Ore. teacher wants to take gun to school

[Rich Parsons]

Check this link:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071008/ap_on_re_us/pistol_packing_teacher

 

[Gordon Nore]

Check this link:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071008/ap_on_re_us/pistol_packing_teacher

Three thoughts:

1. My understanding of the Second Amendment is that it covers the right to bear arms, not necessarily the right to carry them concealed.

2. As a parent, I would not feel safe knowing my kid's teacher was being stalked, whether she had a gun or not. If she is in that much danger, may she shouldn't be at school.

Even if she wins, Katz said, she may not bring the gun to school. "The whole point of carrying concealed is no one should know you're carrying," she said. "So I feel like my carrying concealed on campus now sets me up as a target."

3. So why did she even bring it up in the first place?

 

[bushidomartialarts]

It's pretty clear that you're not allowed to have a gun even near a school where I live. There was even a flap some years back about whether or not gun owners whose homes were within that distance could keep guns at all.

Turns out they could, once all was said and done.

But I find I tire of people who believe they should be the exception to the rule. This is not the first teacher who's been stalked. Why does she feel she should be allowed to break the rule?

This isn't really about the second amendment. It's about one woman's sense of entitlement, which just happens to involve a gun in this case. If she'd wanted to wear miniskirts to class (also against the rules and arguably free expression), we wouldn't be reading about this. She'd just quietly be dismissed.

Just my two cents.

 

[Makalakumu]

This isn't really about the second amendment. It's about one woman's sense of entitlement, which just happens to involve a gun in this case. If she'd wanted to wear miniskirts to class (also against the rules and arguably free expression), we wouldn't be reading about this. She'd just quietly be dismissed.

So, how will this song be sung when the perp walks into the school, either when kids are there or not, and guns her down? This question has nothing to do with what a person is wearing to class, its about protecting one's self from violence.

 

[Big Don]

Three thoughts:

1. My understanding of the Second Amendment is that it covers the right to bear arms, not necessarily the right to carry them concealed.

As written: [SIZE=+1]A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.([/SIZE]

Main Entry: in·fringe
Pronunciation: in-'frinj
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): in·fringed; in·fring·ing
Etymology: Medieval Latin infringere, from Latin, to break, crush, from in- + frangere to break -- more at [SIZE=-1]BREAK[/SIZE]
transitive verb
1 : to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another <infringe a patent>
2 obsolete : [SIZE=-1]DEFEAT[/SIZE], [SIZE=-1]FRUSTRATE[/SIZE]
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/infringe)[SIZE=+1]I don't see any qualifiers, such as; except in certain places, but, not concealed, etc. As written, which is the only sane way to look at it, it allows people to bear (carry) arms and adding qualifiers, such as rules against concealment, etc would seem to defeat and frustrate the armed citizen.

[/SIZE] 2. As a parent, I would not feel safe knowing my kid's teacher was being stalked, whether she had a gun or not. If she is in that much danger, may she shouldn't be at school.

People that are attacked don't deserve consideration or help either...

3. So why did she even bring it up in the first place?

Because BOTH her safety and her rights were endangered and she was too honest to sneak a gun to work. Gee, nice to see how being honest helps...

 

[Big Don]

This isn't really about the second amendment. It's about one woman's sense of entitlement, which just happens to involve a gun in this case. If she'd wanted to wear miniskirts to class (also against the rules and arguably free expression), we wouldn't be reading about this. She'd just quietly be dismissed.

Just my two cents.

Really? So, the US Constitution doesn't apply to her? Why?

 

[jks9199]

Let's see...

She's complied with the law to obtain a permit and she's got reasonable justification to carry a gun. (Not that I really think she needs individual justification... but I'll let David Grossman et al address that in a moment.)

She's got every right to make a living, in the profession she's trained for and practiced for some years.

While I think it would be good for her (and other teachers & school staff) to recieve some specialized training recognizing their unique situation... why should she be barred from a reasonable means of protecting not only herself, but the students?

Folks... I got news. It's not just angry exes we've got to worry about in schools. It ain't even just the disgruntled students. Terrorists WILL attack our schools; I really think it's only dumb luck they haven't yet. (I'll ignore the observation that some gang shootings that have occurred at schools, as well as special interest, hate-related, or narcotic related crime that have taken place at our schools are very arguable terrorism.) As I said, I'm going to let David Grossman, Richard Fairburn and a few others speak to this... they do it much better than I can. See this, or this for starters. Beyond that... plug things like "Beslan" and "school terrorism" into a search engine.

Why the hell shouldn't a willing teacher be armed? Does anyone else think that maybe the death toll at Virginia Tech or Columbine would have been a lot lower with a few teachers (or, in the case of Tech, adult students) carrying guns?

And... for those of the opinion that if her ex is stalking her, she shouldn't be working... Maybe you'll give up your job because of the actions of someone else, whom you cannot control? I know this is going to be inflammatory -- but I can't help but wonder if maybe you'd be happier if she'd stayed with an abusive husband?

