hypothetical scenario- armed teacher

[Correll]

Why not post a link to your so-called experts and teachers? What you're saying is that it's a better idea that everybody in a school be helpless to a mass murderer. Where is the logic in that anyway?

EVERYONE BUT BRAIN DEAD RW IDIOTS is saying its better for the kids to have expertly trained security in schools protecting them than it is to have someone that makes their living showing kids how to solve algebra problems

Everyone isn't saying that. Only your fellow gun control kooks are. The claim that it's more effective was disproven in FL. "Expertly trained security" is also very expensive. It's cheaper to pay bonuses to a dozen teachers to train and carry a concealed weapon than it is to have one full time security gaurd.

Exactly what would be required in this training? Would it be simply becoming proficient in shooting at a static target? If so, what kind of shooting scores would be required for the teachers to carry?

Or, would they be required to take tactical shooting courses so that they would learn how to use cover and fire a weapon from different positions?

When I was part of the Security Force, it took me 4 months before I qualified for my Expert Sharpshooter Medal. And, that was training for 1 week out of every month, with a couple of days reserved for range time. Not only did we learn to shoot from various positions using various kinds of cover, but we were also taught ammo control.

And....................how many hours a month are these teachers going to have to train to qualify for their bonuses?

These are questions that should be answered when you say to train teachers to carry weapons in school.

Was your training based on the likely enemy of one or two armed amateurs attacking the base?

do you go to Jack In The Box and order a 16 oz bone in rib eye and a bake potato ?

or to Del Frisco's and order a Jumbo Jack and fries ?

idiots dont want teachers shooting around their kids either

Sure we don't WANT that.


IF the other option, though, is an unopposed shooter who has all the time in the world to shoot our kids, then having a teacher or two who might be able to help,


WOULD BE BETTER.

 

[ABikerSailor]

EVERYONE BUT BRAIN DEAD RW IDIOTS is saying its better for the kids to have expertly trained security in schools protecting them than it is to have someone that makes their living showing kids how to solve algebra problems

Everyone isn't saying that. Only your fellow gun control kooks are. The claim that it's more effective was disproven in FL. "Expertly trained security" is also very expensive. It's cheaper to pay bonuses to a dozen teachers to train and carry a concealed weapon than it is to have one full time security gaurd.

Exactly what would be required in this training? Would it be simply becoming proficient in shooting at a static target? If so, what kind of shooting scores would be required for the teachers to carry?

Or, would they be required to take tactical shooting courses so that they would learn how to use cover and fire a weapon from different positions?

When I was part of the Security Force, it took me 4 months before I qualified for my Expert Sharpshooter Medal. And, that was training for 1 week out of every month, with a couple of days reserved for range time. Not only did we learn to shoot from various positions using various kinds of cover, but we were also taught ammo control.

And....................how many hours a month are these teachers going to have to train to qualify for their bonuses?

These are questions that should be answered when you say to train teachers to carry weapons in school.

Was your training based on the likely enemy of one or two armed amateurs attacking the base?

Random shooters were part of the training, but so was riot and crowd control.

Actually had to use that once when we had a visiting ship that got protested by the locals.

SO, the scenario(s) envisioned for the armed teachers were just a part of your training.


So, comparing YOUR training, as a prime response team to a lot of potential, and very high level threats, to that for a last ditch back up defense, against a much more limited and smaller threat,

is not reasonable.

Okay..................what kind of training would YOU require for the teachers to have? Being able to shoot a tight group at a target is just a small part of it, because in active shooter situations, the target is shooting back.

And yeah, I DO think it's important for a teacher to know different shooting positions, Weaver stance, on one knee, knowing how to take cover behind doors and windows, etc.

So...............again.................what kind of training would YOU require teachers to have so they could carry in schools? Is being able to shoot accurately enough, or should there be more?

