Bill Would Allow Texas Teachers to Use Deadly Force Against Students

I think I remember the original topic having to do with teachers being able to shoot someone for theft, and destruction of school property. Yes, that is one thing mentioned in the proposed bill. However, regardless of how some want to focus on this one part of the proposed bill, the bill is not focused on this part alone.

If you read the bill in it's entirety, it simply affords teachers the same protections under the law that is extended to all citizens of the state of Texas. This bill is only to make sure teachers and administrations in districts across the state, who have decided to arm teachers in said districts, are not subject to anything more than an average citizen is subjected to.

Texas passed a law allowing EACH school district to make their own decision regarding arming teachers. No school district is required to do so. In addition, each district has the responsibility to set their own guidelines regarding training and qualifications, before teachers are allowed to enter a school armed. This can be as little as having a Concealed Carry permit, or instituting much more stringent guidelines.

As for the section about theft of property etc. provisions in state law, very few people would ever use or require that defense in a court of law. You might hear of a case here and there, but Texas is not the wild west as some believe. And I don't believe school districts will teach that as policy to teachers. My policy has always been simple. If you are climbing out my window with my new Sony tv, you can have it. If you are inside my house and a threat to me or my family, you are toast.

Honestly, way too much has been made over a simple clarification made to protect teachers. I foresee no teachers shooting children over stealing pencils, and most probably not over a simple assault. We can debate all day long the "what if's", but until something really happens, we're just debating. Utah has had guns in their schools for a decade, and the only injury by guns was 1 teacher shooting herself in the leg. Stupid is as stupid does. I expect Texas will have at least this good of a record.

a reply to: retiredTxn

Hear hear (here here?)

Well said.

Simply mention the word Texas and guns and liberals start slobbering all over themselves. They should visit us and see the reality for what it truly is instead of having these stupid memes floating around in their empty heads.

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: retiredTxn

Hear hear (here here?)

Well said.

Simply mention the word Texas and guns and liberals start slobbering all over themselves. They should visit us and see the reality for what it truly is instead of having these stupid memes floating around in their empty heads.

I was born and raised in Texas, went to A&M and still own the family farm in the Panhandle [now leased]. I chose to leave the racist, ultra conservative, myopic, Fundamentalist Christian environment that I found in almost all Texan locales. It's a bit more tolerant along the Gulf and Travis co.
I'm a gun owner,capitalist, entrepreneur and business owner, believe in capital punishment and personal responsibility. Label me a Liberal if you want...but you would be wrong.

Talk about stupid memes floating around in empty heads....

a reply to: bbracken677

Oh stop. Did you read the replies to your post on the previous page? I'm pro 2nd Amendment so you are barking up the wrong tree there.

a reply to: retiredTxn

I disagree. The proposed bill goes out of it's way to include defense of property.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: retiredTxn

I disagree. The proposed bill goes out of it's way to include defense of property.

The proposed bill is just covering all bases I think it is you who is going out of your way to make this a bigger issue then it is.

a reply to: retiredTxn

The bill is not "focused" on any part of itself. Are you suggesting somehow that part of it would be bolded or set off in some different typeface to set it off from the rest of the document??? (Frankly, this seems a somewhat nonsensical statement.)

The bill is a series of legal statements. We are discussing one part of it that bill, "focusing" on the portion that in this case, seems problematic to us.

Are you saying that the law of Texas automatically exonerates anyone who uses deadly force to "protect" their property regardless of the circumstances, as the text of this bill does?

I'm pretty sure that the law you're referring to applies to private individuals on private property, and I'm not sure that the language is as similar to this bill as you're presenting. At any rate, an individual acting to protect their home, besides being a completely different scenario than a teacher in front of a classroom or in a hallway with dozens of kids all around them, is really not comparable to a state employee "protecting" state property.

But, giving you the benefit of the doubt, would you point that part of the Texas Law Code you're referring to, out to us, just for verification?

As to mishaps with guns and teachers in schools ... there seem to be a few more than the one you mentioned in Utah, the same thing (teacher accidentally shoots self) has happened in Idaho and Ohio, and on a similar note, in Arkansas, a State Senator working to arm teachers in the classroom shot a teacher while giving a demonstration at the school.

So again, the issue with gun accidents is more predominant that you're suggesting, and the simple laws of averages tell us that the number will go up with more guns in schools, more guns, more chances for mishap.

Honestly, It seems that you are mischaracterizing the bill as a "simple clarification" that really changes nothing. I'm aware that you are seeking to seem a bit more even-handed than some posters in the discussion, but really, nothing you've said really impacts what we're discussing, because, again, the issue is not related to anyone's gun ownership, carrying their weapons, or protecting their on life with their weapon.

a reply to: Kali74

I don't see how the provision regarding school property is any different from the typical laws allowing defense of private property. I think deadly force against someone stealing styrofoam cups is generally wrong, but all force is potentially deadly. Unless this law is significantly different from the current self-defense laws allowed to individuals, I don't see how it's a grave injustice–although I might be mistaken.

originally posted by: thesaneone

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: retiredTxn

I disagree. The proposed bill goes out of it's way to include defense of property.

The proposed bill is just covering all bases I think it is you who is going out of your way to make this a bigger issue then it is.

Why is the topic so intimidating that you keep trying to shut it down, thesaneone? If you don't want to participate ...

Obviously, it is a concern to many of us. Even if not, and it's merely a subject of interest ... what's the problem with discussing it?

You're not trying to suppress conversation, are you?

a reply to: thesaneone

All it needed to do was state that teachers on school property were covered by Texas law regarding use of force and deadly force in defense of life.

"That kid is leaving the class without returning the pencil I let him borrow!"
*Shoots him in the head*
"I was protecting school property! I was within my rights!"

a reply to: Kali74

The things mentioned in the proposed bill, are already on the books in Texas. There are no additional laws created, just clarification that teachers are protected under the same laws as all citizens are. The fact that all provisions justifying use of force are listed, does not in any way mean it is going out of it's way to include defense of property. It merely lists the statutes already on the books.

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: retiredTxn

Hear hear (here here?)

Well said.

Simply mention the word Texas and guns and liberals start slobbering all over themselves. They should visit us and see the reality for what it truly is instead of having these stupid memes floating around in their empty heads.

I was born and raised in Texas, went to A&M and still own the family farm in the Panhandle [now leased]. I chose to leave the racist, ultra conservative, myopic, Fundamentalist Christian environment that I found in almost all Texan locales. It's a bit more tolerant along the Gulf and Travis co.
I'm a gun owner,capitalist, entrepreneur and business owner, believe in capital punishment and personal responsibility. Label me a Liberal if you want...but you would be wrong.

Talk about stupid memes floating around in empty heads....

Lol...the irony. I graduated from Texas Tech (geology). I am now semi retired and living in Dallas after spending many many years out of state. Dallas...is not the Dallas I remember. Not much different from any other large city anywhere else in the country in many respects. Still a bit farther right than San Francisco, but then what city isnt? lol

In my absence and return I have noted a huge change (at least in my perception) in Texas. Sure, there is still lots of conservatism but there is much more liberalism and open acceptance than back in the early 70s. I go to the local mall and I am guaranteed to see openly gay men... no one treats them badly and they do not live in fear of a whippin LOL

That could not have been said 40 or 50 years ago.... but it is true today, and yet when I see someone else's perception (particularly from California or up east) of Texas I am amused. When reading and seeing outsiders perceptions of Texas I am reminded of the Texas of decades ago....

BTW...you forgot the pocket of liberalism that exists in and around Austin.

Me? I am a totally weird combo of ultra conservative and liberal values.....

a reply to: Kali74

That would be too logical...you know govt is not logical!

If there is an easy way and a convoluted, complicated, backwards way to do something, which will govt choose?

I just don't get it....

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: thesaneone

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: retiredTxn

I disagree. The proposed bill goes out of it's way to include defense of property.

The proposed bill is just covering all bases I think it is you who is going out of your way to make this a bigger issue then it is.

Why is the topic so intimidating that you keep trying to shut it down, thesaneone? If you don't want to participate ...

Obviously, it is a concern to many of us. Even if not, and it's merely a subject of interest ... what's the problem with discussing it?

You're not trying to suppress conversation, are you?

I wasn't asking for your opinion.

originally posted by: TheJourney
"That kid is leaving the class without returning the pencil I let him borrow!"
*Shoots him in the head*
"I was protecting school property! I was within my rights!"

Response from the typical crowd, were the bill to pass and such an event to occur:

"Look, the kid broke the rules, plain and simple. He stole a pencil. If you don't want to get shot and killed, don't break the rules. It's pretty simple."

a reply to: Kali74

Sorry, that was not directed at you, but a general statement exactly as it was worded.

I am not great at writing between the lines, so I usually just go direct. If I felt you had an empty head with ignorant memes floating around in it I would have said so directly to you. Count on it.

We may not always agree, but I would never describe you as empty headed. My apologies that it seemed that way.

Again...I tend to be very direct. If you ever get under my skin there will be no doubt LOL

a reply to: TheJourney

*sigh* or *facepalm*

Taking things to an extreme is a bit ridiculous, don't you think?

Do you honestly believe that a situation where a kid had a gun on campus (verbotten) and shot another kid because of a stolen pencil that any civilized people in the world would be ok with it?

Seriously?

Your allegory was more trolling than it was legit. In fact...the allegory was stupid as hell.

a reply to: bbracken677

BTW...you forgot the pocket of liberalism that exists in and around Austin.

No, I said...

It's a bit more tolerant along the Gulf and Travis co.

Austin is in Travis co....

Try and keep up...

Texas may have changed but not near enough for me to return. You had a chance to elect Kinky but went for a dumbass!!

a reply to: bbracken677

The thing is... people are okay with shooting a man in the back for stealing a six pack. So why wouldn't they be? Don't want to get shot, don't steal doesn't apply in my opinion because of the 5th Amendment. Property crime is not a capital crime and never should be.