Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: I'm not sure if we should put a cop in every school, but I do agree with the NRA

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    1

    I'm not sure if we should put a cop in every school, but I do agree with the NRA

    I think there should be a member of the school staff that is required to train in firearms self-defense. Though, with all the shooting going on, no one can be prepared for every event. I wish I had an answer for all the shootings / killings, but sadly, I don't. When the nation ( and the world ) falls upon bad times, all the nuts are more uneasy and take it out on the world.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    I prefer buying doors that actually work. Doors never sleep, don't ask for a pension, can actually keep people out, and do not affect the world's donut supply.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Bolivar, MO
    Posts
    34
    Oak Door with a Steel Core, 12in square safety glass , pin code entry , emergency dead bolt

  4. #4
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by ArmsMonkey View Post
    I think there should be a member of the school staff that is required to train in firearms self-defense. Though, with all the shooting going on, no one can be prepared for every event. I wish I had an answer for all the shootings / killings, but sadly, I don't. When the nation ( and the world ) falls upon bad times, all the nuts are more uneasy and take it out on the world.
    My condolences to the people of your state and to the victims of this tragedy.

    I must disagree with the phrase "for all the shootings/ killings, ", violent crime is way down historically, and massacres seemed to have peaked in the 1920's in this country. When we look at the most recent tragedies we see many of them happened in areas highly "regulated" by government and preventing firearms from being there.

    I don't think more laws or requirements is the answer, but less laws and less requirements.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,929
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    I don't think more laws or requirements is the answer, but less laws and less requirements.
    In before the "Why don't you just move to Somalia!"

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh, Pa.
    Posts
    5

    Re: I'm not sure if we should put a cop in every school, but I do agree with the NRA

    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    I prefer buying doors that actually work. Doors never sleep, don't ask for a pension, can actually keep people out, and do not affect the world's donut supply.
    I have to agree. Retrofitting doors and windows is in the long run cheaper than having many extra employees on the books.

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by ArmsMonkey View Post
    I think there should be a member of the school staff that is required to train in firearms self-defense. ....
    You are aware that for the most part teachers are Liberals who believe in the Nanny State and that firearms and violence never solve anything, aren't you?

    There are some teachers who would fit the bill, but just supposing there was an incident - who would supervise their class and classroom while they ran off down the hall to deal with the presence of a mentally deranged rapid mass murderer? And would the union/professional organization allow them to have the extra duty without additional compensation? Not to mention arming even a one only teacher in each school would require all sorts of bureaucratic paperwork to keep up with their certifications and arranging substitutes to cover their classes while they attended training and qualification/requalification. Plus the changes in the law necessary to allow a non-LEO (while in the performance of their duty) to carry in a GFSZ.

    We also must consider how the reactions of the students would impact the assigned cop. Imagine the entire female student body of XYZ Middle School going "Eww. Seriously? That is so gross!" every time an out-of-shape cop walked by. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Knjf3ABPc0E

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  8. #8
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by PistolPackingMomma View Post
    In before the "Why don't you just move to Somalia!"
    All this straw is making me feel itchy....
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by BAMF View Post
    Oak Door with a Steel Core, 12in square safety glass , pin code entry , emergency dead bolt
    Sounds good. Until the Stanley Door Company lobbyists start pushing for state and federal regulations requiring such. Then we end up paying for such doors. On how many public schools? How many such doors on a single school?

    Oh, and then we get mission creep. A couple years after public schools, the regulations are increased requiring them on private schools. Then colleges. Then day care.

    Like SVG, I'd rather see fewer laws, in this case gun laws, specifically repeal of GFSZ's. And, enforcement of civil liabilitiy and fraud laws against psychiatry for its failure to cure these people while pretending to have solutions.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  10. #10
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Sounds good. Until the Stanley Door Company lobbyists start pushing for state and federal regulations requiring such. Then we end up paying for such doors. On how many public schools? How many such doors on a single school? SNIP
    What's wrong with that? Doesn't the Stanley door company have a right to lobby for laws that will increase their profits?
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  11. #11
    Regular Member MamaLiberty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Newcastle, Wyoming, USA
    Posts
    884
    Don't ban guns... ban government "schools."

    The Case for Separation of School and State
    http://www.schoolandstate.org/case.htm
    America was a free and thriving country, the envy of the world, well before compulsory state schooling was instituted.

    Take a deeper look here at how the state came to control education, why it shouldn't, and how millions of people are taking back their educational freedom.
    I will not knowingly initiate force. I am a self owner.

