Here we go again. . . . . . .
Shooting in Delaware school
and
A teacher going to sue in order to carry a handgun to work - right or wrong?
ref
Col
Get the distinct feeling we're going to round in the same circles here.
On one hand, if you are part of the group who think that the less guns there are, the less people there are who will get shot, you will be told you don't understand the situation.
On the other hand, if you feel that everyone should be issued a gun as long as they're well-trained and only use them responsibly, since it will make everyone safer, you're going to be classed as dangerous.
Nobody's stance on this is going to changed by any comments made in this forum. People who dislike the idea of anyone getting shot are still going be against guns. People who feel that disarming everyone is less safe than ensuring yet more people are armed are still going to be pro guns. That part of the 'debate' isn't going to progress.
The bit I did find interesting in that story about the teacher was the way she outlines wanting to carry one as defence against her ex, then - almost as an aiside - throws in a comment about how having more armed adults in schools would have (in her opinion) prevented or at least alleviated the past shootings. I got the distinct impression that she thought she'd get more sympathy if she tried to tie her own problems into the tragic shootings elsewhere. To my mind, taking a gun to school is asking for trouble, trained person or not. Kids can - and do - get away with taking teachers' wallets, car keys, etc. how tempting would it be to have a gun within reach? I couldn't tell if she was proposing being allowed to carry it
everywhere? In which case, where is the guarantee that someone passing her in the hall couldn't take it off her?