Meeting at Elementary School.....kids/guns/frustration....


PDA






PCRCCW
April 2, 2003, 09:19 AM
I had a meeting with the school staff about one of my kids...nothing bad...just learning concerns....ADHD etc...

During the meeting the staff, Principal, Counselor, Phsycologist, teachers etc...were discussing issues while we filled out paperwork...no big deal.

AND THEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The Principal says "Guns in schools....this has got to stop....there is no need for guns in schools......ever....this CCW cowboy crap has got to stop".....Im trying not to jump out of my skin..........

The start a discussion...and before I know it....I ask her point blank "Would you disarm police when entering the school?"
She says "No...Why?"......
What is the difference between a CCW permit holder and Police officer when it comes to a person carrying a gun, their safety level and reasons to make them different?".....
"Permit holders are the Good Guys whether you want to admit it or not!".........
The whole staff is looking at me like.....OK , wheres your gun.....(It was at 4.00 Oclock :D )
She looked confused at me...and said that we should get on with the meeting.....We agreed to disagree.........

I hold my malice against people with twisted, stupid, opinionated, closed minded, shallow, misinformed views...normally anyway...but this was just plain and simple bias gleeming through.

The staff was questioning the whole thing.....I could tell by their faces.....I got them thinking.....LOL

I just wanted to pass on this.......therapy!

Shoot well.....

If you enjoyed reading about "Meeting at Elementary School.....kids/guns/frustration...." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
mini14jac
April 2, 2003, 09:48 AM
Way to go!
At least you spoke up, and it sounds like you did it in a civil, non-threatening way.
Kudos.

I read a newspaper article titled "Imagine there were no guns.".
It started by paraphrasing the John Lennon song.
I saw the author's email address, and I sent her a line.
I was really shocked when she answered me back.
I had quoted the book "More guns, less crime" and some other statistics.
Her first reply was rather sarcastic.
I emailed here again.
We exchanged about 5 emails that day.

She ended up saying that she had horses that she loved, and the day before, a friend had been killed by his horse.
She said she wouldn't want to lose her horse, because someone had been killed by one!

Just keep sharing the facts, in a civil manner.
The liberals haven't won yet.

gwalchmai
April 2, 2003, 10:09 AM
PCRCCW, I believe there should be no restrictions whatsoever on carrying by CCW holders. We have submitted to an invasion of our privacy by the state and have been shown to be law abiding citizens. Restricting us implies that we are somehow likely to abuse our carry rights. I further feel that all LACs should be allowed to carry openly without any licensing by the state.

I'm curious about your meeting. Did the principal just come out with this statement out of the blue or did something precipitate it? Have there been incidents in that school of students or staff carrying firearms?

Admiral Thrawn
April 2, 2003, 10:29 AM
Great job!!! :D

Greg L
April 2, 2003, 10:33 AM
How did the subject even come up? :confused:

Greg

TechBrute
April 2, 2003, 10:38 AM
I hold my malice against people with twisted, stupid, opinionated, closed minded, shallow, misinformed views...normally anyway...but this was just plain and simple bias gleeming through. Yeah, but isn't it annoying that these are the people "educating" your child?

Betty
April 2, 2003, 11:16 AM
PCRCCW,
You made people at a staff meeting think? How could you!:p

It is amazing how quickly people change subjects when they start thinking. :scrutiny:

Bonker
April 2, 2003, 11:24 AM
Thank God I live in Texas. My principal is a shooter too :)

Don Gwinn
April 2, 2003, 11:25 AM
You were right, but be careful now. The teachers in that meeting may now consider you to be one of the "nutty" parents. Whether they admit it or not, all teachers have certain parents they consider fools or worse. It should not affect their treatment of the student, but sometimes it does.

On the other hand, some in that meeting may have agreed with you. It all depends on how brave they are and how passionate the administration is.

UnknownSailor
April 2, 2003, 11:36 AM
The latent paranoid in me would be more concerned that the school administration might take it upon themselves to report you to CPS, for abuse and/or neglect.

gogetumnow
April 2, 2003, 12:07 PM
The teachers union here in Utah is hellbent on preventing CCW here in schools. (churches too). It's a pretty hot-button topic around here.

Good job, you stood your ground! It really chaps my hide when these so called "open minded" liberals assume everybody shares their same views.

shootist2121
April 2, 2003, 12:19 PM
PCRCCW....Correct me if I'm wrong..Please!...But were you not in violation of Federal Law by having a firearm on your person and on school grounds?

I applaud your stance but you broke the law by being arm if I understand the law...I am believe CCW permit doesn't allow it unless you are LEO.

So jump in everybody and clear up my understanding here please.

:confused:

gwalchmai
April 2, 2003, 12:21 PM
I saw nothing in PCR's post to indicate he was armed at the time. Did I miss something?

shootist2121
April 2, 2003, 12:23 PM
"The whole staff is looking at me like.....OK , wheres your gun.....(It was at 4.00 Oclock )"

I assumed by that statement that he had his weapon on his right rear hip...Correct me if I miss understood.



:confused:

gwalchmai
April 2, 2003, 12:27 PM
I took that to mean the staff looked at him in an inquiring manner wondering whether he was packing. I assumed that the meeting was being held at 4 PM. Maybe you're right. ;)

spacemanspiff
April 2, 2003, 12:31 PM
federal law does trump state law....

so if the MEETING was at 4 oclock, how long did it take? were you outta there by 4:30?

Leatherneck
April 2, 2003, 12:57 PM
Spiff: good catch! :D :D :D

TC
TFL Survivor

Double Maduro
April 2, 2003, 01:13 PM
shootist2121,

Correct me if I'm wrong..Please!...But were you not in violation of Federal Law by having a firearm on your person and on school grounds?

Actually the law varies from state to state. Here in Oregon it is legal to carry in public schools with your chl.

shootist2121
April 2, 2003, 01:27 PM
Thanks to all for clearing it up a clear as mud...LOL

I believe spiff is still correct that Federal law beats local..
But since I live here in the great state of Misery..Missouri we don't have the option yet...But we're tryin...Very trying..


:p :p

Double Maduro
April 2, 2003, 01:49 PM
Can you cite the federal law that applies?

I grew up in Arnold, Misery and have spelled and pronounced it that way for many, many years. lol

spacemanspiff
April 2, 2003, 02:11 PM
for some funny reason, my boss wants me to work during business hours, so i cant search for the fed laws right now. maybe you could take a shortcut and call your district attorneys office?
i learned of this federal law when i took the class for my CHL. my state laws allow a firearm only to be stored in a vehicle while on school grounds (except for LEO on official business), but federal law states that the firearm must be locked in a container in the vehicle while on school grounds. only LEO on official business can carry (open or concealed) while on school grounds.

the only exceptions my state has on this law is that in rural areas a person may carry a firearm ACROSS school grounds with the express permission of the school and only if the person is engaged in an activity like hunting that obviously requires the use of a firearm.

Correia
April 2, 2003, 02:13 PM
CCW in schools is legal in Utah. But it has been our Antis pet battle for the last couple years.

