Trump: Guns for teachers will end school shootings

[dead0man]

can you guarantee they will never happen in a specific place?

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

He's doubled down because no one else has a more sensible idea that will actually, and immediately, make schools safer for children that are forced to go to them.

A lot of folks here are for gun control because they don't like guns, and they don't like the NRA because it's a GOP interest group.  They really don't care about the safety of schoolchildren because they're now out of high school, but they don't have kids to think about yet.  It's mere politics for them now.  For some of us, however, this issue involves thinking of the safety of lives we are specifically responsible for.  We're playing for keeps, not just to win an argument that will help our favorite candidate win.

Don't you even dare.

I care about school children. I care about one of my closest friends, who is a school teacher. I care about half a dozen of my other friends, who are also school teachers.

But I also care about the teachers I don't know, the students I will never meet, all of them. No child deserves to die, especially not one merely going through their daily routine.

I am for gun control because I truly believe it is the best way to keep children and those who care for them safe. I have nothing against guns themselves. I grew up in a house with a shotgun and rifle, both used for hunting. I do have something against people who believe their right to own any kind of gun they want without licensing trumps the safety of children. I do have something against people who want to continually increase the number of guns in the world. I do have something against people who think they should be allowed to pack heat wherever they want. I do have something against people who are so terrified of the world that they're okay seeing children die time after time if it's the sacrifice that has to be made so they can continue to hold on to their cold metal security blanket.

Don't ever assume that only those who agree with you care about others. In addition to being wrong, it's just disgusting. The reason I believe as strongly as I do is because I believe it the best option, just as you feel about your beliefs.

I've already dared to question folks sincerity on this issue.  And I'll double down on what I posted earlier.  I can imagine you pounding the keys, posting your response, taking my screen name in vain, all because you could not provide an experience-based response to the issue, and because your political motives were called out.  

"Don't you even dare!"  I must confess that such a response, right there, is the giveaway of shallow motivation; the overly dramatic reply.  I'm sure you've figured out that this crisis bolsters support for your point of view on the subject, which will, I'm sure, please you no end.  Liberals are not unlike Conservatives in their willingness to exploit a crisis or tragedy for political gain; they just don't want to be caught at it.

When I was young, single, and knew it all, I was a politically active Democrat, and, believe me, I understand the purely political view of life.  I KNOW folks root for bad things to happen so THEIR SIDE can win.  Republicans cheered when the prime rate hit 20% during the Carter years, while Democrats cheered "Reaganvilles" during the recession of 1981-82.  I don't see you write how you have a child, however, and while that doesn't invalidate your point of view, I have, in addition to a 12 year old son, four (4) granddaughters currently attending public schools, so I'm personally vested in this issue.  You're an anti-gun crusader.  That's fine and good, but, quite frankly, I believe that your contempt for me far, far exceeds any compassion you may feel for schoolchildren.  That's fine, too; a number of people who have actively wished me ill post here.

And, no, you are NOT playing for keeps.  Kids in schools, yes.  Folks with kids and grandkids in schools, yes.  You, no.  It's academic and political for you.  That doesn't make you an HP, but I'm OK with bringing somewhat shallow motivations to light when it seems fit.

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

He's doubled down because no one else has a more sensible idea that will actually, and immediately, make schools safer for children that are forced to go to them.

A lot of folks here are for gun control because they don't like guns, and they don't like the NRA because it's a GOP interest group.  They really don't care about the safety of schoolchildren because they're now out of high school, but they don't have kids to think about yet.  It's mere politics for them now.  For some of us, however, this issue involves thinking of the safety of lives we are specifically responsible for.  We're playing for keeps, not just to win an argument that will help our favorite candidate win.

This is ridiculous. High school students don't care about their own safety? Come on.

High school kids care about their safety.

Parents of high school kids care about kids' safety.

Childless anti-gun advocates care about their political agenda.  The "kids" are a talking point.

An unfair overgeneralization?  Perhaps.  But I've been at the place where I was politically active, to where all I could see in situations such as this is how such a situation could be exploited.  And most of the folks I was working with were the same way.  I was young, single, and childless then, so my world view was a Political Game worldview.  Marriage and family bring about a different worldview.  Becoming Saved, receiving Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord brings about a different worldview.  But I know folks who, to this day, view life's events as something that either helps or hurts their "side". 

