It's about damn time.

That's a hell of a good deterent for idiot students who bring knives and chains and guns to school, give them to the teachers.

That's not to say I support it, though.

[QUOTE="DeadMann420"]lol i love the "it will stop students from shooting up a school" argument.

You know what would really stop anyone from shooting up 30+ people? No guns...

Try killing 30 people with a knife.
mastershake575

That's a hell of a good deterent for idiot students who bring knives and chains and guns to school, give them to the teachers.

That's not to say I support it, though.

tycoonmike

If you want to have a hunting rifle all the power to you. because of the proper precautions and paperwork i trust a rifle owner... in Texas it seems you need an automatic rifle and a hand gun to protect yourself from the other guy with an automatic rifle and a hand gun...
DeadMann420

And who's to say you can't apply the same law to automatic weaponry?

[QUOTE="mastershake575"][QUOTE="DeadMann420"]lol i love the "it will stop students from shooting up a school" argument.

You know what would really stop anyone from shooting up 30+ people? No guns...

Try killing 30 people with a knife.
DeadMann420

There's nothing like shooting the class clown for getting a good working environment.SolidSnake35

[QUOTE="DeadMann420"]
If you want to have a hunting rifle all the power to you. because of the proper precautions and paperwork i trust a rifle owner... in Texas it seems you need an automatic rifle and a hand gun to protect yourself from the other guy with an automatic rifle and a hand gun...
tycoonmike

And who's to say you can't apply the same law to automatic weaponry?

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"]There's nothing like shooting the class clown for getting a good working environment.LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="SolidSnake35"]There's nothing like shooting the class clown for getting a good working environment.SolidSnake35

[QUOTE="sparkypants"]

1. stop encouraging the image of an idiot america(a redneck is not a good thing)

2.Im proving the point that a)your not the only state, and b)you dont need guns to be safe a friendly

3. its common sense putting guns where children can easly access them is not the brightest idea anyone has come up with. LESS guns would be a smarter move its like someone elese said, try killing 30 people with a knife.

Redneck33

1. Why is being known as an idiot redneck a bad thing :?. Most intelligent people know that this is just a false stereotype anyways. Plus I find that the dumbest people tend to also be the friendliest people. I dont know about you, but I prefer friendly.

2. I never said I was the only state, I was simply defending Texas from all of the bashers. Also I feel that you do need guns to feel safe. Humans are always going to have the urge to murder, so we need to defend ourselves against the few psychos out there.

3. I feel that this law should ONLY apply to middle and high schools. Plus, most of these guns that are killing arent legally bought anyways, so legal guns are not much of a problem.

tell when has a gun done something positive and safe to society?

I'd make the state pay for private education at an unarmed school. No way I send my child to an armed school.LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="DeadMann420"][QUOTE="mastershake575"][QUOTE="DeadMann420"]lol i love the "it will stop students from shooting up a school" argument.

You know what would really stop anyone from shooting up 30+ people? No guns...

Try killing 30 people with a knife.
mastershake575

tell when has a gun done something positive and safe to society?

sparkypants

Using that mentality, you could also say when has a gun done something bad for society. It can't. A gun is merely an inanimate object. If a person wants to kill, they will kill whether they have a gun or not. The old saying still holds true; Guns dont kill people, people kill people.

Having a gun at the teachers disposal will just make it easier to take down a student who is going on a shooting spree. Just because someone has a gun doesn't mean that they are going to use it.

I DO NOT WANT TO SEE THE DAY MY SCIENCE TEACHER WEILDS ANY SORT OF HARMFUL OBJECT.

I take a step back when she takes out a pencil...

I really should not have seen batman :|

[QUOTE="tycoonmike"]

[QUOTE="DeadMann420"]
If you want to have a hunting rifle all the power to you. because of the proper precautions and paperwork i trust a rifle owner... in Texas it seems you need an automatic rifle and a hand gun to protect yourself from the other guy with an automatic rifle and a hand gun...
DeadMann420

And who's to say you can't apply the same law to automatic weaponry?

You don't need such weaponry for hunting. I believe that automatic weaponry should be legalized because you're just as dead if you're shot in the head with a rifle as you are shot in the head with an SMG. And, above all else, the prohibition of automatic weaponry, just as the prohibition of alcohol in the 1920s and the modern prohibition of marijuana, encourages its use by criminal organizations to their means. I mean, I wouldn't like it if some idiot were walking down the street with an M16 strapped to his back, but at least I would feel safer knowing that such weaponry was in the hands of everyone, rather than simply the police, the military, and the Mafioso or related criminals.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]I'd make the state pay for private education at an unarmed school. No way I send my child to an armed school.SolidSnake35

[QUOTE="sparkypants"]

tell when has a gun done something positive and safe to society?