She's not even argueing a constitutional issue; the state's laws PERMIT her to carry. (In VA, only cops are allowed to carry concealed at a school -- but anyone who can have the gun legally can leave it in a "locked container" in the parking lot -- and the car counts as a container!) It's only an exception to a school rule that she's seeking. And I'd bet there are plenty of other rules that they've made exceptions for...

 

[Grenadier]

I actually find it rather odd, that people who are so vehemently against this lady lawfully carrying her gun, think that she could be a source of trouble. All it takes is a bit of common sense.

I'll put it forth rather bluntly... If someone wants to cause problems with a firearm, he / she isn't going to go through the trouble of getting a concealed carry permit. I strongly doubt that this teacher is going to be the type to cause trouble.

Criminals the likes of Cho Seung Hui, et. al., are going to commit crimes, regardless of the laws or school rules in place. Such rules don't create any magical auras that prevent them from carrying out their actions.

 

[Andrew Green]

For those that support her, Suppose a 18 year old student had similar concerns and wanted a concealed carry permit and to bring a gun to school, should they be allowed?

 

[Big Don]

For those that support her, Suppose a 18 year old student had similar concerns and wanted a concealed carry permit and to bring a gun to school, should they be allowed?

Absolutely! Is an 18 year old student not allowed Constitutional rights? Does self-defense begin at 21?

 

[tellner]

But I find I tire of people who believe they should be the exception to the rule. This is not the first teacher who's been stalked. Why does she feel she should be allowed to break the rule?

Bushido, take a careful look at the facts and your dismissal of the situation. Her ex is a well-established threat to her life. He is violent. He ignores restraining orders. So do almost all the people who have them. The school board won't even forbid him from working in the same building she does.

This isn't some sort of Jackie Chan fantasy where they will jump up on the desks and she will defeat him with her superior badly dubbed kung fu. Her only reasonable means of staying alive if or more likely when he comes for her is a gun. She's been investigated and shown to be law-abiding. Her pistol is only a threat to the criminal, not to the innocent. Judges generally issue mutual restraining orders which would have prohibited her from even owning firearms. It's telling that it only goes one way.

She could have just carried her gun and not told anyone. It's what I'd do in her shoes even though it's against The Rule. But she's a standup kind of person and wants to do it legally and above board, so she is trying to get the rule clarified or changed. The callous way you dismiss the very real threat to her life is troubling considering what a kind guy you are in person.

 

[tellner]

jks, we've had six uninterrupted years of unremitting paranoia and propaganda about The Terrorists. They're everywhere. They're a constant threat to everyone. They justify anything the twits in the White House want to do. We need to jettison our freedoms and the rule of Law. We need surveillance cameras on every corner. We should all buy duct tape and Saran Wrap to protect ourselves from the poison gas and dirty bombs. Sorry, women carrying breast milk for their babies need to drink it in front of the TSA because it might be a poisoned terrorist weapon (true story). Oops, I mean Homeland Security funds need to go to a turkey festival in the Corn Belt because The Terrorists might attack it (again, a true story). Chertoff reached into his bag of M&Ms and pulled out an orange one. Everybody panic!

The reality is that schools are among the safest places in the country. That's precisely why the teacher's request is so noteworthy. She's in an unusually bad situation and needs to take exceptional measures precisely because it is so far outside what commonly happens in schools. The chances of The Terrorists breaking into a random school in a benighted town in Southern Oregon and getting in a gunfight are about, oh I don't know, half as likely as the cow jumping over the moon and landing on my head when she touches down. And if they did the odds against it being in one of the few schools where someone happened to have a handgun and her encountering them and driving them off with it are pretty much zero outside of Hollywood.

It's not a good argument much as we both support her right to carry in her personally dangerous situation.

 

[Big Don]

And if they did the odds against it being in one of the few schools where someone happened to have a handgun and her encountering them and driving them off with it are pretty much zero outside of Hollywood.

I'm curious, September 10th 2001, what were the odds that terrorists would fly planes into buildings? Odds have little if anything to do with terrorism or crime, as neither are the acts of rational people.

 

[shesulsa]

Having had my life and those of my children threatened by an ex on a restraining order ... I'm all for it. She tried to do this anonymously but found her case would likely be dismissed as an anonymous entity cannot sue another entity and the case would have been thrown out.

I'm frustrated that the school board will not deny this man employ in the vicinity; but I wonder about the employment laws and how that all mixes. They likely cannot discriminate against him and keep him from doing a job he applied for and is qualified for if he is not a felon and has no other qualities that preclude him from employment through the district. I wonder if she must submit the court order to her employer and if it's a breech of confidentiality she didn't want to risk? I'd have to wonder that if they employed him and he had need to be in her vicinity as a part of his regular duties if they could be held liable for aiding and abetting if he decided to be a bad little boy?

Well, if all works out the way it should, the kids will never see the gun, she'll be able to manage their undoubtedly incoming inquiries and maintain a level of respect with her peers. This is certainly a road less travelled. I'll be interested to see how all this pans out.

I want to say that it's about doggone time a woman came forward to openly set a firm example of a woman vehemently valuing her own safety and life enough to take such a stance. Good for her.

 

[Cruentus]

We've discussed this issue at length before this incident, and my opinion still stands (even though the thread got a bit heated at times...

