I have no problem with schools asking for trained volunteers out of their staff to carry. The simple truth is every teacher Who finds themselves barricaded in a classroom certainly would wish they had a gun in her hands. but you can’t make people carry.

But look, I just read the actual statistics and there have been 16 mass school shootings since 1966. Let’s not go crazy. Retrofit schools with a single entry point and other common sense security measures. Follow through with the gun laws that are actually on the books right now.

At this point, we very well could be at a place where 10 times as many people have been murdered in inner cities as were killed in Texas school shooting. That matters. It matters because it should temper our response from an emotional knee-jerk reaction driven mostly by political posturing to something more logical that actually has results. Of course we all know we won’t do that.

We’ll scream and holler about gun control and blame everything on a couple senators who hold out and then a hundred million dollars will be spent on commercials between now and November about how Republicans want to kill school kids because the NRA gave them some campaign cash.

A school teacher,
that is less physically capable than a
Violent Student, is the norm.
So using the
"minimum amount of force necessary to stop the assault"
would be a stretch.
AND, that teacher, would have to PROVE,
beyond any shadow of a doubt,
they believed their life was in danger,
and no way else, except striking the Student back,
would save their life.


 Yeah it's called law.  Teachers can't assault students without reason, no more than any other human.  The difference is you are trying to say that if they don't have guns they don't have the right to defend themselves.  If they have that right "removed" they can't exercise it without penalty.

 This is wrong - no teacher anywhere has to allow an assault to commence upon their person if they lack the possession of a firearm.

 You are mixing the "removal" of a right with "ability" and this fools nobody.  Nobody is going to believe a teacher is not allowed to hit somebody assaulting them unless that teacher has a gun - then they can defend themselves, and only then.

 Why is it so hard to be honest and just say that denying teachers the ability to carry a firearm greatly reduces their ability to defend themselves and others?  Why go overboard and make it sound like teachers without guns have to let crimes happen or can't do anything at all?

No gun = "remove" right to defend.

"Removed" right to defend = let the assailant do what they want, no actions allowed that could "defend" because that right is "removed".


"Golly Gee, If a Student is bigger and stronger than the Teacher.
Or if the Student has a knife, gun, baseball bat, hockey stick, etc.
Don't think the, teacher, has much choice."

 No they do not have to let a person murder them.

Wasn't quite sure if your previous post was,
'Spin', or 'Defending'.
Now I know it was Spin.


Eegore wrote on 05/30/22 at 11:15:20:


Perhaps you missed the part;


If a Student is bigger and stronger than the Teacher.
Or if the Student has a knife, gun, baseball bat, hockey stick, etc.
Don't think the, teacher, has much choice

"You know the difference. You know the topic. An ARMED Assailant, murdering children and teachers. Not a slap fight. The school did not allow teachers, even if they were legally able to concealed carry, to have their Second amendment rights in the school.
Now, stop pretending that is Not the conversation."

 Stop pretending that if a teacher doesn't have a gun their rights are "Removed".  They aren't.

"So instead of telling,
what someone, 'should' think/say.

You, are telling me,
what I am thinking "...trying to say..."."

 Good deflection.  Indicating what someone is trying to do is not equal to indicating what they think.

 The words you are using convey specific things.  The word "removal" means removal, not restriction or reduction.  

 "Removing" a Right is not restricting or reducing.  

 So lets restructure my statement:

 The words you are using convey that the inability to carry a firearm "removes" a Right.

Eegore wrote on 05/30/22 at 12:21:10:


Their Second Amendment rights, to keep and bear arms, is REMOVED.

So,teach is just supposed to stop a gunman.

You are playing a very disturbing game.

The PROBLEM is the rule that stops teach from pulling a GUN and protecting the kids and themselves. If you think they would be Uncomfortable with a gun,imagine needing to rush the guy with a ball point pen  Teach is probably not gonna be James Bond.
You are working so hard to limit real discussion. Why? It's ABOUT teach not being Able to Carry.
You want a thread on how many other ways there are to defend against an ARMED, MURDEROUS NUTJOB
Fire it up!

Exactly what the FUKK is your goal here? It looks like you're really determined to undermine a regular conversation. A stranger walking by Might conclude your goal is to stifle a regular conversation by playing with some very serious hair splitting. I've explained it and you insist on playing little games. WTFis wrong with you? Nobody said teach can't FIGHT,? One MORE MUTHERFUKKIN TIME.. Because teachers are not Allowed to CARRY A GUN, their SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS is removed. Now YOU need to stop pretending that is Not the topic.

I'm goin to get completely rude with you if you keep playing your game.
?STOPPIT!