Wouldn't arming teachers make them the first target for any shooter?

I was listening to an interview with the head of an Eastern WA district that has about 15-20 administrators who are required to carry a concealed weapon when on school grounds. It was response to Sandy Hook. He made some interesting points.

They train, with a former State Patrolman, twice a month. This training is significantly more than some PDs.

They carry 9mm. The Superintendent wants to upgrade this as he believes 9mm is way undergunned, especially against a rifle.

To counter the idea that the SWAT team would take them out, the local PD is well aware, has notified been notified of the carry program, and each "carrier" has a vest to wear when actually engaging an intruder.

It sounds like tis district took the question seriously and is actually working with local LE. It does concern me, though, that they are doing more training than at least some PDs. In my mind, if you are authorized/required to carry a weapon then you had better be on the high end of ability to hit targets and those targets have to be more than static paper.

Funny how things change. At my high school one could say that we students armed the Principle and Superintendent. That is, if we brought firearms to school via the school bus (for afternoon bird hunting typically) we had to drop off our shotguns and shell bags in the Principle's office. If there had been a school shooter, I'd have been totally at ease with Mr. Parker or Mr. Miller, both WWII veterans, borrowing a student's shotgun. Not sure if #8 birdshot would really take care of business though.

Disgusting thread.

Much like most things in life that annoy or upset us, there is the "Non Participation Option" available for your use.

Harden our schools.
It's pathetic they are so soft.

I told my kids to run the opposite direction from the gun fire.
Fast and far.

Staying behind and trusting a liberal snowflake to protect them is a waste of time.

Toppenish School District has had 20 school administrators carrying guns (concealed) since 2014. They train twice a month.

http://q13fox.com/2018/02/28/new-legisla...-in-washington/

If teachers are armed and a shooter comes into the school, wouldn't your first move as the shooter be to take out the teachers? Maybe that's too logical but it would seem to be what would happen.

Only if the teacher is slow.

"take out the teachers first"? Excuse me, since when did psycho boy become a navy seal team member? He's going to plan a way to take out teachers first because of the idiot's superior training and experience in military takeovers? WTF? These booger-eating morons get a gun and walk into a room of helpless kids and fire away, but we're going to act like he's a tactical assassin? It's a gun, you point and shoot.
Here's how you solve this problem....no more assault rifles period. No guns for anybody under 21 period. And the screening process after that is more thorough than a colonoscopy. Anybody known to post anything of a violent and/or threatening nature on social media gets a visit from law enforcement....computers, guns, and cell phone is taken, plus a forearm shiver to the throat on the way out. Parents are told if any more crap is posted they will be fined.....we're talking half of their retirement. Next, more security at schools. Wish I would have been in the parking lot when that Bainbridge idiot was doing assaults yesterday. They would have needed a shovel to scrap his face off the pavement. Last, anyone caught alive doing this again is executed immediately.

Just sayin'
Snake

Outlawing Black guns is RACIST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The hell does ANYONE, and that includes Parker, NEED an AR clone for? You really think you need more than 8 shots from a .45 to defend yourself and your home? Lotta fire-fights where you live?

If a 12 ga. Remington 870, .30-06 and a .357 are not sufficient, then it's Red Dawn.

And calling an AR-15 a "modern sporting rifle" is done for the same reason that the tribes referring to gambling as "gaming"- because it sounds less scary. Doesn't change the fact that it's BS marketing designed to make you feel better about your decision that you want to own an AR (or gamble) because you farking WANT TO.

I get that, I want to own a Dodge Demon but I am not going to try to persuade myself that I somehow need it. As for getting rid of the ones already out there, simple- $500 per gun returned. No, I know you paid a lot more than that for you Colt LE6920, but I bet a lot of those ARs are sitting unused in the safe and the wife would be happy if you got rid of the gaddam thing you only bought because you thought Obama was coming to take it away. That's a measly $8 million which is not even the Pentagon's toilet paper budget. We did it for clunkers, why not ARs?

Big Bank Hank (look him up), no one including the "Demotard" (did you really write that?) believes that it's going to stop it all. Whitman was a trained marine (at least according to Full Metal Jacket) and those fellas are hard to stop. Nothing will stop it all. There's a death penalty for aggravated murder in several states and Old Sparky and lethal injections still happen all the time. Behavior is hard to legislate but it might help, it might save a school or two and it is hard to see how it would hurt.

No. Negative. Shall not infringe. No inches. No deals. No negotiation. Sorry, not sorry.

[quote=Capt. Quint]The hell does ANYONE, and that includes Parker, NEED an AR clone for?
quote]
You don't get to ask that question.
Answer is NUNYA! As in NUNYA FUKEN BIZNESS

Hank is back.

So who ordered a blowjob?

Hankster:

Read the Bill: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/5087/text

Your tube fed .22 is exempted. You can keep it.

P.s. It doesn't stand a chance at passing.

Okie doke, down the rabbit hole we go.

"No. Negative. Shall not infringe. No inches. No deals. No negotiation."

Re the Second Amendment - what about that whole "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state . . ." part? Militias required to keep our state secure these days? You part of that militia? Just checkin.

First Amendment- "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech..."

And yet, all sorts of speech are prohibited and restricted. You cannot yell FIRE! in a movie theater and hate-speech (and some of you here would be the ones who would know about that) is also not protected.

How many of you all own full-autos? How come you don't? The law already curtails your rights to own certain arms and it appears that more restrictions may be coming. No constitutional right is unrestricted and who knows but more restrictions could be coming although it appears that it isn't going to happen right now.

Lastly, you might wish to review the comments of late Justice Scalia in the Heller case. Here's a handy NY Times article but I am sure Breitbart has coverage of it too... https://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/12/11/justice-scalias-gun-control-argument/

Why are you questioning •my• needs?

What is an "AR clone"?

PS. I don't own any of the firearms at my house. They are owned by a trust.

Start googling National Firearms Act Trust laws and trust laws in general and then get back to me with more stupid statements about my needs or what you believe is in the possession of the trust.

I believe he is calling all modern sporting rifles other than the original ArmaLite model AR-15 "clones". Did you set up your own trust? If so, was it difficult? If not, who helped you do it? I've been tossing the idea around for a year or two. Current legislation makes me feel I should get around to it sooner than later...