Gun Control - What's the Problem?

[Wyatt earp]

To put your mind at ease, we don't hate Al gun owners as bad. We just hate you.

No you hate the 2nd amendment..

 

[Rigby5]

To put your mind at ease, we don't hate Al gun owners as bad. We just hate you.

Lol
I don’t “hate” anyone, it’s a wasted effort.
But when Congress gets back, an all out firearm confiscation will be pursued. Progressives will not be happy till that is accomplished.
Mandatory firearm buy back will be demanded, were it will be tax payer funded. Giving people pennies on the dollar for their firearms.

It will backfire

Ah, the doomsday defense. There's a commie behind every tree so let's cut down all the trees. The Rooskies have the bomb now so every home should have to be forced to have a bomb shelter. They're coming for all my guns so I had better make sure that everyone has more guns so that it will take them longer to come and get mine. No Gun Regulations at all because the NRA missed the oppurtunity to sell more guns to 5 year olds.

There has been fruitcakes among us forever. If you are shocked that we find you entertaining, you would be wrong. Your hatred is clean and present and it just makes you sound exactly like what you are.

View attachment 276353

No, the problem has nothing to do with political systems.
It is the pragmatics of democracy and corruption.

First of all, even in a perfect democratic republic, you will have unstable and violent people sometimes.
So what are the possible solutions?
The choice of the British monarchy was to disarm everyone but the mercenary forces paid by the monarchy, to control everyone.
But obviously that is what led to abuses so bad a revolution became necessary,
So no sane person should want that.
Instead, what the founders decided on and wanted, was for all people to be equal under the law, and to deal with problems themselves.
That means things like Neighborhood Watch, local militias, posses, citizen soldiers, etc.
They were totally against mercenaries, like police, a professional military, etc.
And therefore they would never have accepted the inherently corrupt ideal of gun control.
Gun control makes absolutely no sense, because the average person in the general population is who you can trust with weapons the most.
Those you can trust the least are those working for pay.
And clearly if average citizens were given more responsibility and access to government resources, then problem individuals would be identified and dealt with long before they actually harmed anyone.
The problem is entirely due to the fact we have failed in our responsibility for local community involvement to identify and deal with problems.
Gun control is the exact opposite of what people should do in a democratic republic.
Gun control is where a paid elite dictate over the general population, which has been made helpless and without any power at all.
It plunges society right back into feudalism.
It can not possibly have a good ending.
It is the most illogical and corrupt choice possible.

 

[Rigby5]

Constitutional guaranteed rights such the 1st and 2nd amendment are not absolute. Government can suspend the guarantee of those rights in certain circumstances. A person is not guaranteed freedom to cry fire in crowded auditorium nor is a convicted felon guaranteed the right to bear arms. Governments have the right and obligation to protect it's people. If that requires suspension of constitutional rights for prisoners, those convicted of felons, and the mentally ill so be it.

It is not illegal to yell fire in a crowded theater.

It never was

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

All depends on what you deliberately cause others to do?
If for example, you are in a play on stage, and when you yell "fire" no one panics because they know it is not real, then it is not illegal.
But if you deliberately act in such as way as to cause unnecessary harm and panic, that would be illegal.
However, it is also local laws that would be used to determine if legal or not.

You will never be charged for yelling fire you might be charged with inciting a riot or some sort of endangerment.

It's Time to Stop Using the 'Fire in a Crowded Theater' Quote

I think the fire in a crowded theater is a good example to use.
It shows how words can be harmful to others, and it also shows that it is local laws that cover punishment for that potential harm.
The old catch all is likely "Disorderly Conduct".
And the point is people have to act responsibly.

The fact the argument should not have been sufficient to uphold the Alien and Sedition Act does not mean the argument should never be used.

The word itself isn't harmful

And what do you think would happen today if someone yelled fire in a crowded movie theater?

The guy yelling fire would be booed and told to STFU while people threw popcorn and other foodstuffs at him then he would be escorted out by security.

So it's really not a very good analogy any more

Buildings tend to not be wood any more, and have built in sprinkler systems.
But recently several people were killed at a 4th of July celebration when some kids set off little fireworks, the crowd thought it was a gang shooting, and they all panicked, ran, and trampled people to death. So similar concepts are always going to be valid.

 

[Dan Stubbs]

I'm a gun owner, most of my friends are gun owners, but i'm confused... What is the problem that most conservatives have with President Obama's Gun Control ideas? I hear the speeches, read the plans, watched the town hall and listen to commentary on both sides until my ears bleed and I still don't understand the conservative position.