Redneck33

Using that mentality, you could also say when has a gun done something bad for society. It can't. A gun is merely an inanimate object. If a person wants to kill, they will kill whether they have a gun or not. The old saying still holds true; Guns dont kill people, people kill people.

Having a gun at the teachers disposal will just make it easier to take down a student who is going on a shooting spree. Just because someone has a gun doesn't mean that they are going to use it.

but having the gun present icreases the risk of something happening as oposed to it not being there. and your right guns dont kill people, but whats to stop a teacher from snapping, whats to stop the student from getting ahold of the gun. whats to stop the parents from letting the kids bring guns in defense of the teachers. Face it guns have done more damage then any knife(or weapon prior to a fire arm) could. They have evolved to semi-auto,auto to RPGs to explosives the warheads to missles to nukes...they have caused more casualties then any weapon prior, more damage more hostility...guns havent solved any violent problems their presents has only made things worse...and its not the guns fault, but when the insane can chose between a gun and a knife hes going for the gun...

guns havent solved any violent problems their presents has only made things worse

sparkypants

Guns have solved many "violent problems" quite well: World War One, World War Two, the American Revolution, the Civil War, etc. ad nauseaum. Indeed, do you suppose the USA would still be the USA had we decided to become pacifists when Pearl Harbor was attacked?

[QUOTE="DeadMann420"][QUOTE="tycoonmike"]

[QUOTE="DeadMann420"]
If you want to have a hunting rifle all the power to you. because of the proper precautions and paperwork i trust a rifle owner... in Texas it seems you need an automatic rifle and a hand gun to protect yourself from the other guy with an automatic rifle and a hand gun...
tycoonmike

And who's to say you can't apply the same law to automatic weaponry?

You don't need such weaponry for hunting. I believe that automatic weaponry should be legalized because you're just as dead if you're shot in the head with a rifle as you are shot in the head with an SMG. And, above all else, the prohibition of automatic weaponry, just as the prohibition of alcohol in the 1920s and the modern prohibition of marijuana, encourages its use by criminal organizations to their means. I mean, I wouldn't like it if some idiot were walking down the street with an M16 strapped to his back, but at least I would feel safer knowing that such weaponry was in the hands of everyone, rather than simply the police, the military, and the Mafioso or related criminals.

[QUOTE="sparkypants"]

guns havent solved any violent problems their presents has only made things worse

tycoonmike

Guns have solved many "violent problems" quite well: World War One, World War Two, the American Revolution, the Civil War, etc. ad nauseaum. Indeed, do you suppose the USA would still be the USA had we decided to become pacifists when Pearl Harbor was attacked?

World war 1 started because the leader of austria-hungry was SHOT!

World war 2 started because germany lost in WW1 and present the possiblity of Nukes which started the rivalry with russia and the fear of communisum which lead to Vietnam

We TOOK OVER AMERICA WITH GUNS!!! and extermenated a whole race of people(native americans...)

The civil war was faught because the same people who think its ok to have teachers carry guns were the same people who thought slavery was ok

Pearl Harbor wouldnt have happened if guns didnt exist

and neither would the war on terror!

wow.. dont know what to say.

this just adds up to the stereotypical view of americans..

how cant they see, that if the teachers wear guns, the students who already carry guns, are just gonna carry more of them/full-automatic ones. how sad.

edit:

in denmark, where im from, no one but the police is allowed to carry guns. and guess what.. people dont shoot eachother.

no guns -> problem solved.

on a bit more of a serious note, maybe only the principal should have one, so if something does go wrong there is an alternative to the police taking time to get there, then being to scared to go in (wich has sadly happened before...) even if your p.pal does have a fat @$$ like mine, it may take him a bit to get up the stairs. He can keep it in a safe in the "super secret" teachers lounge, and if a teacher thinks that something may go wrong, he or she could have the option to take and conceal the other arm. Or if zombies attack, the principal and secretary could fight them off together. Now I'd like to be alive to see THAT.

Oh, and our school does have a policeman that is there most days working as a guidance counceler, and he does hae the gun and the ppr spray and the cuffs, so I feel a little more secure.

Why not give every student a gun and some training as well? And maybe the janitor as well.

