Texas School District Will Let Teachers Carry Guns

[hosemonkey]

Funny, someone here said that he carried a gun so he wouldn’t be scared.

Who was it who said that…?

If someone carries a gun so that he will not be scared, he is carrying for the wrong reason. A person who is scared will often make faulty decisions, plus the fact that if you carry a deadly weapon, you must have already made up your mind that you will use that weapon if necessary. Someone who is not committed to that way of thinking will have their weapon taken away and possibly used against them. It is never easy to use deadly force, but sometimes very necessary. No one who has ever taken a life will ever forget it, even though that taking of life may be totally justified.

 

[hosemonkey]

When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation … and that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

Well said! As an illustration: most martial arts expert practitioners are very mellow, introspective people. By virtue of their expertise, they have the option of avoiding confrontation and violence. They can walk away from most situations. However, if the perpetrator insists upon confrontation, the martial artist is prepared to deal with it. Most of us do not have the time or dedication to devote years of training in a martial art, but we can devote the time and training to safely carry a handgun and know when and when not to use it. When you must deal with criminals who care nothing for the law and who have no respect for themselves or others, you must have recourse to a means of defense that the State cannot provide you, namely, a personal firearm. In times past, it would have been a sword. Even in ancient Rome, anyone on a journey was entitled to carry a sword to defend himself against thugs. All law-abiding citizens, with the proper training, should have similar rights.

 

[melensdad]

Funny, someone here said that he carried a gun so he wouldn’t be scared.

Who was it who said that…?

From what I can tell nobody in this thread! Where did you read it?

the national murder rate, which dropped significantly in the 90s, has been pretty much flat for about 8 years.

Nationally it has been on the rise and has gone from 5.5 to 5.6 to 5.7 from 2004 to 2006 respectively, with 2006 being the last year that I have data.

Even in ancient Rome, anyone on a journey was entitled to carry a sword to defend himself against thugs.

Wait, that makes sense.

I’m still trying to figure out why this action in Texas is news? Since some others areas already allow faculty members to have guns, can anyone who opposes this action show me where there has been one single incident of an unintentional shooting/injury in any of those areas?

Anyone?

 

[The_Barbarian]

Originally Posted by The Barbarian View Post
Funny, someone here said that he carried a gun so he wouldn’t be scared.

Who was it who said that…?
From what I can tell nobody in this thread! Where did you read it?

Right here.

I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid.

Sir Knight

A very sad admission. What an awful thing to need a gun so one is not afraid.

Barbarian observes:
the national murder rate, which dropped significantly in the 90s, has been pretty much flat for about 8 years.

Nationally it has been on the rise and has gone from 5.5 to 5.6 to 5.7 from 2004 to 2006 respectively, with 2006 being the last year that I have data.

Yep. Pretty much flat. Go back a little farther and see how much it dropped.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/totals.png

**Homicide rates recently declined to levels last seen in the late 1960’s

* The homicide rate nearly doubled from the mid 1960's to the late 1970's.

* In 1980, it peaked at 10.2 per 100,000 population and subsequently fell off to 7.9 per 100,000 in 1984.

* It rose again in the late 1980's and early 1990's to another peak in 1991 of 9.8 per 100,000.

* From 1992 to 2000, the rate declined sharply. Since then, the rate has been stable.**

United States Department of Justice

And yet some people are still afraid, if they don’t have their gun with them. What a sad existence that must be.

 

[KenEOTE]

Originally Posted by The Barbarian View Post
Funny, someone here said that he carried a gun so he wouldn’t be scared.

Who was it who said that…?
From what I can tell nobody in this thread! Where did you read it?

Right here.

Sir Knight

A very sad admission. What an awful thing to need a gun so one is not afraid.

Barbarian observes:
the national murder rate, which dropped significantly in the 90s, has been pretty much flat for about 8 years.

Yep. Pretty much flat. Go back a little farther and see how much it dropped.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/totals.png

**Homicide rates recently declined to levels last seen in the late 1960’s

* The homicide rate nearly doubled from the mid 1960's to the late 1970's.

* In 1980, it peaked at 10.2 per 100,000 population and subsequently fell off to 7.9 per 100,000 in 1984.

* It rose again in the late 1980's and early 1990's to another peak in 1991 of 9.8 per 100,000.

* From 1992 to 2000, the rate declined sharply. Since then, the rate has been stable.**

United States Department of Justice

And yet some people are still afraid, if they don’t have their gun with them. What a sad existence that must be.

Interesting. So in 1994 the rate started to decline. One fact that has been over looked is that in 1994 I bought my first hand gun. So I have come to the conclusion that my purchase of a hand gun brought the homocide rate down.

 

[melensdad]

I have come to the conclusion that my purchase of a hand gun brought the homocide rate down.