Everything that the President has suggested makes sense to me. I don't feel threatened about losing my guns, and I don't think that a responsible citizen's ability to buy a gun is being threatened. I think anything that helps keep guns out of the wrong hands is a good idea, it will save lives! The only point I hear from conservatives on why they object is that they think there is a hidden agenda by the Left to take away all guns. That is ridiculous, paranoid and unrealistic, there must be something more...

Why does the pro-gun base object to background checks and regulations that will make it harder for criminals or irresponsible individuals to own a gun? I just don't understand the argument. Please enlighten me.


View attachment 59771

You need gun control only if it solves a problem, otherwise it is just a inroad to control guns nothing else. If you are going to control the shootings you have to control those who do it. I looked back and found just about everyone of the shooters had mental problems and some had been detected and nothing was done to get them in to treatment. So this tells me that the whole gun control effort is nothing but a smoke screen to take away guns from Citizens. So don't give me any of the Commie crap that it will stop the needless killings. Its ashamed I can shoot anymore and don't own any.

 

[Rustic]

To put your mind at ease, we don't hate Al gun owners as bad. We just hate you.

Lol
I don’t “hate” anyone, it’s a wasted effort.
But when Congress gets back, an all out firearm confiscation will be pursued. Progressives will not be happy till that is accomplished.
Mandatory firearm buy back will be demanded, were it will be tax payer funded. Giving people pennies on the dollar for their firearms.

It will backfire

Ah, the doomsday defense. There's a commie behind every tree so let's cut down all the trees. The Rooskies have the bomb now so every home should have to be forced to have a bomb shelter. They're coming for all my guns so I had better make sure that everyone has more guns so that it will take them longer to come and get mine. No Gun Regulations at all because the NRA missed the oppurtunity to sell more guns to 5 year olds.

There has been fruitcakes among us forever. If you are shocked that we find you entertaining, you would be wrong. Your hatred is clean and present and it just makes you sound exactly like what you are.

View attachment 276353

Lol
Projection

 

[Wyatt earp]

I'm a gun owner, most of my friends are gun owners, but i'm confused... What is the problem that most conservatives have with President Obama's Gun Control ideas? I hear the speeches, read the plans, watched the town hall and listen to commentary on both sides until my ears bleed and I still don't understand the conservative position.

Everything that the President has suggested makes sense to me. I don't feel threatened about losing my guns, and I don't think that a responsible citizen's ability to buy a gun is being threatened. I think anything that helps keep guns out of the wrong hands is a good idea, it will save lives! The only point I hear from conservatives on why they object is that they think there is a hidden agenda by the Left to take away all guns. That is ridiculous, paranoid and unrealistic, there must be something more...

Why does the pro-gun base object to background checks and regulations that will make it harder for criminals or irresponsible individuals to own a gun? I just don't understand the argument. Please enlighten me.


View attachment 59771

You need gun control only if it solves a problem, otherwise it is just a inroad to control guns nothing else. If you are going to control the shootings you have to control those who do it. I looked back and found just about everyone of the shooters had mental problems and some had been detected and nothing was done to get them in to treatment. So this tells me that the whole gun control effort is nothing but a smoke screen to take away guns from Citizens. So don't give me any of the Commie crap that it will stop the needless killings. Its ashamed I can shoot anymore and don't own any.



View attachment 276383

You need gun control only if it solves a problem


What problem?

 

[Slade3200]

I'm a gun owner, most of my friends are gun owners, but i'm confused... What is the problem that most conservatives have with President Obama's Gun Control ideas? I hear the speeches, read the plans, watched the town hall and listen to commentary on both sides until my ears bleed and I still don't understand the conservative position.

Everything that the President has suggested makes sense to me. I don't feel threatened about losing my guns, and I don't think that a responsible citizen's ability to buy a gun is being threatened. I think anything that helps keep guns out of the wrong hands is a good idea, it will save lives! The only point I hear from conservatives on why they object is that they think there is a hidden agenda by the Left to take away all guns. That is ridiculous, paranoid and unrealistic, there must be something more...

Why does the pro-gun base object to background checks and regulations that will make it harder for criminals or irresponsible individuals to own a gun? I just don't understand the argument. Please enlighten me.


