• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Yep, teachers should be carrying guns in school...

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
JulesMaximus said:
And that is fine for guns that are DAO and for revolvers but not for guns like the 1911. No way would I carry one cocked with the safety off.
Click to expand...

Right, which is why I'm essentially saying I would never carry an SAO gun. Relying on an external safety is, IMO, inherently unsafe.

Trigger protection is very simple to accomplish. A quality kydex and/or leather holster that fits properly is going to eliminate any distant chance of the trigger somehow getting manipulated while the gun is being carried. No such luck with manual safety manipulation. If the safety is small and/or stiff enough to be very, very unlikely to get flicked off while you move about...it's probably too stiff to count on being smoothly flicked off during a draw.

Of course, this is all once again ignoring the existence of the FPB. I'm not a 1911 guy, so I'm not sure of the specifics...but I'm GUESSING any modern 1911 has one?
 
My bet is on no holster, gun loose in purse, no safety or safety off, followed by blind fishing in purse.

BTW I don't click on Huffing links even if they had donuts.
 
Look if a bunch of kids have to accidentally be shot to maybe protect them from the next intentional school shooting isn't it worth it? Especially if we can now be armed in a school.

Isn't packing everywhere what it's important?
:whiste:
 
This thread is just begging for parodies where the title and first post of each will sarcastically imply that soldiers, police, bodyguards, etc, shouldn't have one just because there is an example of an accident involving one. Even better: accidents related to other tools in unrelated professions.
 
Last edited:
Teachers are easily identifiable and will be the first target of Shooters. Arming the Students is the only deterrent.
 
Personally, I don't really care if teachers carry or not. What I want to see happen, though, is school systems have to report to the parents which teachers do carry and let them decide if they want their kids in a classroom with a gun, licensed and concealed or not.
 
People with a crazy fear of guns should take a few hours and go to a range and get rid of the phobia. Work your way up to the really cool dangerous stuff like flying.
 
Meghan54 said:
Personally, I don't really care if teachers carry or not. What I want to see happen, though, is school systems have to report to the parents which teachers do carry and let them decide if they want their kids in a classroom with a gun, licensed and concealed or not.
Click to expand...

oooh oooh! can we notify them of teachers political leanings, I don't want my kids to suffer through listening to a democrat/republican banter along with their first amendment rights all day!!!!
 
Last edited:
Meghan54 said:
Personally, I don't really care if teachers carry or not. What I want to see happen, though, is school systems have to report to the parents which teachers do carry and let them decide if they want their kids in a classroom with a gun, licensed and concealed or not.
Click to expand...
Let's go one step further and make all CC holders carry around signs so you can decide whether you want to take your kid into Wal-Mart when there is someone with a licensed and concealed gun🙄

Or you could just keep them home all the time and hide under your bed😛
 
sandorski said:
Teachers are easily identifiable and will be the first target of Shooters. Arming the Students is the only deterrent.
Click to expand...

Except then students are back to being the targets, dummy. Autonomous minigun drones bolted to the ceiling of every room is the only real solution. With them set to target gunshots, the only thing you'd have left to worry about is remembering to turn off your camera's flash at school events.
 
CZroe said:
This thread is just begging for parodies where the title and first post of each will sarcastically imply that soldiers, police, bodyguards, etc, shouldn't have one just because there is an example of an accident involving one. Even better: accidents related to other tools in unrelated professions.
Click to expand...

What about pool accidents? Way more kids drown in pools every year than get shot accidentally by some gun in the house. Even so, if you tell a parent that their child is going to visit a friend who has a pool they wouldn't bat an eye. Tell them that the friend's dad has a gun in the house and many of them would freak out and refuse to allow their child to visit. I understand wanting to protect your child from danger. What I don't understand is why people don't prioritize things in the order of actual danger they present to the child and act accordingly. Believe it or not, guns are way down that list.
 
I can pretty much understand why it was legal to lynch mormons in Missouri until the 50s.

This is out of control and needs to be stopped.
 
And I've seen where a security guard logdged a slug into a wall when checking his weapon at shift turnover. Guess we should now arm guards now either in this dipshit world you're making.
 
mikeford said:
People with a crazy fear of guns should take a few hours and go to a range and get rid of the phobia. Work your way up to the really cool dangerous stuff like flying.
Click to expand...

People with a crazy fetish for guns should realize that guns don't make them safer.
 
SlitheryDee said:
What about pool accidents? Way more kids drown in pools every year than get shot accidentally by some gun in the house. Even so, if you tell a parent that their child is going to visit a friend who has a pool they wouldn't bat an eye. Tell them that the friend's dad has a gun in the house and many of them would freak out and refuse to allow their child to visit. I understand wanting to protect your child from danger. What I don't understand is why people don't prioritize things in the order of actual danger they present to the child and act accordingly. Believe it or not, guns are way down that list.
Click to expand...

Except pools aren't designed to kill people. :colbert:

I can teach my son to swim. I cannot teach him how to dodge bullets.
 
JulesMaximus said:
Except pools aren't designed to kill people. :colbert:

I can teach my son to swim. I cannot teach him how to dodge bullets.
Click to expand...

Design is irrelevant. You don't give something that is responsible for more deaths than guns a pass just because it isn't "designed" to kill people. You shouldn't care what the creator's intentions were, just the results. The results are that pools kill far more kids than guns. Just because a gun "feels" more dangerous doesn't mean it's so. In fact the statistics prove otherwise.
 
SlitheryDee said:
Design is irrelevant. You don't give something that is responsible for more deaths than guns a pass just because it isn't "designed" to kill people. You shouldn't care what the creator's intentions were, just the results. The results are that pools kill far more kids than guns. Just because a gun "feels" more dangerous doesn't mean it's so. In fact the statistics prove otherwise.
Click to expand...

When pools are outlawed, only outlaws will have pools.
 
Aren't households with pools more common than households with firearms? If, statistically speaking, one household with pools will kill more (fractional) people than one household with firearms, then you might have a point. Otherwise it could be argued that guns kill fewer people because fewer people are exposed to them.
 
Ruptga said:
Aren't households with pools more common than households with firearms? If, statistically speaking, one household with pools will kill more (fractional) people than one household with firearms, then you might have a point. Otherwise it could be argued that guns kill fewer people because fewer people are exposed to them.
Click to expand...

That's something I don't know, but just considering how many guns are in circulation I doubt there are more households with pools than guns. There are lots of gun nuts out there with 200+ guns in their houses that could be throwing that figure off though.
 
Last edited:
The OP just wants the government to have guns. There goes your constitutional rights. The 2nd protects and safe guards that. Lets just ban free speech because someone said something racially. Or lets outlaw baseball bats because they broke a few skulls. Knives have been the subject of more violence!

Anyway, Huff Post BS
 
Even a 1911 cocked with the slide safety off would still need the beaver tail depressed to allow the trigger to pull. I prefer my Glock 27 or 23 most of the year. Bring out the Kimber in winter. Sig 225 always in my Maxpedition in the truck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top