Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old 03-12-2018, 9:26 PM
randomBytes's Avatar
randomBytes randomBytes is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 1,230
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
I'm not convinced just a CCW permit is enough for me to vet a teacher in a classroom with a gun.
Are teaches less than normal people?
20 years data says that normal people with CCW are not a problem.

Of course some teachers I know would be a menace to themselves and others - but presumably (hopefully) they would not pass any of the tests.

Quote:
If we are talking more training and certification and an actual program, then I am all for it.
I believe The Donald was talking about special training for teachers,
and I don't see any problem with that - anyone who carries a gun should welcome all the training they can get.


Quote:
Problem is we all imagine a pristine school with well educated, well fed, and cogent kids. Some of my friends have taught SF and bay area public schools for the last 30 years, some of them subs, and going into some of those schools is another reality.
Yes, I think the person writing that armed teachers would end up shooting black kids, had that same issue in mind.

But think about it; those kids are not going to end up as useful members of society anyway, perhaps poping a few would do the rest a favor - teach them that there are consequences for behaving like animals.

Of course I wouldn't wish that on anyone (talking about the poor teacher)

Quote:
Another issue is choice. I feel like it should completely be up to the teacher.
Of course.

The left keep trying to frame this as an imposition on teachers - MAKING them carry or something, whereas no one else is talking about anything but letting those willing to CHOOSE to carry.

Quote:
If there are those that have the ability and are willing to train and certify for it then I say more power to them, and congress and the state should support them- even paying for that training and certification.
Concur

Quote:
But it depends on the school too- the liability is intense in some very bad situations. My mothers friend spent the last 40 years teaching in the worst schools, and she has been stabbed, punched, and held hostage. She didn't want to be armed and I have to respect that- she did God's work for 40 years trying to help these kids abandoned by their parents.
Yep, back to some of those animals needing consequences...
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 03-12-2018, 9:36 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,770
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by randomBytes View Post

Yep, back to some of those animals needing consequences...
I am not saying they are animals, far from it. They have been abandoned by the parents and society in general is doing very little for them. If they are American Citizens they deserve to be treated with respect and given the benefit of the doubt. If they become violent then there is a decreasing threshold for when and how they are punished, but I see it as the responsibility of society to give them the best chance possible and best education possible. It's not their fault if the parents are just not there at all.

If they are not citizens then I can't defend them. They should be humanely deported or have to give something to this country (like agreements for future Military service) to stay. If they are "dreamers" they better be excellent students with the right attitude and show that they are Americans and can be employable and productive.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by doggie View Post
Someone must put an end to this endless bickering by posting the unadulterated indisputable facts and truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PMACA_MFG View Post
Not checkers, not chess, its Jenga.
"The California matrix of gun control laws is among the harshest in the nation and are filled with criminal law traps for people of common intelligence who desire to obey the law." - U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez

Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 03-12-2018, 9:48 PM
randomBytes's Avatar
randomBytes randomBytes is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 1,230
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
I am not saying they are animals,
No that was my term, sorry.

Quote:
far from it. They have been abandoned by the parents and society in general is doing very little for them.
Yes, the last few decades has seen a concerted attack on families (not just here but worldwide).
This btw is straight out of the communist play book (nazis did the same).
The number of kids with no proper parents is a direct consequence.

Is society to blame - some of it is for sure - that portion that fostered all the socialist nonsense that has resulted in this situation.

It isn't going to get any better either - at least not for several generations, and is more likely to get much worse first.

But it is a grave mistake to say "this won't fix everything, so we should not do it".
So long as we are taking baby steps in the right direction it is the right thing to do.

Last edited by randomBytes; 03-12-2018 at 9:51 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 03-12-2018, 10:03 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,770
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

Another dimension to this is that any talk of arming teachers needs into the narrative that there is some kind of mass shooting epidemic in US schools. Or just regular shooting epidemic. This is where I criticize both the neoliberal media and the NRA. This narrative is FALSE.

First off, if we look at most "school shootings", like 75% of them or more, they are all 1 casualty events. Usually it's a man finding out his wife has been cheating on him, a workspace dispute turned ugly, or some kind of personal vendetta. In terms of "mass" shootings where shooters just wanted to kill as many people as possible and killed more than 5-10, we have had 4 of those events in 20 years.

The total casualty list for all school shootings including terrorist acts of mass killing and all other shootings comes to a whoping 15 people per year. That's right, we are on track for about 150 dead people (not all students, about a quarter of that is staff) for all of the last decade.

In the 2000's it was 100 dead in 10 years, same as the nineties. So it is going up, but from roughly 10 to 15 per year?

This is where I remind people that 450 people die per year falling out of bed. 60 people die from being struck by lightning PER YEAR in the USA.

So pushing for teachers to are themselves might sell guns and placate the NRA lobby, but it means little when there actually isn't a huge problem that needs some kind of special attention. Need I remind others of the plethora of other things that kill children in the USA that are much worse than any shootings?