PCRCCW
April 2, 2003, 02:33 PM
Its completely legal to carry in schools in UT......PERIOD!
Just have a second...had to jump in and out.....Shoot well.

gwalchmai
April 2, 2003, 02:39 PM
Sounds like an enlightened attitude. I wish it were that way in GA.

atek3
April 2, 2003, 04:48 PM
<rant mode>
If you can, get your kids out of the public schools, especially while they are young and impressionable. Public schools are government mandated indoctrination centers that seek to inculcate children with socialism and statism. If you can't afford private school indepedantly, try getting your child a scholarship. Look into montessori schools, try home schooling. Anything but public schools. Especially for "young boy syndrome" aka ADHD.

Or Don't.
</rant mode>

nascarnhlnra
April 2, 2003, 05:02 PM
Great job ! Some folks just can't figure out that places that don't allow C.C.W.'s are easier targets for terrorists and other scum of the world.

Double Maduro
April 2, 2003, 05:29 PM
every guy I went to school with would have been diagnosed ADHD.

The school gets money for giving the kids the pills. If the school says your Child is ADHD take them to your own doctor for an evaluation.

bogie
April 2, 2003, 06:19 PM
Yeah - a lot of ADHD kids are actually just bored with the often slower teachers...

I was a precocious little SOB... Drove teachers nuts, since I'd generally read the entire texts during the first week of class (hated math tho...). I had a third grade teacher insist that I'd memorized stuff that was in one of the books, because I couldn't possibly be reading at that grade level... And she didn't understand why I was pretending to read books without pictures...

Got into a private school shortly after that.

voilsb
April 2, 2003, 06:34 PM
there's no federal law saying no guns in schools. if there was, no states would publish laws saying you could or couldn't, and the brady campaign wouldn't be trying to get states to outlaw guns in schools.

Double Maduro
April 2, 2003, 06:35 PM
Thanks for the common sense.

280PLUS
April 2, 2003, 07:19 PM
i live on the assumption that connecticut has no laws concerning carrying in a school as long as you're licensed. as far as i have read them, and i believe i read them all, ct laws do not mention carrying in school at all. hence, no laws.

i do believe, however, that if a person of authority of any public building requests it, you must remove the firearm from the property

i always got my ccw with me and since nobody has ever noticed it, i havent been mentioning it to them.

my reasoning is the only best way to protect the firearm from being stolen is to keep it loaded and on my person when it's not in the safe.

leaving it in my vehicle, unloaded of course and locked in a box thats locked in the trunk is still unnacceptable to me because if a crook type takes my car the gun is sure to wind up in that person's posession in very little time.

or someone maybe even nastier down the way...

no, no, no,,,not good

the only place i do relequish it is at the casinos in ledyard as they are on soveriegn territory and do not allow them to be brought on their land. i do it out of respect for the people and their wishes.

the security peeps will very politely help you to their office where you lock your empty gun in a safe deposit while you keep the key, the ammo and a receipt. very gun friendly...at least the guys i dealt with.

they asked if i was leo and i replied i was "just an armed citizen" and that was all that was said on that subject.

they really liked my 332, too. i think they thought i was gonna pull out a big ol' cannon but i pull out this little peashooter instead. they was all checkin it out and stuff...lol

gotta go,

be safe!

:D

280PLUS
April 2, 2003, 07:28 PM
adhd?? got one...12, girl,

hoo boy!!

an angel and a devil allllll wrapped up in one...

ive offered peeps here $ to take her...:what:

no bites:(

awww i'm just kiddin'

the meds help, most of the time.

we go to the doc and ask for prozac, valium, thorazine, lithium and the like,

of course, this is for us :neener:

:D

another okie
April 2, 2003, 08:23 PM
There is a federal law on guns on school property, part of which was overturned by the Supreme Court. If I remember correctly, possessing a valid state CCW is an exemption under the remaining federal law, so if state's allow it, it's OK. I would look into it more, but we have a state law against it here in Oklahoma, so the federal issue is moot.

Standing Wolf
April 2, 2003, 08:44 PM
If I'd had children, they wouldn't have gone to union schools.

Zundfolge
April 2, 2003, 09:10 PM
My wife and I are unable to have children.

The day the doctors told us this we felt as though we were cursed. But the more stories like this I read the more I am convinced that my wife and I are truely blessed.

We're happy with our dogs thank you very much.

Apple a Day
April 2, 2003, 10:33 PM
I'm a teacher and I've been proudly wearing my "Peace Through Superior Firepower" pin on my ID lanyard. The kids love it. :evil:

twoblink
April 2, 2003, 10:38 PM
What is more rediculous is when I asked someone if they should disarm police and they say no; but if they were out of uniform and had a ccw, should they be disarmed... and she said... YES! She said that a cop (off-duty with a ccw) couldn't be trusted, but a cop (on-duty) could. And she further said the SAME cop that she would trust ON-DUTY she would not trust OFF-DUTY.

Err...

I get it now, the blue suit makes you immune to the evil powers of the gun, but without the blue suit, you are like the Green Lantern without the ring.. :rolleyes:

Yohan
April 2, 2003, 10:42 PM
I'm not sure about this. For all of you guys who want people to be allowed to carry at schools, would you take responsibility for people who carry guns to school and have a ND? I'm sure that all of the High Roaders are responsible CCWers, but let's keep in mind that there are a small minority of people out there who are irresponsible with their weapons. As I said, would you take personal responsibility if someone has an AD? Do you guys have a plan for filtering out the idiots from the responsible ones? Unless you don't, I would feel safer knowing that guns are illegal inside of schools.

Frohickey
April 2, 2003, 10:50 PM
The staff was questioning the whole thing.....I could tell by their faces.....I got them thinking.....LOL

How did you know they were thinking? Did you smell something burning? :D

And... don't let them give mind-altering drugs to your son for ADHD! I never had mind-altering drugs, and I think I came out just fine. (Where's my anti-mind-control colland...er... helmet at?) :p

cordex
April 2, 2003, 10:54 PM
For all of you guys who want people to be allowed to carry at schools, would you take responsibility for people who carry guns to school and have a ND?
No! A thousand times no!
It is their responsiblity - in school or out of school.
I'm sure that all of the High Roaders are responsible CCWers, but let's keep in mind that there are a small minority of people out there who are irresponsible with their weapons.
They will be responsible or irresponsible with their weapon whether there is a law restricting where they carry.
As I said, would you take personal responsibility if someone has an AD?
As I said, absolutely not. Just as I will not take personal responsibility if you have an AD while on a firing range. There is no reason for me to. Actions are the responsibility of the actor.
Do you guys have a plan for filtering out the idiots from the responsible ones? Unless you don't, I would feel safer knowing that guns are illegal inside of schools.
Where am I again? THR or MichaelMoore.com?
There is no plan for filtering idiots from CCW out of schools either. Or drivers.
I do not support legislation so you feel comfortable. Feh.

Beorn
April 2, 2003, 10:56 PM
:fire:
Not all teachers are like this! I teach with liberals AND conservatives. The teaching profession is like many other professions; all walks of life are within. The problem is that the conservative teachers don't say anything. They just do their job and go home.

