to post!

As for "medicine," like you, IB keeps proving me correct by offering good reasons to secure the perimeter of a school facility. You keep proving me correct in my belief that there is a God ... every time you post!

And more importantly, every time you post you prove God has a well-developed sense of HUMOR!

With all due respect, ..

.. were you the one who previously was recommending a "biometric trigger guard" on weapons carried by teachers? Originally Posted by LexusLover

Just cause someone requests them to have a trigger guard, does NOT mean they are calling them incompetent.

The resource officers are armed and around students.
No biometric safety devices.
Why isn't that a concern?

Perhaps because the likelihood is quite low.

Just cause someone requests them to have a trigger guard, does NOT mean they are calling them incompetent. Originally Posted by garhkal

I suppose neither do training wheels on a bike for that matter!

Have you ever had a "trigger guard" on any gun of yours?

(You don't have to answer!) Just a "thought"!

I will. No I haven't!

And I've only left the chamber empty when "storing" one away, but in those cases I'm always storing empty magazines to "relax" the springs. That weapon I'm not intending to use on short notice.

There are all kinds of issues related to a plan to arm teachers.

It sounds "macho" on paper, but it is not cost effective and it's not the safest and most secure method of securing the facility for those who are not armed inside the buildings. But it's not worth arguing on here. No one is going to change their minds or their mindset on the issue and solution.

Unfortunately, it's like a low-water crossing to facilitate motor vehicle traffic instead of building a bridge. It's a quick, inexpensive fix, and it will take a few drownings before folks decide to build a bridge. When we are responsible for people's lives we can't cut corners.

We don't agree. You feel that citizens would be out gunned by the federal government should we decide to rise up, and that we would be overcome.

I say that as long as we have the ability to arm ourselves, that will not be the case. Originally Posted by grean

So are you saying the US military is bad ass enough to kick every countries ass even the ones with nukes, but they could not win against a hand full of rednecks with semi automatic rifles?
Its not like I want or I am glad they have us overwhelmed it is just a fact. Yes there may be a mutiny among the soldiers but take a look a Germany, It is not a given. Plus the infrastructure they have would be a significant advantage. Imagine it starts with them going after one group of people or one state. Example Jeff Sessions declares a state of emergency over Colorado and Marijuana.

It seems some think that the citizens could order supplies off Amazon and set up a military using an App they found on Apple or something.

Let me rephrase my opinion.
I do not think without an unexpected windfall or breaking the law, the Citizens could defeat the Government.

Now you know why I didn't answer your stupid, useless question!
My point of asking was for you to see we agree for the most part. But you are so obsessed with twisting words and disagreeing you are too stupid to notice.
But keep pretending the Government gives you the right to post!
Another comment that is pointless.I guess you got the 1st and 2nd confused
As for "medicine," like you, IB keeps proving me correct by offering good reasons to secure the perimeter of a school facility.That would only be logical since I agree with you dumbass! You keep proving me correct in my belief that there is a God ... every time you post!
Why thank you! I do consider myself one of Gods warriors.
And more importantly, every time you post you prove God has a well-developed sense of HUMOR! Originally Posted by LexusLover

You are pretty amusing, even when someone agrees with you, the chance of you acknowledging it is not a possibility. Typical of your kind.

While I do not want teachers having guns, I also thing it would be within their rights to do so. I do not have a binary obsession such as you do.

So are you saying the US military is bad ass enough to kick every countries ass even the ones with nukes, but they could not win against a hand full of rednecks with semi automatic rifles?
Originally Posted by MT Pockets

God is getting a chuckle out of you!

Do you believe the U.S. military consists primarily of mealy-mouthed, wimpy, little Liberal goofballs like you?

Weren't you in the Klan that was cutting their funding and salaries so their dependents would have to do without?

Now that wasn't particularly smart of you mealy-mouthed, wimpy, little Liberal goofballs was it?

As for "rights" of teachers to carry guns onto the school's grounds ...

.. no they don't! Unless the State & School district approves it! But that would require some cognitive talent, which you lack.

So are you saying the US military is bad ass enough to kick every countries ass even the ones with nukes, but they could not win against a hand full of rednecks with semi automatic rifles?
Its not like I want or I am glad they have us overwhelmed it is just a fact. Yes there may be a mutiny among the soldiers but take a look a Germany, It is not a given. Plus the infrastructure they have would be a significant advantage. Imagine it starts with them going after one group of people or one state. Example Jeff Sessions declares a state of emergency over Colorado and Marijuana.

It seems some think that the citizens could order supplies off Amazon and set up a military using an App they found on Apple or something.