The media would have us believe that this isn't hysteria and a normal reaction to an overwhelming problem. It's really not at all a huge problem. But being all supportive of teachers arming themselves just feeds that bogus narrative.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by doggie View Post
Someone must put an end to this endless bickering by posting the unadulterated indisputable facts and truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PMACA_MFG View Post
Not checkers, not chess, its Jenga.
"The California matrix of gun control laws is among the harshest in the nation and are filled with criminal law traps for people of common intelligence who desire to obey the law." - U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez

Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 03-12-2018, 10:40 PM
randomBytes's Avatar
randomBytes randomBytes is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 1,230
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
Another dimension to this is that any talk of arming teachers needs into the narrative that there is some kind of mass shooting epidemic in US schools. Or just regular shooting epidemic. This is where I criticize both the neoliberal media and the NRA. This narrative is FALSE.
Sorry, I disagree.

There does not have to be an epidemic or anything else (though it is pretty hard to say there is not a problem here - it's just that the problem is not the weapons used)

Every time there is one of these school shootings the left and media (same thing really) jump up and down "we must do something"....

Of course by "something" they mean doubling down on what has proven ineffective for 20+ years.

It is time to stop the insanity, and address the real problems.
"The best way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"
sounds cliche but it is true. When all else has failed (all the background checks and mental health .... LEO ignored all the red-flags or there was nothing they could legally do) and an active shooter event is happening, a gun is what you need to stop it, nothing else will help at that point.

The question is whether you wait 5-15min for that gun to show up - at which point body bags are more useful, or do you allow for people to defend themselves.

It really is that simple. The GFZ thing was a bad idea, it has been proven.
Time to get rid of it.

Quote:
The total casualty list for all school shootings including terrorist acts of mass killing and all other shootings comes to a whoping 15 people per year. That's right, we are on track for about 150 dead people (not all students, about a quarter of that is staff) for all of the last decade.
again facts and logic simply don't matter to the left.
It is a waste of effort trying to explain reality to them.

Quote:
So pushing for teachers to are themselves might sell guns and placate the NRA lobby, but it means little when there actually isn't a huge problem that
If you think anyone is pushing this solution to boost gun sales... wow.

Quote:
Need I remind others of the plethora of other things that kill children in the USA that are much worse than any shootings?
We all know that - it is irrelevant, because the left ignore facts when they are inconvenient to their narrative.

Quote:
But being all supportive of teachers arming themselves just feeds that bogus narrative.
No, allowing teachers who are willing the same rights to defend themselves that we all deserve, is the moral solution to a problem, that while statistically small is none the less BIG NEWS.

And getting teachers the "right" to carry, should help the rest of us living under communist oppression...
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 03-12-2018, 10:48 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,770
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by randomBytes View Post

And getting teachers the "right" to carry, should help the rest of us living under communist oppression...
I can agree with you that getting teachers the right to carry is a good thing in general in terms of a cultural war win, but I hate having to go along with the crazy narrative that it's a problem to begin with. We have to be rational and objective an prioritize what is a real danger to kids in schools and what is a public safety risk is important if there is data to support it.

I'll say it again and challenge anyone to come up with different stats (I had to research this myself because I can't find it anywhere in anti or pro gun talking points) but 15 people a year die in school shootings (that includes ALL shootings not just the terroristic mass casualty ones). 60 people a year die from lightning strikes in America a year. I bet you at least 15 of them are below the age of 18 and considered "kids".

I bet you more kids die of lightning strikes than die in school shootings per year in the USA. Do we need a national policy of teachers carrying lightning rods and have special lightning training?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by doggie View Post
Someone must put an end to this endless bickering by posting the unadulterated indisputable facts and truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PMACA_MFG View Post
Not checkers, not chess, its Jenga.
"The California matrix of gun control laws is among the harshest in the nation and are filled with criminal law traps for people of common intelligence who desire to obey the law." - U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez

Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 03-12-2018, 10:51 PM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 13,754
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
If they are American Citizens they deserve to be treated with respect and given the benefit of the doubt.
As long as they stay away from robbing my neighborhood or threatening my family or friends...

We don't have a say in how CA and the modern left treat families or raising children, so they get to keep the product of their policies. While I might have personal pity on kids with no chance, I also have zero tolerance for anyone trying to use it as an excuse to attack me, either physically or politically.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 03-12-2018, 10:54 PM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 13,754
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
I bet you more kids die of lightning strikes than die in school shootings per year in the USA. Do we need a national policy of teachers carrying lightning rods and have special lightning training?
If there was a policy that made it a crime for teachers to carry a lightning rod on a field trip, that would be a problem.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 03-12-2018, 11:00 PM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 13,754
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
If they are "dreamers" they better be excellent students with the right attitude and show that they are Americans and can be employable and productive.
Wait, what?

A "Dreamer" is someone who was brought into the country as a child and had no intent to disobey the law. However, as they grow up, they are now *choosing* to stay and disobey the law. There is now clear *intent*.

Do we, as gun owners, get a pass even for accidentally disobeying the law that we didn't know the legislators passed in the last few years? No. They treat as with "ignorance is not an excuse." How about getting a pass for *intentionally* disobeying the law by claiming that "our rifles were legal when we bought them, so we should be able to keep them without registration?"

Laughable, right? That's how many of us see the so-called "dreamers."
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 03-12-2018, 11:06 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,770
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IVC View Post
Wait, what?