If you can, get your kids out of the public schools, especially while they are young and impressionable. Public schools are government mandated indoctrination centers that seek to inculcate children with socialism and statism. If you can't afford private school indepedantly, try getting your child a scholarship. Look into montessori schools, try home schooling. Anything but public schools. Especially for "young boy syndrome" aka ADHD.
Okay, some points...

1st, private schools are far more restrictive than one would believe. Try concealed carry at a Catholic school.
2nd, You can't paint all schools with this "liberal socialist dogma" paintbrush, it just doesn't work. One of the most liberal teachers at my union (vegetarian, hippie-esque, democratic-to-the-bone) admitted in public that he would prefer me to carry over some of the LEOs we have in our little hamlet. He thought I would be far more responsible for my actions. He actually thinks before he speaks (which makes him kinda rare for liberals, I admit).
2nd continued, to say that all teachers and principals are progressive edcuators is like saying that all teachers use the Socratic method. We know about it, but not all of us use that particular methodology.
3rd, Montesorri schools? You wanna talk about liberalism? "Every child is a flower in search of their own time to blossom." Does that sound like a hard-core education to you? Has it ever occured to you that many people teach in private institutions that can't get jobs in public school? Many charter schools don't even require a teaching credential as a requisite for employment (which, I admit, doesn't always make or break the teacher).
4th, ADD and ADHD are entirely overdiagnosed and over-prescribed in our country. But at all levels of schooling, not just public schools. Ritalin is the devil's brew, if you ask me. Many of these kids (mis)diagnosed with one of these disorders has a parent (usually the parents are divorced, so a parent) that is as nutty as a fruitcake. They don't wish to take responsibility for their child's behavior [as a real parent would], so they drug their kids up, causing arrested development and stunted growth (due to the growth plate retardation).

I am SICK and TIRED of teachers getting nailed for all of society's ills! It ain't (entirely) our fault folks. We're accountable to our superiors. The kids and counsellors and principals and communities are all responsible for these children and their failures. But guess who isn't? The parents, that's who. They can do darned near whatever they want.

We have to register new guns, we need a license to drive, hunt, fish, or get married. But any sperm donor/receptacle can breed. Why don't we license them? I just became a new parent 5 weeks ago. I wouldn't mind answering a few questions to determine suitability.

I have tried since I entered the teaching profession to deliver as balanced and authoritative an education as possible to all of my students. I educate the parents, my superiors, and the community whenever applicable. I'm not alone. Thousands of teachers are exactly the same way. You just don't hear about them. You hear about the fruity "we hate war" beatniks that cling tenaciously to the collective consciousness' juggular. They fawn and preen in front of the media cameras because they seek some strange affirmation for their sacrifice of a real money-making job to educate the future of America. I cannot stand these people. I work with them, but I will try my hardest to never work for them.

If the public school system in your part of the world is reprehensible, then vote the school board officials in that will address your agenda. Only by controlling the top (superintendents are hired/fired by the school board) can you effectively control the base.

Here endeth the lesson.:)

voilsb
April 2, 2003, 11:23 PM
Yohan: simple answer, no. people need to be responsible for their own actions. who is responsible if someone walks into a grocery school and has a AD/ND with his carry piece? the person who had the discharge. who is responsible for a guy who walks into a school with a concealed handgun and kills eight kids with shots to the head? I'll give you a hint ... it's the guy who pulled the trigger.

therefore, who's responsible for a CCW holder who has an AD/ND on school grounds? the CCW holder who had the discharge is responsible.

personal responsibility, people. that's the key. hold people personally responsible for their actions, and a lot of blissninny legislation becomes utterly useless. remove that personal responsibility, and those laws start to make some sense. "what, I'm responsible for my own actions? they never taught me that in highschool!"

synoptic
April 2, 2003, 11:35 PM
First of all, my mom teaches at a public elementary school and is, as well as many of the teachers, are pretty open minded and will listen to reason. She even listens and doesn't argue when i start talking about how I think CHL's should be able to carry ins chool...

As far as carrying in schools, what is the difference between that and carrying in, say, a mall? there are still a bunch of children around, what is the difference between a ND in school or in a mall? what about at Chuck E. Cheese? Should we not be able to carry in these places either? Just a thought...

Zundfolge
April 2, 2003, 11:56 PM
Do you guys have a plan for filtering out the idiots from the responsible ones? Unless you don't, I would feel safer knowing that guns are illegal inside of schools.

If I recall, CCWs have never been handed out in Cracker Jack boxes ... there is already a process for "filtering out the idiots from the responsible ones". However in Vermont there is no need for a license for CCW and I haven't seen law abiding adults shooting up the place there.

Using your logic there should be no CCW allowed ANYWHERE ... why would an idiot be more likely to screw up at a school then a Mall or park or other place where there are children?

I for one don't feel safer ANYWHERE guns are illegal ... the term we like to use for those kinds of places are Victim Disarmament Zones.



I'm not one to buy into conspiracy theories, but I gotta wonder who put this notion in people's heads that the average person is an idiot who cannot be trusted. :(

Flashpoint
April 4, 2003, 01:58 AM
Here in Arkansas you are not allowed to carry in school or churches. I just wonder if the Westside shooting would have turned ou tany different if the had been someone packing heat. I think I could live with myself if a had to shoot an adult to protect me or my family, but a kid, that's a different story. I never understood the reasoning behind no school or church carry, some of the other rules I can see. Some of the recent major shootings that come to mind were in schools and churches. I'm not a school teacher, but I am a college student and I've wonder more than one time what would happen if some student got an "f" and decided to take it out on the teacher and the class. I don't think the campus police would be able to do much good. I would image the guy going postal would run out of ammo befor the police ever knew what happened. If I knew the majic words to get these to regulations changed I'd sure say them.

synoptic
April 4, 2003, 02:13 AM
I think I could live with myself if a had to shoot an adult to protect me or my family, but a kid, that's a different story.

That is something we should all think about a little. It applies everywhere, not just in schools. You're in a mall when an adult (you assume) starts shooting the place up. Given the opportunity to do it safely, I'd guess most CCW's would attempt to kill or incapacitate the person. You sight in on the shooter, start to squeeze the trigger when the shooter turns around and you see it is a 9 or 10 year old boy. Do you fire? Do you wait until he has killed X number of people before firing? Would it cause you to rethink your use of deadly force? If so, why would it have been ok to use deadly force on an adult but not a kid? Do you think the woman behind the counter who can hear the bullets whizzing by cares whether the shooter is an adult or child? Are the bullets leaving the gun any less deadly because they are being fired by a child?

These aren't questions I necessarily expect to see answered, but it is something to think about. I don't condone shooting children, I would hate to have to shoot anybody, especially a child, but thinking about how you would react and preparing yourself would definitly be beneficial if the situation ever arose

SkunkApe
April 4, 2003, 03:09 AM
The Gun-Free Schools Act of 1990 was overturned by the Supreme Court (U.S. vs. Lopez) on Tenth Amendment grounds.