[Dr. Arch]

Trump claims that schools are "frankly no different" than military bases.


Link: https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/966740294556438528

P.S. Couldn't get the Twitter embed to work.

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

Trump claims that schools are "frankly no different" than military bases.


Link: https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/966740294556438528

P.S. Couldn't get the Twitter embed to work.

Is Trump wrong?

Believe me, this was not my idea of school when I was younger.  It's not my idea of school now.  But I am convinced that public schools (at least in Florida) cannot guarantee my son's safety, even while they mandate school attendance.  (My son has a McKay scholarship to a private religious school now where I believe he's safer.) 

Every state mandates children attend school, yet kids are not protected from folks like Cruz in Parkland.  That's what is publicized.  What is less publicized is that kids are not protected from being collateral damage for on-campus gang violence, coercion and tormenting by bullies and predators that are off the chain, to say nothing of sexual assaults endured by female students, and even male students who are unable to defend themselves.

Folks here wonder why so many "Deplorables" stand with Trump.  I'll state my belief on that; it's the fact that Trump has acknowledged the very legitimate fears ordinary folks have for their safety and the safety of their families, and he has made rectifying the problem HIS priority.  And he's willing to think outside the box and trash some previously unassailable ideas for the sake of enhancing public safety.  He has acknowledged maintaining public safety and domestic tranquility as government's primary function, and for that, he shows more awareness about what the Founders deemed to be the priorities of government than do those who lambaste Trump's disdain for certain niceties.  And he has made this a theme of his governace, at a time when millions of Americans are rightly concerned about this matter.

Travel Bans from dangerous hotspots?  "The Wall"?  Immigration Reductions?  Arming Teachers?  Limited Refugee Intake?  This is "America First".  This is what Trump voters, and especially Trump PRIMARY voters, had in mind when they chose Trump.  Whatever the merits and drawbacks of the above-listed proposals, they reflect the idea that Trump's primary concern is the safety and security of the American people, each and every one of them, and that the tut-tutters, critics, nay-sayers, and those who wish us ill, can go pound salt in a manner Trump would probably be unfiltered enough to suggest on camera.  This is what Trump's supporters wanted in their President, and what they considered long overdue from both parties' Presidents.  I'm not necessarily signing off on all of these ideas exactly as Trump puts them forth, but I will suggest that millions of Americans do.

[Dr. Arch]

Trump claims that schools are "frankly no different" than military bases.


Link: https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/966740294556438528

P.S. Couldn't get the Twitter embed to work.

Is Trump wrong?

Yes, and so are any supporters who find the idea of arming underpaid educators in schools attractive in any way. In fact, one of the teachers in the Parkland school is a registered Republican and voted for Trump, and she said that idea was way too much for her to support. His voters wanted "America First," but I'm sure they didn't want that reinforced through stupid policy ideas. Then again, maybe not, considering who they voted for.

[dead0man]

Is Trump wrong?

yes, the average military base is way more important than the average school.

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

Trump claims that schools are "frankly no different" than military bases.


Link: https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/966740294556438528

P.S. Couldn't get the Twitter embed to work.

Is Trump wrong?

Yes, and so are any supporters who find the idea of arming underpaid educators in schools attractive in any way. In fact, one of the teachers in the Parkland school is a registered Republican and voted for Trump, and she said that idea was way too much for her to support. His voters wanted "America First," but I'm sure they didn't want that reinforced through stupid policy ideas. Then again, maybe not, considering who they voted for.

I should say that I had the idea of arming teachers before Trump espoused it.  I found it kind of amazing that a President would think, independently, of a controversial policy idea that no one I knew of, outside of myself, was advocating until Trump made his statement.  Some would argue that it's perhaps time for an Alzheimers checkup on my part if I'm THAT in sync with Trump.  I get that; the proposal, at first blush, seems over the top.  I have reservations about the idea myself (although I do have something of a coherent idea as to how to implement such a plan).  I do believe that lots of other folks have had the idea to arm teachers, but have viewed it as too over the top to fly until now, and didn't think any serious political figure would bite.  I certainly respect the opposite point of view on this question, but I don't think the idea should be dismissed out of hand.