All I know is that if guns cause crime/murder/violence then I have a whole collection of guns that are defective Heck not even 1 single gun in my safe has ever jumped up and shot anyone. Now I’ll admit that a few have knocked some pop cans off the fenceline, others have ‘shattered’ the innocent lives of over ripe watermelons . . .

Barbarian, just for the record, Sir Knight did not say he carries a gun because he is afraid. He said it allows him to be unafraid. Subtle difference in linguistics, but an important one.

And yes, the murder rate did drop dramatically in the 90’s, I clearly never disputed that. It is, however, rising again, as both you and I point out. Why do you keep disputing the obvious when your numbers match my numbers?

 

[stanmaxkolbe]

To get a Concealed Handgun License (CHL) in the State of Texas you must:

† Be at least twenty one years old.
† Have submitted to a full and thorough finger print and background check.
† Training on Texas law and conflict resolution.
† Trained by an instructor certified by the Department of Public Safety DPS [State Police].
† Qualified on a DPS certified range.

Ø You don’t get a CHL to be a criminal!
Ø You don’t get a CHL to be a vigilante!
Ø You get a CHL to protect yourself!

 

[melensdad]

To get a Concealed Handgun License (CHL) in the State of Texas you must:

† Be at least twenty one years old.
† Have submitted to a full and thorough finger print and background check.
† Training on Texas law and conflict resolution.
† Trained by an instructor certified by the Department of Public Safety DPS [State Police].
† Qualified on a DPS certified range.

Ø You don’t get a CHL to be a criminal!
Ø You don’t get a CHL to be a vigilante!
Ø You get a CHL to protect yourself!

Realize that we are not talking about simply getting a CHL, the teachers/administrators have to also take special additional training at their own expense. They have to also take conflict resolution training. Even if they do that, they can NOT carry a gun onto the school grounds (legally) without further being cleared, in writing, by the school board. So there are all sorts of hoops these people go through, which no doubt are expensive for them to attain, and they may still be denied the ability if the school administration feels they are not, for whatever reason, worthy of carrying a gun to protect the children.

I’d also like to point out that there are states which allow people to carry guns without any training at all and in at least 1 (and I think 2) of those states they also allow, with permission, faculty to carry guns in school for the purpose of protecting students. Even in those states there are ZERO instances of accidents.

 

[hosemonkey]

Realize that we are not talking about simply getting a CHL, the teachers/administrators have to also take special additional training at their own expense. They have to also take conflict resolution training. Even if they do that, they can NOT carry a gun onto the school grounds (legally) without further being cleared, in writing, by the school board. So there are all sorts of hoops these people go through, which no doubt are expensive for them to attain, and they may still be denied the ability if the school administration feels they are not, for whatever reason, worthy of carrying a gun to protect the children.

I’d also like to point out that there are states which allow people to carry guns without any training at all and in at least 1 (and I think 2)

If I am not mistaken, the State of Vermont has no requirement for a CCW permit, a permit is not even required to carry a concealed handgun, yet Vermont is not infested with handgun crime. Why is this? Could it be that most citizens are law-abiding and can be trusted not to massacre each other?

 

[The_Barbarian]

Barbarian, just for the record, Sir Knight did not say he carries a gun because he is afraid. He said it allows him to be unafraid. Subtle difference in linguistics,

Difference in spin. Perhaps you don’t know what “linguistics” means. He’s afraid without his gun. Having it keeps him from being scared. How sad. His world must be very dark.

The saying goes: “Liberals are open and friendly because they think everyone is pretty much like they are; conservatives are suspicious and surly for the same reasons.” It’s a generalization, but one with some truth in it.

Guns don’t cause homicides, of course, they just make them easier to do, especially easier to do by mistake.

And yes, the murder rate did drop dramatically in the 90’s, I clearly never disputed that. It is, however, rising again, as both you and I point out.

Let’s see what the Department of Justice says…

*** From 1992 to 2000, the rate declined sharply. Since then, the rate has been stable.**

Sorry, they are more credible.

Why do you keep disputing the obvious when your numbers match my numbers?

A huge drop, followed by fluctuations of a percent or two doesn’t qualify as an increase. That’s why the DOJ points out that it’s been stable.

 

[The_Barbarian]

You don’t get a CHL to be a criminal!

Most people don’t. But in Texas, those with CHLs have a higher rate of firearms violations than most people.

And there are far more criminals with CHLs than there are people who attack children in school.

Another reason that it’s foolish to try to protect against an almost-nonexistent hazard with a greater hazard.

But it’s not about the kids, is it?

 

[Cristiano]

Most people don’t. But in Texas, those with CHLs have a higher rate of firearms violations than most people.

And there are far more criminals with CHLs than there are people who attack children in school.

Another reason that it’s foolish to try to protect against an almost-nonexistent hazard with a greater hazard.

