Fox tell Trump to arm Teachers

[wdmso]

fox new the day of the shooting was all about arming teacher and as if on cue Trump endorses guns for teachers to stop shootings and parroting the NRA taking points on Gun Free Zones

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43149694

Then says he didn't say it

“I never said ‘give teachers guns’ like was stated on Fake News @CNN & @NBC,” he posted on Twitter Thursday. “What I said was to look at the possibility of giving ‘concealed guns to gun adept teachers with military or special training experience – only the best. 20% of teachers, a lot, would now be able immediately fire back if a savage sicko came to a school with bad intentions.”

Here we go again Trump says something clearly ... now we are going to be told what he ment.

got to love his cheat sheet clearly written for him not by him

[Sea Dangles]

I think it's great that this gets your panties bunched up.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Just pointing out the daily inept Leadership in the White House .. to those who accept it ..

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Just pointing out the daily inept Leadership in the White House .. to those who accept it ..

So what is your version of how Trump would be competent? Should he have said the NRA knows nothing, should not be listened to. That the Second Amendment should be repealed. That he would immediately make an executive order to ban AR15 type weapons and to implement everything wanted by Nancy Pelosi and the parents whose kids were killed. And that he would consult wdmso before he said or did anything again in order to be sure he would not be inept?

Not that it matters, but how do you know that he didn't write his cheat sheet?

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

So what is your version of how Trump would be competent? Should he have said the NRA knows nothing, should not be listened to. That the Second Amendment should be repealed. That he would immediately make an executive order to ban AR15 type weapons and to implement everything wanted by Nancy Pelosi and the parents whose kids were killed. And that he would consult wdmso before he said or did anything again in order to be sure he would not be inept?

His actions or lack of actions since he has been in office have reinforced my observation his administration is inept .. its not based on feelings or Hate of republicans.. but tangible events



Not that it matters, but how do you know that he didn't write his cheat sheet? does that change its intent ?

Trump does what Fox news tells him to do ... and they know it

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Trump does what Fox news tells him to do ... and they know it

Foxnews told Trump to compromise on DACA and to ban bump stocks? Interesting...

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Just pointing out the daily inept Leadership in the White House .. to those who accept it ..

a/k/a "It is OK as long as agree with my bias - if not then you are evil"

Short version, we do need school security, and a few armed teachers would not hurt, primarily those with mil/LEO experience and able to maintain significant proficiency. Some armed teachers would also help with refining issues and best practices as they will know far more about classroom teaching then the security personnel. Prominent positions on steering committees.

But armed teachers should be well down the list in the combination of solutions that are applied to address this issue.

First should be a stand up of local LEO to buy time for more formal investigations to occur, depending on what has been studied over the last few years as there may be more refined and agreeable efforts in discussion / implementation than we know about.

So we can continue to argue things are not gonna happen:repealing the 2A is NOT gonna happen nor is relying on teachers to be the armed security at school.

Or we can start looking at solutions:
Actual security for schools (those of us that lived overseas or in cities are more used to this).
Discuss improving the background system to prevent some with mental health issues from access to firearms.



We all need to get more knowledgeable on the issues and facts as their is a lot of disinformation going around.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Just pointing out the daily inept Leadership in the White House .. to those who accept it ..

In the 1950s, southern racists were threatening black students trying to attend newly de-segregated schools. Eisenhower sent the military down there to protect the students. It worked. This is the world we live in now. We can pretend it's not the case, but all that does is ensure more tiny caskets get used.

Read Trump's actual statement about teachers. He didn't say that all teachers should be given guns. He said look into the possibility of taking a small number of teachers, and training them to safely have guns at school. He didn't say to give a bazooka to everyone who works at the school, OK?

We have airline pilots who are trained to have firearms in the cockpits. My next door neighbor flies for Delta, he is always armed in the cockpit.

