Quote:
Originally Posted by AOII Angel
The problem with the idea of teachers conceal carrying is that the more likely occurence than them saving a room full of children from a lone gunman would be that their gun would be used to accidentally or intentionally injur a child in their care. It happens to the most well meaning gun owners in their own homes, but having this happen in a classroom would start a firestorm that would eclipse anything you've seen before. Also, parents have the right NOT to leave their children in the care of someone with a gun. It's dangerous. Accidents do happen. More often than gunmen break into schools.
|
The only way for a gun to fire is to pull the trigger. If a gun is in a holster, and nobody touches it, it will not go off. Cops do have accidental discharges, but that is usually in the locker room when they are readying a firearm to go on duty. As in Texas, and probably Israel, the children never see a firearm. In the US we are all in the care of people with guns. The police, so like it or not they are there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticCat
I agree and have no problem if the context is provided. All too often, particularly early on, it isn't though.
Yes, I know what's in the Declaration of Indendence and the Constitution, and I imagine everyone else here does, too. I don't think there's much misunderstanding. It's just that as much as I revere the Declaration of Independence and what it stands for, I don't consider it authoritative when it comes to theology. I'm guessing others may feel the same way.
In the parlance of the late 18th Century,the right to "the pursuit of Happiness" refers not to the ability to do what we like to do, but to security of wellbeing. The Second Amendment in that context arises from the 18th Century experience that (1) firearms can be necessary for defense and for the precurement of food, both of which are part of security of wellbeing, and (2) that security of wellbeing is threatened when the government can deprive people of the ability to defend themselves or to procure food.
Hunting rifles, which is what the post people have responded mentioned, in a 21st Century context do not necessarily fit that understanding.
|
Right you are. I went back to reread and the comments were directed toward hunting rifles and the Second Amendment isn't about hunting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticCat
But it's time to have serious discussions with no sacred cows. If the gun lobby is going to offer nothing more than stupidity like "this is why teachers need to be armed" and is going to fight even the most reasonable restrictions and requirements, then they are part of the problem, pure and simple. (But be clear, not all of the problem by any means.)
|
I absolutely think that gun control should be discussed. I just can't, for the life of me, think of a law that would have protected those kids. As I said before, even if you suddenly make guns disappear so you can't even get one by killing a cop, how do you stop a knife wielding psycho from stabbing 6 year olds? How do you prevent them from chaining exit doors and firebombing the school with gasoline? What law prevents it? I do not propose to arm all teachers, but it worked in Pearl, MS and has worked in Israel. I cannot prove a deterrent affect in Texas as it is unknown how many teachers are actually armed.
Threaded Mode