This is considered by legal scholars to be a landmark case, as it finally puts some limits on the federal governments use of the interstate commerce clause to regulate everything and anything.

http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/93-1260.ZS.html

[quote]

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Syllabus



UNITED STATES v. LOPEZ

certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the fifth circuit

No. 93-1260. Argued November 8, 1994 -- Decided April 26, 1995


After respondent, then a 12th grade student, carried a concealed handgun into his high school, he was charged with violating the Gun Free School Zones Act of 1990, which forbids "any individual knowingly to possess a firearm at a place that [he] knows . . . is a school zone," 18 U.S.C. § 922(q)(1)(A). The District Court denied his motion to dismiss the indictment, concluding that §922(q) is a constitutional exercise of Congress' power to regulate activities in and affecting commerce. In reversing, the Court of Appeals held that, in light of what it characterized as insufficient congressional findings and legislative history, §922(q) is invalid as beyond Congress' power under the Commerce Clause.

Held: The Act exceeds Congress' Commerce Clause authority. First, although this Court has upheld a wide variety of congressional Acts regulating intrastate economic activity that substantially affected interstate commerce, the possession of a gun in a local school zone is in no sense an economic activity that might, through repetition elsewhere, have such a substantial effect on interstate commerce. Section 922(q) is a criminal statute that by its terms has nothing to do with "commerce" or any sort of economic enterprise, however broadly those terms are defined. Nor is it an essential part of a larger regulation of economic activity, in which the regulatory scheme could be undercut unless the intrastate activity were regulated. It cannot, therefore, be sustained under the Court's cases upholding regulations of activities that arise out of or are connected with a commercial transaction, which viewed in the aggregate, substantially affects interstate commerce. Second, §922(q) contains no jurisdictional element which would ensure, through case by case inquiry, that the firearms possession in question has the requisite nexus with interstate commerce. Respondent was a local student at a local school; there is no indication that he had recently moved in interstate commerce, and there is no requirement that his possession of the firearm have any concrete tie to interstate commerce. To uphold the Government's contention that §922(q) is justified because firearms possession in a local school zone does indeed substantially affect interstate commerce would require this Court to pile inference upon inference in a manner that would bid fair to convert congressional Commerce Clause authority to a general police power of the sort held only by the States. Pp. 2-19.

2 F. 3d 1342, affirmed.

Rehnquist, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas, JJ., joined. Kennedy, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which O'Connor, J., joined. Thomas, J., filed a concurring opinion. Stevens, J., and Souter, J., filed dissenting opinions. Breyer, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Stevens, Souter, and Ginsburg, JJ., joined.

[end quote]

Also good reading, but too long to copy here:

http://www.ncpa.org/~ncpa/oped/dupont/10am.html

Oleg Volk
April 4, 2003, 09:47 AM
:) Yesterday, several of my college students found my web sites, went straight to the Human Right pages, then to THR. Got to field questions on what I think of FN P90, Remington 700PSS and Taurus vs. Colt revolvers...one said "I didn't have you pegged as a gun owner" (reply: "I am an American, aren't I?" -- that got a few nods around the room).

Frohickey
April 4, 2003, 01:37 PM
Got to field questions on what I think of FN P90, Remington 700PSS and Taurus vs. Colt revolvers.

You need to work on your students... no mention of Ruger. :p

Leatherneck
April 4, 2003, 03:15 PM
I think I could live with myself if a had to shoot an adult to protect me or my family, but a kid, that's a different story.
Two separate thought processes here. First one--to shoot or not--should be made strictly on tactical and self-defense grounds. Second one--can I live with what I did?--would be agonizing no doubt, but if the first one was correct, then get over it. Soldiers these days--and police as well--go through this. You simply cannot apply an age filter to a tactical decision. :mad:

TC
TFL Survivor

Flashpoint
April 4, 2003, 04:30 PM
I know bullets are just as deadly wheather the are shot by some punk kid just out of his training paints or a serial killer. The decision to be prepared to shoot should be made when a person opts to carry a gun. If not, what's the point of carrying? I have great respect for those who choose to make that decision every day. Me personally, after having to defend against a kid, would more than likely need counseling. I just pray it never comes to having to draw my weapon for any reason.

Strings
April 4, 2003, 05:11 PM
... the willingness to shoot is sonething that should be decided BEFORE carrying, and should include the concept of children. It doesn't matter if the tango is 30 or 13: in order for me to use deadly force, my life (or another's in my immediate proximity) must be in immediate danger. If 8 year old Junior is shooting up the food court of the mall, he is just as much of a danger as a 20-30 year old, breaking in through my front door...

Might be a tough row AFTER the shooting, but the aftermath isn't something *I* would be thinking of at that moment...

Kaylee
April 5, 2003, 08:21 PM
A very good friend of mine is an Army Seargent who was looking at shipping out recently.. his advice to his guys --

"The United States is plum full of all kinds of psychologists and other headshrinks to help you get over just about any kind of psychological trauma.... but you have to be alive to make use of them.

... so do what ya gotta do to come home."


Don't see as it's all that different in civilian life.


-K

PCRCCW
April 5, 2003, 08:58 PM
You have all heard this before...but what the hell, its about time to tell everyone again. My CCW course instructer put it this way to me...
"When you have your CCW Permit, get good with your gun and have the right awareness..you are in an odd situation. You should be polite to everyone you meet and then at the same time, be prepared to kill them if you have to"
Sorry if this torques anyone...remember I have 2 gun supporting kids....If the situation ever gets bad...WHATEVER the age of the shooter is....Ill do what I have to do....PERIOD!
As far as carrying in schools...I say let the principal do whatever/say whatever she wants....If it ever came down to it...Id protect her life too.....with my evil gun on her blessed school grounds. Its a real bitch that it just may take a situation that far gone to get some closed minded dip****s to see the truth....oh well, so be it.
Shoot well.........thanks for the replies.....ALL OF YOU! :D

Didorian
April 6, 2003, 03:52 AM
As far as guns in schools go...
If children were taught that guns were tools like any other, that they have their uses... and they were taught not only firearm safty, but how to USE firearms..... ALL of our schools would be safer... Take away the big mystique surrounding firearms, and a lot of kids wouldn't see anything special about them anymore... then the only reason that they would carry them, is for safty.
One of the biggest reasons that kids carry guns is the exactly same reason that many adults carry guns.... They're scared.
I know many adults don't like to go anywhere unarmed... so why do adults think that kids would feel any different?
If someone is going to harm you, they REALLY intend to harm you... they don't need a gun to do it...


Anyone else agree with me here???

atek3
April 6, 2003, 06:41 AM
Didorian.... Word Brother

atek3

pax
April 6, 2003, 12:12 PM
Beorn,
We have to register new guns, we need a license to drive, hunt, fish, or get married. But any sperm donor/receptacle can breed. Why don't we license them? I just became a new parent 5 weeks ago. I wouldn't mind answering a few questions to determine suitability.
And you are a school teacher.

That, right there, is one of the many reasons that my children will never be sent to public school. I don't want them indoctrinated by people who think they have a right to determine whether or not I am "suitable" to rear my own children. Nor do I want them brainwashed into believing that this sort of meddling in other people's lives is a good thing.

