Mass Shooting at High School in Parkland, Florida

[jaws7777]

Hello; A few years ago at one of the anti gun group meetings such comments were reported to have been said. Before you ask I was not present. I also do not any longer have the reference from where I saw this. The way I recall this was told by someone at such a meeting. There fore the comment cannot be considered a proven fact. It does however make sense for this is the way I would go about eventually getting a ban. First you get the data about who has what and how many guns, then you take them.



Hello; It is called saving until you have enough to make a purchase. Takes a long time. I was in my thirties before I had enough saved to take the first step. That was I had saved enough to have the full price of a work van. I used the savings as collateral and got a very good rate on the loan. I paid the loan off and thus still had may savings. I kept making payments to my savings and paid cash for the next truck. Saved over 3 grand on interest by buying outright. Took a while to save enough to buy my house and I was 62 years old. It can be done.


Hello; The American Rifleman is a long existing national publication. The left and gun ban advocates are keen to get any dig in at them. While I cannot personally speak for how their stuff is fact checked, I will give them the benefit of the doubt until some how their stories are not in fact true. For example the five stories used in the July 2017 edition each have reference information included for anyone to check up on.


Hello; This is correct . No one actually knows until the moment arrives. I imagine this is true for combat troops as well as police officers. Some may freeze, but how is that any worse than being un-armed and at the mercy of a crazed killer?


Hello; This is an unknown as arming teachers is not wide spread. Those who prefer not to be armed should not be. Even if a small number in each school take training, that, to me, seems better than zero.

Hello; I may be looking at this slightly different because of where I am from. Many of the teachers I worked with were hunters and it was common for us to have guns. It may be different in other places.
I disagree that it will not work. I think it can work. If for no other reason our schools will no longer be "soft target" zones. On top of that my guess is some armed teachers will step up. After all rookie police officers and soldiers face the same situation for the first time at some point.


Hello; They were when I knew them. Above comment applies. I do not know much about places where most teachers are not willing to stand up for their students.

Hello; This is an unknown as arming teachers is not wide spread. Those who prefer not to be armed should not be. Even if a small number in each school taketraining, that, to me, seems better than zero

I dont think you fully grasp the situation. Putting a gun in someones hand who doesnt have the heart to use it and has very little training is worse than not having the gun.


Hello; I may be looking at this slightly different because of where I am from. Many of the teachers I worked with were huntersand it was common for us to have guns. It may be different in other places.
I disagree that it will not work. I think it can work. If for no other reason our schools will no longer be "soft target" zones. On top of that my guess is some armed teachers will step up. After all rookie police officers and soldiers face the same situation for the first time at some point.

Comparing rookie soldiers and police officers to teachers ? The teacher may have known the attacker for some time. Yrs maybe. Maybe it was his/her student. I could absolutely see a teacher freeze up when face with shoting a former student.

Killing a dear or turkey is nowhere near equal to killing a human. It sounds great but doesnt translate.
Simple question:

Have you and the other teachers that hunt and own firearms ever hurt another person ? I do not mean by accident i mean intentionally caused physical pain and suffering.

 

[jaws7777]

Hello; A few years ago at one of the anti gun group meetings such comments were reported to have been said. Before you ask I was not present. I also do not any longer have the reference from where I saw this. The way I recall this was told by someone at such a meeting. There fore the comment cannot be considered a proven fact. It does however make sense for this is the way I would go about eventually getting a ban. First you get the data about who has what and how many guns, then you take them.



Hello; It is called saving until you have enough to make a purchase. Takes a long time. I was in my thirties before I had enough saved to take the first step. That was I had saved enough to have the full price of a work van. I used the savings as collateral and got a very good rate on the loan. I paid the loan off and thus still had may savings. I kept making payments to my savings and paid cash for the next truck. Saved over 3 grand on interest by buying outright. Took a while to save enough to buy my house and I was 62 years old. It can be done.