Just get armed security guards that are trained and paid to protect the individuals of the school, don't hand guns around like candy to all in sight. And since you can carry a gun in your car, home, and now at work (I'm pretty sure it's legal in Texas), yes you're pretty much handing them out.

[QUOTE="sparkypants"]

tell when has a gun done something positive and safe to society?

Redneck33

Using that mentality, you could also say when has a gun done something bad for society. It can't. A gun is merely an inanimate object. If a person wants to kill, they will kill whether they have a gun or not. The old saying still holds true; Guns dont kill people, people kill people.

Having a gun at the teachers disposal will just make it easier to take down a student who is going on a shooting spree. Just because someone has a gun doesn't mean that they are going to use it.

Also, i don't know of any police force that carry automatic rifles. An automatic gun is made to: kill, kill fast, and to kill a lot.

I don't see any need for civilians to wield that kind of power.

You cant argue against the fact its harder to kill many people with a hunting rife than it is with an automatic rifle.
DeadMann420

American SWAT teams will usually carry such weapons as MP5s and automatic rifles when it is so required.

I do, in order to defend themselves against a tyrannical government.

"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"- Amendment II, US Constitution

The security of a free state depends upon the ability of the people of said state to defend itself agaisnt all foes, foreign and domestic. If the government were to try to initiate a police state, the people would not be able to defend itself adequately with rifles and pistols.

I can. A hunting rifle can be converted, with something as simple as a telescopic gunsight (which is most hunting rifles come equipped with), into a sniper rifle. Proper training with such a weapon can enable a psychopath to kill several people in a short period of time. I grant you that something like an AK has a far greater rate of fire than does the rifle, but that doesn't stop either weapon, when deployed properly, from killing the same amount of people.

Well, I agree if the teacher is teaching in a bad area, full of crimes/gangs ect.. a gun would be useful

But a small town in texas? I'm a little shaky on that.

[QUOTE="tycoonmike"][QUOTE="sparkypants"]

guns havent solved any violent problems their presents has only made things worse

sparkypants

Guns have solved many "violent problems" quite well: World War One, World War Two, the American Revolution, the Civil War, etc. ad nauseaum. Indeed, do you suppose the USA would still be the USA had we decided to become pacifists when Pearl Harbor was attacked?

World war 1 started because the leader of austria-hungry was SHOT!

World war 2 started because germany lost in WW1 and present the possiblity of Nukes which started the rivalry with russia and the fear of communisum which lead to Vietnam

We TOOK OVER AMERICA WITH GUNS!!! and extermenated a whole race of people(native americans...)

The civil war was faught because the same people who think its ok to have teachers carry guns were the same people who thought slavery was ok

Pearl Harbor wouldnt have happened if guns didnt exist

and neither would the war on terror!

Yes, but none of them would have been solved without guns either.

"All they that take the sword shall perish with the sword"- Matthew 26-52

The day that we as a race forego violence as a method of solution is the day the human race becomes extinct. We are a violent race by nature, whether it be with arrows and swords or machine guns and artillery. The idea that violence never solves anything is a load of horse manure because violence has solved every single war to date. Every single war has ended either in the dissolution, complete destruction, or surrender of the losing side. And I don't think the winning side used, as its primary weapon, words or nonviolent protest.

I dont see how this would do anything...The kid will just take out the teacher first, then the kids.

So, fail.

Yes, but none of them would have been solved without guns either.

"All they that take the sword shall perish with the sword"- Matthew 26-52

The day that we as a race forego violence as a method of solution is the day the human race becomes extinct. We are a violent race by nature, whether it be with arrows and swords or machine guns and artillery. The idea that violence never solves anything is a load of horse manure because violence has solved every single war to date. Every single war has ended either in the dissolution, complete destruction, or surrender of the losing side. And I don't think the winning side used, as its primary weapon, words or nonviolent protest.

tycoonmike

In some cases, people make violence the only option. If someone goes around shooting people in mall. We don't exactly have any peaceful option to stop him. Methods of stopping that person will have to be either painful or lethal. Unless we can develop some technology that can incapacitate someone without causing pain or damage. But will that weapon really be better than violence? (think of the evil implications)

[QUOTE="sparkypants"][QUOTE="tycoonmike"][QUOTE="sparkypants"]

guns havent solved any violent problems their presents has only made things worse

tycoonmike

Guns have solved many "violent problems" quite well: World War One, World War Two, the American Revolution, the Civil War, etc. ad nauseaum. Indeed, do you suppose the USA would still be the USA had we decided to become pacifists when Pearl Harbor was attacked?