    Let the record show that I did not consent to be governed. I did not consent to any constitution. I did not consent to any president. I did not consent to any law except the natural law of "mala en se." I did not consent to the police. Nor any tax. Nor any prohibition of anything. Nor any regulation or licensing of any kind.

  12. #12
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    What's wrong with that? Doesn't the Stanley door company have a right to lobby for laws that will increase their profits?
    Google the term rent-seeking/rent-seeker.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  13. #13
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Google the term rent-seeking/rent-seeker.
    I'm familiar with the concept.
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  14. #14
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    I'm familiar with the concept.
    Then what was the point of your comment? I'm not saying you didn't know rent-seeker; I'm at a loss for your comment. Unless it was just sarcasm.
    Last edited by Citizen; 01-05-2013 at 03:13 PM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  15. #15
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Then what was the point of your comment? I'm not saying you didn't know rent-seeker; I'm at a loss for your comment. Unless it was just sarcasm.
    It was sarcasm, I keep forgetting to put purple on it.

    sorry
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  16. #16
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    It was sarcasm, I keep forgetting to put purple on it.

    sorry
    I wouldn't worry about it too much.

    The views of many regular users are known to everybody else. For example, if Amlevin suddenly wrote a comment hypercritical of police, I would know he was being sarcastic.

    That right there knocks out tons of necessity to expressly identify one's own sarcasm.

    Besides, its too easy to clear it up if there is a lack of understanding.

    Also, I think the recent trend towards purple for sarcasm is a little silly. What's next? Red for anger? Yellow for annoyance? Green for envy?

    If a fella writes something and wants to make sure readers understand its sarcasm, he can always write the classic /sarcasm.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  17. #17
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by PistolPackingMomma View Post
    In before the "Why don't you just move to Somalia!"


    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    All this straw is making me feel itchy....
    No straw yet until your lobby comment.

    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    It was sarcasm, I keep forgetting to put purple on it.

    sorry
    It was sarcasm but one you meant to provide as a straw argument.

    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post

    Also, I think the recent trend towards purple for sarcasm is a little silly. What's next? Red for anger? Yellow for annoyance? Green for envy?

    If a fella writes something and wants to make sure readers understand its sarcasm, he can always write the classic /sarcasm.
    I too think it was silly and used it extensively to point out the silliness . Was having fun but got old even for me.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  18. #18
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    You are aware that for the most part teachers are Liberals who believe in the Nanny State and that firearms and violence never solve anything, aren't you?

    There are some teachers who would fit the bill, but just supposing there was an incident - who would supervise their class and classroom while they ran off down the hall to deal with the presence of a mentally deranged rapid mass murderer? And would the union/professional organization allow them to have the extra duty without additional compensation? Not to mention arming even a one only teacher in each school would require all sorts of bureaucratic paperwork to keep up with their certifications and arranging substitutes to cover their classes while they attended training and qualification/requalification. Plus the changes in the law necessary to allow a non-LEO (while in the performance of their duty) to carry in a GFSZ.

    We also must consider how the reactions of the students would impact the assigned cop. Imagine the entire female student body of XYZ Middle School going "Eww. Seriously? That is so gross!" every time an out-of-shape cop walked by. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Knjf3ABPc0E

    stay safe.
    Hahaha "Ewww Gross".

    Good points there skid. This is the problem, every time government tries to fix a problem it usually creates more problems, and then of course instead of doing away with that bureaucratic mess they try more fixes.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  19. #19
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,270
    From a rights perspective, why would anyone require any teacher of staff member to be required to have more certifications/training beyond what the law provides in each state to carry a firearm on school property for your average citizen. The premise that a teacher or staff member must have "additional" requirements is anti-liberty and supports the claim by the anti-liberty crowd that more "regulations" re guns is a good thing. Now, is there a "breaking in" period that is needed? Essentially, having more regs and scaling back on those regs.......uh, wait, I forgot, I am referring to government.

    Anyway, in Missouri, all a teacher needs, or any other citizen for that matter, is permission from the "school" to carry via a CCW endorsement. I recall posting the relevant laws in another thread.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Tennessee, ,
    Posts
    695
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    From a rights perspective, why would anyone require any teacher of staff member to be required to have more certifications/training beyond what the law provides in each state to carry a firearm on school property for your average citizen.
    For the most part, I would agree with you. However, the point could be argued that since locations are allowed to prohibit carry, the point could also be made that locations could also impose additional requirements for carrying on those properties, or restrict carry only to "authorized" persons. I for one would propose a voluntary program, which I have discussed elsewhere. (I would describe it here, but since I received a strongly worded PM regarding posting my sentiments in multiple places, I suppose I'll just leave it at that.

