Shooting at Florida high school

well no shit insurance companies won't play along. That's capitalism for your ass - of course capitalism is good for the left (like in this case) when it might block any ideas from the right. Got it!

 

Get back to me when every American has health insurance. In the meantime, explain how you can post something like this:

with a straight face and keep honking on about "the left."

 

good point! The right complains about capitalism too. But seriously, it is absurd to expect academia to arm themselves. Out of sight, out of mind - if schools hire trained, armed security (for example retired military like myself who can still physically out perform 90 percent of the teachers) to discreetly protect their children they might be able to circumvent insurance costs & still keep themselves & the kids safe.

 

Yeah, I've been hashing the armed teacher thing over with some actual teacher friends on Facebook, and they've convinced me that's it's a generally impractical idea. The insurance aspect is something I admittedly hadn't thought of, and it's a show-stopper. Other things they've brought up is that they already have more work and responsibilities than they can handle, and none of them think they'd be able to shoot a student they've known personally, and is technically in their care. One or two said they would be willing to be the armed teacher, but again, the insurance question kills the whole idea.

So back to thinking about armed security services.

 

We had an armed cop on our high school but he had to cover like half a dozen high schools so he was only at each one on a very part time basis. Mostly he seemed to spend his time gauling aeay the students who got caught with drugs or fighting or what not.

 

If we're going to put more cops in schools, I think they should have special training and a specific mandate. If they're there to protect the students, then they're not there to police the students. Otherwise, don't place cops into schools and then not expect them to act like cops.

Just my opinion.

 

I agree - don't make the students hate the poor guy who's trying to defend them.

I'm thinking here's an opportunity for a whole new private industry.

 

A good thread on the topic.

 

I wish they were only arresting students for “Routine Violations” here in Memphis.

 

Look, the kids are over 18 and it's your mom's business, not yours.

 

I'd do it if they pay me 130 percent of what I make now. Work is getting slow anyway. Drug free, active security clearance, can pass the standard law enforcement physical test - hell I'd do it for a few years until retirement age.

 

Iowa grants gun permits to the blind

 

the article is dated 2013. That's several years for a multitude of blind people shooting mishaps but I don't remember hearing much about them if they occurred frequently.
Any thoughts?

 

It's also not clear how many people purchased guns or what the crime rate in their area was. My thought is most of the people participating just wanted to feel they weren't being discriminated against. I'm also wondering why Iowa doesn't let blind people drive as well.

 

Where do you hide from a blind person with a gun? How do you make a noise that ain't like a rabbit? /gallagher

 

They never saw that coming.

 

Teacher Accidentally Fires Gun; at Least One Student Injured

Dennis Alexander was reportedly teaching a lesson on 'public safety' at a Calif. high school

 

None of that story makes any sense. What was a teacher doing armed at a class IN CALIFORNIA?!? I mean is that a thing in California of all places? What lesson was he trying to teach that required him to draw a firearm, point it at the ceiling, and pull the trigger?

 

We already have oldfella to supply this kind of color commentary, thank you.

 

Oh my god. That did sound like him didn't it. All it needed was some bolded words.

 

Aaaand that goes on the list as another "school shooting."

 

No, it goes on the list of "Arming teachers is a stupid idea." Try to keep up.

 

#1: We've had dozens and dozens of discussions on this board over the years about shooting on an commercial airplane. I've always described it as shooting in a Kindergarten, but worse. Well, now we're talking about actually shooting in a Kindergarten and that makes me uncomfortable.

#2: Weapon retention. A Level III retention holder that law enforcement uses to secure their sidearms requires a 2" or 2-1/2" belt. No teacher is going to wear that. Flight Deck Officers (FDO's) that are certified to carry sidearms while engaged in Commercial Avaiation have a special retention holster that they wear. No teacher is going to want to wear that. So, the gun is locked up in a desk drawer or worse. If it's not secured on the teacher's person, there's an extremely high risk of it falling into a student's hands and thus, you've actually armed a shooter. If it is secured on the teacher's person, there's nothing to stop this teacher from being overpowered in a non-lethal force encounter. When I was in school, if two kids were fighting a teacher or the principal would charge in and break it up. Now, if two kids are fighting is the armed teacher going to draw down on them? Are we willing to run the risk of one of the fighting students going for the armed teacher's gun?

 

I said I was already convinced.

 

Oh, I know. Just adding my two cents.

 

Armed security guards would be better. Provided they don't run and hide if they're actually needed, of course.

 

no worries there - most security guards couldn't run (and need a barn nearby to hide behind) if they wanted to!

 

This guy should have dropped the mic at the end.

/thread

 

I don't agree with him on every point, but he does make a number of good ones, including the heart of why the platitude Democrats keep repeating about "debate" just isn't going to ever work.

 

My brother-in-law, a rather far-left leftie, offered to have a reasonable discussion of guns on Facebook last year. To start, he suggested banning semi-autos, and asked for reasons why not. I explained why that was impractical due to the enormous number of them in existence, how they existed because they were simply the most modern technology (since about 1896), and how they were generally the best solution for personal defense... His immediate reply was "Okay, so we agree, ban semi-autos. What's next?"
Yeah, reasonable discussion.