I do think that parents have the right to believe that their children are as safe at their local public school as they are at a military base, and that they shouldn't have to factor in the dysfunctional and malevolent students into the equation before lowering their expectation.  We are so far from that ideal that it isn't funny.  And you won't get honest feedback about what actually goes on in public schools because everyone is shielded by privacy laws.  Yes, I get it that you don't want Mr. Jones to go over to little Bobby Smith's father and coldcock Bobby's Dad because Bobby coldcocked litle Timmy Jones in the cafeteria that day, but privacy laws do more to protect schools from litigation than they do to protect students from physical and psychological harm.  Trump gets it.  And he gets it that this event in Parkland is an opportunity for a gun grab by folks who have made disarming law-abiding Americans their goal in life.  

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

Is Trump wrong?

yes, the average military base is way more important than the average school.

Is the life of a soldier in uniform on base more valuable than the life of a child in a public middle school or high school?

To quote Richard Nixon in 1968:  "I'll turn that question over to our TV viewers and allow them to decide the answer to that."

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Trump claims that schools are "frankly no different" than military bases.


Link: https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/966740294556438528

P.S. Couldn't get the Twitter embed to work.

Trump (R-Moscow) is a blithering idiot and a disgrace to both our nation and the human race.

[Alabama_Indy10]

Trump claims that schools are "frankly no different" than military bases.


Link: https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/966740294556438528

P.S. Couldn't get the Twitter embed to work.

Trump (R-Moscow) is a blithering idiot and a disgrace to both our nation and the human race.

You're overusing this. Come up with something new

[Koharu]

He's doubled down because no one else has a more sensible idea that will actually, and immediately, make schools safer for children that are forced to go to them.

A lot of folks here are for gun control because they don't like guns, and they don't like the NRA because it's a GOP interest group.  They really don't care about the safety of schoolchildren because they're now out of high school, but they don't have kids to think about yet.  It's mere politics for them now.  For some of us, however, this issue involves thinking of the safety of lives we are specifically responsible for.  We're playing for keeps, not just to win an argument that will help our favorite candidate win.

Don't you even dare.

I care about school children. I care about one of my closest friends, who is a school teacher. I care about half a dozen of my other friends, who are also school teachers.

But I also care about the teachers I don't know, the students I will never meet, all of them. No child deserves to die, especially not one merely going through their daily routine.

I am for gun control because I truly believe it is the best way to keep children and those who care for them safe. I have nothing against guns themselves. I grew up in a house with a shotgun and rifle, both used for hunting. I do have something against people who believe their right to own any kind of gun they want without licensing trumps the safety of children. I do have something against people who want to continually increase the number of guns in the world. I do have something against people who think they should be allowed to pack heat wherever they want. I do have something against people who are so terrified of the world that they're okay seeing children die time after time if it's the sacrifice that has to be made so they can continue to hold on to their cold metal security blanket.

Don't ever assume that only those who agree with you care about others. In addition to being wrong, it's just disgusting. The reason I believe as strongly as I do is because I believe it the best option, just as you feel about your beliefs.

I've already dared to question folks sincerity on this issue.  And I'll double down on what I posted earlier.  I can imagine you pounding the keys, posting your response, taking my screen name in vain, all because you could not provide an experience-based response to the issue, and because your political motives were called out.  

"Don't you even dare!"  I must confess that such a response, right there, is the giveaway of shallow motivation; the overly dramatic reply.  I'm sure you've figured out that this crisis bolsters support for your point of view on the subject, which will, I'm sure, please you no end.  Liberals are not unlike Conservatives in their willingness to exploit a crisis or tragedy for political gain; they just don't want to be caught at it.

When I was young, single, and knew it all, I was a politically active Democrat, and, believe me, I understand the purely political view of life.  I KNOW folks root for bad things to happen so THEIR SIDE can win.  Republicans cheered when the prime rate hit 20% during the Carter years, while Democrats cheered "Reaganvilles" during the recession of 1981-82.  I don't see you write how you have a child, however, and while that doesn't invalidate your point of view, I have, in addition to a 12 year old son, four (4) granddaughters currently attending public schools, so I'm personally vested in this issue.  You're an anti-gun crusader.  That's fine and good, but, quite frankly, I believe that your contempt for me far, far exceeds any compassion you may feel for schoolchildren.  That's fine, too; a number of people who have actively wished me ill post here.