A "Dreamer" is someone who was brought into the country as a child and had no intent to disobey the law. However, as they grow up, they are now *choosing* to stay and disobey the law. There is now clear *intent*.

Do we, as gun owners, get a pass even for accidentally disobeying the law that we didn't know the legislators passed in the last few years? No. They treat as with "ignorance is not an excuse." How about getting a pass for *intentionally* disobeying the law by claiming that "our rifles were legal when we bought them, so we should be able to keep them without registration?"

Laughable, right? That's how many of us see the so-called "dreamers."
I agree most "Dreamers" are probably not the hard working perfect people the media wants us to think they are. But some are, and for those that came here, stayed, payed taxes, obeyed the law otherwise, and are culturally American and willing to swear to the Constitution and become real Americans then I am open to allowing some of them a tough road to Citizenship.

Obummer did the wrong thing of course by playing this inane game, and I would consider it a 1 time amnesty pending some hard work to get to being a citizen. Reagan has a similar plan in 1986 that was never followed through to my understanding. After that the border closes (as it has been closed by Trump) and we don't ever allow this total BS to occur again.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by doggie View Post
Someone must put an end to this endless bickering by posting the unadulterated indisputable facts and truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PMACA_MFG View Post
Not checkers, not chess, its Jenga.
"The California matrix of gun control laws is among the harshest in the nation and are filled with criminal law traps for people of common intelligence who desire to obey the law." - U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez

Reply With Quote
  #91  
Old 03-12-2018, 11:14 PM
rugershooter rugershooter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,662
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaliforniaLiberal View Post
I'm looking for a calm, reasoned argument for why teachers should not be armed in classrooms.

I've read a lot of discussions about armed teachers and all I find is emotional arguments like "Children shouldn't have to be around guns" and "What if a teacher shoots a child by accident" and "It's more dangerous to have guns in classrooms that it is to have deranged shooters on a killing rampage."

Or my favorite, "Only highly trained police and military personnel are responsible enough to have guns."

I have various relatives who are teachers or retired from a lifetime teaching and they also can't give a good argument against arming teachers. They get real twitchy and emotional and upset when pressed for reasonable discussion.

Can someone here with more understanding than I set out the anti-armed teacher argument in a rational, logical manner?
There really isn't a reason for teachers to not be "allowed" to be armed.
Here's my take on it:
Federal/state/local governments shouldn't arm teachers. Their job is to teach. That is it. Being combat effective requires a certain level of training and proficiency. Regardless of a teacher's past experiences, they were hired to teach. Period. Expecting them to do someone else's job is unreasonable and wrong. We wouldn't ask or expect the security guard to do the teacher's job. If people want a person to perform a specific task or function, they need to be hired for that as part of their job. Being an armed guard isn't in a teacher's job description.
However:as a (supposedly) free person in a (supposedly) free society, teachers should be able to exercise their rights just like anyone who isn't a teacher or who isn't on school grounds. Whatever complications arise from carrying on a school campus really aren't any different than carrying off campus. Stress, dealing with people, possibly physical altercations, etc., are all issues outside the campus. The issue of "arming teachers" is really an issue of deciding whose life is worth enough; meaning that not allowing a teacher to carry a gun on campus because of the things that might go wrong really means that the teacher's life has no value.
I honestly don't see any legitimate or logical argument for not allowing teachers to carry a gun on campus, especially when you frame it in terms of law abiding gun owners being licensed and trained to a government mandated minimum standard.
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 03-12-2018, 11:28 PM
JeffC's Avatar
JeffC JeffC is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 426
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaliforniaLiberal View Post
I'm looking for a calm, reasoned argument for why teachers should not be armed in classrooms.

I've read a lot of discussions about armed teachers and all I find is emotional arguments like "Children shouldn't have to be around guns" and "What if a teacher shoots a child by accident" and "It's more dangerous to have guns in classrooms that it is to have deranged shooters on a killing rampage."

Or my favorite, "Only highly trained police and military personnel are responsible enough to have guns."

I have various relatives who are teachers or retired from a lifetime teaching and they also can't give a good argument against arming teachers. They get real twitchy and emotional and upset when pressed for reasonable discussion.

Can someone here with more understanding than I set out the anti-armed teacher argument in a rational, logical manner?
because they being government agents will have a monopoly on guns. That is about as anti 2A a lesson a kid can get.
__________________
I want gay married couples to be able to protect their marijuana plants with guns
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 03-13-2018, 7:38 AM
a1c's Avatar
a1c a1c is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lake County, CA
Posts: 9,079
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Noble Cause View Post
Apparently these Teachers disagree with you:

AFTER FLORIDA HIGH SCHOOL SHOOTING, HUNDREDS
OF TEACHERS SIGN UP TO ARM THEMSELVES

NewsWeek. 2/21/18
http://www.newsweek.com/sheriff-conc...eachers-815242

We don't need a majority of Teachers to CCW in order for it to be effective.
And those few hundreds can do their thing if they want, it's their right. They are hardly representative of their profession as a whole however. Bottomline is that while you'll find a few such teachers here and there, there would still be a majority of schools where none of them are armed even if they could be.
__________________
WTB: French & Finnish firearms. WTS: raw honey, tumbled .45 ACP brass, stupid cat.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 03-13-2018, 7:48 AM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 13,754
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a1c View Post
And those few hundreds can do their thing if they want, it's their right. They are hardly representative of their profession as a whole however. Bottomline is that while you'll find a few such teachers here and there, there would still be a majority of schools where none of them are armed even if they could be.
No problem with that. Their choice. Nobody is looking at "representatives" and those who carry could care less if whole schools or areas choose not to carry.