Hello; The American Rifleman is a long existing national publication. The left and gun ban advocates are keen to get any dig in at them. While I cannot personally speak for how their stuff is fact checked, I will give them the benefit of the doubt until some how their stories are not in fact true. For example the five stories used in the July 2017 edition each have reference information included for anyone to check up on.


Hello; This is correct . No one actually knows until the moment arrives. I imagine this is true for combat troops as well as police officers. Some may freeze, but how is that any worse than being un-armed and at the mercy of a crazed killer?


Hello; This is an unknown as arming teachers is not wide spread. Those who prefer not to be armed should not be. Even if a small number in each school take training, that, to me, seems better than zero.

Hello; I may be looking at this slightly different because of where I am from. Many of the teachers I worked with were hunters and it was common for us to have guns. It may be different in other places.
I disagree that it will not work. I think it can work. If for no other reason our schools will no longer be "soft target" zones. On top of that my guess is some armed teachers will step up. After all rookie police officers and soldiers face the same situation for the first time at some point.


Hello; They were when I knew them. Above comment applies. I do not know much about places where most teachers are not willing to stand up for their students.

Hello; This is an unknown as arming teachers is not wide spread. Those who prefer not to be armed should not be. Even if a small number in each school taketraining, that, to me, seems better than zero

I dont think you fully grasp the situation. Putting a gun in someones hand who doesnt have the heart to use it and has very little training is worse than not having the gun.


Hello; I may be looking at this slightly different because of where I am from. Many of the teachers I worked with were huntersand it was common for us to have guns. It may be different in other places.
I disagree that it will not work. I think it can work. If for no other reason our schools will no longer be "soft target" zones. On top of that my guess is some armed teachers will step up. After all rookie police officers and soldiers face the same situation for the first time at some point.

Comparing rookie soldiers and police officers to teachers ? The teacher may have known the attacker for some time. Yrs maybe. Maybe it was his/her student. I could absolutely see a teacher freeze up when face with shoting a former student.

Killing a dear or turkey is nowhere near equal to killing a human. It sounds great but doesnt translate.
Simple question:

Have you and the other teachers that hunt and own firearms ever hurt another person ? I do not mean by accident i mean intentionally caused physical pain and suffering.

We talk about how the liberal media has brainwashed the libs. I hope that isnt happening to you from the right. Ive heard this arming teacher suggestion from a few of fox's talking heads and imo it doesnt hold water, its not feasible. Teachers stick to what they know and teach. This sounds like a great idea but i can come up with just s many ways that it could back fire and cause more harm. Meet my sons 2nd grade teacher she can barely stand up. In fact i think she passed away 10 yrs ago and came back from the dead. I do not want her armed around a kid and i believe she wouldnt want to be armed

 

[skjl47]

Hello jaws7777; I get that you do not like me much. Sensed it back in the flag protest thread. That's fine I am a big boy and can deal with it. I fear you are not helping your cause in this discussion.
While I respond to many of your comments, you are not the target of my comments. Others follow these threads and may actually follow the points I try to make.

I do not know how many teachers will be willing to be trained and take the responsibility of being armed. I admit this but you do not know either. I figure it is worth giving a try while you and others do not want it to happen.
You seem to overlook that some teachers are ex-military both male and female. Not sure how many but I knew of some.
I stated this before but will do so again as you seemed to have missed it. Only the teachers who volunteer to be armed should be. Those that do not wish to be armed should not be. Most schools I was in had at most a single resource officer. He/she was not always around as their duties were not just to protect the school.
A few more trained people around should be a positive in terms a final layer of protection in a crisis. I can also see the general knowledge of an unknown number of armed teachers/employees being around as being a deterrent to potential shooters. Go back to the meme about the teacher with a 45 stopping a shooter. It worked that time for sure.