View attachment 59771

You need gun control only if it solves a problem, otherwise it is just a inroad to control guns nothing else. If you are going to control the shootings you have to control those who do it. I looked back and found just about everyone of the shooters had mental problems and some had been detected and nothing was done to get them in to treatment. So this tells me that the whole gun control effort is nothing but a smoke screen to take away guns from Citizens. So don't give me any of the Commie crap that it will stop the needless killings. Its ashamed I can shoot anymore and don't own any.



View attachment 276383

Well let me ask.. why don’t we sell booze to kids? They can always shoulder tap or have older people buy them booze, they are going to get it if they want it... so why even card them at liquor stores. What problem is that solving?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Another example of bat shit crazy gun control laws. "Reasonable" gun control laws are never reasonable.

Man arrested with gun, magazines, knife in school in Clarksville

Man arrested with gun, magazines, knife in school in Clarksville

A man who was picking up a student walked into Byrns Darden Elementary School packing a handgun, two spare magazines and a knife on Monday.

School Resource Officers with the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office stopped the man and arrested him for possessing a firearm inside an elementary school, according to a news release.

At 3:18 p.m., the 53-year-old man entered the school to pick up a student, according to Sandra Brandon, MCSO spokeswoman. Front office staff noticed what looked to be the outline of a firearm under his clothing and notified the School Resource Officer.

While waiting for the SRO, faculty, staff and administrators monitored the man from the office and remotely via cameras, according to Anthony Jordan, CMCSS spokesman.

The man, who does have a valid handgun carry permit, said he was unaware that it was against the law to carry in the school. The law is posted on the door when entering the school, Brandon said.

I have to say that even I have a problem with this.

First off, you need to know the laws when carrying a concealed weapon, and also have to accept the consequences if you decide to break the law. It doesn't mean you have to approve of the laws, but just abide by them.

The problem here is that if this guy was a kook who did have a permit, allowed to enter the school armed, he could use that permit to carry out a mass murder of students. That's why there's a law against going to certain places with a firearm which of course excludes authority.

Making a law so that you CAN arrest someone who was an actual problem, does NOT mean you SHOULD arrest someone who acted reasonably and was not a problem.

If you are breaking the law, you are a problem.

That is incorrect.
For example, once I simply forgot I was carrying concealed at a post office.
No one ever knew, and I did not discover it until later.
There was no problem.
There are lots of laws like that, which make something illegal without having as its basis, the need to defend the rights of others.
And when the rights of others are not harmed, there is no rational or justification for prosecuting.
The fact a law exists and it was violated, does not always means it should be enforced with prosecution.
For example, when there is a medical emergency, it would be foolish to obey speed limits.
No law is absolute, and all laws can legally and should be violated under certain circumstances.
As a general principle, the way to understand law is that if police can do something legally, then everyone can under the right circumstances.
That is because there is no legal basis for police being authorized any more than anyone.
Actually you can tell they can't be, because police are created by us, and we can not create that which has more authority than we have to give them.

We do give them that authority and we elect the representatives that make the laws. As the old saying goes, ignorance of the law is no excuse. When you apply and are granted a license to carry a firearm in public, you also agree to the laws that govern that license.

In our state you need to inform an officer if you have a loaded firearm in the car when you are pulled over. Sure, people get a little worked up when they see those lights flashing and are pulled over, and you may forget to tell the officer perhaps until you realize it. But I don't buy this guys story he had no idea it was against the law to carry in a school. Especially in light of the past school shootings.

It seems he was defiant of the law, and when busted, played stupid.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Fuck off "buddy". I stand by what I said

"The man, who does have a valid handgun carry permit"



This gets so tiring. Keep up.

.

Illegal to carry in a school...and signs were posted

Just as an undercover cop can carry concealed in a school or where posted that guns are not desired by the owner, so can a person with a concealed carry permit in many states. They are certified as part of the local militia or posse.

stacle
Outside of college campuses, what state allows anybody with a CCW to carry a firearm in a primary school with children?

Probably all of them.
All schools have the legal responsibility to protect our children while at school, and instead of hiring expensive private security guards, licensed parent volunteers are becoming a more acceptable alternative after the paid guard in FL fled from the shooting.

The federal law specifically allows states and local areas to choose who they want armed at schools, so there is no obstacle in law.

That's a first to me. I never read a story of schools allowing armed parents to protect the kids. Yes, some schools are allowing teachers to carry in the building, but under strict guidelines and in some cases extensive training. But my point is that it's likely no state allows just anybody with a license to go into a school armed.

 

[Wyatt earp]

To put your mind at ease, we don't hate Al gun owners as bad. We just hate you.