 

[Unkotare]

why is it you see 100 police cars sitting outside a hostage situation with policemen squatting down behind their cars with their service weapons aimed at the the entrance securing building and not entering doors or windows shooting at a suspect ?

Great point. Why is everyone acting like a freaking teacher should go grab a gun and turn into Rambo?

99% of these stupid shits are clueless RW's - making intelligent/complex decisions totally escapes them.

I've been to a two way rifle range in Vietnam, have you?


.

no ... but Im not a dumbass.

on second thought -- if you are talking about a firefight in a combat situation, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.

if not, my other comment stands

That's exactly what I'm talking about, many teachers have combat experience also,.....


.

How many?

 

[basquebromance]

"the children who are dying are real kids from real families. some were doing foolish things. some were just caught at the wrong place at the wrong time. but all kids have the right to make mistakes. all kids have the right to live. my kid is dead. your kid could be next" - Clementine Bardot, who set up Save Our Son after her two sons were shot in Detroit (one died, one survived)

we need these armed teachers to protect our kids!

 

[Cecilie1200]

hypothetical scenario- armed teacher

Most experts and teachers agree that arming teachers is a really dumb and dangerous idea. However, all those extra gun sales would be great for the gun industry and the NRA.

Why not post a link to your so-called experts and teachers? What you're saying is that it's a better idea that everybody in a school be helpless to a mass murderer. Where is the logic in that anyway?

EVERYONE BUT BRAIN DEAD RW IDIOTS is saying its better for the kids to have expertly trained security in schools protecting them than it is to have someone that makes their living showing kids how to solve algebra problems

Everyone isn't saying that. Only your fellow gun control kooks are. The claim that it's more effective was disproven in FL. "Expertly trained security" is also very expensive. It's cheaper to pay bonuses to a dozen teachers to train and carry a concealed weapon than it is to have one full time security gaurd.

What do you think the swat team will do when they round the corner and see a guy with a gun in the hallway? Dead teacher that’s what!

I think the SWAT teams knows that spree killers in schools are NOT usually adults. I also think the SWAT team will be apprised before they get there that there are armed teachers, since this will be known information and something that is relevant to pass on to them. And I think they're trained well enough not to just shoot people willy-nilly.

Why do you leftists insist on believing that every person in this country is Cletus, the Slack-Jawed Yokel the instant their skin comes in contact with a gun? What does this tell us about YOU?

 

[Siete]

Everyone isn't saying that. Only your fellow gun control kooks are. The claim that it's more effective was disproven in FL. "Expertly trained security" is also very expensive. It's cheaper to pay bonuses to a dozen teachers to train and carry a concealed weapon than it is to have one full time security gaurd.

Exactly what would be required in this training? Would it be simply becoming proficient in shooting at a static target? If so, what kind of shooting scores would be required for the teachers to carry?

Or, would they be required to take tactical shooting courses so that they would learn how to use cover and fire a weapon from different positions?

When I was part of the Security Force, it took me 4 months before I qualified for my Expert Sharpshooter Medal. And, that was training for 1 week out of every month, with a couple of days reserved for range time. Not only did we learn to shoot from various positions using various kinds of cover, but we were also taught ammo control.

And....................how many hours a month are these teachers going to have to train to qualify for their bonuses?

These are questions that should be answered when you say to train teachers to carry weapons in school.

Was your training based on the likely enemy of one or two armed amateurs attacking the base?

Random shooters were part of the training, but so was riot and crowd control.

Actually had to use that once when we had a visiting ship that got protested by the locals.

SO, the scenario(s) envisioned for the armed teachers were just a part of your training.


So, comparing YOUR training, as a prime response team to a lot of potential, and very high level threats, to that for a last ditch back up defense, against a much more limited and smaller threat,

is not reasonable.

Okay..................what kind of training would YOU require for the teachers to have? Being able to shoot a tight group at a target is just a small part of it, because in active shooter situations, the target is shooting back.

And yeah, I DO think it's important for a teacher to know different shooting positions, Weaver stance, on one knee, knowing how to take cover behind doors and windows, etc.