Where the real problem for those who are anti-gun, and don't want to acknowledge that LaPierre was correct when he said "only a good guy with a gun can stop a bad gun with the gun," is if an armed teacher in another school stops the shooting, or there is another shooting in an unarmed school.

These anti-gun teachers are terrified that their bluff is being called, nothing more.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 03-13-2018, 7:55 AM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 13,754
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
But some are, and for those that came here, stayed, payed taxes, obeyed the law otherwise, and are culturally American and willing to swear to the Constitution and become real Americans then I am open to allowing some of them a tough road to Citizenship.
If I violate AW laws in CA or obtain a full auto rifle illegally, but I pay taxes and obey the law otherwise, have no intention of harming or threatening anyone, do I get to: (1) Stay out of jail?, (2) Keep the rifle because I am *otherwise* law abiding?, and/or (3) Have my rifle added to the national registry even though the registry was frozen decades ago because, you know, I'm generally law abiding?

Same concept, different law.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
After that the border closes (as it has been closed by Trump) and we don't ever allow this total BS to occur again.
We are already in the AFTER THAT period - there was an 1986 Amnesty. These people today ARE part of the "this total BS" and they were supposed to be deported, border secured, etc.

You really need to brush up on facts...
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 03-13-2018, 7:56 AM
njineermike's Avatar
njineermike njineermike is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: CO
Posts: 9,605
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a1c View Post
And those few hundreds can do their thing if they want, it's their right. They are hardly representative of their profession as a whole however. Bottomline is that while you'll find a few such teachers here and there, there would still be a majority of schools where none of them are armed even if they could be.
It's been explained before ad nauseum. Nobody anywhere is saying all teachers should be forced to carry a firearm. Why do you continue as though that's the discussion at hand? Why would you say no teacher should be armed because all teachers don't want to be armed? That's as ridiculous as saying no citizen should be allowed to CCW because all citizens don't want to CCW.
__________________
NRA lifetime member
2AF Defender member

When did I go from being a "citizen" to a "taxpayer"?

Jon Lovitz: I cant wait to go to a hospital run by the DMV!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestryll View Post
Dude went full CNN...
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 03-13-2018, 8:01 AM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 13,754
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Tell the teachers who believe in gun control that "gun control only" approach is as effective as "abstinence only sex education" is in preventing STDs.

And "we should try if it only saves one life" is equally ridiculous in both cases.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 03-13-2018, 8:05 AM
njineermike's Avatar
njineermike njineermike is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: CO
Posts: 9,605
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IVC View Post
Tell the teachers who believe in gun control that "gun control only" approach is as effective as "abstinence only sex education" is in preventing STDs.

And "we should try if it only saves one life" is equally ridiculous in both cases.
Ive always found the concept that one natural biological process inherited through generations to create better humans is able to be controlled while another is unable to be controlled, yet both come trom the same set of hormones, namely violence and sex. All of them can either be controlled or they all can't.
__________________
NRA lifetime member
2AF Defender member

When did I go from being a "citizen" to a "taxpayer"?

Jon Lovitz: I cant wait to go to a hospital run by the DMV!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestryll View Post
Dude went full CNN...
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 03-13-2018, 8:07 AM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 13,754
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by njineermike View Post
It's been explained before ad nauseum. Nobody anywhere is saying all teachers should be forced to carry a firearm. Why do you continue as though that's the discussion at hand? Why would you say no teacher should be armed because all teachers don't want to be armed? That's as ridiculous as saying no citizen should be allowed to CCW because all citizens don't want to CCW.
Glad you're calling him on it - it's how the MSM is presenting the debate and how his friends are being spoon-fed the issue.

It's the same as when pro abortion people start talking about "woman's body" or "safe operation," while the other side is blue in the face explaining that it's about *the baby*, and that women can do whatever they want with their bodies.

It's called "controlling the narrative" and it had worked well while the select few had full control of mass media and dissipation of information. This is rapidly changing with social media, so the left is creating echo chambers where they are not disturbed by alternate points of view. In this case, to them, it's "arming all teachers." Facts be damned.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 03-13-2018, 8:28 AM
a1c's Avatar
a1c a1c is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lake County, CA
Posts: 9,079
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by njineermike View Post
It's been explained before ad nauseum. Nobody anywhere is saying all teachers should be forced to carry a firearm. Why do you continue as though that's the discussion at hand? Why would you say no teacher should be armed because all teachers don't want to be armed? That's as ridiculous as saying no citizen should be allowed to CCW because all citizens don't want to CCW.
First of all, let's talk about carry here. Most teachers don't wear their coats or jackets in class. If they're going to be armed, it's not going to be concealed, it's going to be open in most cases. Sure, you can still carry concealed a small handgun in your pants' front pocket, but that's a restrictive option.

