The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: MikeBjerum on December 28, 2012, 11:39:30 AM
-
Arizona Attorney General is pushing for a minimum of one armed staff member in each school. They are also paying for training in concealed carry for any teacher that wishes.
-
My S-I-L was just talking about this at Christmas. Have a gun in a locker that is accessible if needed. I think two authorized people would be better, or even 5 if the gun is in a locker. Gives the staff more of a chance to get to the weapon and accounts for sick days, etc.
-
I believe that as this progresses it will take common sense twists to allowing approved and trained staff to carry. I found it interesting that they are willing to pay up to $600 per person for any school staff that wants, but talking about only one staff member per school with a firearm or firearm access.
Wait and see, but so far it is a positive move.
-
Having the pistol in an unmonitored locker opens the potential for theft.
On body carry for teachers who have valid CCW costs the school nothing and assures that the fire arm is accountable at all times.
-
Yeah, but On-body carry is too scary and meets with heavy resistance. Two Gunvaults mounted out-of-the-way would make the weapons reasonably secure but available...like a fire extinguisher. It doesn't do anything for CCW laws, but I think it's a workable idea and worth trying, because unlike the gungrabbers I am actually interested in protecting kids in school.
-
CCW is the safest and best plan, and we must not give on that. Unless they are going to have vaults with ready handguns every place these staffers go in the building it is line the carry gun that never leaves the storage place at home. Not with you is like not at all!
-
CCW is the safest and best plan, and we must not give on that. Unless they are going to have vaults with ready handguns every place these staffers go in the building it is line the carry gun that never leaves the storage place at home. Not with you is like not at all!
I agree that it is the best way, but if locked up guns gets them into the schools legally it is moving in the right direction.
-
I agree that it is the best way, but if locked up guns gets them into the schools legally it is moving in the right direction.
While I sota agree, it's going to take another tragedy for one of two things to happen.
1. The libs say that a gun in the closet didn't work. take it out.
2. Keeping it in the closet didn't work so put it on body.
Which do you think is most likely. Either way it'll take another tragedy.
-
I know that we are already viewed as extreme and over the top, but we need to remember that the two main groups getting places, abortion rights and homosexual rights, have both told us that we are too quiet and compromising. We need to stay strong and loud in our demands. We need to hammer them with facts and not let up!
It is Solus suggestion that has gotten us to the point we are in today with regulations and bans. Since 1934 we have bargained our rights away in the name of compromise, and all the time we have let them label us as extreme and unreasonable.
ENOUGH !!!
I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore!
-
I know that we are already viewed as extreme and over the top, but we need to remember that the two main groups getting places, abortion rights and homosexual rights, have both told us that we are too quiet and compromising. We need to stay strong and loud in our demands. We need to hammer them with facts and not let up!
It is Solus suggestion that has gotten us to the point we are in today with regulations and bans. Since 1934 we have bargained our rights away in the name of compromise, and all the time we have let them label us as extreme and unreasonable.
ENOUGH !!!
I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore!
You are right only if you shut up and go away after the first step.
Instead, keep pushing....cops in schools don't have their weapons locked up. Guns being locked up in the school didn't bring the walls down or bolts of lightening from the sky.
Every legislation session push to have to move to where it should be..
I look at some of the AWB stuff put out there and am glad they are looking for everything at once. Either confiscation or $200 stamp for every semi-auto. Asking for all that at once is the best way to lose.
-
You are right only if you shut up and go away after the first step.
Instead, keep pushing....cops in schools don't have their weapons locked up. Guns being locked up in the school didn't bring the walls down or bolts of lightening from the sky.
Every legislation session push to have to move to where it should be..
I look at some of the AWB stuff put out there and am glad they are looking for everything at once. Either confiscation or $200 stamp for every semi-auto. Asking for all that at once is the best way to lose.
Solus is wrong.
Sales figures show we have the population numbers to take what we want from the outdated discredit gun banners .
It's time to flex our muscle.
-
Solus is wrong.
Sales figures show we have the population numbers to take what we want from the outdated discredit gun banners .
It's time to flex our muscle.
Sales figures don't necessarily show that. Could be that the majority of the purchases are by those already pro 2A, just expanding their collection.
And because someone buys a gun doesn't mean they want to see teachers packing in school. Some here have not been totally in support of that idea.
-
Sales figures don't necessarily show that. Could be that the majority of the purchases are by those already pro 2A, just expanding their collection.
And because someone buys a gun doesn't mean they want to see teachers packing in school. Some here have not been totally in support of that idea.
Every sale of an AR or AK is a person investing several hundred $ in the proposition that if anything we will achieve less restrictions .
The idea that the numbers are primarily "adding to collections is ridiculous.
The surge in sales has been growing to consistently for to long to support that thinking.