Let me rephrase my opinion.
I do not think without an unexpected windfall or breaking the law, the Citizens could defeat the Government. Originally Posted by MT Pockets

At the time of the American Revolution, The British Military was the equivalent of the American Armed Forces of today. By contrast, the American rebellion was a joke. As mentioned before, the first battles were fought by militia. Untrained, unorganized, unfunded and well OUTGUNNED IN EVERY WAY, was exactly how they started.

Add to that was the fact a large number of Americans were still very loyal to the crown.

Had we not eventually been aided by France, we certainly would have remained under British rule.

Today would be no different. At no point did I say it would be easy, nor would winning be guaranteed.

However, it's fair to say the need for high capacity and light weight, semi-automatic rifles, would make it much easier and give a higher likely hood of success than if we started out with sling shots.

As to your rephrased opinion, of course the government would call any rebellion illlegal. That's the most obvious thing in the world. If GW, Hamilton and others not found a way to win, they would have been hung for treason. History books would have segments about them similar to Shays or the Bacon rebellion.

There's a "presumption" that the whole military would lockstep along with the instructions given by the CIC, but the discussion about it being useless to resist as a means of marginalizing or interpreting the 2nd Amendment is ridiculous at best. The best argument against disarmament is the one being offered today based on the FACTS coming out about the failure of the GovernmentS (several levels) to protect citizens and their children in a public (government) building funded by the taxpaying citizens.

It appears that many of the same people calling for disarmament are the same ones who failed to provide the protection of Government to the citizens they wish to disarm. Whether it's "unwillingness" or just plain incompetence it doesn't matter. The result is the same.

In fact attempting to blame it on the weapons (or style of weapon) is merely a diversion from the reality of their failure to PROTECT.

God is getting a chuckle out of you!

Do you believe the U.S. military consists primarily of mealy-mouthed, wimpy, little Liberal goofballs like you?
You do know I am contending the military is competent enough to succeed if it came down to it. By the way I voted for Daryl Castle dimwit.
Weren't you in the Klan that was cutting their funding and salaries so their dependents would have to do without?
I assume you mean Obama. By the way he has the record for the largest military budget fucktard.
http://comptroller.defense.gov/Porta...Green_Book.pdf

U.S. Military Budgets 1948-2015

Obama FY2010-15 $663.4 billion per year
Bush Jr FY2002-09* $634.9 “ “ “
Clinton FY1994-2001 $418.0 “ “ “
Bush Sr FY1990-93 $513.4 “ “ “
Reagan FY1982-89 $565.0 “ “ “
Carter FY1978-81 $428.1 “ “ “
Ford FY1976-77 $406.7 “ “ “
Nixon FY1970-75 $441.7 “ “ “
Johnson FY1965-69 $527.3 “ “ “
Kennedy FY1962-64 $457.2 “ “ “
Eisenhower FY1954-61 $416.3 “ “ “
Truman FY1948-53 $375.7 “ “ “

*Excludes $80 billion supplemental added to FY2009 under Obama.

Now that wasn't particularly smart of you mealy-mouthed, wimpy, little Liberal goofballs was it?
What, you mean giving the the largest budget in history? LOL!
As for "rights" of teachers to carry guns onto the school's grounds ...

.. no they don't! Unless the State & School district approves it! But that would require some cognitive talent, which you lack.
By the Constitution and the Bill of Rights they do. And just as I have said many times , by the powers of the state. I have said before the State has the right to regulate arms.
You want to say yes and no at the say time. Priceless! Originally Posted by LexusLover

So now that you have been proven wrong every count, who is it with the cognitive issue? LOL!

At the time of the American Revolution, The British Military was the equivalent of the American Armed Forces of today. By contrast, the American rebellion was a joke. As mentioned before, the first battles were fought by militia. Untrained, unorganized, unfunded and well OUTGUNNED IN EVERY WAY, was exactly how they started.

Add to that was the fact a large number of Americans were still very loyal to the crown.

Had we not eventually been aided by France, we certainly would have remained under British rule.

Today would be no different. At no point did I say it would be easy, nor would winning be guaranteed.

However, it's fair to say the need for high capacity and light weight, semi-automatic rifles, would make it much easier and give a higher likely hood of success than if we started out with sling shots.

As to your rephrased opinion, of course the government would call any rebellion illlegal. That's the most obvious thing in the world. If GW, Hamilton and others not found a way to win, they would have been hung for treason. History books would have segments about them similar to Shays or the Bacon rebellion. Originally Posted by grean

That is a lot of words for not saying anything. You seem to have Segued into saying they would not lose for sure. I guess if we found out some citizen had a cache of tanks and jets and a few nukes we could win as well. Then again Trump may have his hands on the chemtrail chemicals Obama was using and make us all Zombies LOL!