[Jim in CT]

Also, like Trump or not (and I don't), it was politically VERY gutsy for him to do what he did yesterday. Invite victim's families into a meeting with him, live and unfiltered, on TV? Gutsy. And hopefully productive.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by wdmso

fox new the day of the shooting was all about arming teacher and as if on cue Trump endorses guns for teachers to stop shootings and parroting the NRA taking points on Gun Free Zones

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43149694

Then says he didn't say it

“I never said ‘give teachers guns’ like was stated on Fake News @CNN & @NBC,” he posted on Twitter Thursday. “What I said was to look at the possibility of giving ‘concealed guns to gun adept teachers with military or special training experience – only the best. 20% of teachers, a lot, would now be able immediately fire back if a savage sicko came to a school with bad intentions.”

Here we go again Trump says something clearly ... now we are going to be told what he ment.

got to love his cheat sheet clearly written for him not by him

Its actually that you hear what you want to hear.

This is what Trump actually said, which kind of echos what he said he said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.c7af90f414fb

"Your concept and your idea about — it’s called concealed carry — and it only works where you have people very adept at using firearms, of which you have many, and it would be teachers and coaches. If the coach had a firearm in his locker when he ran at this guy — that coach was very brave. Saved a lot of lives, I suspect. But if he had a firearm, he wouldn’t have had to run; he would have shot and that would have been the end of it.

And this would only be, obviously, for people that are very adept at handling a gun. And it would be — it’s called concealed carry, where a teacher would have a concealed gun on them. They’d go for special training. And they would be there, and you would no longer have a gun-free zone. A gun-free zone to a maniac — because they’re all cowards — a gun-free zone is, let’s go in and let’s attack, because bullets aren’t coming back at us.

And if you do this — and a lot of people are talking about it, and it’s certainly a point that we’ll discuss — but concealed carry for teachers and for people of talent — of that type of talent. So let’s say you had 20 percent of your teaching force, because that’s pretty much the number — and you said it — an attack has lasted, on average, about three minutes. It takes five to eight minutes for responders, for the police, to come in. So the attack is over. If you had a teacher with — who was adept at firearms, they could very well end the attack very quickly."

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Its actually that you hear what you want to hear.

This is what Trump actually said, which kind of echos what he said he said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.c7af90f414fb

"Your concept and your idea about — it’s called concealed carry — and it only works where you have people very adept at using firearms, of which you have many, and it would be teachers and coaches. If the coach had a firearm in his locker when he ran at this guy — that coach was very brave. Saved a lot of lives, I suspect. But if he had a firearm, he wouldn’t have had to run; he would have shot and that would have been the end of it.

And this would only be, obviously, for people that are very adept at handling a gun. And it would be — it’s called concealed carry, where a teacher would have a concealed gun on them. They’d go for special training. And they would be there, and you would no longer have a gun-free zone. A gun-free zone to a maniac — because they’re all cowards — a gun-free zone is, let’s go in and let’s attack, because bullets aren’t coming back at us.

And if you do this — and a lot of people are talking about it, and it’s certainly a point that we’ll discuss — but concealed carry for teachers and for people of talent — of that type of talent. So let’s say you had 20 percent of your teaching force, because that’s pretty much the number — and you said it — an attack has lasted, on average, about three minutes. It takes five to eight minutes for responders, for the police, to come in. So the attack is over. If you had a teacher with — who was adept at firearms, they could very well end the attack very quickly."

Thank you. It's being reported that he said that everyone at the school should get a howitzer if they want one. That's not even close to what he said. This is the state of the "news" today.

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

How about a national guardsman at every single school, every single day, just inside the front door, armed to the teeth. As I have said, I don't like the sight of that. But I like it more than the sight of tiny caskets being covered with dirt.

I would want someone more experienced, retired LEO, Guardsman with multiple years service. But not PFC Schmuckatelli.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by JohnR

I would want someone more experienced, retired LEO, Guardsman with multiple years service. But not PFC Schmuckatelli.

Agreed 100%.