You think I'm nitpicking here? I'm not. Because the idea of teachers openly carrying is a major point here where people have strong opinions. Some parents and kids don't want to see an armed teacher in class. A teacher openly carrying better be constantly aware and not let someone else grab his gun. And so on. It opens the teacher and the school to major liability issues.

And that's the other thing. Let's ignore the open vs. concealed aspect of things. Having armed teachers opens the schools and their districts to major liability. They're going to have to get new insurance schemes in place in case something were to go wrong. Most of those districts can't afford it even if they wanted to. I don't know if you're involved with school district business, but it's tough enough getting affordable insurance for some school activities or school infrastructures, forget about finding a policy that would cover armed civilians.

This was already clearly spelled out by the insurance industry back after Sandy Hook. They made it clear they wouldn't even touch the idea. So what does that leave us? It would require the states to pass regulation to mandate such insurance, following models like FEMA's national flood insurance program, or the State of California-endorsed earthquake insurance. If you've ever had to buy some of those policies in risk-prone areas you know how expensive they are.

So right there is a major reason - financial - why that won't work, at least for most school districts. So if you're going to require armed personnel, make it professionals, whether private security or LEOs.
__________________
WTB: French & Finnish firearms. WTS: raw honey, tumbled .45 ACP brass, stupid cat.
Reply With Quote
  #101  
Old 03-13-2018, 8:40 AM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 13,754
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

THEY CAN CHOOSE NOT TO CARRY. HOW DIFFICULT IS THIS???
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 03-13-2018, 8:43 AM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 13,754
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a1c View Post
Some parents and kids don't want to see an armed teacher in class.
Some people don't want to see an openly gay person in class. Funny business civil rights...

Besides, it's *concealed*, so even ostriches can go to school.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 03-13-2018, 8:54 AM
a1c's Avatar
a1c a1c is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lake County, CA
Posts: 9,079
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IVC View Post
Some people don't want to see an openly gay person in class. Funny business civil rights...

Besides, it's *concealed*, so even ostriches can go to school.
I don't know when was the last time you saw a teacher teaching, but they do tend to take their jackets or coats off once they get to their class, making it challenging to carry concealed.
__________________
WTB: French & Finnish firearms. WTS: raw honey, tumbled .45 ACP brass, stupid cat.
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 03-13-2018, 9:21 AM
jeremiah12 jeremiah12 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,522
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

I am a teacher so I will give some answers from my colleagues.

First and foremost, it is just another thing society is expecting us to do. Every year we are given more to do and few resources to do those things with. We have to be counselors, therapists, child psychologist, medics and find a way to make every kid want to learn so they pass school. Every student that is failing is our fault.

I have been at parent meetings where the parents have said I do not know what to do with my kid, you are the expert, you figure it out. I am thinking that this is a lost cause be these parents failed to parent from the very beginning. By the time i get them at 16, they need intensive intervention, the parents included.

As for carrying a gun, I had a related legal issue last fall that will shed light on the legal trap this is.

I had a student that was a danger to himself and others because he suffers from a significant mental illness. At home, his parents do not make sure he takes his meds. Parents are divorced so he spends half of his time with mom and half with dad. He is in what is called an intensive intervention program (II). This is for students with behavior issues. The have one class in the program and the other 5 classes in general education. If they have issues, they take their work and go back to the program classroom. They can go there whenever they want and teachers can send them there if they are having problems.

This student had a history of getting into fights and beating students so badly they were hospitalized for a few weeks. Because it is due to his mental illness, not a lot can be done to discipline him. If suspended, he just serves the suspension confined in II. It has been determined he would do better at a lock up facility and the district would have to pay for it. Mom, who has educational rights, does not agree and refuses to sign off.

Last fall, he went off of his meds because mom stopped buying them because her son said they made him feel bad. The voices came back and all of a sudden he was sure I was out to kill him. He was sure the two students he sat next to were spreading rumors about him and helping me to find a way to kill him. Finally one day he goes off and starts to beat the girl. I pulled him off of her and physically tossed him out of class.

My principal took action against me for unprofessional conduct and attempted to take action against my credential. She then reported me to the police for assaulting a student. My Union allotted me 150 hours for an attorney. I needed two.

Basically the DA declined to file charges because I did not violate any law. I used the minimum amount of force to protect the student and myself. The district was in violation of Ed. Code for not giving me notice of this student's violent past. I did know about it because the student bragged about it and another teacher had told me.

What I learned from the attorney, never again intervene when students fight or are in danger. The law is written to be an affirmative defense. As a teacher, if I injure a student while protecting others from harm, I have the burden of proof to show the others were in harm's way and I did everything else possible to escalate the situation first.

The very first thing I am supposed to do is inform administration and wait for their directives. That is the only way the district is forced to cover my legal behind. Teachers are not required to intervene if they might get injured by intervening. So, if a teacher does get injured, the district can use that as a basis for disciplinary action. My attorney, who specializes it teacher/labor law, gave me several examples of teachers who were fired for breaking up fights and had to endure a 2 or 3 year legal battle to get their job and credential back. It happens often.

My brother is the union president of teachers union in the largest district in the county I live in. His district is attempting to fire 16 teachers this school year alone for breaking up fights. (My bother went from an ultra-conservative republican to a progressive Bernie supporter--I do not talk politics with him).

