Are teachers willing to carry guns in schools? 18% say yes

Yes, very true, and it may be a higher number eventually.

 

The same applies to the numerous firearm-related restrictions that have been proposed in the last month as if they held actual merit, when they do not.

 

I agree its a mentality of the far left public education people who object to teachers (or anyone) carrying in school. People carry all the time in all kinds of environments, without any problems.

 

Whether its 18% of every teacher in every school, or just 18% of schools, it does not matter. It removes the stupid "gun free zone" from schools and that might be all that's needed. The killer does not know which schools are defenseless unless a school declares itself "gun free".

The mass killers want to avoid a fight, they want an easy defenseless victim. When confronted by an armed person, the killers almost universally either commit suicide or surrender. They want "gun free" targets.

And if its only 1 in 5 schools, so what? Its better than 0 in 5.

Your complaint is without merit.

 

Those 100% of gun free schools elsewhere in the developed world must be quite jealous!

 

You mean like Monash University in Australia? You better get educated on the subject.

 

82% not willing is an even more significant number

 

It is now a gun free zone now more or less. Wasn’t so much then

BTW not a mass shooting by FBI criteria

Happened 16 years ago now

And the shooter was disarmed by an unarmed bystander

 

Really?

Got proof???

http://concealedcarrykillers.org/mass-shootings-committed-by-concealed-carry-killers/

 

There is zero evidence of whether the sign gun free has any impact on a mass shooters decision

 

Really? What are the odds that they will be able to react get to the kill zone assess the situation and fire before a dozen kids are dead?

 

I know a teacher who recently retired who carried a concealed pistol discreetly on his person for years in school. No one ever noticed it, and it never became an issue. It was against school rules, but he refused to be a potential helpless victim.

Given good, high quality training, I have no problem with this.

 

Google it, its easy to find.
http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/10/r...mit-holders-are-more-law-abiding-than-police/

The report, titled, “Concealed Carry Permit Holders Across The United States 2016,” compared permit holders to the general population and then to police officers in Florida and Texas, two states which largely mirror the rest of the country.

The data revealed that from 2005 to 2007, “there were 103 crimes per 100,000 police officers,” while the U.S. population’s crime rate is 37 times that number.

Permit holders are convicted of felonies and misdemeanors at less than a sixth of the rate of police officers, according to the study. Officers also commit firearm violations, 16.5 per 100,000, seven times more frequently than permit holders, at only 2.4 per 100,000 in Texas and Florida.​

A VPC link? VPC is totally discredited, and that claim in your link particularly discredited. Concealed carry had nothing to do with the vast majority of the incidents listed. Google that too.

 

When you have to rely on a weapon like a gun for protection you have already lost

In my day here in Aus WE had teachers that could not only stop a gun man with one ice cold look but they could deactivate the gun by lodging a piece of chalk in the barrel after tossing it from 200 yards away WHILST still shielding the class with an up turned desk!

 

He shot 7, the fact he was a bad shot and did not kill enough to be counted as a "mass killer" is not relevant. It was 6 years after the hyped and failed AUS gun ban, the AUS gun ban fanatics ratcheted up their gun control, proving that gun banners in their myopic world will never be satisfied with anything short of a total gun ban.

 

Oh my!!!!

And guess who is the source for the so called research? None other than the disgraced academic John Lottt!!

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/thinkprogress.org/debunking-john-lott-5456e83cf326/amp/

And the only place the PC is discredited is on Lotts and the NRAs blog sites

 

We did not enact a total gun ban. It was after the Monash shooting that the laws in Victoria were changed

 

WRONG. As usual.

The Aurora theater killer selected that theater - as opposed to several other closer theaters - because it was "gun free", it advertised it was "gun free". He researched potential targets, selected that theater, visited it.

And here https://crimeresearch.org/2014/09/m...ty-on-guns-analysis-of-recent-mass-shootings/
in which all public mass shootings are listed, the huge majority are in "gun free" zones.

I know you will whine about the source, but you can download his spreadsheet and check it yourself - if you have the integrity, that is.

 

Thinkprogress.org? Wow, you went from the totally discredited VPC to the openly and self-admitted political PR outlet Thinkprogress. Total absolute FAIL.

And there is a difference between your false claims and Lott - Lott provides his data on his web site for all to check. Got the guts to go check it?

 

I did not write "total gun ban". AUS banned almost all semi-auto center fire rifles, many shotguns, and most calibers of handguns. The claim was that it would improve public safety, all it did was reduce an already very low gun-related homicide rate in exchange for a massive increase in sexual assaults, assaults with severe bodily injury, robbery (including armed robbery). I wonder what the gun banners who lied to the AUS people tell all the raped women and severely beaten people.

But you know all this, as you have seen the data, and even posted the AIC chart that proves it.

 

I got a smile from that.

So it is with all due respect .... but "you've lost" when some whacko kills you where you work, and you had no means to fight back because your employer ordered you to be helpless. That's really losing.

The teacher I spoke of I know well. He not only had a way to defend himself, but his students as well. The ability he possessed to protect them and himself outweighs any philosophical "loss". Nobody knew about it. Nobody was frightened about it. Nobody was harmed in any way, shape, or form because of it. But, unbeknownst to them, in his classroom, they were being protected.

 

John Lott again

Sorry but he has less credibility than whatever level you claim the VPC has

He has been caught blatantly altering outcomes of research

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lott

Now just how does Lott explain away James Holmes own diary notes?

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/05/james-holmes-diary-aurora-gun-free-zones-debunked/

 

My point is, and I guess this is an Aussie thing

Murphy Rules

The most consistent law any and everywhere is that the perversity of the universe tends to a maximum or as it is more commonly stated

Whatever can go wrong will at the worst possible time.

So rest assured the one time a gun will be needed will be the one time it is not where it should be loaded how it should be. So, given that the gun will be useless you start thinking of every other way to get to the same outcome.

 

You have NEVER proved anything other than the fact that data can and is cherry picked

 

This graph shows a downward trend in gun deaths, before, and after the gun ban. So it didn't really have much of a positive, or negative effect relating to gun deaths at all.

Basically, if you didn't know the year the gun ban happened, and they were colored the same, you wouldn't know when Australia had their buy back by looking at the graph. Could've been any year where it's a noticeable drop or rise compared to random fluctuations.