So...............again.................what kind of training would YOU require teachers to have so they could carry in schools? Is being able to shoot accurately enough, or should there be more?

its an entirely NEW GAME when there are rounds whizzing by your head .. human nature is to protect yourself first even for trained personnel ... HIGHLY TRAINED INDIVIDUALS like Navy Seals or special op soldiers who have faced combat situations could get it done but even they wear body armor ...

RW's cant grasp the big picture and never could.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Exactly what would be required in this training? Would it be simply becoming proficient in shooting at a static target? If so, what kind of shooting scores would be required for the teachers to carry?

Or, would they be required to take tactical shooting courses so that they would learn how to use cover and fire a weapon from different positions?

When I was part of the Security Force, it took me 4 months before I qualified for my Expert Sharpshooter Medal. And, that was training for 1 week out of every month, with a couple of days reserved for range time. Not only did we learn to shoot from various positions using various kinds of cover, but we were also taught ammo control.

And....................how many hours a month are these teachers going to have to train to qualify for their bonuses?

These are questions that should be answered when you say to train teachers to carry weapons in school.

Was your training based on the likely enemy of one or two armed amateurs attacking the base?

Random shooters were part of the training, but so was riot and crowd control.

Actually had to use that once when we had a visiting ship that got protested by the locals.

SO, the scenario(s) envisioned for the armed teachers were just a part of your training.


So, comparing YOUR training, as a prime response team to a lot of potential, and very high level threats, to that for a last ditch back up defense, against a much more limited and smaller threat,

is not reasonable.

Okay..................what kind of training would YOU require for the teachers to have? Being able to shoot a tight group at a target is just a small part of it, because in active shooter situations, the target is shooting back.

And yeah, I DO think it's important for a teacher to know different shooting positions, Weaver stance, on one knee, knowing how to take cover behind doors and windows, etc.

So...............again.................what kind of training would YOU require teachers to have so they could carry in schools? Is being able to shoot accurately enough, or should there be more?

its an entirely NEW GAME when there are rounds whizzing by your head .. human nature is to protect yourself first even for trained personnel ... HIGHLY TRAINED INDIVIDUALS like Navy Seals or special op soldiers who have faced combat situations could get it done but even they wear body armor ...

RW's cant grasp the big picture and never could.

Stunningly, not everyone has spent decades immersing themselves in the idea that they're just animals, with no higher priorities than their own animal instincts, and trying to drag society down into it with them. SOME people in the world still believe in the morals of bravery and self-sacrifice and caring for others before themselves, and all the other things you leftists have been airily dismissing as "archaic".

The big picture here REALLY is that America is seeing a stark and graphic demonstration of why the leftist view of society is not just wrong, but toxic.

 

[Correll]

Everyone isn't saying that. Only your fellow gun control kooks are. The claim that it's more effective was disproven in FL. "Expertly trained security" is also very expensive. It's cheaper to pay bonuses to a dozen teachers to train and carry a concealed weapon than it is to have one full time security gaurd.

Exactly what would be required in this training? Would it be simply becoming proficient in shooting at a static target? If so, what kind of shooting scores would be required for the teachers to carry?

Or, would they be required to take tactical shooting courses so that they would learn how to use cover and fire a weapon from different positions?

When I was part of the Security Force, it took me 4 months before I qualified for my Expert Sharpshooter Medal. And, that was training for 1 week out of every month, with a couple of days reserved for range time. Not only did we learn to shoot from various positions using various kinds of cover, but we were also taught ammo control.

And....................how many hours a month are these teachers going to have to train to qualify for their bonuses?

These are questions that should be answered when you say to train teachers to carry weapons in school.

Was your training based on the likely enemy of one or two armed amateurs attacking the base?

Random shooters were part of the training, but so was riot and crowd control.

Actually had to use that once when we had a visiting ship that got protested by the locals.