Lol
I don’t “hate” anyone, it’s a wasted effort.
But when Congress gets back, an all out firearm confiscation will be pursued. Progressives will not be happy till that is accomplished.
Mandatory firearm buy back will be demanded, were it will be tax payer funded. Giving people pennies on the dollar for their firearms.

It will backfire

Ah, the doomsday defense. There's a commie behind every tree so let's cut down all the trees. The Rooskies have the bomb now so every home should have to be forced to have a bomb shelter. They're coming for all my guns so I had better make sure that everyone has more guns so that it will take them longer to come and get mine. No Gun Regulations at all because the NRA missed the oppurtunity to sell more guns to 5 year olds.

There has been fruitcakes among us forever. If you are shocked that we find you entertaining, you would be wrong. Your hatred is clean and present and it just makes you sound exactly like what you are.

View attachment 276353

No, the problem has nothing to do with political systems.
It is the pragmatics of democracy and corruption.

First of all, even in a perfect democratic republic, you will have unstable and violent people sometimes.
So what are the possible solutions?
The choice of the British monarchy was to disarm everyone but the mercenary forces paid by the monarchy, to control everyone.
But obviously that is what led to abuses so bad a revolution became necessary,
So no sane person should want that.
Instead, what the founders decided on and wanted, was for all people to be equal under the law, and to deal with problems themselves.
That means things like Neighborhood Watch, local militias, posses, citizen soldiers, etc.
They were totally against mercenaries, like police, a professional military, etc.
And therefore they would never have accepted the inherently corrupt ideal of gun control.
Gun control makes absolutely no sense, because the average person in the general population is who you can trust with weapons the most.
Those you can trust the least are those working for pay.
And clearly if average citizens were given more responsibility and access to government resources, then problem individuals would be identified and dealt with long before they actually harmed anyone.
The problem is entirely due to the fact we have failed in our responsibility for local community involvement to identify and deal with problems.
Gun control is the exact opposite of what people should do in a democratic republic.
Gun control is where a paid elite dictate over the general population, which has been made helpless and without any power at all.
It plunges society right back into feudalism.
It can not possibly have a good ending.
It is the most illogical and corrupt choice possible.

All that to say you hate the constitution?

 

[basquebromance]

brothers and sisters: not everyone who is mentally ill is dangerous, just like not everyone who is dangerous is mentally ill, my friends!

 

[Blues Man]

It is not illegal to yell fire in a crowded theater.

It never was

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

All depends on what you deliberately cause others to do?
If for example, you are in a play on stage, and when you yell "fire" no one panics because they know it is not real, then it is not illegal.
But if you deliberately act in such as way as to cause unnecessary harm and panic, that would be illegal.
However, it is also local laws that would be used to determine if legal or not.

You will never be charged for yelling fire you might be charged with inciting a riot or some sort of endangerment.

It's Time to Stop Using the 'Fire in a Crowded Theater' Quote

I think the fire in a crowded theater is a good example to use.
It shows how words can be harmful to others, and it also shows that it is local laws that cover punishment for that potential harm.
The old catch all is likely "Disorderly Conduct".
And the point is people have to act responsibly.

The fact the argument should not have been sufficient to uphold the Alien and Sedition Act does not mean the argument should never be used.

The word itself isn't harmful

And what do you think would happen today if someone yelled fire in a crowded movie theater?

The guy yelling fire would be booed and told to STFU while people threw popcorn and other foodstuffs at him then he would be escorted out by security.

So it's really not a very good analogy any more

Buildings tend to not be wood any more, and have built in sprinkler systems.
But recently several people were killed at a 4th of July celebration when some kids set off little fireworks, the crowd thought it was a gang shooting, and they all panicked, ran, and trampled people to death. So similar concepts are always going to be valid.

Throwing fireworks is nowhere near the same as yelling fire.

 

[Flash]

The man, who does have a valid handgun carry permit, said he was unaware that it was against the law to carry in the school. The law is posted on the door when entering the school, Brandon said.

You're not defending this guy are you?

No, but you're sure willing to make him a felon and throw the book at him for a mistake that was harmless--like about 75% of all gun laws do (see lawmaker who unlawfully made an SBR and was not prosecuted, but let it be one of us, and you commie cocksuckers have no problem sending us to a federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison).

See why we don't trust you fucking cocksuckers. There will be no compromise, thanks to you and your ilk.

.

Carrying without a permit is no minor deal buddy

Why should anybody be required to have a permit to carry a firearm when the Constitution says very clearly that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed? Permitting a Constitutional right is infringing the hell out of it.

