Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Combat Veteran against teachers carrying a firearm.
#1
I’ve been shot in combat. And as a veteran, I’m telling you: allowing teachers to be armed is an asinine idea

This article came across my news feed this morning. I disagree completely. I admit I only skimmed the article because I thought I already knew what it said. Then I thought well maybe I should read it. So I did, it's even worse than I thought.


If you subscribe to the writers logic then no one should have or carry a gun. His reasoning suggests that ordinary people can not handle the stresses of a life and death situation. 

Now I agree that you never know how a person will handle a situation like an active shooting until they are in that situation. But you can train for it. You can have the mindset that you are willing to do whatever it takes to protect your life and the life of others. 

A teacher should not be forced to carry a firearm. Those that are willing, that already have that fight and protect mindset, should have that choice. I am in no way saying that this is a guaranteed solution. It is a chance. Which is more than what our students and teachers currently have. 

Ordinary people are put into extraordinary situations and come out on top on a daily basis. The writer is comparing field combat against soldiers to a self defense scenario. Granted there are very similar stresses but the two do not line up.


The worst statement in this article is this.

"You don’t know how a person will respond when their task is shooting someone they know or taught. You just don’t know.


And now we are expecting teachers, even with training, to perfectly handle this situation. I say perfectly because anything less could mean even more tragedy and death. This isn’t a movie where bullets always miss the hero. These teachers aren’t action stars. These are average people, who more likely than not, have never come close to experiencing anything like this."

This thinking suggests that because a person may not be 100% perfect in this situation the solution is to allow a murderer the undeterred ability to kill as many students and teachers as possible. The best idea is to offer no resistance and cower in a corner waiting to be shot.

I can not understand nor support that line of thinking.

Smileak
Reply
#2
Both sides think they have the right answer. Personally, if I were a teacher, I would carry. I always have and I always do.
Reply
#3
Goes to show that even in a group MOST people would probably think are pro-gun/pro-carrying (because they've seen what happens to people who are UNarmed) -- not "garden-variety" vets but combat vets, in this case -- you have plenty of them who are not. In fact, some combat vets REJECT firearms and wouldn't own or use one for ANY reason, not even self-defense. So they can't see or support OTHERS using them in that manner.
I remember seeing "fellow" RVN vets wearing their uniforms in those anti-Vietnam-War marches/protests on TV news. I remember back then thinking they weren't any "brothers in arms" of mine, but simply traitors. The enemy.
I still think they are even today -- along with Jane Fonda, of course! ;-)
ETA (3-4-18): So these "combat vets" who are against arming teachers are clueless, in-denial (of reality) naive fools...and probably (if they weren't already) liberal Democrat supporters/voters, so their "no guns in schools" position is what you'd expect. As well, if schools continue to be GFZs (and malls, theaters, businesses, and other GFZs) we can expect more kids (and shoppers, employees) to die at the hands of the next psycho-shooter (and there are plenty out there).
El Paso, TX
(formerly Colorado Springs CO and Galveston TX)
Reply
#4
I feel bad now, just posted on a thread geared more toward constitutional carry going on about these issues presented here. But anywho...

Don't want to pass laws to allow teachers to protect their students? Fine, I have another idea. Take any number of the liberal arts classes and programs offered at the schools, cut those programs to be able to fund better security measures in the schools. Take a high school band teachers salary, a computer tech class teachers salary (because lets be honest is any student going into high school these days and still needing to learn how to use a computer?) and any other funds needed for those programs and... BAM!! apply all those funds to school security.

This is coming from someone who greatly benefited from liberal arts programs and band as a kid, but times have changed. So if my future children losing those privilages in school means they stay alive until they're 18 then so be it.

Many teachers may make the argument that when they decided go to college to "make a difference in children's lives and bestow their infinite priceless knowledge and opinions on them" that they weren't signing up to be body guards and so they shouldn't be forced to. But again, times have changed.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)