I don't want ANYONE there with a gun. I have 3 kids in elementary school. But in this world, I'm not sure that's a responsible position to take anymore. Obviously experienced, trained people. But if we do that, there's a possibility that person could snap and kill everyone at the school. There are no perfect solutions, we have to find the least repugnant solution.

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Its actually that you hear what you want to hear.

This is what Trump actually said, which kind of echos what he said he said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.c7af90f414fb

" A gun-free zone to a maniac — because they’re all cowards — a gun-free zone is, let’s go in and let’s attack, because bullets aren’t coming back at us.."

Two problems:
1. It wasn't a gun free zone. Guns didn't prevent Vegas, Douglas high, Fort Hood, Columbine...
2. Most of these crazed people are looking for a final shoot out, so the idea of "let's attack, because bullets aren't coming back" doesn't hold up.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Two problems:
1. It wasn't a gun free zone. Guns didn't prevent Vegas, Douglas high, Fort Hood, Columbine...
2. Most of these crazed people are looking for a final shoot out, so the idea of "let's attack, because bullets aren't coming back" doesn't hold up.

although not technically a gun free zone, only one allowed to carry was the security guard(s). How many did they have on campus vs how many buildings.

Vegas is not a school, lets stay on topic. that's a different argument.

Fort Hood is actually a Gun Free zone, not allowed to carry unless on security detail/duty. Most military bases are, that is why he killed so many UNARMED SOLDIERS

Columbine was a Gun Free zone.

and my post wasn't in response to arming teachers, it was in response to clarifying what Trump said in regards to arming teachers.

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

although not technically a gun free zone, only one allowed to carry was the security guard(s). How many did they have on campus vs how many buildings.

Vegas is not a school, lets stay on topic. that's a different argument.

Fort Hood is actually a Gun Free zone, not allowed to carry unless on security detail/duty. Most military bases are, that is why he killed so many UNARMED SOLDIERS

Columbine was a Gun Free zone.

and my post wasn't in response to arming teachers, it was in response to clarifying what Trump said in regards to arming teachers.

I was responding to Trump's quote. Wouldn't have mattered if you out someone else posted it. I should have just quoted Trump.

Columbine had two armed guards.

No need to tell me what the topic is. Thanks. Whether you think mass shootings outside of schools are relevant to Trumps idea about soft targets is your opinion.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Two problems:
1. It wasn't a gun free zone. Guns didn't prevent Vegas, Douglas high, Fort Hood, Columbine...
2. Most of these crazed people are looking for a final shoot out, so the idea of "let's attack, because bullets aren't coming back" doesn't hold up.

Were the shooters looking for or expecting bullets to come back? The Las Vegas shooter was in an upper story room of a building away from the festival. The festival itself was a gun free or weapons of any kind free zone (the shooter in the attack on the republican base ball game also was also operating outside of the kill area and was stopped by guards on the field using handguns.) Fort Hood massacre--the victims were not allowed to be armed on base. The armed guards at Douglas High and Columbine failed. Better security was required, lesson learned.

What is the evidence that gun free zones hold up? Aren't the vast majority of gun homicides a result of an armed person killing an unarmed person or persons rather than being a shoot out?

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Were the shooters looking for or expecting bullets to come back? The Las Vegas shooter was in an upper story room of a building away from the festival. The festival itself was a gun free or weapons of any kind free zone (the shooter in the attack on the republican base ball game also was also operating outside of the kill area and was stopped by guards on the field using handguns.) Fort Hood massacre--the victims were not allowed to be armed on base. The armed guards at Douglas High and Columbine failed. Better security was required, lesson learned.

What is the evidence that gun free zones hold up? Aren't the vast majority of gun homicides a result of an armed person killing an unarmed person or persons rather than being a shoot out?

There were tons of armed police in Vegas. Arming every person at the Vegas concert wouldn't have prevented the massacre.

There were armed guards at multiple sites with school shootings and the armed guards didn't prevent the event, prevent death or limit the death.

So now we went from guards to multiple armed teachers.