SO, the scenario(s) envisioned for the armed teachers were just a part of your training.


So, comparing YOUR training, as a prime response team to a lot of potential, and very high level threats, to that for a last ditch back up defense, against a much more limited and smaller threat,

is not reasonable.

Okay..................what kind of training would YOU require for the teachers to have? Being able to shoot a tight group at a target is just a small part of it, because in active shooter situations, the target is shooting back.

And yeah, I DO think it's important for a teacher to know different shooting positions, Weaver stance, on one knee, knowing how to take cover behind doors and windows, etc.

So...............again.................what kind of training would YOU require teachers to have so they could carry in schools? Is being able to shoot accurately enough, or should there be more?

My personal opinion?

None. Trust the teachers to know if they are capable enough to have a gun in an emergency.

 

[hadit]

Exactly what would be required in this training? Would it be simply becoming proficient in shooting at a static target? If so, what kind of shooting scores would be required for the teachers to carry?

Or, would they be required to take tactical shooting courses so that they would learn how to use cover and fire a weapon from different positions?

When I was part of the Security Force, it took me 4 months before I qualified for my Expert Sharpshooter Medal. And, that was training for 1 week out of every month, with a couple of days reserved for range time. Not only did we learn to shoot from various positions using various kinds of cover, but we were also taught ammo control.

And....................how many hours a month are these teachers going to have to train to qualify for their bonuses?

These are questions that should be answered when you say to train teachers to carry weapons in school.

Was your training based on the likely enemy of one or two armed amateurs attacking the base?

Random shooters were part of the training, but so was riot and crowd control.

Actually had to use that once when we had a visiting ship that got protested by the locals.

SO, the scenario(s) envisioned for the armed teachers were just a part of your training.


So, comparing YOUR training, as a prime response team to a lot of potential, and very high level threats, to that for a last ditch back up defense, against a much more limited and smaller threat,

is not reasonable.

Okay..................what kind of training would YOU require for the teachers to have? Being able to shoot a tight group at a target is just a small part of it, because in active shooter situations, the target is shooting back.

And yeah, I DO think it's important for a teacher to know different shooting positions, Weaver stance, on one knee, knowing how to take cover behind doors and windows, etc.

So...............again.................what kind of training would YOU require teachers to have so they could carry in schools? Is being able to shoot accurately enough, or should there be more?

its an entirely NEW GAME when there are rounds whizzing by your head .. human nature is to protect yourself first even for trained personnel ... HIGHLY TRAINED INDIVIDUALS like Navy Seals or special op soldiers who have faced combat situations could get it done but even they wear body armor ...

RW's cant grasp the big picture and never could.

Bottom line, when the shooter comes through the classroom door, the teacher is the kid's last defense.

I want that teacher to be armed to the highest level he/she is comfortable.

You want that teacher armed only to the level YOU are comfortable.

Good luck, kids.

 

[Unkotare]

Exactly what would be required in this training? Would it be simply becoming proficient in shooting at a static target? If so, what kind of shooting scores would be required for the teachers to carry?

Or, would they be required to take tactical shooting courses so that they would learn how to use cover and fire a weapon from different positions?

When I was part of the Security Force, it took me 4 months before I qualified for my Expert Sharpshooter Medal. And, that was training for 1 week out of every month, with a couple of days reserved for range time. Not only did we learn to shoot from various positions using various kinds of cover, but we were also taught ammo control.

And....................how many hours a month are these teachers going to have to train to qualify for their bonuses?

These are questions that should be answered when you say to train teachers to carry weapons in school.

Was your training based on the likely enemy of one or two armed amateurs attacking the base?

Random shooters were part of the training, but so was riot and crowd control.

Actually had to use that once when we had a visiting ship that got protested by the locals.

SO, the scenario(s) envisioned for the armed teachers were just a part of your training.


So, comparing YOUR training, as a prime response team to a lot of potential, and very high level threats, to that for a last ditch back up defense, against a much more limited and smaller threat,

is not reasonable.