World war 1 started because the leader of austria-hungry was SHOT!

World war 2 started because germany lost in WW1 and present the possiblity of Nukes which started the rivalry with russia and the fear of communisum which lead to Vietnam

We TOOK OVER AMERICA WITH GUNS!!! and extermenated a whole race of people(native americans...)

The civil war was faught because the same people who think its ok to have teachers carry guns were the same people who thought slavery was ok

Pearl Harbor wouldnt have happened if guns didnt exist

and neither would the war on terror!

Yes, but none of them would have been solved without guns either.

"All they that take the sword shall perish with the sword"- Matthew 26-52

The day that we as a race forego violence as a method of solution is the day the human race becomes extinct. We are a violent race by nature, whether it be with arrows and swords or machine guns and artillery. The idea that violence never solves anything is a load of horse manure because violence has solved every single war to date. Every single war has ended either in the dissolution, complete destruction, or surrender of the losing side. And I don't think the winning side used, as its primary weapon, words or nonviolent protest.

there are so many things wrong with this...if the gun never existed the war wouldnt...therefore you wouldnt need the gun to stop the guy with the gun BECAUSE THE GUN ISNT THERE!

"The idea that violence never solves anything is a load of horse manure because violence has solved every single war to date."

It also started it...

Yes violence is in are blood but why feed the fire?

[QUOTE="DeadMann420"]

Also, i don't know of any police force that carry automatic rifles. An automatic gun is made to: kill, kill fast, and to kill a lot.

I don't see any need for civilians to wield that kind of power.

You cant argue against the fact its harder to kill many people with a hunting rife than it is with an automatic rifle.
tycoonmike

American SWAT teams will usually carry such weapons as MP5s and automatic rifles when it is so required.

I do, in order to defend themselves against a tyrannical government.

"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"- Amendment II, US Constitution

The security of a free state depends upon the ability of the people of said state to defend itself agaisnt all foes, foreign and domestic. If the government were to try to initiate a police state, the people would not be able to defend itself adequately with rifles and pistols.

I can. A hunting rifle can be converted, with something as simple as a telescopic gunsight (which is most hunting rifles come equipped with), into a sniper rifle. Proper training with such a weapon can enable a psychopath to kill several people in a short period of time. I grant you that something like an AK has a far greater rate of fire than does the rifle, but that doesn't stop either weapon, when deployed properly, from killing the same amount of people.

American SWAT teams will usually carry such weapons as MP5s and automatic rifles when it is so required.

-Correct me if I'm wrong but SWAT =/= regular everyday Police

I do, in order to defend themselves against a tyrannical government.

-See my older post on that

"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"- Amendment II, US Constitution

-Oh yes a document created in 1787 should still retain the same authority it did during a time you were still afraid of being re colonized by Britain. /sarcasm

Welcome to the 20th century friend

The security of a free state depends upon the ability of the people of said state to defend itself agaisnt all foes, foreign and domestic. If the government were to try to initiate a police state, the people would not be able to defend itself adequately with rifles and pistols.

Typical fear ruled ideologies … Jesus I wonder how far we have really come when people feel the need for weapons to feel safe.

Words and ideas > Any weapon

I can. A hunting rifle can be converted, with something as simple as a telescopic gunsight (which is most hunting rifles come equipped with), into a sniper rifle. Proper training with such a weapon can enable a psychopath to kill several people in a short period of time. I grant you that something like an AK has a far greater rate of fire than does the rifle, but that doesn't stop either weapon, when deployed properly, from killing the same amount of people.

I think you fail to understand a majority of rifles in Canada are 20 caliber… you can hardly HURT a human by shooting them with a 20 caliber.

Also scope + hunting rifle hardly = fully functional long range sniper rifle.

Also a child in Africa can kill numerous amounts of people with an AK. Not so easy to do the same with a modified rifle (what with wind, bullet trajectory ETC)

there are so many things wrong with this...if the gun never existed the war wouldnt...therefore you wouldnt need the gun to stop the guy with the gun BECAUSE THE GUN ISNT THERE!

"The idea that violence never solves anything is a load of horse manure because violence has solved every single war to date."

It also started it...