Scratch almost any "reasonable" person in the right spot, and a controlling, two-bit Hitler will emerge.

pax

Ours may become the first civilization destroyed, not by the power of our enemies, but by the ignorance of our teachers and the dangerous nonsense they are teaching our children. In an age of artificial intelligence, they are creating artificial stupidity. -- Thomas Sowell

Theories and goals of education don't matter a whit if you do not consider your students to be human beings. -- Lou Ann Walker

Shootin' Buddy
April 6, 2003, 12:15 PM
Why don't we instead stop the registration of guns, hunting, fishing, and marriage?

No, wait, let's just simplify everything. Instead of having multiple licenses to own guns, hunt, fish, get married, have babies, drive a car, serve liquor, dig a hole in your backyard, build a building -- let's just have one license, to be reissued every year. We'll call it "The Existence License." Once a year, you'll take a test. If you pass the test, you will be identified as a decent human being and trusted as responsible enough to own guns, hunt, fish, get married, have babies, drive cars, etc etc. If you don't pass the test, the government will just gas you.

It's the perfect utopia. No bad people and no government overhead.

MitchSchaft
April 6, 2003, 05:11 PM
Shootin' Buddy, Hitler tried something very similar to that at one time:scrutiny: .

atek3
April 6, 2003, 05:18 PM
buddy was being sarcastic...RIGHT BUDDY? :scrutiny:


:)
atek3

atek3
April 6, 2003, 05:59 PM
1

Feanaro
April 6, 2003, 06:05 PM
I think I could live with myself if a had to shoot an adult to protect me or my family, but a kid, that's a different story.

Myself, I wouldn't have a problem with it. Well, that's not quite the right way to say that. I wouldn't be anymore worried about shooting a child who is attacking myself or another person than an adult doing the same thing. They both, I believe, forfeit their lives the instant they attack myself or someone else.

Beorn
April 8, 2003, 12:53 AM
And you are a school teacher.
Yes I am. One of the better ones IMHO.
That, right there, is one of the many reasons that my children will never be sent to public school. I don't want them indoctrinated by people who think they have a right to determine whether or not I am "suitable" to rear my own children. Nor do I want them brainwashed into believing that this sort of meddling in other people's lives is a good thing.
I don't either. My point is not that we should all be retinally scanned, fingerprinted, CAT-scanned and DNA-encoded to ensure a care-free lifestyle. My attitude has always been "I'll leave you alone if you leave me alone." But Pax, the liberal people in this country AREN'T LEAVING US ALONE! They attempt to meddle in the affairs of everyone not just like them. If we turn some of this crud back on them, don't you think they'd step back and say "wait a minute! I don't like being told what to do!" I sure hope they would.
Please do not think that real teachers legislate morality. we don't. I have said time and time again: I teach ethics, not morals. Morals are up to the parents. You teach "thous shalt not kill," and I'll teach them "murder is against the law."
The problem is that parents, by and large, have fallen down on the job. TVs babysit, teachers discipline (except when it's inconvenient to point out the parent's many howling flaws), day care canters raise, and grandparents more often than not actually do the parenting.
Tell me I'm wrong in a good portion of the country Pax. Please tell me I'm wrong. Tell me that most parents ask their kids if they did their homework, and check to make certain they really did. Tell me most parents take their kids to church. Tell me that most parents know where their kids are most of the time, who their friends are, what their interests are, what music they like.
If you can honestly tell me that most parents are actually doing the job, then I will back off and admit to my incorrect stance on the state of the American Nuclear Family.
But you can't tell me that, can you Pax.
Not because you don't want to.
But rather, because that wouldn't be the truth.
And you tell the truth.
I know 'cause I've read some of your posts, and you seem to be a good person who cares about America and our rights. All of our rights. Yeah, my suitability remark was out of line. I know that I don't really believe that it's right, nor would I allow it to happen without challenging it in court. But you don't see the apathetic parents I see. You don't hear kids ask me to help them fill out their college applications because the parent(s) are either unwilling or unable to read an application.

You know, they have a program that is nation-wide in US schools that was spear-headed in San Diego in the early 1980s called AVID. It's a program designed to assist "at-risk" students (though the focus of the class has broadened a bit in the past 5 or so years) in school.

Do you know what AVID teachers do? They help kids with their homework, check their grades, help them organize their notes, work, schedules, and they help them fill out college applications.

You know who did that when we were in school? Our parents. Why are teachers (many very liberal at that) doing the job that parents are supposed to do?

I'll bet you'd help your children with their homework Pax. I'd bet serious money that you'd meet with teachers to discuss your child's welfare, future, and education. Pax, I'll bet you're one heck of a parent.

But you are a modern exception to the rule.

I wish you weren't.

I wish all parents cared about their kids the way you most obviously do. Like I care about my daughter (who might not attend public school either come to think of it [heh heh]). But the very, very sad fact is that the job just ain't being done anymore.

You got any ideas about how we fix an entire generation of fruity, hands-off, enabler, self-absorbed, me-monkeys?

Because, I'm all out of ideas.

P.S.- I respect anyone who wants to do what is best for their children. Private school often is a better place for children, if for no other reason than the disciplinary environment is more controlled, yet the learning environment is not. Kudos to you and all like you; I just can't give up on my profession quite yet.

P.P.S- Anyone know of a good private school hiring Assessment co-ordinators and music educators? I got some good references...:p

atek3
April 8, 2003, 01:06 AM
I wish my music ed teacher shot idpa.

ours was a really funny gay guy. :)
not quite big gay al, but you get the picture.

atek3

Norton
April 8, 2003, 06:54 AM
Beorn is right on the money ladies and gentlemen. I'm a veteran teacher as well and up until three years ago had worked in wonderful, rural communities in Virginia where the kids and parents still valued education and teachers. In fact, the first day that I taught in 1989 and called the roll, the kids still answered "here, sir".

Now, due to the wife's job, I've been working in a DC metro school system where, to put it mildly, the inmates run the asylum. Step into our halls at any time of the day and there are kids just walking the halls and stairs. If you challenge them to ask where they are supposed to be, they just walk away from you, knowing full well that you can't "do" anything to make them come to the office with you.

Just yesterday, two of our finer academics, were messing around in our hallway and I stopped them. They didn't have on their ID's and said that they were to have left after the previous class to go home. Since we were thirty minutes into the next class I told them they had to come with me to the security office. One guy says, "I don't know why you bein' so pressed, they ain't going to do nothing to us" and precedes to talk trash to me about how he can say anything he wants to me.

On other occasions I've had kids raise their hands to me as if to strike me and another talk about going and getting his gun. Now, ladies and gentlemen, I'm 6'7" and weigh 240 pounds.......if this is how they talk to me, and I challenge them, how do you think your average 5'1" female is going to react? The kid will always get his way and the teacher will just go along for the ride, rather than making waves.

I never thought that I would want to have my kids going to private school when I was in my previous jobs, but there is no way in heck that when I have kids that I will subject them to the watered down, socialist dogma laden, feel good crap that is being taught in the public school here.