 

[pescado209]

iv met a few teachers that carried when off the clock. just because you "feel " that it's alot of responsibility to carry doesnt mean there are not willing teachers .

carrying is alot of responsibility but I feel safer knowing that I as a law abiding citizen have the ability to protect myself when the need arises. biggest reason I wanted to carry was because I used to take my family ,mom and sisters, out alot and I am responsible and the first responder for there safety. when seconds count. the police are minutes away, on average 10 minutes away here where I live. a lot of bad things can happen in that time.

many teacher look at there pupils as there children. someone to teach and look up to them, those that choose to protect them should have the right to protect them. disarming teachers because of people's feelings is a rediculas as banning something on its looks, shows how weak minded and in informed how those people are.

these is no fix all solution, just look at the violent crime is gun free countries compared to our gun toting country.just because there is no fix all solution doesn't mean we have to leave our kids defenseless. if it saves one life why won't libs allow our brave teachers to protect there beloved stupdents?

an armed society is a polite society, plain and simple comrade.

 

[jaws7777]

Hello jaws7777; I get that you do not like me much. Sensed it back in the flag protest thread. That's fine I am a big boy and can deal with it. I fear you are not helping your cause in this discussion.
While I respond to many of your comments, you are not the target of my comments. Others follow these threads and may actually follow the points I try to make.

I do not know how many teachers will be willing to be trained and take the responsibility of being armed. I admit this but you do not know either. I figure it is worth giving a try while you and others do not want it to happen.
You seem to overlook that some teachers are ex-military both male and female. Not sure how many but I knew of some.
I stated this before but will do so again as you seemed to have missed it. Only the teachers who volunteer to be armed should be. Those that do not wish to be armed should not be. Most schools I was in had at most a single resource officer. He/she was not always around as their duties were not just to protect the school.
A few more trained people around should be a positive in terms a final layer of protection in a crisis. I can also see the general knowledge of an unknown number of armed teachers/employees being around as being a deterrent to potential shooters. Go back to the meme about the teacher with a 45 stopping a shooter. It worked that time for sure.

Skj47 honestly that is completely wrong. Im quite fond of you. I actually enjoy our little dances. I dont think your 100% wrong in any of our disagreements infact ypu couls be 100% right i just dont see eye to eye with you on certain subjects.

Im mot the type to lie. There are a few members i do not like and if you were one of them i would have no problem agreeing with you about it.

It does seem that you take me disagreeing with you as a personal attack.

I fear you are not helping your cause in this discussion.

How so ?


While I respond to many of your comments, you are not the target of my comments.
Others follow these threads and may actually follow the points I try to make.


I feel you pick and choose what you respond to but thats fair man. Maybe we all do that.

Of course there are people that agree with you. If your goal is to communicate with people that only agree with you then maybe have those discussions over pm.

What i dont understand is no where did i say put a weapins ban in. Yet thats exactly where the conversation always leads.

Arming teachers may help and they may not. Say your the armed teacher. You kniw little johnny is an ass. Little johny is one of your students and knows that your armed. Little johnny comes to school with the intent of committing a mass shooting. Guess what he knows your armed your mow target no 1. He gets the drop on you amd guess whos next your students. Mayne he doesnt get the drop on you maybe he doesnt. Im just saying this is not as cut and dry as you make it sound.


K krichardson this example should relate to you. Especially what just happened with your co-worker.

Every time this happens we the arguement over soft targets. Arming teachers and/or getting ex police and military in our schools. Some even say they will volunteer. I actually talked about it with my wife when we 1st moved here. There are several issues with this.

1) liability. You shoot your firearm even if you kill the bad guy anyone else that gets hurt in the act can and probably will sue you (this is the lawsuit era) who takes on the liability? The school or you ?

2) more liability.... the teacher misses and shoots and innocent child.

3) pay...these people say they will do it for free. But for how long. Especially with all of that liability. Who pays ? I know we dont care atleast i dont if i pay a little more in taxes.

4) training/talent/cost its super expensive. So expensive that most large cities dont arm their school safety officers.

Tell you one thing. I dont think there are mass shooting in schools that have school safety (could be wrong) maybe they are onto something.