Okay..................what kind of training would YOU require for the teachers to have? Being able to shoot a tight group at a target is just a small part of it, because in active shooter situations, the target is shooting back.

And yeah, I DO think it's important for a teacher to know different shooting positions, Weaver stance, on one knee, knowing how to take cover behind doors and windows, etc.

So...............again.................what kind of training would YOU require teachers to have so they could carry in schools? Is being able to shoot accurately enough, or should there be more?

My personal opinion?

None. Trust the teachers to know if they are capable enough to have a gun in an emergency.

I would like to wear a sword in school, but I worry that a student might get a hold of it and cut class.

 

[Unkotare]

Was your training based on the likely enemy of one or two armed amateurs attacking the base?

Random shooters were part of the training, but so was riot and crowd control.

Actually had to use that once when we had a visiting ship that got protested by the locals.

SO, the scenario(s) envisioned for the armed teachers were just a part of your training.


So, comparing YOUR training, as a prime response team to a lot of potential, and very high level threats, to that for a last ditch back up defense, against a much more limited and smaller threat,

is not reasonable.

Okay..................what kind of training would YOU require for the teachers to have? Being able to shoot a tight group at a target is just a small part of it, because in active shooter situations, the target is shooting back.

And yeah, I DO think it's important for a teacher to know different shooting positions, Weaver stance, on one knee, knowing how to take cover behind doors and windows, etc.

So...............again.................what kind of training would YOU require teachers to have so they could carry in schools? Is being able to shoot accurately enough, or should there be more?

its an entirely NEW GAME when there are rounds whizzing by your head .. human nature is to protect yourself first even for trained personnel ... HIGHLY TRAINED INDIVIDUALS like Navy Seals or special op soldiers who have faced combat situations could get it done but even they wear body armor ...

RW's cant grasp the big picture and never could.

Bottom line, when the shooter comes through the classroom door, the teacher is the kid's last defense.

I want that teacher to be armed to the highest level he/she is comfortable.....

Dress code prevents me from wearing my tear-away t-shirts.

 

[Correll]

Most experts and teachers agree that arming teachers is a really dumb and dangerous idea. However, all those extra gun sales would be great for the gun industry and the NRA.

Why not post a link to your so-called experts and teachers? What you're saying is that it's a better idea that everybody in a school be helpless to a mass murderer. Where is the logic in that anyway?

EVERYONE BUT BRAIN DEAD RW IDIOTS is saying its better for the kids to have expertly trained security in schools protecting them than it is to have someone that makes their living showing kids how to solve algebra problems

Everyone isn't saying that. Only your fellow gun control kooks are. The claim that it's more effective was disproven in FL. "Expertly trained security" is also very expensive. It's cheaper to pay bonuses to a dozen teachers to train and carry a concealed weapon than it is to have one full time security gaurd.

What do you think the swat team will do when they round the corner and see a guy with a gun in the hallway? Dead teacher that’s what!

I think the SWAT teams knows that spree killers in schools are NOT usually adults. I also think the SWAT team will be apprised before they get there that there are armed teachers, since this will be known information and something that is relevant to pass on to them. And I think they're trained well enough not to just shoot people willy-nilly.

Why do you leftists insist on believing that every person in this country is Cletus, the Slack-Jawed Yokel the instant their skin comes in contact with a gun? What does this tell us about YOU?

I think they are projecting what they think THEY would do, if it were them.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Why not post a link to your so-called experts and teachers? What you're saying is that it's a better idea that everybody in a school be helpless to a mass murderer. Where is the logic in that anyway?

EVERYONE BUT BRAIN DEAD RW IDIOTS is saying its better for the kids to have expertly trained security in schools protecting them than it is to have someone that makes their living showing kids how to solve algebra problems

Everyone isn't saying that. Only your fellow gun control kooks are. The claim that it's more effective was disproven in FL. "Expertly trained security" is also very expensive. It's cheaper to pay bonuses to a dozen teachers to train and carry a concealed weapon than it is to have one full time security gaurd.

