fly - why did you post that? there are probably zero tea party people here. further, i doubt more than like 5% of tea party people would agree with whoever wrote that.

Honestly, if the students were armed with guns none of this would have happened.

The lulz? Many posters from more urban/Northern enclaves might not be exposed to the raw Real Americanism on display in that amazing post, so it provides some educational value.

cool story, bro

Dude got a lot of comments for that post. Many approving of what he said.

willie- I'm gonna post something else now.
http://www.salon.com/2012/12/17/gun_..._armed_revolt/

Big jump in the public support for gun control with polling immediately after the shooting jumping to a 10 year high. There have been bumps like this before (the story indicates a bump after the Gifford shooting that subsequently faded). Will this one last?

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-...-10-year-high/

Well let's do some maths... that's about 1 in 1000 peeps in the USA. Let's remove all those who carry at work whose work directly involves security issues (cops, guards, jewelers, repo men, etc). What are we at now, maybe somewhere about 1/2000 to 5000.

Now take all the peeps who teach, are staff, or who are adult students at all the schools and colleges. Subtract out all those subtracted out above (guards, etc). Now divide by the percentage you estimate would choose to arm, and then divide by your estimate of about 2000 to 5000 above.

Finally multiply by your "minimal" amount of accidents, and what do you get? I guessing that there would be dozens of weapon accident casualties yearly, some fatal, easily dwarfing any alleged actual or deterrent effects of having an armed campus.

And that's not even counting the other kind of weapon "accidents" that an armed campus would enable. People at work don't always get along in real life... and those school children will drive anybody at least temporarily crazy. One of the unintended side-affects of having an armed campus will necessarily be weapon casualties inflicted by the non-security professionals themselves. I mean, just because there is a law that says you can't use a weapon to attack that other teacher in the break room for sleeping with your spouse and your mom... people are people and it's gonna happen.

Add both the accidents and "accidents" together... then do the maths above again.

No it wouldn't be effective. In fact, it would be counter-effective (see above).

And it's pretty obvious that's true if we look to the general situation. As I blogged above, a school campus is not fundamentally different than an industrial campus, say a factory, or really any other dedicated space which requires public access to function, like a mall. And these spaces are, in general, private property, the 2nd Amendment doesn't apply, and management can make any weapons policy they wish.

Here IRL the vast majority of factories, malls, and such have weapon restriction polices, and quite a few actively enforce them with armed security. Those arguing for 'arm the teachers' really gotta address this issue in depth to be taken seriously...

Yeah, but is that the same people every day in a campus or work setting. Concealed carry doesn't mean secret carry. The school office, or loss prevention office, is gonna wanna know if and when you are carrying. And all but the slowest of your co-workers, vendors, customers, and the kids, will figure it out soon enough.

BTW, IIRC the TX Fruitcakes were talking about Open Carry campuses. Since you stressed concealed carry above, I assume you have different opinions about open carry here. Just curious...

Also how do you feel about mandatory holster locks required for these armed teachers. Again, just curious...

That's a far cry from how we carry out the drug war, don't you think? Do they lock people up and make it much more difficult for them to get a job when they come out? Do they go busting down doors and shooting up users in GB?

H_F, are you assuming that they do it differently in GB because you believe their outcomes are better, or do you have concrete knowledge regarding law enforcement practices?

Edit: Wait, this kind of reads like you think the part of the Drug War that causes gun deaths is SWAT team raids. The vast majority of gun deaths involved with drugs are criminals shooting other criminals. The police are not involved.

I found another thing worth reading as a link!
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer...ion-award.html

Before you read it, I'll just say that if it becomes the libertarian/gun nut position we are going to long for the thoughtful and considered days of "arm the teachers with fully automatic assault rifles".

Um that's exactly what it means. I don't understand why anyone would open carry, that just makes you the first target.

Not sure why you believe it's so obvious when someone is carrying a gun?

If you live in a shall issue state, I'm guessing you would be in terror knowing how many people are legally carrying that you walk by every single day. The fact that you have no idea, is the point.

FWIW, when the shall issue CCW law was first issued here in MN, I carried into tons of places that posted "no guns" signs. Why? Because **** them, that's why.

As long as its not a federal building and nobody can see it, whats the difference? Concealed means concealed. I carried a full size Glock 21 constantly when I first got my permit. Nobody ever saw an imprint or anything, despite me wearing non baggy clothing.

guns, government should have them all

/sarcasm

always re-actionaries after a big media event, generally they get laws passed unfortunately.

So is "well-regulated".

I'd take that bet. People should really browse on occasion the most popular rightwing/tea party news sites; blatant racism and xenophobia is the norm, not the exception, especially when it comes to community comments.

If you could go down to a school with a carton of Marlboros and give a few dozen people lung cancer I'd be pretty comfortable regulating cigarettes more harshly.

http://www.urbin.net/EWW/polyticks/RKBA/militia.html

there aren't really localized well regulated militias as described in the 2nd amendment

LDO.

There's certainly some of that, but of course the gun deaths are because of the illegality of the drugs. The dealers resort to violence to hold turf because they have no legal recourse. On the user side, we make it difficult for people to get jobs after they get busted and get out. What are they gonna do? Put themselves in a situation where they are much much more likely to kill somebody will a gun, or be killed with a gun.

so if you have a legal recourse, why do you need a gun?

Those numbers have been growing more and more and will continure to increase. There are still a lot of people out there concealed carrying.

Concealed Carry is most definitely secret carry. Principle may know who "can" carry but no one else knows when, how, where and what you are carrying because concealed is concealed. Plus people are so oblivious that even if you print a little no one notices anyway.

In regard to open carry, I think its pointless. Makes you a target and just freaks people out. I dont really see the point in it but not really against it.

I've never heard of a holster lock, when would they use it and how would it work? If the gun is concealed and no one knows the person is carrying then the only time the gun leaves the holster is in their home if they choose to remove it or if a situation arises where they need to use the firearm.

Well, the good news is that people tend to make their best decisions when in highly emotional states, so we got that going for us.

The irony of this, in a gun thread, is delicious.

Not sure if level, but if not I think you need to read the Samurai vs. Musketeer thread in OOT.