And, no, you are NOT playing for keeps.  Kids in schools, yes.  Folks with kids and grandkids in schools, yes.  You, no.  It's academic and political for you.  That doesn't make you an HP, but I'm OK with bringing somewhat shallow motivations to light when it seems fit.

You may have been a shallow person who didn't care about others, but you are not me. I do care.

I also have no interest in interacting with someone who claims to know my motivations better than I do. Goodbye.

[Dr. Arch]

Trump claims that schools are "frankly no different" than military bases.


Link: https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/966740294556438528

P.S. Couldn't get the Twitter embed to work.

Is Trump wrong?

Yes, and so are any supporters who find the idea of arming underpaid educators in schools attractive in any way. In fact, one of the teachers in the Parkland school is a registered Republican and voted for Trump, and she said that idea was way too much for her to support. His voters wanted "America First," but I'm sure they didn't want that reinforced through stupid policy ideas. Then again, maybe not, considering who they voted for.

I should say that I had the idea of arming teachers before Trump espoused it.  I found it kind of amazing that a President would think, independently, of a controversial policy idea that no one I knew of, outside of myself, was advocating until Trump made his statement.  Some would argue that it's perhaps time for an Alzheimers checkup on my part if I'm THAT in sync with Trump.  I get that; the proposal, at first blush, seems over the top.  I have reservations about the idea myself (although I do have something of a coherent idea as to how to implement such a plan).  I do believe that lots of other folks have had the idea to arm teachers, but have viewed it as too over the top to fly until now, and didn't think any serious political figure would bite.  I certainly respect the opposite point of view on this question, but I don't think the idea should be dismissed out of hand.

I do think that parents have the right to believe that their children are as safe at their local public school as they are at a military base, and that they shouldn't have to factor in the dysfunctional and malevolent students into the equation before lowering their expectation.  We are so far from that ideal that it isn't funny.  And you won't get honest feedback about what actually goes on in public schools because everyone is shielded by privacy laws.  Yes, I get it that you don't want Mr. Jones to go over to little Bobby Smith's father and coldcock Bobby's Dad because Bobby coldcocked litle Timmy Jones in the cafeteria that day, but privacy laws do more to protect schools from litigation than they do to protect students from physical and psychological harm.  Trump gets it.  And he gets it that this event in Parkland is an opportunity for a gun grab by folks who have made disarming law-abiding Americans their goal in life.  

So the solution is more guns? You're a fool.

[The Dowager Mod]

Such a bad idea.

[dead0man]

Is Trump wrong?

yes, the average military base is way more important than the average school.

Is the life of a soldier in uniform on base more valuable than the life of a child in a public middle school or high school?

that's not the statement I'm making, and no, a soldier in uniform on a base is not worth more than a child's life at school.  Quite the opposite in fact.  That doesn't mean a military installation is less valuable than a school.


edit-and society (and not just American society or even the West at large. This is, apparently, a human thing) agrees with me and shows it in very obvious ways.  I'd rather that not be the case, but such is life.

[Bismarck]

I agree with the consensus that this will not be a solution but some of the criticisms here are rather silly as well. Nobody proposed forcing teachers to be armed, only allowing those teachers who wanted to. So no sweet old lady teacher would be forced to have a gun. Also they surely would have to be locked up, it wouldn’t just like be sitting on a desk or in a holster for God’s sake. Get a grip people. Oppose a policy on its merits or lack thereoff, don’t just spout nonsense.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

I agree with the consensus that this will not be a solution but some of the criticisms here are rather silly as well. Nobody proposed forcing teachers to be armed, only allowing those teachers who wanted to. So no sweet old lady teacher would be forced to have a gun. Also they surely would have to be locked up, it wouldn’t just like be sitting on a desk or in a holster for God’s sake. Get a grip people. Oppose a policy on its merits or lack thereoff, don’t just spout nonsense.

So, you're saying that the GOP's actual proposal to stop all school shooting is that some teachers and other school employees will have a gun locked up somewhere? So that when a shooting is in progress, they can just go mosey on over to their gun locker - while the gunman patiently waits - then, in a state of complete calm, open the locker, ready their weapon, and then fire some of those magic bullets that will find the prospective shooter and kill them (and only them), without forcing the now-armed school employee to conduct a frantic hunt for them.