Arm teachers and all of a sudden in this state you will have a situation where a teacher hits an innocent student while trying to stop the threat of an active shooter. The district will throw that teacher under the bus. There will be no legal protections in place.

What if the active shooter is a student? The teacher is still required to follow all the state and federal laws. Does the student have a behavioral intervention plan? If he does and the deescalation techniques are not used, the teacher is in violation of special education laws. LE is not bound by those laws.

As a teacher, I am a teacher. I also happen to be a gun enthusiast that shoots as often as I can but not as often as I wish. During the school year, I spend too much time grading papers or lesson planning. By the time Saturday comes, I am too tired to go to the range.

When am I going to have the time to be trained and then keep in practice for active shooter situations. Are you going to pay me extra for this or is it like everything else the district adds to our plate each year, you get to do it for free because it is for the students. Sorry, I cannot pay for my son's college or my car repair bills with good intentions.

BTW, my school site is understaffed by 2 counselors, 1 assistant principal, 4 campus security people, and 8 teachers. The district knows this but is spending money to buy chrome books so every student will have one to take home next year. They are telling us to do more with less.

The average teacher is liberal and will not touch a gun. Many more that are not gun aversive will not fire a gun if there is a chance of shooting a student. It is a mindset many teachers have. There are teachers that would not have a problem shooting a student and those are the ones that you need to worry about. They are the ones burned out and just doing time waiting for retirement.

Because of the teacher shortage in CA, people are not going into the profession for many reasons, we were forced to hire two teachers with mental health issues. One has been let go from two previous schools. She has been with us two years and we are letting her go at the end of the year. The other will not be rehired after just one year. He filled a science position that has been open for 5 years now.

If you want real security at school, hire real police that have real training rather than teachers that are doing many things and have little time to add one more thing to the list.
__________________
Anyone can look around and see the damage to the state and country inflicted by bad politicians.

A vote is clearly much more dangerous than a gun.

Why advocate restrictions on one right (voting) without comparable restrictions on another (self defense) (or, why not say 'Be a U.S. citizen' as the requirement for CCW)?

--Librarian
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 03-13-2018, 10:08 AM
njineermike's Avatar
njineermike njineermike is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: CO
Posts: 9,605
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a1c View Post
First of all, let's talk about carry here. Most teachers don't wear their coats or jackets in class. If they're going to be armed, it's not going to be concealed, it's going to be open in most cases. Sure, you can still carry concealed a small handgun in your pants' front pocket, but that's a restrictive option.

You think I'm nitpicking here? I'm not. Because the idea of teachers openly carrying is a major point here where people have strong opinions. Some parents and kids don't want to see an armed teacher in class. A teacher openly carrying better be constantly aware and not let someone else grab his gun. And so on. It opens the teacher and the school to major liability issues.

And that's the other thing. Let's ignore the open vs. concealed aspect of things. Having armed teachers opens the schools and their districts to major liability. They're going to have to get new insurance schemes in place in case something were to go wrong. Most of those districts can't afford it even if they wanted to. I don't know if you're involved with school district business, but it's tough enough getting affordable insurance for some school activities or school infrastructures, forget about finding a policy that would cover armed civilians.

This was already clearly spelled out by the insurance industry back after Sandy Hook. They made it clear they wouldn't even touch the idea. So what does that leave us? It would require the states to pass regulation to mandate such insurance, following models like FEMA's national flood insurance program, or the State of California-endorsed earthquake insurance. If you've ever had to buy some of those policies in risk-prone areas you know how expensive they are.

So right there is a major reason - financial - why that won't work, at least for most school districts. So if you're going to require armed personnel, make it professionals, whether private security or LEOs.
You wouldn't have to do as much typing if you'd simply admit you don't support teachers concealed carrying. All this logical nonsense you post to mask that fact is just tiresome.
__________________
NRA lifetime member
2AF Defender member

When did I go from being a "citizen" to a "taxpayer"?

Jon Lovitz: I cant wait to go to a hospital run by the DMV!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestryll View Post
Dude went full CNN...
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 03-13-2018, 10:28 AM
a1c's Avatar
a1c a1c is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lake County, CA
Posts: 9,079
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by njineermike View Post
You wouldn't have to do as much typing if you'd simply admit you don't support teachers concealed carrying. All this logical nonsense you post to mask that fact is just tiresome.
I do not support teachers carrying concealed OR open (as they would have to do in most cases during class) for all sorts of reasons which I already explained. Insurance providers will not allow schools to have armed teachers for the same reasons I explained: it's not the teachers' job to be armed, because they are not trained like LEOs or private security professionals who do this for a living.
__________________
WTB: French & Finnish firearms. WTS: raw honey, tumbled .45 ACP brass, stupid cat.
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 03-13-2018, 10:29 AM
k1dude's Avatar
k1dude k1dude is online now
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: la Republika Popular de Kalifornistan
Posts: 7,805
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremiah12 View Post
If you want real security at school, hire real police that have real training rather than teachers that are doing many things and have little time to add one more thing to the list.
Thanks for your insiders take on the issue.

