So You Want to "Arm" Teachers?

[MT Pockets]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

I don't know where you get your ideas or your information from. The second Amendment protects citizens from tyranny and to seal that protection further the Posse Comitatus Act also protects citizens from the misuse of Military Forces by Law Enforcement.

Jim

So tell me how this is working out for you now days LOL! While It may have been useful when we all had the same weapons, but the Citizens are so out-gunned now the only way a state would even have the slightest chance would be if tall 50 joined forces. If you think the latest uprising of conservatives is enough to overthrow a government you are delusional.

[grean]

Originally Posted by MT Pockets

So are you saying that if Trump( or whomever is in charge at the time) chose to go ahead with a gun confiscation, the people would be able to defend themselves against them? Where are they gonna get the stuff you mentioned on a moments notice? The one not thinking it through is you. Let them drop a few bombs on your town and then you tell us how you are gonna get all Rambo on them. Now we both know
the military has about had of Trumps bullshit they can stand so I do agree most would defect. But for you to think owning an AR15 alone would make a strong enough militia you are a fool. The government has already compromised the citizens of every state. You do know that we can not possess even a fraction of the arms available.

Your premise is basically that you believe we stand zero chance of victory and should accept an illegitimate government to rule over us?

[Mr MojoRisin]

Originally Posted by MT Pockets

So tell me how this is working out for you now days LOL! While It may have been useful when we all had the same weapons, but the Citizens are so out-gunned now the only way a state would even have the slightest chance would be if tall 50 joined forces. If you think the latest uprising of conservatives is enough to overthrow a government you are delusional.

You're the delusional one. Quit trying to interpret the constitution you're making a dam fool out of yourself. If our Government ever was to go rogue there is no guarantee the Military would be backing it. anyway. My main point is the second amendment is a constitutional right and can't be negotiated without gross violation of the constitution. If you are supportive of Gun Registration and Gun Control then you support the violation of the Constitution it's that simple.

Jim

[MT Pockets]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Now that is "amazing"! It is AMAZINGLY STUPID!

The State of Texas does NOT GIVE ME THE RIGHT TO "BEAR ARMS" nor can State of Texas take away "my right to bear arms" unless my unlawful behavior rises to the level that would prohibit me from being allowed to possess a firearm. But the Federal government can do that as well!

But this discussion is not about law abiding or sane people.

So try, as difficult as it is for you, to keep those concepts straight and separated.

All that you are doing now is babbly and copying and pasting bullshit that agrees with what you are struggling to post. But you still have to change what people pose to appear correct. You're not.

Wait let me guess! You think your right to bear arms is a God given right! LOL! Fucking idiot. Show me a SCOTUS case that backs your claim that a state can not regulate your arms ownership.



Ironically an AR15 may be one of the few weapons that could not be regulated because it would be a perfect weapon for a militia.

So do you think teachers should have guns?

[grean]

Originally Posted by MT Pockets

Wait let me guess! You think your right to bear arms is a God given right! LOL! Fucking idiot. Show me a SCOTUS case that backs your claim that a state can not regulate your arms ownership.



Ironically an AR15 may be one of the few weapons that could not be regulated because it would be a perfect weapon for a militia.

So do you think teachers should have guns?

Heller. It said that the right is without question an individual right and not an abstract collective right.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by MT Pockets

Wait let me guess! You think your right to bear arms is a God given right!

Do you believe in God? It's a natural right as a human being.

The "right" has been around since before the 2nd Amendment.



Do you get weary of being wrong so much? Or do you even realize it?

[grean]

Originally Posted by MT Pockets

Wait let me guess! You think your right to bear arms is a God given right! LOL! Fucking idiot. Show me a SCOTUS case that backs your claim that a state can not regulate your arms ownership.



Ironically an AR15 may be one of the few weapons that could not be regulated because it would be a perfect weapon for a militia.

So do you think teachers should have guns?

Prior to Heller see
West Virginia State Bd. of Educ. v. Barnette,
319 U.S. 624 (1943)Annotate this Case




The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials, and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by grean

The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials, and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts.

I disagree. Our "Bill of Rights" was to protect those natural rights free people enjoyed without government to assure that government did not infringe upon them.

Like any "natural right" social behavioral standards and mores may result in a curtailment of those rights under limited circumstances and conditions to assure the safety and well-being of the rest of society, so long as any limitation is approved by a sufficient number of the society who will be affected by the limits. Schools are such a place with respect to the obligation of the school system to "parent" the innocent entrusted to them for a relatively brief period of time, so a restriction is justified with respect to "things" that might harm the defenseless. If one is going to inject harmful "things" into that environment then those "things" need to be under the control of persons with sufficient experience to control their application in a manner that does not jeopardize the "wards" of the school. The issues have been addressed with the comments about "protecting" weapons possessed by teachers.

[grean]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

I disagree. Our "Bill of Rights" was to protect those natural rights free people enjoyed without government to assure that government did not infringe upon them.