Anyone who thinks "arm the teachers" is anything other than moronic is, themselves, so stupid they ought to be found legally incompetent to conduct their own affairs.

[Bismarck]

I agree with the consensus that this will not be a solution but some of the criticisms here are rather silly as well. Nobody proposed forcing teachers to be armed, only allowing those teachers who wanted to. So no sweet old lady teacher would be forced to have a gun. Also they surely would have to be locked up, it wouldn’t just like be sitting on a desk or in a holster for God’s sake. Get a grip people. Oppose a policy on its merits or lack thereoff, don’t just spout nonsense.

So, you're saying that the GOP's actual proposal to stop all school shooting is that some teachers and other school employees will have a gun locked up somewhere? So that when a shooting is in progress, they can just go mosey on over to their gun locker - while the gunman patiently waits - then, in a state of complete calm, open the locker, ready their weapon, and then fire some of those magic bullets that will find the prospective shooter and kill them (and only them), without forcing the now-armed school employee to conduct a frantic hunt for them.

Anyone who thinks "arm the teachers" is anything other than moronic is, themselves, so stupid they ought to be found legally incompetent to conduct their own affairs.

Learn the concept of nuance my friend. I never said it was a good solution. Actually I said it wasn’t. I just think a policy should be considered honestly rather than demagogued. You are correct in stating that it isn’t a practical solution. It might at the very least be something that makes shooters less brazen though. One of the reasons schools are chosen is because they are easy targets.

[Kingpoleon]

He's doubled down because no one else has a more sensible idea that will actually, and immediately, make schools safer for children that are forced to go to them.

A lot of folks here are for gun control because they don't like guns, and they don't like the NRA because it's a GOP interest group.  They really don't care about the safety of schoolchildren because they're now out of high school, but they don't have kids to think about yet.  It's mere politics for them now.  For some of us, however, this issue involves thinking of the safety of lives we are specifically responsible for.  We're playing for keeps, not just to win an argument that will help our favorite candidate win.

Don't you even dare.

I care about school children. I care about one of my closest friends, who is a school teacher. I care about half a dozen of my other friends, who are also school teachers.

But I also care about the teachers I don't know, the students I will never meet, all of them. No child deserves to die, especially not one merely going through their daily routine.

I am for gun control because I truly believe it is the best way to keep children and those who care for them safe. I have nothing against guns themselves. I grew up in a house with a shotgun and rifle, both used for hunting. I do have something against people who believe their right to own any kind of gun they want without licensing trumps the safety of children. I do have something against people who want to continually increase the number of guns in the world. I do have something against people who think they should be allowed to pack heat wherever they want. I do have something against people who are so terrified of the world that they're okay seeing children die time after time if it's the sacrifice that has to be made so they can continue to hold on to their cold metal security blanket.

Don't ever assume that only those who agree with you care about others. In addition to being wrong, it's just disgusting. The reason I believe as strongly as I do is because I believe it the best option, just as you feel about your beliefs.

I've already dared to question folks sincerity on this issue.  And I'll double down on what I posted earlier.  I can imagine you pounding the keys, posting your response, taking my screen name in vain, all because you could not provide an experience-based response to the issue, and because your political motives were called out.  

"Don't you even dare!"  I must confess that such a response, right there, is the giveaway of shallow motivation; the overly dramatic reply.  I'm sure you've figured out that this crisis bolsters support for your point of view on the subject, which will, I'm sure, please you no end.  Liberals are not unlike Conservatives in their willingness to exploit a crisis or tragedy for political gain; they just don't want to be caught at it.

When I was young, single, and knew it all, I was a politically active Democrat, and, believe me, I understand the purely political view of life.  I KNOW folks root for bad things to happen so THEIR SIDE can win.  Republicans cheered when the prime rate hit 20% during the Carter years, while Democrats cheered "Reaganvilles" during the recession of 1981-82.  I don't see you write how you have a child, however, and while that doesn't invalidate your point of view, I have, in addition to a 12 year old son, four (4) granddaughters currently attending public schools, so I'm personally vested in this issue.  You're an anti-gun crusader.  That's fine and good, but, quite frankly, I believe that your contempt for me far, far exceeds any compassion you may feel for schoolchildren.  That's fine, too; a number of people who have actively wished me ill post here.

