Texas school’s ‘Guardian Plan’ allows teachers to have guns

[fgarvb1]

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/texas-school-guardian-plan-allows-teachers-guns-174238129.html


In 2007, a school district in Harrold, Texas, made a controversial decision. It allowed teachers to carry concealed weapons on school grounds to protect students against potential shooters.

Now, in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary attack in Newtown, Conn., that left 28 dead including 20 children and the gunman, the school district's methods are getting a closer look. In a report from CBS Dallas Fort Worth, superintendent David Thweatt says the district's "Guardian Plan" is a way of taking charge in the chaos of a potential shooting. Teachers are the true first responders, Thweatt says. "We need to be here to protect our children. Not four, five minutes or six minutes from now."

more...

 

[BotanyBoy]

Well that's just insane....now there will be wholesale slaughter in tx schools no doubt.

 

[koalabear]

AGAINST MONSTERS
Saturday, December 15th, 2012

The atrocity at the Connecticut elementary school will not be the last such horror, nor was it the first or even the worst. Go back to the year 1764, in what is now Franklin County, Pennsylvania. The first: during Pontiac’s Rebellion in the wake of the French and Indian War, four “warriors” entered a schoolhouse and slaughtered the headmaster and some ten children. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontiac's_Rebellion_school_massacre . The worst: in 1927, a crazed monster beat his wife to death, then triggered a bombing in an elementary school in Bath, Michigan, killing some 38 kids and several adults. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster .

I’ll repeat what I said in the Wall Street Journal op-ed section and on the Today show in 1999, after the Columbine High School atrocity: if we simply prepared teachers to handle this type of crisis the way we teach them to handle fires and medical emergencies, the death toll would drop dramatically. We don’t hear of mass deaths of children in school fires these days: fire drills have long since been commonplace, led by trained school staff, not to mention sprinkler systems and smoke alarms and strategically placed fire extinguishers that can nip a blaze in the bud while firefighters are en route. In the past, if someone “dropped dead,” people would cry and wring their hands and wail, “When will the ambulance get here?” Today, almost every responsible adult knows CPR; most schools have easily-operated Automatic Electronic Defibrillators readily accessible; and a heart attack victim’s chance of surviving until the paramedics arrive to take over is now far greater.

The same principle works for defending against mass murders…it just doesn’t work HERE, because it is politically incorrect to employ it HERE. After the Ma’alot massacre in 1974, Israel instituted a policy in which volunteer school personnel, parents, and grandparents received special training from the civil guard, and were seeded throughout the schools armed with discreetly concealed 9mm semiautomatic pistols. Since that time, there has been no successful mass murder at an Israeli school, and every attempt at such has been quickly shortstopped by the good guys’ gunfire, with minimal casualties among the innocent. Similar programs are in place in Peru and the Phillippines, with similarly successful results.

Some people see the logic in the Israeli approach. Dave Workman does, as seen here: http://www.examiner.com/article/oba...-gun-free-school-zone-tragedy?cid=db_articles . Ann Coulter does, as seen here: http://www.thewrap.com/media/column...ter-makes-her-case-concealed-carry-laws-69361 .

Unfortunately, in this country, logic has been buried under political correctness. Those in power whose ego is invested in brie et Chablis values that include scorn for the peasantry they accuse of “clinging to guns and Bibles” will never see that logic. Children will continue to die in gun-free zones hunting preserves for psychopathic murderers, and the cowardly murderers will continue to surrender or kill themselves as soon as armed good guys show up…far too late.


http://backwoodshome.com/blogs/MassadAyoob/2012/12/15/against-monsters/

 

[fgarvb1]

Well that's just insane....now there will be wholesale slaughter in tx schools no doubt.

I would not pull a gun or try to harm a kid there if I was you.

 

[BotanyBoy]

I would not pull a gun or try to harm a kid there if I was you.

LOL man I wouldn't harm any kids...I was just mocking the anti gun nuts, b/c you know guns = violence which is why all these rampage shootings happen at places like ranges and gun shows. They need to get a clue from the gun free zones where it's safer b/c there are not guns there. ......