The problem with putting 2 to 5 cops on each campus is cost. Who will pay for it? As you pointed out, the schools don't have the money. The same problem holds true for the city, county, and state.

The solution for decades has been to continually throw more and more money at schools, and yet education continues to deteriorate and the extra money magically disappears with no effect. It magically gets absorbed by a politically appointed top heavy managerial organization before it ever hits the classroom.

Politicians magically find a way to come up with funds for trains to nowhere, illegal alien and homeless benefits, welfare increases, paying criminals to not commit crimes, and now it seems a free universal wage for the poor. All while real services to the law abiding continue to diminish.

Until the proper allocation of resources occurs, there will be no funds for the necessary and deserving. Those funds are being spent on the unnecessary and undeserving simply because they vote Democrat. Yet the Democrats are screaming the loudest for a solution. But they'll never cough up the funds and then blame it on the Republicans.

The insane are running the asylum.

Until this state implodes, nothing will change.
__________________
Show me a young conservative and I'll show you a man without a heart. Show me an old liberal and I'll show you a man without a brain. - Sir Winston Churchill

I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue! - Senator Barry Goldwater
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 03-13-2018, 10:31 AM
a1c's Avatar
a1c a1c is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lake County, CA
Posts: 9,079
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by k1dude View Post
Thanks for your insiders take on the issue.

The problem with putting 2 to 5 cops on each campus is cost. Who will pay for it? As you pointed out, the schools don't have the money. The same problem holds true for the city, county, and state.
And the school districts don't have the money either to have armed teachers because no insurance provider will allow it. This was discussed years ago already. The insurance industry is dead set against the concept.
__________________
WTB: French & Finnish firearms. WTS: raw honey, tumbled .45 ACP brass, stupid cat.
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 03-13-2018, 10:35 AM
njineermike's Avatar
njineermike njineermike is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: CO
Posts: 9,605
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a1c View Post
I do not support teachers carrying concealed OR open (as they would have to do in most cases during class) for all sorts of reasons which I already explained. Insurance providers will not allow schools to have armed teachers for the same reasons I explained: it's not the teachers' job to be armed, because they are not trained like LEOs or private security professionals who do this for a living.
See? That was incredibly easy to admit you're not our ally in this fight. You are the enemy.

And people wonder why gun laws in CA are as bad as they are. I present exhibit A.
__________________
NRA lifetime member
2AF Defender member

When did I go from being a "citizen" to a "taxpayer"?

Jon Lovitz: I cant wait to go to a hospital run by the DMV!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestryll View Post
Dude went full CNN...
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 03-13-2018, 10:37 AM
a1c's Avatar
a1c a1c is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lake County, CA
Posts: 9,079
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by njineermike View Post
See? That was incredibly easy to admit you're not our ally in this fight. You are the enemy.
Okay. Tell that to the teacher above who explained his point of view. Go ahead.

Quote:
Originally Posted by njineermike View Post
And people wonder why gun laws in CA are as bad as they are. I present exhibit A.
Oh, I'm not the only gun owner in this state or others to think it's a dumb idea.
__________________
WTB: French & Finnish firearms. WTS: raw honey, tumbled .45 ACP brass, stupid cat.
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 03-13-2018, 10:38 AM
LBDamned's Avatar
LBDamned LBDamned is offline
Made in the USA
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Free in AZ!!! yes, it's worth the Pain to make it happen!
Posts: 11,045
iTrader: 51 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a1c View Post
And those few hundreds can do their thing if they want, it's their right. They are hardly representative of their profession as a whole however. Bottomline is that while you'll find a few such teachers here and there, there would still be a majority of schools where none of them are armed even if they could be.
Okay. So what?

Some teachers armed and some not. What's your point?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by MachineGuntongue View Post
Music is magic - - - Wisdom is golden - - - Learning to navigate life better as we age is amazing and a choice.
-----------------------------
http://i1329.photobucket.com/albums/w558/LBDamneds/Misc/III_zpsofbisb36.jpg
-----------------------------
Dignity, Respect, Purpose - Live It!
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 03-13-2018, 10:38 AM
k1dude's Avatar
k1dude k1dude is online now
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: la Republika Popular de Kalifornistan
Posts: 7,805
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by njineermike View Post
You wouldn't have to do as much typing if you'd simply admit you don't support teachers concealed carrying. All this logical nonsense you post to mask that fact is just tiresome.
Put him on your ignore list. His leftist drivel is inane and tireless. He's been on my ignore list for years.

Notice how the leftists arguments fall flat on this issue? Every single point they make is refuted by the fact that 12 states have had this policy for decades - and none of the scenarios they incessantly pontificate about have ever occurred.

It reminds me of how hard the left fought against concealed carry at the state level for years. Blood will run in the streets! It's too insane to even consider! It will bring back the days of the wild west! ........................and none of that happened either.
__________________
Show me a young conservative and I'll show you a man without a heart. Show me an old liberal and I'll show you a man without a brain. - Sir Winston Churchill

I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue! - Senator Barry Goldwater
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 03-13-2018, 10:41 AM
a1c's Avatar
a1c a1c is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lake County, CA
Posts: 9,079
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LBDamned View Post
Okay. So what?

Some teachers armed and some not. What's your point?
A teacher above summed things up way better than I did.