And, no, you are NOT playing for keeps.  Kids in schools, yes.  Folks with kids and grandkids in schools, yes.  You, no.  It's academic and political for you.  That doesn't make you an HP, but I'm OK with bringing somewhat shallow motivations to light when it seems fit.

You may have been a shallow person who didn't care about others, but you are not me. I do care.

I also have no interest in interacting with someone who claims to know my motivations better than I do. Goodbye.

Fuzzy Bear’s moral elitism vs. jphp’s moral “outrage “


Stay classy, guys.

[HisGrace]

This won't be a "deterrent" since most of these guys don't care if they get caught/killed or just kill themselves afterward.

Add to that it's a big waste of money to try and train teachers to use guns instead of just spending more on regular security.

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

I agree with the consensus that this will not be a solution but some of the criticisms here are rather silly as well. Nobody proposed forcing teachers to be armed, only allowing those teachers who wanted to. So no sweet old lady teacher would be forced to have a gun. Also they surely would have to be locked up, it wouldn’t just like be sitting on a desk or in a holster for God’s sake. Get a grip people. Oppose a policy on its merits or lack thereoff, don’t just spout nonsense.

So, you're saying that the GOP's actual proposal to stop all school shooting is that some teachers and other school employees will have a gun locked up somewhere? So that when a shooting is in progress, they can just go mosey on over to their gun locker - while the gunman patiently waits - then, in a state of complete calm, open the locker, ready their weapon, and then fire some of those magic bullets that will find the prospective shooter and kill them (and only them), without forcing the now-armed school employee to conduct a frantic hunt for them.

Anyone who thinks "arm the teachers" is anything other than moronic is, themselves, so stupid they ought to be found legally incompetent to conduct their own affairs.

Learn the concept of nuance my friend. I never said it was a good solution. Actually I said it wasn’t. I just think a policy should be considered honestly rather than demagogued. You are correct in stating that it isn’t a practical solution. It might at the very least be something that makes shooters less brazen though. One of the reasons schools are chosen is because they are easy targets.

Most folks here have one agenda; to disarm law abiding citizens and take their guns, along with their right to keep and bear arms.  That's their bottom line.  

I'm willing to be proven wrong.  Much has been said about Trump being a demogogue over arming teachers, but there is a degree of demogoguing the gun control issue as well.  

[Obama-Biden Democrat]

High School kids are quite often immature idiots who don't listen to the teacher or openly talk back. I bet lots of teachers vent in the teacher's lounge about how annoying some of the kids can be. Dealing with teenagers is a very tough and stressful job. Eventually a teacher who has a firearm who had a rough day will snap and shoot a kid who talks back rudely. Or some punk kid will try to rush the teacher and steal the gun. Is the teacher going to shoot the kid? The Orange Clown is a complete moron on this, as usual.

[Dr. Arch]

I agree with the consensus that this will not be a solution but some of the criticisms here are rather silly as well. Nobody proposed forcing teachers to be armed, only allowing those teachers who wanted to. So no sweet old lady teacher would be forced to have a gun. Also they surely would have to be locked up, it wouldn’t just like be sitting on a desk or in a holster for God’s sake. Get a grip people. Oppose a policy on its merits or lack thereoff, don’t just spout nonsense.

So, you're saying that the GOP's actual proposal to stop all school shooting is that some teachers and other school employees will have a gun locked up somewhere? So that when a shooting is in progress, they can just go mosey on over to their gun locker - while the gunman patiently waits - then, in a state of complete calm, open the locker, ready their weapon, and then fire some of those magic bullets that will find the prospective shooter and kill them (and only them), without forcing the now-armed school employee to conduct a frantic hunt for them.

Anyone who thinks "arm the teachers" is anything other than moronic is, themselves, so stupid they ought to be found legally incompetent to conduct their own affairs.

Learn the concept of nuance my friend. I never said it was a good solution. Actually I said it wasn’t. I just think a policy should be considered honestly rather than demagogued. You are correct in stating that it isn’t a practical solution. It might at the very least be something that makes shooters less brazen though. One of the reasons schools are chosen is because they are easy targets.