Yes violence is in are blood but why feed the fire?

sparkypants

Let me explain something to you. The ONLY way to eradicate war is to eradicate conscious thought, either by the extinction of the human race or the extinction of human nature. That means no philosophy, no science, no reason, no love, no emotion, no passion, nothing that would make us human. Frankly, I prefer a world in everlasting war to a world in everlasting peace because it is in chaos that men are truly free. We are free because of chaos, and because of chaos we desire security, and because we desire security we are enslaved to war. It is because of the violent nature inside of us that all of our beauty comes from. All our science, philosophy, art, music, ALL of it because we are war-like. I would rather die a free man than live as an enslaved man.

[QUOTE="sparkypants"]

there are so many things wrong with this...if the gun never existed the war wouldnt...therefore you wouldnt need the gun to stop the guy with the gun BECAUSE THE GUN ISNT THERE!

"The idea that violence never solves anything is a load of horse manure because violence has solved every single war to date."

It also started it...

Yes violence is in are blood but why feed the fire?

tycoonmike

Let me explain something to you. The ONLY way to eradicate war is to eradicate conscious thought, either by the extinction of the human race or the extinction of human nature. That means no philosophy, no science, no reason, no love, no emotion, no passion, nothing that would make us human. Frankly, I prefer a world in everlasting war to a world in everlasting peace because it is in chaos that men are truly free. We are free because of chaos, and because of chaos we desire security, and because we desire security we are enslaved to war. It is because of the violent nature inside of us that all of our beauty comes from. All our science, philosophy, art, music, ALL of it because we are war-like. I would rather die a free man than live as an enslaved man.

...what!?

by taking away guns your not eradicating war. War has been around long before guns...and by taking them away your not losing your preciouse war so dont worry pal. By taking away guns your taking away the potential of countless slaughterings...I dare you to go say this little speech to the countless mothers who lost their son(s) to war while you sat at a computer talking about how guns and war are a good thing. Why dont YOU go and fight. You speak nonsense just like this law!

-Correct me if I'm wrong but SWAT =/= regular everyday Police

-See my older post on that

-Oh yes a document created in 1787 should still retain the same authority it did during a time you were still afraid of being re colonized by Britain. /sarcasm

Welcome to the 20th century friend

Typical fear ruled ideologies … Jesus I wonder how far we have really come when people feel the need weapons for safety.

I think you fail to understand a majority of rifles in Canada are 20 caliber… you can hardly HURT a human by shooting them with a 20 caliber.

Also scope + hunting rifle hardly = fully functional long range sniper rifle.

Also a child in Africa can kill numerous amounts of people with an AK. Not so easy to do the same with a modified rifle (what with wind, bullet trajectory ETC)

DeadMann420

I will grant you that you don't necessarily see SWAT members walking down the street on routine patrols, but the fact is that SWAT is a part of the police force for most American towns and cities.

You're damn right it should. If you haven't noticed, the Constitution is still (supposedly, but that's another tale for another time) the supreme law of the land. And frankly, I am afraid of all government types. I do not trust an oligarchy, which is what almost all governments are. Government limits the freedom of the people by forcing them to choose, or not to choose, someone to make decisions for them.

I doubt that. I'd be willing to bet a skilled marksman could harm, or even kill, someone with a properly placed shot.

And such factors don't affect the AK?

...what!?

by taking away guns your not eradicating war. War has been around long before guns...and by taking them away your not losing your preciouse war so dont worry pal. By taking away guns your taking away the potential of countless slaughterings...I dare you to go say this little speech to the countless mothers who lost their son(s) to war while you sat at a computer talking about how guns and war are a good thing. Why dont YOU go and fight. You speak nonsense just like this law!

sparkypants

Highlighted: NO YOU ARE NOT! Take away guns and you simply take away one weapon. There are COUNTLESS other weapons that can be used, crossbows, longbows, swords, maces, daggers, darts, blowguns, cannon, rockets, gauntlets, fists, etc. ad endless nauseaum. And even if you weren't to take away all guns, you still have to deal with an undefeatable black market for the weapons.

Because I do not see the reason to go and fight for something I see as a lost cause. The "war on terror", for instance, is a lost cause because you cannot uproot a terrorist organization by brute force. Those mothers would probably demand my head on a platter, but that doesn't stop me from being right. Warfare is, ultimately and unfortunately, the final solution of any and all human beings, be it as simple as punching out the offender or detonating a nuclear weapon in the enemy's capitol. I don't like it, but I accept violence as being the final solution for all of man's problems. We, normally, take every step available to avoid it and only use violence as a last resort. There are notable exceptions, but generally speaking that is the way.

That is the stupidest idea I have ever heard :|