 

[Flash]

No, but you're sure willing to make him a felon and throw the book at him for a mistake that was harmless--like about 75% of all gun laws do (see lawmaker who unlawfully made an SBR and was not prosecuted, but let it be one of us, and you commie cocksuckers have no problem sending us to a federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison).

See why we don't trust you fucking cocksuckers. There will be no compromise, thanks to you and your ilk.

.

Carrying without a permit is no minor deal buddy

Get your facts straight, BUDDY.

You fucking moron.

.

Fuck off "buddy". I stand by what I said

"The man, who does have a valid handgun carry permit"



This gets so tiring. Keep up.

.

Illegal to carry in a school...and signs were posted

You are confused Moon Bat.

A fucking sign that was clearly in violation the Constitution because the Bill of Rights very clearly says that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. If the stupid sign said you can't carry a firearm then the stupid sign was infringing upon the Constitutional right to bear arms.

 

[Flash]

Another example of bat shit crazy gun control laws. "Reasonable" gun control laws are never reasonable.

Man arrested with gun, magazines, knife in school in Clarksville

Man arrested with gun, magazines, knife in school in Clarksville

A man who was picking up a student walked into Byrns Darden Elementary School packing a handgun, two spare magazines and a knife on Monday.

School Resource Officers with the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office stopped the man and arrested him for possessing a firearm inside an elementary school, according to a news release.

At 3:18 p.m., the 53-year-old man entered the school to pick up a student, according to Sandra Brandon, MCSO spokeswoman. Front office staff noticed what looked to be the outline of a firearm under his clothing and notified the School Resource Officer.

While waiting for the SRO, faculty, staff and administrators monitored the man from the office and remotely via cameras, according to Anthony Jordan, CMCSS spokesman.

The man, who does have a valid handgun carry permit, said he was unaware that it was against the law to carry in the school. The law is posted on the door when entering the school, Brandon said.

I have to say that even I have a problem with this.

First off, you need to know the laws when carrying a concealed weapon, and also have to accept the consequences if you decide to break the law. It doesn't mean you have to approve of the laws, but just abide by them.

The problem here is that if this guy was a kook who did have a permit, allowed to enter the school armed, he could use that permit to carry out a mass murder of students. That's why there's a law against going to certain places with a firearm which of course excludes authority.

The guy wasn't there to commit a crime. He was there to pick up his granddaughter.

The law is wrong. There should never be a crime to posses or carry a firearm. The crime should be what is illegally done with the firearm, not the possession of the firearm.

Had there been a real criminal at the school this man could have prevented the criminal from doing a lot of harm. Then he would have been a hero. A school posted as a gun free zone is just asking for trouble. We have seen it several times.

 

[Flash]

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

To put your mind at ease, we don't hate Al gun owners as bad. We just hate you.

Lol
I don’t “hate” anyone, it’s a wasted effort.
But when Congress gets back, an all out firearm confiscation will be pursued. Progressives will not be happy till that is accomplished.
Mandatory firearm buy back will be demanded, were it will be tax payer funded. Giving people pennies on the dollar for their firearms.

It will backfire

Ah, the doomsday defense. There's a commie behind every tree so let's cut down all the trees. The Rooskies have the bomb now so every home should have to be forced to have a bomb shelter. They're coming for all my guns so I had better make sure that everyone has more guns so that it will take them longer to come and get mine. No Gun Regulations at all because the NRA missed the oppurtunity to sell more guns to 5 year olds.

There has been fruitcakes among us forever. If you are shocked that we find you entertaining, you would be wrong. Your hatred is clean and present and it just makes you sound exactly like what you are.

View attachment 276353

Given the recent past behavior of the commies in the D party, I think we can expect no less. They made us fight them over the individual right itself. I have no delusions about their likely goal.

.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Another example of bat shit crazy gun control laws. "Reasonable" gun control laws are never reasonable.

Man arrested with gun, magazines, knife in school in Clarksville

Man arrested with gun, magazines, knife in school in Clarksville

A man who was picking up a student walked into Byrns Darden Elementary School packing a handgun, two spare magazines and a knife on Monday.

School Resource Officers with the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office stopped the man and arrested him for possessing a firearm inside an elementary school, according to a news release.

At 3:18 p.m., the 53-year-old man entered the school to pick up a student, according to Sandra Brandon, MCSO spokeswoman. Front office staff noticed what looked to be the outline of a firearm under his clothing and notified the School Resource Officer.