What do you think the swat team will do when they round the corner and see a guy with a gun in the hallway? Dead teacher that’s what!

I think the SWAT teams knows that spree killers in schools are NOT usually adults. I also think the SWAT team will be apprised before they get there that there are armed teachers, since this will be known information and something that is relevant to pass on to them. And I think they're trained well enough not to just shoot people willy-nilly.

Why do you leftists insist on believing that every person in this country is Cletus, the Slack-Jawed Yokel the instant their skin comes in contact with a gun? What does this tell us about YOU?

I think they are projecting what they think THEY would do, if it were them.

Oh, I know they are. Leftists seem to be afflicted with a severe case of autophobia. I keep saying it. They never respond, possibly because they don't want to admit that they don't know what autophobia is.

 

[Correll]

Was your training based on the likely enemy of one or two armed amateurs attacking the base?

Random shooters were part of the training, but so was riot and crowd control.

Actually had to use that once when we had a visiting ship that got protested by the locals.

SO, the scenario(s) envisioned for the armed teachers were just a part of your training.


So, comparing YOUR training, as a prime response team to a lot of potential, and very high level threats, to that for a last ditch back up defense, against a much more limited and smaller threat,

is not reasonable.

Okay..................what kind of training would YOU require for the teachers to have? Being able to shoot a tight group at a target is just a small part of it, because in active shooter situations, the target is shooting back.

And yeah, I DO think it's important for a teacher to know different shooting positions, Weaver stance, on one knee, knowing how to take cover behind doors and windows, etc.

So...............again.................what kind of training would YOU require teachers to have so they could carry in schools? Is being able to shoot accurately enough, or should there be more?

My personal opinion?

None. Trust the teachers to know if they are capable enough to have a gun in an emergency.

I would like to wear a sword in school, but I worry that a student might get a hold of it and cut class.

So, you know you are not capable of resisting an attempt to take the sword from you.


Congratulations. You just supported my point.

 

[Timmy]

Most experts and teachers agree that arming teachers is a really dumb and dangerous idea. However, all those extra gun sales would be great for the gun industry and the NRA.

Why not post a link to your so-called experts and teachers? What you're saying is that it's a better idea that everybody in a school be helpless to a mass murderer. Where is the logic in that anyway?

EVERYONE BUT BRAIN DEAD RW IDIOTS is saying its better for the kids to have expertly trained security in schools protecting them than it is to have someone that makes their living showing kids how to solve algebra problems

Everyone isn't saying that. Only your fellow gun control kooks are. The claim that it's more effective was disproven in FL. "Expertly trained security" is also very expensive. It's cheaper to pay bonuses to a dozen teachers to train and carry a concealed weapon than it is to have one full time security gaurd.

What do you think the swat team will do when they round the corner and see a guy with a gun in the hallway? Dead teacher that’s what!

I think the SWAT teams knows that spree killers in schools are NOT usually adults. I also think the SWAT team will be apprised before they get there that there are armed teachers, since this will be known information and something that is relevant to pass on to them. And I think they're trained well enough not to just shoot people willy-nilly.

Why do you leftists insist on believing that every person in this country is Cletus, the Slack-Jawed Yokel the instant their skin comes in contact with a gun? What does this tell us about YOU?

Lol. Yeah ok .

You watch too many movies .

 

[Unkotare]

Random shooters were part of the training, but so was riot and crowd control.

Actually had to use that once when we had a visiting ship that got protested by the locals.

SO, the scenario(s) envisioned for the armed teachers were just a part of your training.


So, comparing YOUR training, as a prime response team to a lot of potential, and very high level threats, to that for a last ditch back up defense, against a much more limited and smaller threat,

is not reasonable.