But it’s not about the kids, is it?

Would you be so kind to prove your assertions.

 

[hosemonkey]

But it’s not about the kids, is it?

So, what, in your opinion,IS it about?

 

[KenEOTE]

So, what, in your opinion,IS it about?

Oh he answered that a while ago. Its an agenda. But don’t call it a conspiracy. Its just and agenda by people who want people not to be afraid of guns and make them more mainstream.

I am guessing the agenda is to have people more educated about guns, and to undertand how to use them properly. Which is a bad thing. Anytime you there is any kind of education it should be stopped.

 

[stanmaxkolbe]

Most people don’t. But in Texas, those with CHLs have a higher rate of firearms violations than most people.

And there are far more criminals with CHLs than there are people who attack children in school.

Another reason that it’s foolish to try to protect against an almost-nonexistent hazard with a greater hazard.

But it’s not about the kids, is it?

As the next poster said can you prove this do you have a link?

 

[melensdad]

Let’s see what the Department of Justice says…

*** From 1992 to 2000, the rate declined sharply. Since then, the rate has been stable.**

Barbarian, first, I agreed with you that there was a large drop in those years. But why are you disputing the fact that the murder rate climbed 1 tenth of a point each year for the years 2004, 2005 and 2006, using numbers on a website you cited? I use your source and you still argue with me?

Did you forget your meds this morning

 

[Sir_Knight]

Barbarian, just for the record, Sir Knight did not say he carries a gun because he is afraid. He said it allows him to be unafraid. Subtle difference in linguistics,

Fear is meant to alert of to a potential danger. The prudent individual takes steps to address that possible danger. Once that is done, there is nothing to be afraid of.

Why do people have smoke detectors and fire extinguishers in their homes? Isn’t it because they are “afraid” of having a fire? Do they “live in fear”? No. Why do people wear seatbelts? Isn’t it because they are “afraid” of being injuried in an accident? We prepare for other dangers in life. Why is it alright to prepare oneself from one type of danger but “sad” to protect oneself from another type of danger?

 

[KenEOTE]

Fear is meant to alert of to a potential danger. The prudent individual takes steps to address that possible danger. Once that is done, there is nothing to be afraid of.

Why do people have smoke detectors and fire extinguishers in their homes? Isn’t it because they are “afraid” of having a fire? Do they “live in fear”? No. Why do people wear seatbelts? Isn’t it because they are “afraid” of being injuried in an accident? We prepare for other dangers in life. Why is it alright to prepare oneself from one type of danger but “sad” to protect oneself from another type of danger?

Oh Please… Only people afraid of fire would use a smoke detector. I for one am not afraid so I wont use one. I am not afraid of going through my windshield. Heck when I drive at night I don’t even turn my lights on cause I am not afraid of driving in the dark.

 

[hosemonkey]

Oh Please… Only people afraid of fire would use a smoke detector. I for one am not afraid so I wont use one. I am not afraid of going through my windshield. Heck when I drive at night I don’t even turn my lights on cause I am not afraid of driving in the dark.

OK, I dig the heavy irony. IMO, folks like Barbarian, those with the typical “liberal” mindset cannot stand the idea that there just may be another way of approaching life. They loathe and fear guns because they are unfamiliar with them and carry around all sorts of misconceptions as to what the place of firearms and weapons in general is in our society. I am sure that if we had our firearms removed from us a la the Brits and the Australians, they would have the same level of and paranoia about knives, for example. With the general liberalization of carry laws and the establishment of the second amendment as a fundamental right (finally properly interpreted) we have not seen an explosion of gun crimes among law-abiding citizens. Who commits gun crimes? Thugs and hoodlums who care nothing for the law anyhow, getting busted for carrying a firearm is merely an occupational hazard. “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns”, is not merely a bumper sticker, but a statement of fact. In my opinion, what is lacking in our society, is a general loss of the sense of outrage at what the thugs and outlaws have forced us to become. WHY to we have to create gulags of our schools? Why are we even discussing the necessity of teachers carrying guns? Because the yahoo culture has taken over. I say this, look at the takeover of our cities by gangs. I would like to see an outraged, decent populace issue a warning to these scum and then start decorating the lampposts with festive gangbangers. There are still more of us than there are of them and I’ll bet the forces of light would prevail. Extreme? Yup. But I’ll bet we would get their attention. In 1865, in Virginia City, Montana, Henry Plummer’s gang was making life miserable. The miners finally got sick of it and hung Henry and 13 of his cohorts from the rafters of a house under construction. All the remaining bad guys departed for more congenial territory and life returned to normal. I can hear the liberals gnashing their teeth, but our society needs a good scrubbing. Wishful thinking on my part, perhaps, but that’s how I see it. A pox on all liberals.

 

[john1863]

Gee,

Could Davey Cockett have been wrong?

John