While waiting for the SRO, faculty, staff and administrators monitored the man from the office and remotely via cameras, according to Anthony Jordan, CMCSS spokesman.

The man, who does have a valid handgun carry permit, said he was unaware that it was against the law to carry in the school. The law is posted on the door when entering the school, Brandon said.

I have to say that even I have a problem with this.

First off, you need to know the laws when carrying a concealed weapon, and also have to accept the consequences if you decide to break the law. It doesn't mean you have to approve of the laws, but just abide by them.

The problem here is that if this guy was a kook who did have a permit, allowed to enter the school armed, he could use that permit to carry out a mass murder of students. That's why there's a law against going to certain places with a firearm which of course excludes authority.

The guy wasn't there to commit a crime. He was there to pick up his granddaughter.

The law is wrong. There should never be a crime to posses or carry a firearm. The crime should be what is illegally done with the firearm, not the possession of the firearm.

Had there been a real criminal at the school this man could have prevented the criminal from doing a lot of harm. Then he would have been a hero. A school posted as a gun free zone is just asking for trouble. We have seen it several times.

You would have better chances at hitting the lottery than this guy being there when a school shooting took place.

The fact is schools are trying to take preemptive measures so that a shooting doesn't happen in the first place. That's an impossible task if allowing strangers to carry guns into the school legally. They don't know who is or is not a threat. So the best thing to stop a shooting is keeping the school gun free, again, with the exception of security, authority, or perhaps an armed teacher or two with additional training outside your standard CCW course.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Carrying without a permit is no minor deal buddy

Get your facts straight, BUDDY.

You fucking moron.

.

Fuck off "buddy". I stand by what I said

"The man, who does have a valid handgun carry permit"



This gets so tiring. Keep up.

.

Illegal to carry in a school...and signs were posted

You are confused Moon Bat.

A fucking sign that was clearly in violation the Constitution because the Bill of Rights very clearly says that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. If the stupid sign said you can't carry a firearm then the stupid sign was infringing upon the Constitutional right to bear arms.

Then that is an issue with the state and courts, not the police. Police simply enforce the law--not create it.

 

[Flash]

Another example of bat shit crazy gun control laws. "Reasonable" gun control laws are never reasonable.

Man arrested with gun, magazines, knife in school in Clarksville

Man arrested with gun, magazines, knife in school in Clarksville

A man who was picking up a student walked into Byrns Darden Elementary School packing a handgun, two spare magazines and a knife on Monday.

School Resource Officers with the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office stopped the man and arrested him for possessing a firearm inside an elementary school, according to a news release.

At 3:18 p.m., the 53-year-old man entered the school to pick up a student, according to Sandra Brandon, MCSO spokeswoman. Front office staff noticed what looked to be the outline of a firearm under his clothing and notified the School Resource Officer.

While waiting for the SRO, faculty, staff and administrators monitored the man from the office and remotely via cameras, according to Anthony Jordan, CMCSS spokesman.

The man, who does have a valid handgun carry permit, said he was unaware that it was against the law to carry in the school. The law is posted on the door when entering the school, Brandon said.

I have to say that even I have a problem with this.

First off, you need to know the laws when carrying a concealed weapon, and also have to accept the consequences if you decide to break the law. It doesn't mean you have to approve of the laws, but just abide by them.

The problem here is that if this guy was a kook who did have a permit, allowed to enter the school armed, he could use that permit to carry out a mass murder of students. That's why there's a law against going to certain places with a firearm which of course excludes authority.

The guy wasn't there to commit a crime. He was there to pick up his granddaughter.

The law is wrong. There should never be a crime to posses or carry a firearm. The crime should be what is illegally done with the firearm, not the possession of the firearm.

Had there been a real criminal at the school this man could have prevented the criminal from doing a lot of harm. Then he would have been a hero. A school posted as a gun free zone is just asking for trouble. We have seen it several times.

You would have better chances at hitting the lottery than this guy being there when a school shooting took place.

The fact is schools are trying to take preemptive measures so that a shooting doesn't happen in the first place. That's an impossible task if allowing strangers to carry guns into the school legally. They don't know who is or is not a threat. So the best thing to stop a shooting is keeping the school gun free, again, with the exception of security, authority, or perhaps an armed teacher or two with additional training outside your standard CCW course.

Ray, I agree with you 99% of the time but I respectfully disagree with you on this.

No sign is ever going to do a darn bit of good. A sign does not provide any meaningful protection but it does serve notice to a potential shooter that he has little to worry about from any of his potential victims.