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

LOL man I wouldn't harm any kids...I was just mocking the anti gun nuts, b/c you know guns = violence which is why all these rampage shootings happen at places like ranges and gun shows. They need to get a clue from the gun free zones where it's safer b/c there are not guns there. ......

Don't forget all the places that have guns.

 

[unregistered]

 

[BotanyBoy]

Don't forget all the places that have guns.

Such as? I can't even think of a major shooting all over the news that wasn't.

Postal offices, court houses, movie theaters, School Campus, Universities, churches, even on military bases.....every single one a gun free zone.

Where are all the gun show/range rampage shootings with sky high body counts?

How many clerks in gun stores get gun downed vs. gun free zone 711's?

Rampage shooters been tearing up GUA/NRA meetings at the local Y have they?

Guns = violence....where are all the IPSC/IDPA/3 gun competitions winding up in a slaughter fest???

Going off just this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_the_United_States

from 1927 - 90 there were 18 major school shootings and there for a while they had public access to REAL machine guns....enter the gun free zone act 1990-2012 there were 108. Hmmm.....gonna have to say that liberal policy blew up in their faces quite literally.

 

[Exquisition]

They need to get a clue from the gun free zones where it's safer b/c there are not guns there. ......

Most of Europe is a gun free zone and the stats for gun related crime entirely supports this point.

Well done.

A break through.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Most of Europe is a gun free zone and the stats for gun related crime entirely supports this point.

Well done.

A break through.

That might mean something if we were talking about Europe now wouldn't it? But we aren't so it doesn't. You know where else is a gun free zone? Juarez Mexico...murder capital of the world.

 

[islandman]

Heaven help all them should a teacher ever decide to go postal.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Aren't teachers fat overpaid idiots who took the only job that would accept people as untalented as them.

 

[LiFeNdEaTh]

that's crazy

 

[islandman]

Aren't teachers fat overpaid idiots who took the only job that would accept people as untalented as them.

Dunno, but I'm thinking you've just created a paradox with that sentence-construction.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Dunno, but I'm thinking you've just created a paradox with that sentence-construction.

I've been trying to end the universe for a couple of years now.

Still seriously. I thought teachers were incompetent and now we're talking about arming them?

 

[Lancecastor]

Problem with guns?

Give everyone more guns.

Great idea!

 

[islandman]

I've been trying to end the universe for a couple of years now.

Still seriously. I thought teachers were incompetent and now we're talking about arming them?

Police officers get training and they still manage to shoot bystanders.

Can't imagine the calamity a teacher would cause.

 

[Lancecastor]

Police officers get training and they still manage to shoot bystanders.

Can't imagine the calamity a teacher would cause.

How long before a Texas teacher shoots a student?

Office Pool!

 

[BotanyBoy]

How long before a Texas teacher shoots a student?

Office Pool!

5 bucks and handie says CA adds another serial rape/torture/kill psychopath to their long distinguished list first.

 

[eyer]

Just like all the other "remedies" to date, arming teachers isn't anything practically more than a friggin' bandaid..

...how many teachers already molest kids? How long would it be before an armed teacher went postal (as Lance has already offered)?

It's only a matter of time...

...when, not if.

There is only one practical stab available to make any serious effort at tackling the right to bear arms problem so many seem to believe America has:

A 28th Amendment to repeal the 2nd, redefine the issue, and present to posterity a totally different mindset on the issue...

...nothing else can address the current situation anyway near as well - legally and peacefully.

All the other baloney - limiting mag capacity, outlawing this "type" of weapon, outlawing that "type" of weapon, bettering criminal and mentally-challenged background checks, outlawing bullet types and calibers, metal detectors in schools with armed guards, armed teachers, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah...

...will only help until the next wacko decides to kill and uses whatever's available to him to do the job.