-
Solus,
Your theory of take a small victory, shut up, attack, shut up, attack, ... is exactly what the other activist groups say we are doing wrong. The successful groups have attacked, attacked hard, and even today with all a group like abortion rights they do not back off.
Have you ever tried to purchase a suppressor? That process is what take a little and shut up has gotten us. Today the whole class three mess is so deeply entrenched in the government and the minds of the sheeple who do not even understand it that we will have a tough fight resisting its expansion, much less its repeal.
-
Solus, if m58 and I both agree on this then you must be wrong.
-
Solus,
Your theory of take a small victory, shut up, attack, shut up, attack, ... is exactly what the other activist groups say we are doing wrong. The successful groups have attacked, attacked hard, and even today with all a group like abortion rights they do not back off.
Have you ever tried to purchase a suppressor? That process is what take a little and shut up has gotten us. Today the whole class three mess is so deeply entrenched in the government and the minds of the sheeple who do not even understand it that we will have a tough fight resisting its expansion, much less its repeal.
I never said shut up...I said DON'T shut up
I think many more people will accept armed security guards in the schools...Military or police officers... than arming teachers..the way it should be done.
As soon as that is in place, the logistics problems will present themselves and rather than take away that protection, other options will be considered. Parents are looking to volunteer for school security. That will keep guns in the schools, but still out of the classrooms...which will be more attractive to some ...and a pretty workable solution.
From there, arming teachers as the 'last line of defense' will be easier.
Are you going to tell me it will be as easy to convince folks to arm every teacher who wants to carry than it will to convince them that we need armed guards in the schools?
And about the sales. I said it could be to collections. We don't know. You made the statement it was proof we had more support. Show me that proof. Show me the number of first time buyers in the sales.
And then show me that most of those first time buyers agree teachers should be armed.
And if anything, this buying indicates the belief that restrictions will increase...or why the buying frenzy?
If we have such sure support, why not require gun safety and marksmanship training be made available for all the students as part of the package? I, for one, think that would be the ideal approach.
-
Now here is the way to get teachers armed. And then let them do the pushing to get 'permission' to carry on school grounds.
After the mass murder at a Newtown, Connecticut elementary school, Buckeye Firearms Foundation announced that they would provide free firearms training to teachers and school administrative staff.
So far, the Armed Teacher Training Program has attracted more than 600 applicants from all parts of Ohio and several from other states, including Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, and West Virginia. More teachers inquire about the program every day.
http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/8709
-
Rob Pincus has a program going, and he has been offering it to teachers at schools. It sounds like they have already done a couple classes. I can't remember the name of the program, it starts with an S, but it can be found at the I.C.E. website.
I believe that now is the time for the gun culture ( firearms trainers, NRA, etc.) to show the self defense and awareness programs they have been offering and developing for years. The anti's think we are just shoot em up, and now is the time for us to show everything we do and the benefits of it.
-
Some of you guys remind me of a story told about the first meeting between Nikita Krushchev and JFK in Vienna.
JFK: Let's talk instead of fighting all the time.
NK: Okay. Give me your wallet and your watch.
JFK: Wait a minute. Let's negotiate.
NK: Okay. Just give me your wallet!
Moral of the story: Never negotiate with what is already yours, only with what is his! (old Russian proverb?) In other words, stop acting like Republicans.
-
Some of you guys remind me of a story told about the first meeting between Nikita Krushchev and JFK in Vienna.
JFK: Let's talk instead of fighting all the time.
NK: Okay. Give me your wallet and your watch.
JFK: Wait a minute. Let's negotiate.
NK: Okay. Just give me your wallet!
Moral of the story: Never negotiate with what is already yours, only with what is his! (old Russian proverb?) In other words, stop acting like Republicans.
So, did JFK give him his wallet?
Didn't work, huh?
-
Solus, it didn't? Do any of us have any idea of how much borrowed money we pour into Russia today to clean up Krushchev's ( et al) nuclear mess? We don't need half measures that we convince ourselves are victories.
-
What Solus is advocating are the same type of foolish half measures that led to stalemate in Korea, loss in Vn., and quagmire in Afghanistan .
If you are going into a battle you go to win a complete victory or you are a fool.
Whether it is with tanks and bombs or political influence the principle is the same.
Half measures are for losers who don't learn from history.
The only proper attitude is that "the debate is over, Shall not be infringed means what it says ."
-
What Solus is advocating are the same type of foolish half measures that led to stalemate in Korea, loss in Vn., and quagmire in Afghanistan .
If you are going into a battle you go to win a complete victory or you are a fool.
Whether it is with tanks and bombs or political influence the principle is the same.
Half measures are for losers who don't learn from history.
The only proper attitude is that "the debate is over, Shall not be infringed means what it says ."
So you say to throw everything into the first engagement rather than a series of engagements that lead to total victory?