Most folks here have one agenda; to disarm law abiding citizens and take their guns, along with their right to keep and bear arms.  That's their bottom line.  

I'm willing to be proven wrong.  Much has been said about Trump being a demogogue over arming teachers, but there is a degree of demogoguing the gun control issue as well.  

I'm not sure who you're talking about, but I have NEVER advocated to disarm everyone. Of course, you're welcome to beat up as many straw men as you like.

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

I agree with the consensus that this will not be a solution but some of the criticisms here are rather silly as well. Nobody proposed forcing teachers to be armed, only allowing those teachers who wanted to. So no sweet old lady teacher would be forced to have a gun. Also they surely would have to be locked up, it wouldn’t just like be sitting on a desk or in a holster for God’s sake. Get a grip people. Oppose a policy on its merits or lack thereoff, don’t just spout nonsense.

So, you're saying that the GOP's actual proposal to stop all school shooting is that some teachers and other school employees will have a gun locked up somewhere? So that when a shooting is in progress, they can just go mosey on over to their gun locker - while the gunman patiently waits - then, in a state of complete calm, open the locker, ready their weapon, and then fire some of those magic bullets that will find the prospective shooter and kill them (and only them), without forcing the now-armed school employee to conduct a frantic hunt for them.

Anyone who thinks "arm the teachers" is anything other than moronic is, themselves, so stupid they ought to be found legally incompetent to conduct their own affairs.

Learn the concept of nuance my friend. I never said it was a good solution. Actually I said it wasn’t. I just think a policy should be considered honestly rather than demagogued. You are correct in stating that it isn’t a practical solution. It might at the very least be something that makes shooters less brazen though. One of the reasons schools are chosen is because they are easy targets.

Most folks here have one agenda; to disarm law abiding citizens and take their guns, along with their right to keep and bear arms.  That's their bottom line.  

I'm willing to be proven wrong.  Much has been said about Trump being a demogogue over arming teachers, but there is a degree of demogoguing the gun control issue as well.  

I'm not sure who you're talking about, but I have NEVER advocated to disarm everyone. Of course, you're welcome to beat up as many straw men as you like.

Do you wish to disarm me?  If "yes", to what extent?

[Dr. Arch]

I agree with the consensus that this will not be a solution but some of the criticisms here are rather silly as well. Nobody proposed forcing teachers to be armed, only allowing those teachers who wanted to. So no sweet old lady teacher would be forced to have a gun. Also they surely would have to be locked up, it wouldn’t just like be sitting on a desk or in a holster for God’s sake. Get a grip people. Oppose a policy on its merits or lack thereoff, don’t just spout nonsense.

So, you're saying that the GOP's actual proposal to stop all school shooting is that some teachers and other school employees will have a gun locked up somewhere? So that when a shooting is in progress, they can just go mosey on over to their gun locker - while the gunman patiently waits - then, in a state of complete calm, open the locker, ready their weapon, and then fire some of those magic bullets that will find the prospective shooter and kill them (and only them), without forcing the now-armed school employee to conduct a frantic hunt for them.

Anyone who thinks "arm the teachers" is anything other than moronic is, themselves, so stupid they ought to be found legally incompetent to conduct their own affairs.

Learn the concept of nuance my friend. I never said it was a good solution. Actually I said it wasn’t. I just think a policy should be considered honestly rather than demagogued. You are correct in stating that it isn’t a practical solution. It might at the very least be something that makes shooters less brazen though. One of the reasons schools are chosen is because they are easy targets.

Most folks here have one agenda; to disarm law abiding citizens and take their guns, along with their right to keep and bear arms.  That's their bottom line. 

I'm willing to be proven wrong.  Much has been said about Trump being a demogogue over arming teachers, but there is a degree of demogoguing the gun control issue as well. 

I'm not sure who you're talking about, but I have NEVER advocated to disarm everyone. Of course, you're welcome to beat up as many straw men as you like.

Do you wish to disarm me?  If "yes", to what extent?

Unless you have mental health issues or a violent criminal record, no. I want control on what people can arm themselves with (thinking about bump stocks), how fast they do it (not immediately/waiting period), closing the ridiculous gun show loop hole, and making sure there are universal background checks.