Yep, it stopped legal permit holders from self defence and allowed a mad shooter to shoot who he wanted to. I guess he missed the memo about guns not allowed on school grounds.
Would you be as willing to draw down on the principal if she might be armed as well? Knowing if you did follow through that some of your co-workers would drop you before you leave the building?
Maybe you could answer why Foster surrendered when he found himself on the other end of a gun.
Should the state/school be liable for not preventing those employee's injuries when they were denied their constitutional right in order to work there?
When the state cannot guarantee your protection (they would be fools to do so) and therefore will never be held responsible for same, why does it make sense to disarm law-abiding citizens in violation of our country's and state's constitutions?
If the school Administrators didn't chose to carry a weapon, would they be at fault for being shot? Even if allowed, I can't believe that many would be wearing a gun around school, most likely it would be in a desk, locked up.
"If the school Administrators didn't chose to carry a weapon, would they be at fault for being shot?"
No, but there is a difference in choosing not to be prepared and being prevented from it. Their odds are a lot better if those good people willing to defend are allowed to do so. I believe you are right about the desk.
Laws don't prevent evil. They only deal with consequences. Some would-be evil-doers can be stopped by making the consequences undesirable enough, but not all of them - no matter what unthinking, zero-tolerance, type law is passed.
Your post is extremely distasteful and uncalled for. You should be ashamed of yourself.
ReplyDeleteBut how would your proposal to let teachers pack heat have helped?
ReplyDeleteWould you be as willing to draw down on the principal if she might be armed as well? Knowing if you did follow through that some of your co-workers would drop you before you leave the building?
ReplyDeleteMaybe you could answer why Foster surrendered when he found himself on the other end of a gun.
Should the state/school be liable for not preventing those employee's injuries when they were denied their constitutional right in order to work there?
When the state cannot guarantee your protection (they would be fools to do so) and therefore will never be held responsible for same, why does it make sense to disarm law-abiding citizens in violation of our country's and state's constitutions?
Don't stop there! Let's arm the kids, too! Yee-haw!
ReplyDeleteIf the school Administrators didn't chose to carry a weapon, would they be at fault for being shot? Even if allowed, I can't believe that many would be wearing a gun around school, most likely it would be in a desk, locked up.
ReplyDelete"If the school Administrators didn't chose to carry a weapon, would they be at fault for being shot?"
ReplyDeleteNo, but there is a difference in choosing not to be prepared and being prevented from it. Their odds are a lot better if those good people willing to defend are allowed to do so. I believe you are right about the desk.
Laws don't prevent evil. They only deal with consequences. Some would-be evil-doers can be stopped by making the consequences undesirable enough, but not all of them - no matter what unthinking, zero-tolerance, type law is passed.