OK let me understand this. FEWER homes have swimming pools than contain guns. MORE kids accidently die in swimming pools than by gun accident.
My wife is a teacher, both she and I believe she is a ‘sitting duck’ and should, if she chooses, and is capable to qualify in accord with the school district rules, be allowed to carry a concealed firearm on her person to protect her students and herself.you confuse me melensdad…lol…are you for or against these teachers being allowed to carry guns?
Interestingly if you look at a ‘functional’ home where nobody in the house is a ‘domestic abuser’ a ‘felon’ or a ‘drug abuser’ then you will find that the violence in homes is statistically non-existent. However, you will find that guns in the homes do not cause increases in violence. Violence is separate and apart from gun ownership. Guns may be used in violence. But there is no cause-effect relationship. You are either violent or you are not. If you are violent you may choose to use any number of weapons from feet and fists to guns, cars, baseball bats or, dare I say, swimming pools
The fact is that a gun does tend to make things more lethal, no doubt about that, but it does not correlate to causing violence.Yes.
On the subject of how you store a firearm, there are factors that everyone must consider, and do what is best for their family. If you live where the risk of someone breaking in is significant (perhaps along the Mexican Border?), you may want to have a loaded weapon with you at all times. If you are a gun owner, have small children, and the risk of a break in is not high, you may want to keep the gun(s) in a safe place that is accessible in emergencies. We seem to have been talking mainly to people that know firearms. Shooting cans and targets is fun for kids, but you can not teach children what you don’t know. If you grew up in a home that did not have any firearms and you are not sure you want one, I recommend that you take the CCW course, and then decide if you want to own one.
If no one had access to guns…only police and our military…**in a perfect world…there would be less violence. **This is my opinon. I would not want my kids going to a school…where the teacher, if he/she snaps…can just grab a gun and start shooting. I don’t agree with it…it just seems like we are not treating the real problem, and just compounding the problem.Interestingly if you look at a ‘functional’ home where nobody in the house is a ‘domestic abuser’ a ‘felon’ or a ‘drug abuser’ then you will find that the violence in homes is statistically non-existent. However, you will find that guns in the homes do not cause increases in violence. Violence is separate and apart from gun ownership. Guns may be used in violence. But there is no cause-effect relationship. You are either violent or you are not. If you are violent you may choose to use any number of weapons from feet and fists to guns, cars, baseball bats or, dare I say, swimming pools
But what would keep the police and military from snapping? The reason we have the right to bear arms is just in case you do need protection. If the military was the only one with weapons, what is keeping them from making it a police state. Who would then be able to fight or defend against the one who have all the weapons?
You’ve noticed that too, eh wabrams?
That’s not how Barbarian works, melensdad. He ignores any evidence that presented to him, and simply repeats his pet mantras over and over again, as if nothing has been said, then accuses you of not knowing what you’re talking about.
Sounds like a rational approach to me. In the late 70s, the National Safety Council did a study based on accidental shootings, and NRA data on the number of people who had protected themselves by shooting or scaring off an intruder, that about 20% of Americans lived in places sufficiently dangerous that keeping a gun was safer than not having one.
did right to bear arms…extend to this though? I always viewed that ‘right’ as being for one’s security or protecting home, and family…it seems like we are stretching it to be applied everywhere…in public settings. I am asking the question…I don’t know what to make of it.
The ting is it doesn’t sound like anyone is being forced to carry a gun, or discharge it. They are being allowed to have a concealed weapon. I would view it differently if the State was giving each teacher a gun and require that they keep it with them at all times.
hmmm…that’s true.
The whole story makes for a great after school special. Maybe Kirk Cameron could play a teacher with a gun.
It’s a reasonable argument, and why the Constitution assures the right to keep and bear arms. In the days of muskets and solid shot cannon, a tyrant would need a huge army to keep down an armed citizenry.
I’m sorry but I find this post utterly repulsive. You claim you are being personally attacked? No sir you are not. I see no evidence of that. What I do see is that you ignore the truth, repeat lies, and claim falsehoods as if they are proclamations issued by King Henry VIII – with an attitude of ‘convert or die’ supremacy that rings very hollow!
I respect your opinion but history proves you dead wrong.
did right to bear arms…extend to this though? **I always viewed that ‘right’ as being for one’s security **or protecting home, and family…it seems like we are stretching it to be applied everywhere…in public settings. I am asking the question…I don’t know what to make of it.
The right actually varies from state to state as each state has its own constitutional document, some guarantee the right with near absolute clarity, others not so much.