Like any "natural right" social behavioral standards and mores may result in a curtailment of those rights under limited circumstances and conditions to assure the safety and well-being of the rest of society, so long as any limitation is approved by a sufficient number of the society who will be affected by the limits.

It's the SCOTUS you're disagreeing with.

[grean]

He asked for case law. I gave it.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by grean

It's the SCOTUS you're disagreeing with.

And your point?

I can dig back into the bowls of the SCOTUS opinions and find agreeable and disagreeable snippits on almost any issue worth discussing. We see that frequently within the opinions themselves when the instant Court distinguishes from a former panel of Judges their rationale or simply overturns prior decisions based on current events or even the current facts of the case they are considering.

Liberal "thought" may wish that "inalienable rights" are "awarded" to the subjects by the "king," but this country was founded upon those beliefs that despised that philosophy and braved the angry waters of the Atlantic to escape them.

I'm more comfortable with that assessment of the "meaning" than some after thought trying to justify government control over day-to-day existence. Our Republic will survive longer by maintaining the compass of individual liberties. If we are born with those RIGHTS then our heritage, ethnicity, or race don't matter, because we are all then equal as far as those RIGHTS are concerned regardless of what the "majority" says through a government edict. In other words it doesn't matter my party affiliation I can still possess a firearm and I'm free to speak my mind on that subject.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by MT Pockets

It is you that keeps bringing up my Pee-pee. But when you have no cognitive response I guess that is your go to.

You'd be the faggot that was talking about "we" "we's" indicating you had something in your pocket, M T Brain Socket, and you have the weest wee-wee on the block, M T Brain Socket.

Originally Posted by MT Pockets

Wait let me guess! You think your right to bear arms is a God given right! LOL! Fucking idiot. Show me a SCOTUS case that backs your claim that a state can not regulate your arms ownership.

Ironically an AR15 may be one of the few weapons that could not be regulated because it would be a perfect weapon for a militia.

So do you think teachers should have guns?

Are you suggesting teachers are too incompetent to handle a weapon, M T Brain Socket? Don't project you inadequacies onto others, M T Brain Socket.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Are you suggesting teachers are too incompetent to handle a weapon, ..... .

With all due respect, ..

.. were you the one who previously was recommending a "biometric trigger guard" on weapons carried by teachers?

Yes ... post #42.

Apparently the Austin Crowd believes their teachers are more capable than police officers, also.

I'm not sure that's comforting and supporting, but .... "any port in a storm!"

I'll have to check to see if the Austin ISD police officers have "biometric" guards on their duty weapons .... or if the are instructed by their policies to have the chamber empty while on duty! Two remarkable suggestions for teachers who are being touted as expert handgun handlers! At least the Florida legislature has a grasp on reality.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

With all due respect, ..

.. were you the one who previously was recommending a "biometric trigger guard" on weapons carried by teachers?

Yes ... post #42.

Apparently the Austin Crowd believes their teachers are more capable than police officers, also.

I'm not sure that's comforting and supporting, but .... "any port in a storm!"

I'll have to check to see if the Austin ISD police officers have "biometric" guards on their duty weapons .... or if the are instructed by their policies to have the chamber empty while on duty! Two remarkable suggestions for teachers who are being touted as expert handgun handlers!

U.S. prisons do not allow weapons inside the wire for a reason. There are criminals in those classrooms. And there are many, many more who not mastered self-control -- external factors beyond the teacher's ability to use a weapon. So, a bio-metric trigger safety is a solution that would preclude a student unexpectedly snatching a teacher's weapon and causing immediate havoc.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

.... -- external factors beyond the teacher's ability to use a weapon. So, a bio-metric trigger safety is a solution that would preclude a student unexpectedly snatching a teacher's weapon and causing immediate havoc.

You just made my point ... again!

If you were correct then the Austin ISD would have no rounds in their chamber and biometric trigger guards.

If a person cannot retain their weapon from being snatched ... they have no business having a weapon in their possession. Period!

There are no weapons taken into jails and prisons, because those responsible for the safety of EVERYONE inside the jail or prison recognize that the ONLY WAY TO KEEP IT SAFE is to NOT HAVE ANY FIREARMS INSIDE. It's rather simple. Unless of course, someone is trying to advance an agenda. That is also why the legislatures and Congress create "Gun Free Zones" with exceptions to LE, both local, state, and Federal and a select few individuals like Judges.

LE officers are instructed and trained on weapon retention, and they aren't even allowed to carry them into Jails and Prisons.

TCOLE (Texas):
Course No. 2047 Officer Survival/Weapon Retention

But you want to allow an untrained teacher to carry one into a school with children inside????

You have now injected a new "block" of instruction in the Education Curriculum for want-a-be teachers. It's called:

Teacher Survival/Weapon Retention

The mere fact of your suggestions of a "trigger guard" PROVES they shouldn't be in the schools with teachers.