By the way.....count me in as another music teacher who doesn't mind spending a couple of hours a week at the range :evil:

pax
April 8, 2003, 01:46 PM
Beorn,

You got any ideas about how we fix an entire generation of fruity, hands-off, enabler, self-absorbed, me-monkeys?
Yeah, actually, I do. But you won't like it, because frankly you're a better person than I am. I say that because you are plainly worried about Other People's Children. I discovered a long time ago that the only kids I am, or even could be responsible for, are my own. To my mind, Other People's Children are emphatically Other People's Problem.

Just as responsible gun owners should not be punished for the problems caused by irresponsible gun owners, neither should responsible parents be punished for the problems caused by irresponsible parents. Responsible gun owners should not be subject to registration, onerous restrictions, governmental hoops and hoopla, or any sort of scheme whereby people who don't know a thing about it are able to force the gun owner to do it their way "or else." Equally, responsible parents should not be subject to registration, onerous restrictions, governmental hoops and hoopla, or any sort of scheme whereby people who don't know the kids in question are able to force the parent to raise the kids their way "or else."

Sadly, both groups (gun owners and parents) are increasingly hampered by government programs designed to "help" them be responsible. And I think both groups have thus been subject to a depressing cycle in which the ones inclined to be a little irresponsible have become more irresponsible as a direct result of the government programs which are supposed to be encouraging responsibility -- and which causes the politicians and meddlers of all stripes to believe that the solution is more meddling and more intrusive programs.

As the programs become more onerous, there are fewer people willing to jump through the hoops, and an increasing number of (good) people willing to break a law they consider stupid or unnecessary. This means there are an increasing number of "irresponsible" people, as seen by the meddlers.

You wrote, If we turn some of this crud back on them, don't you think they'd step back and say "wait a minute! I don't like being told what to do!" I sure hope they would. But that's just plain wrong. In addition to being morally wrong (don't do to other people what you don't want them doing to you), it's also poor tactics -- similar to a married couple I knew once. The wife spent $1500 they didn't have on stupid stuff she wanted to buy, because her husband had just spent $1500 they didn't have on some outdoors stuff he wanted. Her form of retaliation might have made her feel better, but they'll be bankrupt pretty soon.

So how do I suggest fixing a cycle like that? I don't. I suggest we break it completely. I suggest we quit playing this stupid game and instead take responsibility only for our own responsibilities -- instead of worrying about what everyone else is doing. I suggest letting Other People's Kids be Other People's Problem, while we rear our own in the best way we know how.

Imagine how much better the world would be if everybody did that! (But you can't make anybody else do that. You can only do it yourself, and hope others follow suit.)

Am I saying you should give up on your profession? Nope. By all means, if you enjoy it, you should keep doing it. But never fall into the mistaken belief that the kids in your classroom are your kids. They aren't. Their education is your responsibility for one year of their lives -- and that, only to the extent that the parents have delegated it to you. Your child is your responsibility and their children are their responsibility. Keep that in mind, and you'll be happier and our society will be better off.

Here endeth the lesson.

pax

It's too bad I'm not as wonderful a person as people say I am, because the world could use a few people like that. -- Alan Alda

Beorn
April 8, 2003, 07:03 PM
frankly you're a better person than I am. Pax, I do not believe that for one minute.
I say that because you are plainly worried about Other People's Children. Well, it is my job, afterall. And part of that is reporting child-abuse, neglect, and other horrors that are inflicted on some poor and unfortunate kids. And make no mistake about it, I love my own daughter very much; other children I just want them to get an education (preferably with the help of their parents).

I don't want meddling, but how do we punish those that are totally out of control? I say we only as a society. Do we make abuse consequences very, very heavy? How can we get the less than desirable influences away from our children? I want to do what's right, of course. But that course of action seems indeterminable, you know?

But that's just plain wrong. In addition to being morally wrong (don't do to other people what you don't want them doing to you), it's also poor tactics Okay, I agree with that.

Imagine how much better the world would be if everybody did that! (But you can't make anybody else do that. You can only do it yourself, and hope others follow suit.) That's exactly my point. Do you think teachers asked for all of the extra responsibilities ladled out on us with little additional training and no extra pay? No way! Teachers are becoming "glorified babysitters" against our own will. I DON'T WANT TO TAKE CARE OF ANOTHER'S CHILDREN! I just want to teach them. But now, thanks to our current educational climate (set in motion by progressive liberal educators; I know I wasn't at any of the 'meetings' to approve this crap), I am a counsellor, coach, big-brother, and surrogate parent. I never signed up for this...

But never fall into the mistaken belief that the kids in your classroom are your kids. They aren't. Their education is your responsibility for one year of their lives -- and that, only to the extent that the parents have delegated it to you. Your child is your responsibility and their children are their responsibility. Keep that in mind, and you'll be happier and our society will be better off. I have never thought that they belonged to me. I didn't ask for the 'extended family' model. Although I see children in music from 7th through 12th grade, so I have seen some students for 5 years. My choir parents are much like you; they control their own children and assist me by handling everything except for the actual teaching. Happiness would come sooner if more parents acted the way you do.

All the same, I don't believe that my current attitude worsens our society. A teacher who doesn't care at all may not be worse than one who meddles too much, but the gray area in this instance is far more thin than I find comfortable.

Thank you for the discourse and the lesson, Pax. I have enjoyed it very much.:)

Don Gwinn
April 9, 2003, 08:39 AM
A school teacher has to be concerned with other peoples' children. That's not some newfangled liberal attitude. It goes back to Socrates.

The school gets money for giving the kids the pills. If the school says your Child
is ADHD take them to your own doctor for an evaluation.


Seriously, where do people come up with this stuff? Wouldn't it be simpler to go to your local school and ask anyone on staff whether this is true? Here are the facts about Ritalin and ADHD:

1. Your school does not diagnose your child with ADHD. They can't, by law. The most they can ever do if they suspect your child has it is suggest to you, the parent, that your child might benefit from a visit to your pediatrician.

2. Your school does not "get money for giving you kids pills." Your school does not give your child pills. Your school nurse can be prosecuted for giving your kid an aspirin, and you think she's forcing him to take Ritalin for fun and profit? Think it through!

3. The process for getting a child ADHD medication is this: The parent or teacher notices what they think is a problem, the pediatrician examines the child (at least, one hopes) and finds that ADHD is indeed the problem in his opinion, then the pediatrician prescribes the Ritalin or whatever drug he thinks best, then the parents give the child the drug. The most the school is ever involved is the initial advice to have the child examined, plus dispensing the pills the parents send to school with the child.


But of course, it's a lot easier to blame the teacher than it is to blame the people who are actually medicating all these kids--parents and pediatricians. The teacher can be decried conveniently as an interloper who is sticking his nose in where it doesn't belong. It's a little harder to face the truth that lazy, apathetic parents are medicating kids with whom they don't want to deal.

If you don't believe me, go to any public school and check into it. Talk to the school board, your state legislator, whoever you want. They'll all tell you the same thing. This is exactly the same kind of wild, strange inaccuracy that we laugh about when it concerns Glock 7s and armor-piercing Black Talons.