The true deal with gun/accessory availability is that whatever piece of that puzzle the Dudley Doorights proclaim is what's needed, it's simply a lie because you can outlaw all cartridge magazines today, yet there's still enough existing to feed killing thousands of people for decades and decades and decades to come.

(Stop for just a sec and let yourself imagine how many gun lovers got the message the last time Congress regulated magazine capacity...

...and hoarded what they had and gathered all the then-existing suddenly-illegal capacity mags they could. And then - when the ban expired and anybody who could could again make mags of whatever capacity - those same gun lovers stocked-up big time believing that sooner-or-later government would pull the same lame deal all over again.)

Here's the core issue:

The Constitution dictates that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed...

...now, you can cite all the Supreme Court rulings, Executive branch orders, scholarly dissertations, or public opinion you want to try to dilute the 2nd Amendment, but after 221 years of existence as a firmly entrenched, inherent right as the 1st is, the only other option to ratifying a 28th Amendment to solve the "problem" is to forcibly remove the hundreds of millions of guns - and even more of their accessories - from more than a hundred million Americans who aren't very likely to give that inherent right up without a fight - a really bloody fight.

And that's exactly what the socialists among us would like: "laws" made by majority rule - their beloved democracy - that outlaw all guns owned privately, so they feel they have the moral high ground to go after all the outlaws righteously...

...and that's exactly why the socialists among us will not chance what they intend to do by obeying the Constitution on the only legal way to disarm American individuals. For you see, there's no democracy involved at all in the Amendment process because private American citizens aren't Constitutionality able to vote in the ratifying process.

In the republican form of government America's federal and state governments are Constitutionally restricted to, only Congress and the respective State legislatures have a vote in the Constitution's dictated Amendment process...

...and that clear erection of different classes - a voting and a non-voting class - is the very poison to the existence of actual democracy itself.

Democracy must depend on the illusion that there are no different classes among "us", that only one class of citizen can exist, that we are all equal. This, of course, mirrors Marx's assertion that the proletariat class must defeat the bourgeois class to create one class where all would be equal...

...but the real-world problem with Marx's utopia is that humans will never all group to the same class because there are too many natural differences among us. Marx tried to glaze over that fact of life when he also asserted that after the proletariat class established itself by forcibly displacing the bourgeois class, there would have to be "special" class of proletariats to run the government and carry-out its rule. Too friggin' funny!

What really unravels the utopian idea of democracy - that we're all automatically equal - is that human nature has this inherent tendency to want to not only better itself but also its surroundings. That doesn't work when all humans are forcibly held to be in the same class, because there are always enough humans who will not be so restrained...

...which is what happened to Marx's proletariat utopia: too many proletariats eventually desired to gain a better life for themselves and others that Marx's disciples eventually had to resort to extermination to get a handle on the utopian problem they created.

Democracy leads to socialism.

- Marx

The goal of socialism is communism.

- Lenin

Communism is simply the tyrannical force needed to compel the citizenry to socialism when the utopia of the whole matter shows itself to be the fraud it is.

The republican form of government - on the other hand - succinctly dictates the humans can only be considered equal under the law...

...and that (recognizing and revering the truth of human nature) individuals gathered as any group will always naturally hold too many differences to ever agree on one view that logic would consider paramount. Madison (traditionally referred to at the father of the Constitution) called all these differences of peoples' views on unlimited things "factions", and he suggested America would celebrate its countless factions instead of forcibly conquering that natural human trait and herding people into any unnatural, democratic class. Madison also realized that so many different factions was also the single best deterrent for any one democratic class to ever gain enough power to preside over the citizenry.

In America - the theory goes - we all are to be equal under the law. The founders and framers believed that a free people needed as few laws as possible in order to remain free...

...that is why it is essential to individual liberty that the laws which are enacted always respect the concept of individual liberty above all else - which also naturally means laws must be vastly limited.

(And sorry, socialists: individual liberty does not include doing anything anyone wishes to do...)

When delegates met in Philadelphia in the summer of 1787 at the summoning of Madison, with the influential backing of Washington and George Mason, a citizen's right to bear arms eventually arose in the great debate, as did every other issue which would become what we know today as the Bill of Rights: the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution for the United States of America.