  21. #21
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    From a rights perspective, why would anyone require any teacher of staff member to be required to have more certifications/training beyond what the law provides in each state to carry a firearm on school property for your average citizen. The premise that a teacher or staff member must have "additional" requirements is anti-liberty and supports the claim by the anti-liberty crowd that more "regulations" re guns is a good thing. Now, is there a "breaking in" period that is needed? Essentially, having more regs and scaling back on those regs.......uh, wait, I forgot, I am referring to government.

    Anyway, in Missouri, all a teacher needs, or any other citizen for that matter, is permission from the "school" to carry via a CCW endorsement. I recall posting the relevant laws in another thread.
    Well remember though, we're not just talking statute, we're also talking civil and contract.

    if a school authorizes a teacher to carry on premises, and that teacher kills someone over grades, is that a civil tort against the school for allowing it?

    lets not even talk about what L&I will think about paid employees carrying guns on the clock all the time, probably already some structure for administrative rules regulating that. much as you'd like to think otherwise, allowing teacher carry like you propose would require a significant change in terms of regulations, laws, legal culture etc that has built itself up over a century. not easy to do.
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  22. #22
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,270
    Quote Originally Posted by unreconstructed1 View Post
    For the most part, I would agree with you. However, the point could be argued that since locations are allowed to prohibit carry, the point could also be made that locations could also impose additional requirements for carrying on those properties, or restrict carry only to "authorized" persons. I for one would propose a voluntary program, which I have discussed elsewhere. (I would describe it here, but since I received a strongly worded PM regarding posting my sentiments in multiple places, I suppose I'll just leave it at that.
    Locations being "allowed" to permit citizens to carry or not to carry a firearm is not codified in all states and therefore it is not a violation of law to carry. Trespassing a citizen who refuses to leave then becomes a violation of law not technically associated with the firearm. You could be trespassed at a school for wearing a shirt with "offensive" text or images. Additional requirements placed upon "employees" is a condition of employment and not, that I am aware of, required under any states statute until additional requirements are codified into law.

    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    Well remember though, we're not just talking statute, we're also talking civil and contract.

    if a school authorizes a teacher to carry on premises, and that teacher kills someone over grades, is that a civil tort against the school for allowing it?

    lets not even talk about what L&I will think about paid employees carrying guns on the clock all the time, probably already some structure for administrative rules regulating that. much as you'd like to think otherwise, allowing teacher carry like you propose would require a significant change in terms of regulations, laws, legal culture etc that has built itself up over a century. not easy to do.
    Interesting perspective. What mechanism holds Sandy Hook harmless from being sued in a civil tort for wrongful death? CT is a shall issue state as far as I know, however that is tangential to this discussion. Unless CT has laws that specifically prohibit the carry of a firearm by a citizen, any citizen, on school property as the GFSZ Act does allow, via a "state license", then the argument could be made in a civil court for wrongful death. This in turn could hold Sandy Hook and the school district accountable for not permitting the adults to be armed for self defense as CT law allows, if CT law allows. Missouri does technically allow carry on school property. The reality of a citizen carrying on school property is a different discussion.

    A change in laws may not be required, just a change in the district and school policy (employee) handbook. The difference between a "state school" and a private school (business) is that the state is prohibited from infringing upon a citizen's RKBA where a private business (citizen) is not so encumbered.

    If any of those poor souls who lost a child are a 2A supporter, I would recommend that they sue that school, the district, and every administrator for the wrongful death of their kid(s). Let the courts (the state) tell parents, once and for all, that the state mandates that parents are not permitted to protect their kid's right to happiness, liberty, and more importantly, life. Remember, the state currently mandates that a child has no right to protect themselves via the 2A. The state mandates that any adults present are not permitted to protect kids in any school (that Texas school and the few others notwithstanding).
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    153
    All I got out of Wayne LaPierre on the 21st, was "We need cops in school and it's all that darn rap music and video games fault."

    News flash Wayne...We're 16 trillion dollars in debt. We can't afford to hire a gazillion more cops just to put in schools, and stop blaming video games. You sound like one of the antigunners.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •