Common Sense Gun Legislation

originally posted by: PorkChop96
a reply to: quintessentone

That his opinion, we are all entitles to them.

Everyhting else in that is a nothingburger.

We already have background checks to buy a gun

National and state level age restrictions are already in place, most of these school shooters were also under the age of 18. so how is raising the age going to help anything there?

I agree, guns are not supposed to just be laying around in the open. But there is no enforcement that can be done on that without violating other rights.

Most people want to ban that big bad black rifle, the AR15. Even though it is not what is used in most shootings. 56% or more shootings are done with a handgun, not a rifle.

And this all keeps going back to the thing that all of us that know more than what the media tells you about guns have bene saying, MENTAL HEALTH IS THE PROBLEM. Not the guns

That one guy's opinion from his extensive training is the opinion that matters most regarding ordinary armed people rushing into an active shooting scenario, IMO.

Of course mental health is the problem, but so are red flag laws being ignored and having more guns around kids where accidents can happen. Anyway, I'll leave you to your thread as I've said what I wanted to say.

a reply to: quintessentone

Studying is not training, big difference


There have already been rulings on red flag laws being unconstitutional. They are not being ignored, they are being removed., and rightfully so

Bye bye

First problem with armed teachers is the cops.

The cops seeing an armed adult will shoot that person.

People defending their own homes have been shot by responding cops

if someone breaks into my home i am going to shoot the bad guy first then after the problem is taken care if then i will call the cops so thy can bring a body bag.

a reply to: anned1

That is why in the bill it is specified that the school admin and police will know who is armed and who is not, but nobody else will get that info to protect the teachers.

But, at the same time, a good portion of the time the shooters are not adults. If the police know they re looking for a kid, they will more than likely not shoot a teacher that is defending their won students.

gun-bullet alternative is the Non-Lethal BYRNA product ... looks like a Glock but launches kinetic balls/or chemical pods to disable bad actors

...but smart people have glock or Taurus pistol as backup... the BYRNA kit is about $400 for all items needed for protection
i dont sell Byrna, i only suggest a look-see at the system @ byrna.com

a reply to: StudioNada

Sorry to say, but the only way to deal with a lethal threat is with lethal force.

If you were to disable an active shooter with this and they got arrested, they would plead insanity at their hearing and everything would get thrown out and they would be right aback out on the street where they could do it again.

The only way to make sure the threat is eliminated is to make sure they never take another breathe.


Non-lethal force has it's time and place but an active shooter scenario is not that time or place.

a reply to: PorkChop96

Sorry i didn't read trough it all might have beem adressed already... If so quote or link to post is ok...

Can they judge a situation to be life threatening on their own volition?
Or is it outlined what exactly warrants the use of their guns, and the the punishment for abandoning protocol?

If the later that could work. If the former the punishment for misjudging a situation should end their ownership of guns and their carrer as teachers in any faculty. With a huge fine and a good prison stay.

them misjudging a situation is the only thing I'd be scared off in such a setup... Because if you really wanted to kill you could try and use a pencil. I can see pubescent boys menacing their teacher with a pencil, because they saw one to many John wick movies and a teacher getting scared for his life and pulling his gun.
Before you know they use their guns to break up yard fights among teens.

ETA

If the solution to all your problems is guns then gunshot is the solution to all your problems... Or in other words if you loose the ability to solve issues without guns, every issue needs a gun to be solved and the final solution is always just a pull of the trigger away. It's MAD amongst citizens, if that's the only way to peace you are at war with everyone around you.

Don't go there as a nation... Less policing each other and more policing your government.
Apparently that's what thems guns are meant for...

a reply to: anned1

if someone breaks into my home i am going to shoot the bad guy first then after the problem is taken care if then i will call the cops so thy can bring a body bag.

That's probably totally legit in the USA at least on private property...
School is public property right? aren't the laws a little different when it comes to being the judge and executioner all on your own volition?

Don't get me wrong i see the possible danger in what you pointed out here.

First problem with armed teachers is the cops.

The cops seeing an armed adult will shoot that person.

a reply to: Terpene

The same "common sense" used in an every day concealed carry situation would be the most useful in this situation as well.

The person carrying the firearm would be in charge of making the call on what is a threat worth shooting for and what's not, in the same sense as what police do. Are there going to be mistakes, in almost every avenue of life their are so why wouldn't this one.

When you take your CCW class, you are taught that you do not pull your concealed firearm unless you feel an IMMEDIATE threat to your life. A student menacing you with a pencil does not, in my opinion, qualify for a reason to pull a firearm on anyone.


That thought is where most people get it wrong when it comes to the US and our firearms. They are not the answer to every solution, but when it comes to protecting us or our own property, they are the best option for those that want to do us harm or take our property. The argument you see the most from people who think all we want to do when we wake up is to shoot someone is the idea of "Why is your property more valuable than someone else's life?". But the question that should be asked is: Why does the person that wants to steal from me willing to risk their life for my things? That to me says they value my things over their own life, so why shouldn't I?


There will always be that minority amongst society that see a firearm as the answer to all of their problems, such as those that want to shoot up a school, movie theatre, mall, etc. But we are talking about less than .00001% of the US population and pretty close to the same, if not less, of the armed population of this country. They are not to be judged as the majority, just as 1 white guy being a racist does not make all white people racist.


I hope I answered all of your questions here, if not feel free to ask some more. Be happy to explain anything you want to know about this

a reply to: grey580

Mass shooters are cowards. This is why they generally always perpetrate their acts in gun free zones. One of the biggest deterrents to a mass shooter is the possibility of someone returning fire, or even engaging them before they fire at all. Walking into an environment where a shooter knows not only are the teachers armed, but they are also trained to use their firearm creates an environment similar to a police station. Notice you don't see any mass shootings at police stations? I wonder why? In truth, I know the answer why; because the coward shooter knows he will be shot.

THAT is a real deterrent, not some apologist window dressing which does nothing.

Bottom line - You fix real problems with real solutions.

originally posted by: anned1
First problem with armed teachers is the cops.

The cops seeing an armed adult will shoot that person.

People defending their own homes have been shot by responding cops

if someone breaks into my home i am going to shoot the bad guy first then after the problem is taken care if then i will call the cops so thy can bring a body bag.

That's not a problem when people are trained how to react when LEO's show up. The problem of responding officers shooting home defenders is a very small one.

Oh, and for the record, the scenario you paint about what you 'would' do, is a bad plan (well, unless you enjoy prison food and the game of cornhole). A better plan is to just tell law enforcement there has been a shooting and give the address. Do not say who shot who, or anything else.

a reply to: PorkChop96

But it's not everyday, it's your kids. It's exactly why you consider doing it you want it more save. Adding guns into the mix and not making sure they are in the hands of the best of the best available is inviting in the same problems you have everywhere else.

what if those armed teachers are all leftist snowflakes, you know how their feels trump anything...

If I had a kid in that school I'd want them armed teachers to be held to the higest standard possible, like beyond police Standard, taught in descalation, perfect aim, and what not. I wouldn't feel comfortable to send my kids to somone who can pull their guns on the account of their feels , has poor aim without any social skills. Would you? And whenever they misjudge, the consequences for them need to be devastating...

feel an IMMEDIATE threat to your life

feels is a poor outline for protocol... It's subjective and that can get out of hand very quickly. Also their job would be to put their life on the line to protect the kids... It takes a special kind of mental forte to be able to remain focused and rational in a life threatening situation . Most teachers can't most gun owners can't...

I'd say if those teachers are held to the same Standards as regular concealed carry joe, absolutely hard NO. It's your kids for God's sake... I dont trust half the teachers already and now you want to give them guns they can pull on a whim.
Then I'd prefer total lock downs much more, turn them school places into high security fema camps....

Sometimes i think the USA i like a leaking ship but the constitution prohibits you to fix the holes....
There are only two ways for that to end, mutiny or at the bottom...

a reply to: Terpene

That would be the reason that it is not being made mandatory, it is only voluntary at this point.

If you are a liberal snowflake, more than likely you do not own a firearm to begin with. Let alone, are you going to sit in a classroom for 8 hours and be told exactly what to do and be criticized for doing things incorrectly. And that is just the beginning of the process.


This thread was from 5 or 6 months ago so I am a little fuzzy on the exact details, I will go back and re-read just to verify what I am saying, but I believe along with being a card carrying CCW permit holder, they must also have extra training beyond that, show competence with their firearm and hold insurance that strictly pertains to a firearm carrying citizen.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Reading that whole thing just made me really want some F'ing cake!


But, on topic, there are still those out there that will question why we need the cake to begin with.

a reply to: PorkChop96

It popped up on the recent page after the other got nuked, and i didn't realize how old it was until after i posted...

The cake is not the problem the government is, and that cake is there to keep it in it's place. Or so i heard....
But you don't trust government anymore so why not put them guns where your mouth is. Could this happen along partie lines, or would it then just be an insurrection?

In 200 years you must have learned somethings to come up with a better and more trustworthy way to govern yourself, so that government doesn't pose such a threat to your life anymore.

Relying on laws 200 years old is like saying we're still as dumb as then and haven't learned anything, and we don't want to.
I'm all for gun rights! concerned citizens should prove their worth to be part of that check and balance to the executive branch of government.
but the process to prove that has to be one of the most invasive vetting an individual should be required to do. It's the most important task civilians could be trusted with.

Is it possible that some think they aren't actually worthy and if they'd be held to a higher standard they'd loose the right to bear arms, that certainly would explain that illogical ressistance to chsnge anything, you know like least having an effective tracking system for firearms.
And how's that estimate of tens of million unregistered firearms even possible. How could you not want more control over the firearms in circulation?
after all it is the government that grants you the rights to bear arms, why should they not make sure those that do bear arms are those best suited to do so?
Do you really think people are their own best judge in that assessment?

It's a tool to kill it has a civic purpose among others and neither your fellow citizens nor cans are part of that purpose.

Maybe i wrongly assumed that civilizations get wiser over time, seems like that is not the case...

I was always cautioned to never travel with weapons, they have a way of getting themselves used.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

They don't have money to give teachers school supplies.

Do we really think that they will offer firearms and training to teachers?

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

They don't have money to give teachers school supplies.

Do we really think that they will offer firearms and training to teachers?

Armed teachers and faculty are already being used in many school districts with great success for many years.
My son goes to one.
Zero shootings at any of those schools so far.

a reply to: Vermilion

Where is this at? I've not run across this in florida or georgia.