We both are looking at the same objective, I just think it is wiser to keep pushing and pushing, obtaining one sure goal each time than rushing headlong toward a very risky initial objective.
-
You know... I was thinking about 'having the same objective' and I think we do...but I question if it is the correct objective for this problem.
For sure an armed populace is the best way to insure folks are protected as efficiently as possible.
This would also apply to kids at school...it is the most efficient way to give them the protection required...having every responsible and willing adult carrying.
But the object we should be looking at for this problem is how to get the kids protected soonest which is, IMHO, not going to be getting CC approved for teachers while in school.
The quickest way is to get Peace Officers and/or military personnel assigned as 'guards'. Since those folks carrying is already accepted, and using them as armed security is already accepted also, it is a much smaller and easily accepted step to have them in the schools.
-
You know... I was thinking about 'having the same objective' and I think we do...but I question if it is the correct objective for this problem.
For sure an armed populace is the best way to insure folks are protected as efficiently as possible.
This would also apply to kids at school...it is the most efficient way to give them the protection required...having every responsible and willing adult carrying.
But the object we should be looking at for this problem is how to get the kids protected soonest which is, IMHO, not going to be getting CC approved for teachers while in school.
The quickest way is to get Peace Officers and/or military personnel assigned as 'guards'. Since those folks carrying is already accepted, and using them as armed security is already accepted also, it is a much smaller and easily accepted step to have them in the schools.
Great idea Solus.
Then, in order to cut down on violent street crime we can have troops and cops on every street corner.
They could check everybodies ID cards, and question them about what they're doing, where they're going, and where they are coming from .
Maybe you would rather just move to Cuba, or North Korea where they already do those things ?
Or maybe you haven't learned anything in the last 60 years and think kissing liberal ass will actually get you some where ?
It will, but not any where a thinking person wants to be.
-
It's not all or nothing, Tom...no matter how much you want to make it seem that way.
As the left is pushing for a total ban on firearms and are willing to let kids die in the mean time to achieve it, you are pushing for for total honoring of our 2A rights, and willing to let kids die in the mean time to achieve it,
-
So you're willing to only give up some of OUR last remaining freedom ?
Don't you realize it's people like you who put us in this situation in the first place ?
Are you so dense, or spineless that you STILL have not figured out that you can not get a little bit f*cked ?
-
So you're willing to only give up some of OUR last remaining freedom ?
Don't you realize it's people like you who put us in this situation in the first place ?
Are you so dense, or spineless that you STILL have not figured out that you can not get a little bit f*cked ?
Show me where I said I was willing to give up any freedom?
Tell me that getting the populace used to thinking 'good guys with guns' is the way to protection doesn't further our cause.
I've not read Alinsky, but I've heard you reference him often. Tell me...would he advocate taking small steps to gain our goals while conditioning the opposition to acceptance of our goals.
And putting them on the defensive over an issue they will likely loose while we push for more?
-
Show me where I said I was willing to give up any freedom?
Tell me that getting the populace used to thinking 'good guys with guns' is the way to protection doesn't further our cause.
I've not read Alinsky, but I've heard you reference him often. Tell me...would he advocate taking small steps to gain our goals while conditioning the opposition to acceptance of our goals.
And putting them on the defensive over an issue they will likely loose while me push for more?
That would be fine and dandy if you were actually advocating progress.
What you in fact are doing is reinforcing the communist mantra that only police and troops are qualified to protect Americans .
Alinsky would not advocate taking small steps.
He would advocate disrupting the oppositions rallies and beating up their candidates if blame could be shifted elsewhere.
He would advocate demonizing, and ridiculing any who do not follow the hard line .
He would point out that newspapers publishing names of permit holders is good for us, if we can get it done in San Francisco DiFi's name can be highlighted.
-
That would be fine and dandy if you were actually advocating progress.
What you in fact are doing is reinforcing the communist mantra that only police and troops are qualified to protect Americans .
Alinsky would not advocate taking small steps.
He would advocate disrupting the oppositions rallies and beating up their candidates if blame could be shifted elsewhere.
He would advocate demonizing, and ridiculing any who do not follow the hard line .
He would point out that newspapers publishing names of permit holders is good for us, if we can get it done in San Francisco DiFi's name can be highlighted.
Then not pushing for the abolishment of all police and the military is also reinforcing that belief .
And if Alinsky would turn down small steps that further the cause, he is a fool.
-
Moderation in pursuit of liberty is no virtue.
-
Moderation in pursuit of liberty is no virtue.
And extremism is no vice. It might lead to a sound defeat and a blown chance at an advance, but it is no vice.
I think we've made our points of view clear?
I'll think about what you have said.
Take care.
-
http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?topic=21460.msg268362#new
Still want "little steps ?
It's time to sh!t or get 0off the pot .
All the Fudds , cowards and sheep can go hide, the last real Americans will again attempt to rescue the freedoms you don't deserve.