If you guys still can't grasp my point of view (or his) - or keep dismissing it as "leftist drivel" - be prepared to keep foaming at the mouth for a long time. Because it's not gonna happen.
__________________
WTB: French & Finnish firearms. WTS: raw honey, tumbled .45 ACP brass, stupid cat.
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 03-13-2018, 10:45 AM
randomBytes's Avatar
randomBytes randomBytes is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 1,230
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a1c View Post
And those few hundreds can do their thing if they want, it's their right. They are hardly representative of their profession as a whole however. Bottomline is that while you'll find a few such teachers here and there, there would still be a majority of schools where none of them are armed even if they could be.
You keep missing the point... all that is required is for there to be a non-zero chance that *someone* might provide armed resistance, for these pukes to look for an easier target.

Today, GFZ laws and school district policies result in *zero* chance that anyone can defend themselves, and the results are predictable.
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 03-13-2018, 10:47 AM
TMB 1's Avatar
TMB 1 TMB 1 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: 530
Posts: 5,570
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a1c View Post
And the school districts don't have the money either to have armed teachers because no insurance provider will allow it. This was discussed years ago already. The insurance industry is dead set against the concept.
Schools have to buy insurance in case there's a shooter? Does the insurance have to pay the families of the dead and wounded or the school?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 03-13-2018, 10:57 AM
randomBytes's Avatar
randomBytes randomBytes is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 1,230
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremiah12 View Post
I am a teacher so I will give some answers from my colleagues.

First and foremost, it is just another thing society is expecting us to do.
No, it is something we are saying you should be ALLOWED to do IF YOU CHOOSE - just like the rest of us - teachers should have a right of self defense.

The rest of your comments do indeed show just how screwed we all are after decades of "progressive improvement". I feel truly sorry for you and anyone else stuck in such a situation.

Private schools, are perhaps the best answer...

Quote:
If you want real security at school, hire real police that have real training rather than teachers that are doing many things and have little time to add one more thing to the list.
As Parkland proved - this does not work.

At the end of the day, do you want to be able to save your own life or not?
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 03-13-2018, 11:02 AM
a1c's Avatar
a1c a1c is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lake County, CA
Posts: 9,079
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TMB 1 View Post
Schools have to buy insurance in case there's a shooter? Does the insurance have to pay the families of the dead and wounded or the school?
Schools - just like corporations, non-profits, etc. - have to have insurance policies covering liability stemming from their staff's actions.

Here's for instance a 2013 denial of coverage from EMC for armed teachers. This was in Kansas when they passed a law about this.

You think you're going to find a company to cover this? I'm not saying that's not possible, but that premium would probably be expensive as hell. I mean, c'mon - NRA membership is required to access many ranges for liability issues. Hell, maybe the NRA can partner with whichever insurance provider they are dealing with for those to offer the same liability coverage to school districts. Somehow I don't see this happening though, because schools are not shooting ranges.
__________________
WTB: French & Finnish firearms. WTS: raw honey, tumbled .45 ACP brass, stupid cat.
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 03-13-2018, 11:04 AM
TMB 1's Avatar
TMB 1 TMB 1 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: 530
Posts: 5,570
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 03-13-2018, 11:10 AM
TMB 1's Avatar
TMB 1 TMB 1 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: 530
Posts: 5,570
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a1c View Post
Schools - just like corporations, non-profits, etc. - have to have insurance policies covering liability stemming from their staff's actions.

Here's for instance a 2013 denial of coverage from EMC for armed teachers. This was in Kansas when they passed a law about this.

You think you're going to find a company to cover this? I'm not saying that's not possible, but that premium would probably be expensive as hell. I mean, c'mon - NRA membership is required to access many ranges for liability issues. Hell, maybe the NRA can partner with whichever insurance provider they are dealing with for those to offer the same liability coverage to school districts. Somehow I don't see this happening though, because schools are not shooting ranges.
NRA is trying. The best insurance for protection from a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Not the NRA's fault you don't want to buy the insurance.
__________________

Last edited by TMB 1; 03-13-2018 at 11:13 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 03-13-2018, 11:13 AM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 13,754
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremiah12 View Post
What if the active shooter is a student? The teacher is still required to follow all the state and federal laws. Does the student have a behavioral intervention plan? If he does and the deescalation techniques are not used, the teacher is in violation of special education laws. LE is not bound by those laws.
You know as well as the rest of us that "carry" is about *self defense*. You don't get to play cop or save the day just because you carry a gun. It's there to protect *your life*, and possibly the lives of students who happen to be arround you, locked in the same room.

If you have a gun pointed at you and you know he/she is going to shoot because he/she has already shot a bunch of other kids, it's still your decision - you can choose to defend yourself, or you can just take it. Nobody is forcing your hand.

On the other hand, it seems that you don't approve of *others* having this choice. That's the puzzling proposition.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremiah12 View Post
The average teacher is liberal and will not touch a gun. Many more that are not gun aversive will not fire a gun if there is a chance of shooting a student. It is a mindset many teachers have.
If you like your gun-free zone, you can keep your gun-free zone.

Except, in this case, it really means what it says - you CAN KEEP your gun-free zone and nobody is forcing you to carry.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 8:22 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.