Matt Damon on Australia's gun confiscation...I wish that could happen in my country

Eventually America will get sick of all its dead children. Unfortunately more will have to die for this to happen. But I believe firmly it will happen

 

When did you dream up this nonsense?

 

What about the many other causes of premature deaths of children ?
More children die every year because their parents refuse inoculation against childhood diseases.

 

From her other sources of homespun wisdom, her advice to use crockery and mop handles for defensive purposes.

 

That should be against the law

 

Further proof, the anti-gun side can only argue from fallacious appeals to emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.

 

The pro gun side can only argue with personal attacks and insults

 

Still the notion of a training requirement, whenn, though challenged many times on it he has never defined what that means or what would be considered a minimum acceptable training program... just regurgitated, left words... nonsense.

 

What we have here is ignorance on display. Proper training (and reality) render the above scenarios ludicrous. Admittedly there is no perfect solution; but properly armed security personnel will save lives far more gun control ever would. Sandy Hook would not have happened with proper security measures (including armed personnel) in place.

 

This is probably the biggest point upon which gun controllers fail. "Innocent until proven guilty". You can NOT place infringements upon someone's inalienable rights without due process. It is not the job of the citizen to pursue governmental permission; it is the job of the government to prove a need for restrictions upon a citizen's rights.

 

Well the courts disagree as clearly we can require ccw to carry in some states

 

I have no problem with cops in schools. My kid has them. But teachers with guns.....no way

 

You describe prior restraint.
Prior restraint violates the constitution in virtually every instance.

 

When I grew up, it was innocent until proven Irish

 

Exactly! Sadly, many ignorant people point to examples of Prior Restraint in law that have been left in place because the Sheeple are okay with it. The courts have allowed laws to stand that were blatantly unconstitutional because they are loathe to allow reins to be placed upon the runaway growth of governmental authority over the rights of the People.

 

If schools are targets as the left so often says, why shouldn't teachers be able to defend themselves?

 

You are certainly entitled to your legal opinions. I take them for what they are

 

Discretely and without the general populations knowledge, dozens and dozens of schools have teachers, custodians, and principals that are fully trained and armed in public schools in America. Many have done this on their own dime and instructors have offered their services for free in many cases. This started in Ohio a few years back and has spread quickly to other parts of the country. We have also trained many groups from churches who have taken the responsibility of being first line defenders for the vital period until the police arrive. All this is quietly in the background and hopefully we will never have to read or hear about a armed teacher saving a room full of kids but.... trained and prepared is better than waiting in line to get shot with no way to defend yourself or those that depend on you.

 

Amen to that!

 

Not in states where that is illegal

 

What I have also seen is lots of kids being enrolled in Krav Maga classes teaching them how a few small kids working in unison can take down an attacker. Our basic pistol classes are sold out for the year. Over half of our students are women from 17 to 80 Carry permits continue to grow. Nice to see many are taking personal responsibility for their own self protection.

 

Such is not known. Nor is it actually relevant to the discussion. You made the claim that if concealed firearms were allowed on school grounds, students would steal them from the staff. It was pointed out that concealed carry on school grounds is legal in at least eighteen states, and you were asked to demonstrate where your prediction has actually played out. So far you have yet to actually do such.

Stop being absurd.

It works in the same way concealed carry in general works. It is not that difficult a concept to understand.

For the sake of the scenario presented above, how does the hypothetical perpetrator know which classroom to enter, and which educator is legally armed and carrying a concealed firearm while on the job? What are they basing their information on, that allows them to know full well which staff member presents the greatest threat? Why should we assume that only one educator is armed, as opposed to numerous staff members?

Pray tell what is your interpretation of common sense? The perpetrator is going to have a firearm regardless of whatever you attempt, that is a constant that cannot be changed. Pray tell what is common sense about only the perpetrator being armed in such a situation? They are going to go about murdering as many students and staff members as possible if they possess a monopoly on deadly force, because absolutely no one will be able to oppose them. Therefore there is an absence of common sense in your position, because you have offered nothing that even begins to resemble a solution.

 

Oh, so we've gone from armed teachers to "properly armed security personnel". More Republican Big Government? Maybe you can have a gestapo agent, with a machine gun, in every classroom. Public education will exceed the military Federal government budget.

 

6Gunner did not suggest that the government place Geheimestaatzpolizei in every classroom. You're building a strawman army. If there have been armed staff at the front office at Sandy Hook, there was some chance that no children would have been killed. School staff could easily be "properly armed security personnel", as could SROs.

It's a lead pipe cinch that the "Gun Free Zone" signs did nothing.

 

that's irrelevant