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=38449&highlight=Guns+schools

This issue is hard for most of us to really wrap our brains around; but an examination of the arguements on both sides really speaks to the collective phobias and rational of our time and culture.

It is interesting to hear the impractical arguements regarding the issue on both sides (not refering or pointing fingers to anyone here, I am saying accross the board and in general). Without addressing those, let's just speak in pragmatic terms here.

Let's pretend that it is legal to concealed carry with a license in schools, and that the issue gets no real attention because carrying or not carrying isn't considered a "big deal" by anyone. What would the results be?

We can say that there wouldn't be a flooding of cases of guns being left all over the school and kids and staff blowing each others heads off. We can also say that many terrorist attacks wouldn't be thwarted by Kindergarden cops across america either. So what can we say?

Business would go on as usual. Students would learn and develop as they would with or without the regulation. Most of the staff would opt not to carry a firearm, as they do in their daily lives already. And the ones that do carry; people won't know and it won't matter in the day to day lives of everyone at the school because they are doing so legally and concealed.

There would be no negative impacts caused by allowing people to carry in schools, and life would go on business as usual.

However, that one time that there is a terrorist attack, whether columbine-like or otherwise, more staff will have the option of defending themselves and their students. Would-be assailents would have to worry about who might defend the school besides 1 SRO who can't be everywhere or defend everything.

Staff in tough school districts who live in tough neighborhoods would also have the option to carry as well; and wouldn't have to be afraid going to their cars and homes at night.

It is real easy to say that "my school (or home, or neighborhood, etc.) is safe, so I don't need to carry a weapon." That is fine for your personal choice. But it is quite another all too easy of a thing to say that, "Since we are safe, we shouldn't let others carry a weapon in our environment."

Everyone thinks there safe until something happends to prove that they are not. Then it is this big shocker; a big surprise to the media and to most people who simply choose to not see the warning signs or the possabilities.

Do we want to have better homeland security? Do we want to be safer in our schools, and public places in general? Well...who do you think that is up too? The Bush Administration? The local police who can't be everywhere? When more people realize that it is up to the individual to ensure safety and self-defense, and that the private citizen is almost always the first responder, then the safer we will be.

Controlling where we can and can't carry a weapon isn't the way to get to that safer, or free society...

There are places where you can carry w/ permit on school property, like in Utah, and lo and behold, there isn't mass shootings of our children by law abiding citizens because of it. Imagine that..

With a proper permit, there is no good reason someone shouldn't be able to carry concealed in schools.

C.

 

[tellner]

Big Don, we knew precisely what odds were on September 10th. It's been tediously well established that the Clinton Administration specifically warned the incoming Bush Administration about specific reliable intelligence they had about the particular plan to hijack airplanes and fly them into buildings in the US. The Bush transition team ignored it. They ignored more specific warnings from the CIA in the months and in fact days leading up to the attack. Two FBI employees who tried to get the Justice Department to take note of similar information were fired.

The White House knew the odds and chose to ignore them. It really is as simple as that.

Why don't you wear plate armor every day? Someone might come after you with a sword.

Why don't you carry a reinforced umbrella to ward off falling meteorites?

How about a bone saw in case someone develops a sudden case of gas gangrene and need to do an emergency high amputation?

There is a chance that all the oxygen in the room will quantum tunnel to the other side of the globe. Do you have a long snorkel so that you can breathe from inside the affected area?

Do you always carry a gas mask, potassium iodate pills, lead-lined clothes, garlic and silver bullets?

You are a sane man, so the answer to all of these is "Of course not." That's because you calculate the odds of these things happening and decide that the chance of them happening is so low that the cost of taking these barking mad measures outweighs any benefit you might get from taking them. To act otherwise is completely crazy.

 

[jks9199]

For those that support her, Suppose a 18 year old student had similar concerns and wanted a concealed carry permit and to bring a gun to school, should they be allowed?

If the 18 year old has complied with the laws, and is eligible to carry legally... why not?

As Grenadier said -- criminals aren't going to play by the rules. I've never taken a weapon off a criminal who cared that it was illegal -- except that they got arrested.

 

[Andrew Green]

There are places where you can carry w/ permit on school property, like in Utah, and lo and behold, there isn't mass shootings of our children by law abiding citizens because of it. Imagine that..

That is a very weak argument that fails at establishing a cause and effect. Mass shootings are rare, and I don't think there is anywhere near enough of them to establish a cause and effect connection based on one state not having had any.

I get the feeling that most of these shooting sprees are carried out by people that have no intention of living through it, just going out in a blaze. Good people with guns might have ended it earlier, but I doubt it would have prevented them.

 

[shesulsa]

I have to say I am concerned that she feels a Columbine attack helps to justify her cause to carry a concealed weapon, but I feel more strongly about a viable threat on her personal safety and a restraining order which the school district specifically states they will not aid the enforcement of.

Are police officers required to check their guns at the office?

 

[tellner]

Agreed. I'd be willing to bet that she knows the Columbine thing is irrational but is willing to invoke it to bring her proposal to a wider audience. The real threat to her life is the one that's going to have her attention.