Were the shooters looking for returned bullets? We can only go based on social media posts and post crime analyses It is often the case that the analysis indicates that the perpetrators plan to go down in a shootout with police. Would a shootout with teachers change that? I don't think we know.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Were the shooters looking for returned bullets? We can only go based on social media posts and post crime analyses It is often the case that the analysis indicates that the perpetrators plan to go down in a shootout with police.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The last shooting the kid dropped the gun and blended in with the students to escape.

Not exactly what I call a blaze of glory
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

If the weapon that the school shooter had was not semiautomatic I would surmise that the coach would have stopped him
Yesterday Rubio said maybe we should eliminate semis
I was quite surprised
The only time so far that a gun was fired by a pilot was by accident
Think about the flip side of arming teachers
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

If the weapon that the school shooter had was not semiautomatic I would surmise that the coach would have stopped him
Yesterday Rubio said maybe we should eliminate semis
I was quite surprised
The only time so far that a gun was fired by a pilot was by accident
Think about the flip side of arming teachers
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"If the weapon that the school shooter had was not semiautomatic I would surmise that the coach would have stopped him "

Major Hasan used a pistol, and he killed 13 trained soldiers, and shot more than 30 others, before being stopped. I agree that a pistols are less deadly than rifles with high capacity magazines, but this is one small piece of the puzzle.

"The only time so far that a gun was fired by a pilot was by accident "

Not sure what your point is. In my town, I'm not sure a cop has fired a weapon on duty in 20 years. Does that mean they don't need guns?

"Think about the flip side of arming teachers"

I am thinking about it. The flip side might be a price we are willing to pay.

How about a national guardsman at every single school, every single day, just inside the front door, armed to the teeth. As I have said, I don't like the sight of that. But I like it more than the sight of tiny caskets being covered with dirt.

[Pete F.]

See below in red

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"If the weapon that the school shooter had was not semiautomatic I would surmise that the coach would have stopped him "

Major Hasan used a pistol, and he killed 13 trained soldiers, and shot more than 30 others, before being stopped. I agree that a pistols are less deadly than rifles with high capacity magazines, but this is one small piece of the puzzle. I suspect Major Hasan had some training and they are all small pieces

"The only time so far that a gun was fired by a pilot was by accident "
The pilot was in a plane and shot thru the fuselage,
not in a school surrounded by classrooms, #^&#^&#^&#^& happens
Not sure what your point is. In my town, I'm not sure a cop has fired a weapon on duty in 20 years. Does that mean they don't need guns?

"Think about the flip side of arming teachers"

I am thinking about it. The flip side might be a price we are willing to pay.
Have your children ever done something stupid or dangerous that you absolutely never would have thought possible, remember far more kids get killed in unintentional shootings than school shootings. There are 100,000 schools in the USA, now think about the statistical possibilities for accidents. And would you want to be the teacher with a gun in his hand when the pumped up and scared cop shows up. The statistics for friendly fire injuries in combat are between 2 and 20% of fatalities and the police have a plan to prevent those for swat teams but they do occur, now throw in some unknown players with guns just to make things interesting.

How about a national guardsman at every single school, every single day, just inside the front door, armed to the teeth. As I have said, I don't like the sight of that. But I like it more than the sight of tiny caskets being covered with dirt.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

See below in red

"I suspect Major Hasan had some training "

True. My point was, banning the AR-15 does not mean we don't still have a big problem. You can do a lot of damage with a pistol in a confined space with a lot of people.

"Have your children ever done something stupid or dangerous that you absolutely never would have thought possible"

Yes, which is one reason why I don't allow guns in my house. I didn't say to arm the kindergarteners. I said trained professionals. Even that can backfire, one of them could accidentally or intentionally kill someone. Could happen, it's possible. It's also possible an armed professional can either prevent an attack, or make an attack less tragic with fewer victims. Time for an honest conversation. You talk about accidents, which is one side of the conversation. The other side, is how many lives might be saved? We need to look honestly at both sides, and see if it's worth it. You only brought one side of the conversation, the reasons not to do it.