Don Gwinn
April 9, 2003, 08:49 AM
Pax, try to understand that for every kid with parents like you, there's another kid with parents who honestly wouldn't mind if their kids disappeared. They don't feed 'em breakfast, they don't teach them to brush their teeth, they don't teach them right from wrong.

Maybe that's their right, and we have no right to try to fill in. But if we don't, then we can't teach those other kids, because unlike the parents, we don't have the option of simply telling Jon, Raheem, Davonte, Kimmy and Almendra (all real children, by the way) that we don't care and they should just go bother someone else. And these kids are so disruptive and sometimes violent that they can make it impossible to carry on class. I know. I've done it.

Apple a Day
April 9, 2003, 06:22 PM
Beorn, pax, Don...
I respect y'all for having a civil discussion.
I will add this: every year it gets harder to teach. I've been doing it 9 years now. I love teaching. I love teaching physics. I revel in the moment that the little light in the back of the kids' heads goes on, when you hear the almost audible click! when they make the connection. I love the fact that I permanently change the brain of a student, improve the quality of the rest of his/her life.
<rant self-edited back out>
We realize that success is earned; payed for in the currency of work, attention, care, and time. I had a loud argument with another teacher this morning over lunch about that very topic. It had to do with school, responsibility, free speech, celebrities, the values of the regular citizen, and such... you had to be there. I had at least half of the other teachers in my corner.
Keep the faith

Norton
April 9, 2003, 07:26 PM
Apple,

Ya got it right, my friend. I agree that it does get harder and harder each year to go back in August. I also agree that it's the most amazing thing to watch that light go on when the kid finally GETS it! I think this is especially true for us music people as we spend so much time with these kids and have them for more than one year in most cases.

Anybody who thinks that there aren't good teachers in the public schools is dead wrong.....however I think that in many cases, the good teachers are hamstrung by red-tape and administrative gobbledeegook.

I'm not sure which system you teach in in Tidewater, but there are some fine schools down there. I long for the day that I get to go back into a VA system

fantacmet
January 30, 2006, 01:57 AM
Ok I've been over this before, but not here. Federal law does quite plainly stomp state law. Federal law also prohibits the carrying of all firearms on school property WITH exceptions. One exception obviously being police officers. Another one being persons licensed to carry a firearm concealed. So in other words, CHL holders according to federal law CAN carry on PUBLIC school property or events being conducted by PUBLIC schools. This includes public COLLEGE, such as community colleges and public universities. State law however may or may not provide additional restrictions.

For the guy in Oregon, you are correct, Oregon State Law says you can carry in public schools with a CHL. However most of these schools say no. OSU is fighting lawsuits right now involving it. I personally am in the process of attacking Portland State University for their laws. I have yet to get a response, but one of their security officers(a friend of mine) got a response when he inquired. He was told the no firearm policy stands. The law does not apply to them. Anyone carrying a gun will be arrested and prosecuted. He was also informed that he was not allowed to respond to me in any way. Threataning his job if he spoke to me again. He did tell me what he could tell me without major fear. That if I were to go on campus he was to arrest me for carrying a firearm.

So I am sending a certified letter(since my e-mails have gotten no response), then we will take it from there. I am NOT going to let this go. These people hate activists, I'm not exactly fond of activists either, BUT people like them create activists, they created me. If they would just comply with the law, they would never hear from me and get the headaches. I'm going to start searching one or two at a time, all public schools, and attacking them legally. This stuff has got to stop. Federal government already uses our constitution as toilet paper, but that doesn't mean we have to. Plus without this basic right, they can abolish the constitution at any time without fear of retaliation.

Rev. Michael

GruntII
January 30, 2006, 02:15 AM
for some funny reason, my boss wants me to work during business hours, so i cant search for the fed laws right now. maybe you could take a shortcut and call your district attorneys office?
i learned of this federal law when i took the class for my CHL. my state laws allow a firearm only to be stored in a vehicle while on school grounds (except for LEO on official business), but federal law states that the firearm must be locked in a container in the vehicle while on school grounds. only LEO on official business can carry (open or concealed) while on school grounds.

the only exceptions my state has on this law is that in rural areas a person may carry a firearm ACROSS school grounds with the express permission of the school and only if the person is engaged in an activity like hunting that obviously requires the use of a firearm.


About your state law I do not know but about the federal it allows the state to make the decision about whether a ccw holder may carry on the school grounds. My state, Alabama, has a specific exemption for a ccw holder in the law that allows for lawful carry on school grounds.There has been a case involving this issue and what we call certain persons forebidden to possess in Alabama that went to the 11th Federal circuit of appeals the Appeals court ruled that the Alabama exemption was within the scope of the law. The case also involved an issue of restoral of rights to a felon which the court resolved to the pro gun side. The case was either Alabama or the US V. Tait I beleive and it was ruled on in 2002 or 2003. Check the 11th Circuit ruling on
findlaw.com for a copy of the synopsis of the ruling. I keep copies of the Alabama law, and the court ruling handy when I'm at a school event on have business on a school because many educators as well as my fellow cops dont' know the law they just know the propaganda.

Herself
January 30, 2006, 02:47 AM
...It's a pity we do not simnply allow bad parents to be bad. Their children are already casualties by the time the reach school age; if those children can pull themselves out, they will, and if they can't, no amount of no-chiild-left-behind, AVID, or free lunch will do it for them.

Let 'em go. Weep if you have to. But stop dragging everyone else down to their level!

We'd be better off as a society without free universal mandatory public education. Where data is available, literacy levels were higher before we had it!

If all the schools were private, we'd be rid of most of the flap over peaceable adults carrying the weapons that protect honest men and women and the civilization they have built. I am not holding my breath.

(And don't come crying to me about the plight of the poor. There were plenty of schools for them before you -- and childless me! -- were taxed to pay for "free" government-run schools).

As long as we keep encouraging stupid, lazy and/or shiftless people to flourish, we'll have a surplus of them. It's not a good idea. It holds back the folks who do care.

"Guns in school?" Schools used to have rifle teams! It was a non-issue! Now... sheeesh.

--Herself

Mad Chemist
January 30, 2006, 03:16 AM
shootist2121,



Actually the law varies from state to state. Here in Oregon it is legal to carry in public schools with your chl.

But not universities.:mad: I think there is a test case proceeding right now.

fjolnirsson
January 30, 2006, 03:53 AM
...It's a pity we do not simnply allow bad parents to be bad. Their children are already casualties by the time the reach school age; if those children can pull themselves out, they will, and if they can't, no amount of no-chiild-left-behind, AVID, or free lunch will do it for them.

Let 'em go. Weep if you have to. But stop dragging everyone else down to their level!

We'd be better off as a society without free universal mandatory public education. Where data is available, literacy levels were higher before we had it!

If all the schools were private, we'd be rid of most of the flap over peaceable adults carrying the weapons that protect honest men and women and the civikization they have built. I am not holding my breath.

(And don't come crying to me about the plight of the poor. There were plenty of schools for them before you -- and childless me! -- were taxed to pay for "free" government-run schools).

As long as we keep encouraging stupid, lazy and/or shiftless people to flourish, we'll have a surplus them. It's not a good idea. It holds back the folks who do care.

"Guns in school?" Schools used to have rifle teams! It was a non-issue! Now... sheeesh.

--Herself

Herself,
As usual, I read your post and find myself nodding. You've nailed it.

The school system will no longer allow decent teachers to toss the rotten apples from the barrel, and it's causing the good fruit to spoil. Maybe we need to get rid of barrels, and start keeping our fruit in baskets....
Well, that sort of fell apart at the end, but you get my meaning, I'm sure...

Herself
January 30, 2006, 08:29 AM
Thanks, fjolnirsson!

...I'd be happier with what I wrote if it didn't have my usual quota of typos and elisions.

But it's true -- we're taking good kids (and bad ones), good teachers (and some bad ones), and hammering them all into the same ill-fitting mold, and everyone loses. It's time to try something different.

--H

fantacmet
January 30, 2006, 08:52 AM
Actually universities fall under the public school jurisdiction. Someone was suing Oregon State for something thathadn't happened yet. The courts simply found in favor of OSU, not that they were within their rights to ban firearms, but that since the person in question was not arrested he had no grounds for a lawsuit, however if he WERE to be arrested for carrying his legally concealed firearm, that would be another matter. The courts more or less just evaded the entire subject, probably so the judge would not make enemies of the gun grabbers I would suspect. Anyway you can check this out in more detail at www.oregonfirearms.org which is a site I highly recommend even to those who do not live in Oregon.

Rev. Michael

Double Maduro
January 30, 2006, 04:55 PM
fantacmet,
Mad Chemist,
EtAl,

You should take a look at this site.

http://www.oregonfirearms.org/index.html

They have a pretty good handle on this, as demonstrated here.

http://www.oregonfirearms.org/news/20011126gunsinps.html

As was explained to me, in my CHL class, as a CHL holder, I am allowed to carry in all public schools. Even private schools, we have no law regarding no weapon signs, they can put one up but it doesn't mean anything, they can only ask you to leave. If you don't then you can be charged with trespassing.

The OFF site has some interresting things to say about these types of rules. Check out the section on the Portland Airport.

Every state is different, check your local laws.

How many times has tyrrany been justified by the phrase, "it's the law"? Whether it is or not, we tend to buckle under, I applaud those who fight back.

DM

TexasRifleman
January 30, 2006, 05:02 PM
It's in Texas schools as well.

Last year I offered to get the Eddie Eagle outfit and do that whole safety thing at my sons elementary school.

The principal about had a fit!!
She flatly refused to even discuss it.

I wrote her and asked her to turn me down in writing.

I have her letter and if some poor child is injured by playing with a gun I'm going to mail her a copy a day for a year.......

Zundfolge
January 30, 2006, 09:10 PM
Ok I've been over this before, but not here. Federal law does quite plainly stomp state law. Federal law also prohibits the carrying of all firearms on school property WITH exceptions.
IIRC under Clinton that law was passed (no guns within 1000 feet of a school) but it has been overturned by the SCOUTS.

Please site what Federal law you are referring to.

san408
January 30, 2006, 09:55 PM
Beorn, pax, Don...
I respect y'all for having a civil discussion.
I will add this: every year it gets harder to teach. I've been doing it 9 years now. I love teaching. I love teaching physics. I revel in the moment that the little light in the back of the kids' heads goes on, when you hear the almost audible click! when they make the connection. I love the fact that I permanently change the brain of a student, improve the quality of the rest of his/her life.
<rant self-edited back out>
We realize that success is earned; payed for in the currency of work, attention, care, and time. I had a loud argument with another teacher this morning over lunch about that very topic. It had to do with school, responsibility, free speech, celebrities, the values of the regular citizen, and such... you had to be there. I had at least half of the other teachers in my corner.
Keep the faith

I couldn't have said it better myself. This is my eleventh year of high school chemistry (in front of the class not sitting in it ;) ) I love it. AHHH stoichiometry. :)

I love the way some folks will just throw a huge blanket statement over thousands of individuals. Teachers are just that, individuals. Individuals that approach their job with a varying degree of professionalism just like any other job. The poster that stated that you don't hear from the conservative teacher because they go do their job, nailed it 100%.

I don't talk to my students about my politics (although many of them know I'm a conservative), and I don't try to push my beliefs on them. Some of them know I like to hunt and I've got a couple of students who have brought in pictures of kills to show me.

I'm lucky. My daughter's are going to the same elementary school I went to, and the wife of my best friend teaches there. She keeps us up to date on the other teachers. They will attend the Junior high my wife teaches at, and they will attend the high school I teach at. Their teachers through junior high, and high school will be picked. I have alot of parents who do the same thing and they don't have my connections. There are ways to be active as a parent to make a difference in your childs education, but it's easier to sit back and blame someone else most of the time. ;)

This should in no way be read as a rant. I'm just making comments. Pax, you would make a great educator. Kids like to be talked to instead of talked at. You seem to be pretty good at that. An ability to communicate makes my job amazingly easy. (well, it helps to know a little stuff too.)

Colt
January 30, 2006, 10:14 PM
Our local public schools are excellent. They aren't socialist indorctination centers. The reason is very simple: We parents hold the teachers, principal, and school board responsible. We keep involved in what are kids are learning at school. We get to know the teachers. When some 23 year-old teacher, fresh out of college, opens her mouth to spout about "the evils of guns" we're all over her like white on rice, if the other teachers don't get her first.

I don't understand some peoples' first reaction when hearing of a liberal/socialist/brainwashing incident in a public school (not even their own): throw up their hands, run around in circles, and sign up for private schooling. What happened to having backbone enough to fight? You're paying for the schools, why let a bunch of wrong-headed dopes steal your taxes and force you to pay a private institution to do the job they should already be doing? Would you let them walk into your house and steal your belongings, too?

Fight! All that evil needs to succeed is for good men (an women) to do nothing. Make some noise, get involved. Fight!

Or don't. But please don't try to tell me it's hopeless. I can't hear you. I'm busy fighting.

Chrontius
January 31, 2006, 02:20 AM
<SNIP of excellent common-sense gun training idea>
One of the biggest reasons that kids carry guns is the exactly same reason that many adults carry guns.... They're scared.
I know many adults don't like to go anywhere unarmed... so why do adults think that kids would feel any different?
If someone is going to harm you, they REALLY intend to harm you... they don't need a gun to do it...

Anyone else agree with me here???

Absolutely. *mods +1, Insightful*

It only took a stalking on my part to make this point.

Herself,
As usual, I read your post and find myself nodding. You've nailed it.

The school system will no longer allow decent teachers to toss the rotten apples from the barrel, and it's causing the good fruit to spoil. Maybe we need to get rid of barrels, and start keeping our fruit in baskets....
Well, that sort of fell apart at the end, but you get my meaning, I'm sure...

Where am I going and why am I in this handbasket? :evil:

If you enjoyed reading about "Meeting at Elementary School.....kids/guns/frustration...." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!