Okay..................what kind of training would YOU require for the teachers to have? Being able to shoot a tight group at a target is just a small part of it, because in active shooter situations, the target is shooting back.

And yeah, I DO think it's important for a teacher to know different shooting positions, Weaver stance, on one knee, knowing how to take cover behind doors and windows, etc.

So...............again.................what kind of training would YOU require teachers to have so they could carry in schools? Is being able to shoot accurately enough, or should there be more?

My personal opinion?

None. Trust the teachers to know if they are capable enough to have a gun in an emergency.

I would like to wear a sword in school, but I worry that a student might get a hold of it and cut class.

So, you know you are not capable of resisting an attempt to take the sword from you.


Congratulations. You just supported my point.

That was a joke, kid. Lighten up.

 

[Siete]

from all teachers being liberal pieces of shit to Annie Oakley keeper of RW's children


stupid F'n RW's crack me up .

 

[ABikerSailor]

Most experts and teachers agree that arming teachers is a really dumb and dangerous idea. However, all those extra gun sales would be great for the gun industry and the NRA.

Why not post a link to your so-called experts and teachers? What you're saying is that it's a better idea that everybody in a school be helpless to a mass murderer. Where is the logic in that anyway?

EVERYONE BUT BRAIN DEAD RW IDIOTS is saying its better for the kids to have expertly trained security in schools protecting them than it is to have someone that makes their living showing kids how to solve algebra problems

Everyone isn't saying that. Only your fellow gun control kooks are. The claim that it's more effective was disproven in FL. "Expertly trained security" is also very expensive. It's cheaper to pay bonuses to a dozen teachers to train and carry a concealed weapon than it is to have one full time security gaurd.

What do you think the swat team will do when they round the corner and see a guy with a gun in the hallway? Dead teacher that’s what!

I think the SWAT teams knows that spree killers in schools are NOT usually adults. I also think the SWAT team will be apprised before they get there that there are armed teachers, since this will be known information and something that is relevant to pass on to them. And I think they're trained well enough not to just shoot people willy-nilly.

Why do you leftists insist on believing that every person in this country is Cletus, the Slack-Jawed Yokel the instant their skin comes in contact with a gun? What does this tell us about YOU?

The SWAT team that was called by one gamer to that other gamer's house across state lines was supposedly appraised of the situation, and they shot an unarmed man anyway.

 

[bripat9643]

as stupid as the RW idiots are on this board I wouldnt want them guarding my bbq smoker much less my grandchildren or daughter

Fine. I certainly don't care if someone guns down your daughter in a school shooting. Just tell me what school she goes to so I can make sure my kid doesn't go to that school.

 

[bripat9643]

Why not post a link to your so-called experts and teachers? What you're saying is that it's a better idea that everybody in a school be helpless to a mass murderer. Where is the logic in that anyway?

EVERYONE BUT BRAIN DEAD RW IDIOTS is saying its better for the kids to have expertly trained security in schools protecting them than it is to have someone that makes their living showing kids how to solve algebra problems

Everyone isn't saying that. Only your fellow gun control kooks are. The claim that it's more effective was disproven in FL. "Expertly trained security" is also very expensive. It's cheaper to pay bonuses to a dozen teachers to train and carry a concealed weapon than it is to have one full time security gaurd.

What do you think the swat team will do when they round the corner and see a guy with a gun in the hallway? Dead teacher that’s what!

I think the SWAT teams knows that spree killers in schools are NOT usually adults. I also think the SWAT team will be apprised before they get there that there are armed teachers, since this will be known information and something that is relevant to pass on to them. And I think they're trained well enough not to just shoot people willy-nilly.

Why do you leftists insist on believing that every person in this country is Cletus, the Slack-Jawed Yokel the instant their skin comes in contact with a gun? What does this tell us about YOU?

The SWAT team that was called by one gamer to that other gamer's house across state lines was supposedly appraised of the situation, and they shot an unarmed man anyway.

So do you hate cops or love them?