Most decisions involve weighing the pros and cons. You listed the cons, and ignored the pros.

I know 17 families in FL and 20 in CT who would give ANYTHING for an armed pro to have been at those 2 schools. You forgot to mention that. It's dishonest to not mention that.

[wdmso]

the real issue is that any gun control suggestions are opposed by the NRA just today their mantra Only Thing That Stops A Bad Guy With A Gun Is A Good Guy by LaPierre and any gun control talks equals confiscation or removal of 2a

the School had security it was secure it had an armed officer.. not sure people have realistic expectations ..

Last week we hated liberal Teachers now we want to arm them ??

this theory of Mutual Assured Destruction being promoted is non sense

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Last week we hated liberal Teachers now we want to arm them ??

well...not the liberal ones....I suspect they'll probably pitch a fit (I know some that already have upon hearing this) and refuse to work in an environment where there may be guns present...could be a win...win

[DZ]

Leave it up to the individual teacher. You have to ask yourself what is the one thing that could make a difference and protect your kids in school tomorrow? Any sort of gun ban would take years, background checks will take a while, a licensed to carry teacher given proper permission takes place immediately.

Let the individual teachers decide.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Last week we hated liberal Teachers now we want to arm them ??

No, we want to LET those who want to carry be allowed to carry, if they are properly trained. I'm pretty sure, as scottw stated, the liberal ones are not going to want to, so nobody is going to make them. and that's not to say that there aren't liberal teachers that would still be willing to.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

the real issue is that any gun control suggestions are opposed by the NRA just today their mantra Only Thing That Stops A Bad Guy With A Gun Is A Good Guy by LaPierre and any gun control talks equals confiscation or removal of 2a

the School had security it was secure it had an armed officer.. not sure people have realistic expectations ..

Last week we hated liberal Teachers now we want to arm them ??

this theory of Mutual Assured Destruction being promoted is non sense

"the real issue is that any gun control suggestions are opposed by the NRA"

That's ONE issue, not THE issue.

Other issues are the fact that Democrat politicians (who take money from Hollywood the way that Republicans take money from the NRA) are opposed to curbing the violence we bombard our kids with. Democrats tend to oppose policies that encourage "traditional" family values, which like it or not, will reduce gun violence (maybe not mass shootings, but garden variety street crime).

Nothing gets done because each side is too beholden to special interests.

Gun control is one of a handful of things that are driving this. School safety, mental health protocols, etc...

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"the real issue is that any gun control suggestions are opposed by the NRA"

That's ONE issue, not THE issue.

Other issues are the fact that Democrat politicians (who take money from Hollywood the way that Republicans take money from the NRA) are opposed to curbing the violence we bombard our kids with. Democrats tend to oppose policies that encourage "traditional" family values, which like it or not, will reduce gun violence (maybe not mass shootings, but garden variety street crime).

Nothing gets done because each side is too beholden to special interests.

Gun control is one of a handful of things that are driving this. School safety, mental health protocols, etc...

Some one should tell that to the NRA and supporters ! because they are not getting the message...


PS the rest of the world plays the same video games they watch the same movies they have seen same sex marriage and gays and drink at a younger age see sexual things daily .. they have no more god in their lives than we do and they tend not to have mass shootings

and Most allow Guns https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overvi...laws_by_nation


So please stop the "traditional" family values, argument thats everyones responsibility as a parent

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Some one should tell that to the NRA and supporters ! because they are not getting the message...


PS the rest of the world plays the same video games they watch the same movies they have seen same sex marriage and gays and drink at a younger age see sexual things daily .. they have no more god in their lives than we do and they tend not to have mass shootings

and Most allow Guns https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overvi...laws_by_nation


So please stop the "traditional" family values, argument thats everyones responsibility as a parent

"Some one should tell that to the NRA "

Agreed. We agree on something!

"please stop the "traditional" family values, argument thats everyones responsibility as a parent"

Yes, it's everyone's responsibility. WAY too many people are derelict in that responsibility. It's irrefutable that it's a major contributor to violence.