The inherent right to bear arms issue, like an individual's inherent right to free speech (and the other 8 Amendment issues), was raised for inclusion in the original C specifically because delegates feared that any new federal government would eventually infringe on what they considered to a natural right of man: the ability to not only defend oneself and his (family, property, et al), but to even assault government itself when/if it became too powerful over individual liberty.

The protestations that the right to bear arms should be codified in the original Constitution were only overcome after it was majority agreed that the entire purpose of a new Constitution was to define the specific form and specifically-limited powers of government, and that any power not specifically granted to government by the Constitution is beyond its reach; the founders and framers thought Constitutional limitation on government was a much better idea than to complete the impossible task of including every single individual liberty that man inherently possessed. Those limitless negative rights of Americans are guaranteed by the Constitution because the Constitution places them completely out of the purview of any government by not mentioning them at all in dictating the powers of government.

Alas - learned men of history naturally fretful of any government's natural, insatiable quest for dominating power - too many delegates refused to approve the new Constitution without such specific, written guarantees, so a majority also agreed that as soon as the original Constitution was signed and ratified, then an Amendment process could be undertaken to even more specifically dictate that "Congress shall make no law...", and that the right to bear arms "shall not be infringed" - you know, to make sure government understood what the law actually said. (insert :hopeless optimism: here)

Of course, the natural appetite for exclusive power government has possessed since the first one began and government's natural corruptible power over almost all who long to serve it, began to muddle the clear intent of the succinct wording of those laws immediately and, thus, the laws themselves naturally started to dilute accordingly...

Which brings us all the way back to today, when "Congress shall make no law..." and "shall not infringe" - the law - are simply phrases to be bounced around in democratic debate where hundreds of millions of different opinions can bat them back and forth by so many players who can't even read the Constitution, let alone comprehend it...

...instead of revering the law for the only equality human beings can count on as one.

Shame, shame, shame on the lawless among us.

The founders and framers did not desire for each succeeding generation to be locked into some out-of-date-old-slave-owning-white-guy dogma, as the domestic enemy Ed Schultz has recently pontificated of...

...but they did lay down the law that a republic changes course by obeying the laws already established, not at any dictate of any democratic mob, no matter how large the majority.

America is to be a nation of laws, not of men.

The only way America has any chance of surviving a serious assault on the 2nd Amendment is if that assault is constructed legally, as dictated by the Constitution's stated Amendment process - that's the only chance that enough law-abiding, 2nd Amendment lovers will voluntarily surrender their weapons to government.

If that assault on the 2nd is not conducted precisely as the Constitution commands - if it is waged democratically - the blood let by a Constitutional War may make the War Between the States seem like a mere argument in comparison.

If a democratic majority arises in America with the directed intent to disarm American citizens of the Constitutional rights the Law dictates they inherently possess, and that mob physically pursues such an illegal action without honoring the Law's commanded Amendment process first...

...what naturally awaits them will be a very well-armed resistance of no small minority who will all consider such belligerents enemies of America and criminals under the Law.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Such as? I can't even think of a major shooting all over the news that wasn't.

Postal offices, court houses, movie theaters, School Campus, Universities, churches, even on military bases.....every single one a gun free zone.

Where are all the gun show/range rampage shootings with sky high body counts?

How many clerks in gun stores get gun downed vs. gun free zone 711's?

Rampage shooters been tearing up GUA/NRA meetings at the local Y have they?

Guns = violence....where are all the IPSC/IDPA/3 gun competitions winding up in a slaughter fest???

Going off just this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_the_United_States

from 1927 - 90 there were 18 major school shootings and there for a while they had public access to REAL machine guns....enter the gun free zone act 1990-2012 there were 108. Hmmm.....gonna have to say that liberal policy blew up in their faces quite literally.

Here's one that happened just a few hours after the one in Newton. This is just off the top of my head, I'm sure if anyone did some research they would find more.