« Back to story "Bob Barr Praises Texas School District that Allows Teachers to Carry Guns"

Story Comments

Posted by: ekul256 1 year, 2 months ago

This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.

All Comments Share Story Report

43%
ekul2561 year, 2 months ago

This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

Simply awesome, about time we allowed teachers in public schools to defend themselves.

(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
Reply
11 Replies

loading ...
- PsychoHosebeastComment removed: Spammer, Abusive10 Replies
  - 50%
    cloud151 year, 2 months ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    I think the question of "Where do you live?" is a very important one. In a lot of inner cities schools in cities like New York have students who are gang affiliated, and carry weapons. Teachers at these school are in constant danger. I don't think the teacher carrying a gun would be for protection from the crazies taking hostages, but rather the thugs they see every day.
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    4 Replies
    
    loading ...
    - Neutral
      DeadXXXManXXXTalkin1 year, 2 months ago
      
      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
      
      where I live is the metal detector school district
      
      where there are metal detectors to tell if students have weapons, is it illogical to consider allowing teachers to carry weapons?
      
      I don't think so
      
      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 4) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
      Reply
      2 Replies
      
      loading ...
      - Neutral
        willottica1 year, 2 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        I think it is. The point of the metal detectors, and they should be able to succeed, is to keep guns out of the school. If the teachers are allowed to bring them in, then the metal detectors have been circumvented, there is a supply of weapons in the school for a potential killer to make use of. Be that killer a student or a teacher who snapped, most of the population will be defenseless.
        
        Logically, if you're to allow the teachers to pack heat, you should also allow the students to do so - so they can protect themselves against the crazies - be they fellow students or teachers.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 6) (recursion depth : 5) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        1 Reply
        
        loading ...
        
        100%
        DeadXXXManXXXTalkin1 year, 2 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        first off, unless you are speaking exclusively of colleges, you are equating an adult teacher with a kid. Legally, we make a distinction, whether one can buy alcohol, vote, drive, carry guns legally etc.
        
        [if you are speaking of colleges, then that takes care of the adulthood issue, and you have a leg to stand on]
        
        secondly, the point is if there are metal detectors on doors it generally means incidents have happened before, which means there is history of student violence [let's be honest you don't really hear about teachers shooting students, do you]
        
        and if it is the students the metal detectors are there for, and there is a history and expectation of student violence that put the m.d's there in the first place, than I say it is not unreasonable to allow teachers to arm themselves, as a further measure of anticipated violence
        
        can you give me an example of a teacher who snapped in school and shot everyone?
        
        I like the M.A.D.[mutually assured destruction] part of your argument tho, because if one guy has the weapons and the other guys don't, there is no disputing the edge
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 7) (recursion depth : 6) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
    - Neutral
      markmawn21 year, 2 months ago
      
      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
      
      The gangs are probably packing bigger heat than the teachers. Spraying bullets from an AK47 will still take out more srudents than one teacher sharpshooting with a pistol. Unfortunately all that might be accomplished is that the killing will stop a few students short of the target when the teacher lets a few off (if it hits that is).
      
      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 4) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
      Reply
      0 Replies
      
      loading ...
  - 80%
    Georgia501 year, 2 months ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    VA Tech banned guns on campus. How'd that work out for 'em in less than a year?
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    2 Replies
    
    loading ...
    - 100%
      DeadXXXManXXXTalkin1 year, 2 months ago
      
      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
      
      an effective way to chop any gun control discussion off at the knees is to bring up two scenes of actual spree killings
      
      one is VA tech
      
      one is a mall in Utah
      
      both assailants had two guns
      
      but while one had over 30 dead
      
      one had 5
      
      then ask which scene a person would rather be at, the one where there was an armed citizen to shoot back, or the one where there wasn't
      
      there is only one answer, and it's the only one I've ever gotten from those willing to answer the question
      
      only an insane person would say they'd rather be at the scene where no one had a gun but the spree killer, just to support an anti-gun argument. what they say is generally, 'well if NO ONE had a gun'. welcome...to Fantasy Island....
      
      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 4) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
      Reply
      1 Reply
      
      loading ...
      - 100%
        toph19731 year, 2 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        I'll take the one where the armed citizen can fure back. With the mall Shoort. Would he have gone in there if they had a conceal and carry law? Probably not. There is only one thing criminals are scared of and that is other guns.
        
        Who was it that said an armed society is a polite society? I would agree.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 6) (recursion depth : 5) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
  - 100%
    lizard891 year, 2 months ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    My parents happen to be teachers in the Judson School District in San Antonio Texas, which two years ago was the largest school district in the State. Having gone through the district myself, I know the variety of kids who go through my parents classes. Teachers need something to defend themselves. At least the teachers at this school have a chance to helf themselves and others. Your solution makes no sense. "Let him shoot up everyone, he would do it even if the teacher had a gun."
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    1 Reply
    
    loading ...
    - Neutral
      alakazam1 year, 2 months ago
      
      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
      
      The concept of considering armed resistance futile is one that is ill conceived at best.
      
      It basically amounts to being willing to let a mad dog killer run amok until he gets bored and goes away.
      
      I guess some folks would rather lie down and take a bullet than fight for their life or the lives of others.
      
      Sounds like cowardice to me..as though they think they might get lucky and be one of the ones who gets to walk away by allowing the murder of others to go unanswered and unchecked hoping the bad guy will go away before he gets to them.
      
      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 4) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
      Reply
      0 Replies
      
      loading ...