Things are not cut and dry im not saying your 100% wrong and i mean you know disrespect in this discussion.

 

[jaws7777]

iv met a few teachers that carried when off the clock. just because you "feel " that it's alot of responsibility to carry doesnt mean there are not willing teachers .

carrying is alot of responsibility but I feel safer knowing that I as a law abiding citizen have the ability to protect myself when the need arises. biggest reason I wanted to carry was because I used to take my family ,mom and sisters, out alot and I am responsible and the first responder for there safety. when seconds count. the police are minutes away, on average 10 minutes away here where I live. a lot of bad things can happen in that time.

many teacher look at there pupils as there children. someone to teach and look up to them, those that choose to protect them should have the right to protect them. disarming teachers because of people's feelings is a rediculas as banning something on its looks, shows how weak minded and in informed how those people are.

these is no fix all solution, just look at the violent crime is gun free countries compared to our gun toting country.just because there is no fix all solution doesn't mean we have to leave our kids defenseless. if it saves one life why won't libs allow our brave teachers to protect there beloved stupdents?

an armed society is a polite society, plain and simple comrade.

Bro i agree with you 100% you are the exact person that should be carrying. No issues at all. I dont know how many times i gotta say it though im not calling foe a ban on weapons. Why is that the only thing you guys come up with.

I already listed a few reasons why the teacher thing would be a problem.
Sure maybe some would be great at it but i can tell you right now once they powers that be sit down and look at the liability factor it will deter them.

Why do you guys think law enforcement agencies spend soo much in training ? Its the liability factor not the safety for staff. They sole reason they teach to aim for center mass is not because its where the vital organs are its because its the largest target and hardest to miss and hit a byatander.

Plus lets face it not all teachers are fit to even be around kids in the 1st place. It sounds great but theres a whole litany of red tape. It could be part of the fix but i dont see it has the end all be all

 

[jaws7777]

My last year in the job i was hit with 2 frivolous lawsuits totalling over 14 mil. Of course the city settled out of court because its cheaper. I can absolutely see liberal parents who are against guns using their child to make some false accusations against an armed teacher. Costs of settling would add up

Krich has a co-worker that kiiled an attacker. He is not off the hook because of the liability factor being in uniform and blah blah blah its total bs but DA's have the power to indict

 

[pescado209]

if history has shown us anything is that registration leads to confiscation. it's a simple fact.

you personally my not be calling for a ban but that's all you hear lib politician talking about . bans don't work and only punish the law abiding citizens. liability is a huge issue and yes some teachers are worthless nobody claims that it's a perfect solution but it is a solid deterent.

a big issue I have with guns laws, especially here in Cali is that they punish me and my friends while at the same time we see career criminals get off with a slap in the hand when they commit crimes with guns, stolen guns at that. criminals by there nature do not follow laws. laws don't effect them and when they do get caught they are let off easyn just look at that piece of **** that killled Kate Stienle.

the pos in Florida could have been stopped but the fbi, once again dropped the ball on another threat. law enforcement on all levels is not doing there dam jobs DAs are letting criminals free on plea bargains so they can at another mark on there "cases won" tally.

the system is broken and it's all in the enforcement side of it , not the laws or the regulation of tools, which is exactly what all guns are, tools.

 

[pescado209]

on a side note. this pretty much sums up the fbis priorities at the moment

 

[krichardson]

My last year in the job i was hit with 2 frivolous lawsuits totalling over 14 mil. Of course the city settled out of court because its cheaper. I can absolutely see liberal parents who are against guns using their child to make some false accusations against an armed teacher. Costs of settling would add up

Krich has a co-worker that kiiled an attacker. He is not off the hook because of the liability factor being in uniform and blah blah blah its total bs but DA's have the power to indict

I remember having a discussion about guns with an oldtimer who is probably long retired now.He said,if you are going to carry a gun and be willing to shoot someone then you'd better have a nice chunk of money put aside for a layer because you will probably need one in the aftermath.