Quote:
Originally Posted by markksman
This. Talking about the police officer is absolutely not a distraction. And it does strongly identify how absurd it is to rely on arming teachers to stop school shooters when an on duty police officer tasked with working in a school stayed outside during an active shooting.
This assumes good faith discussion. Since that won’t happen it is absolutely a distraction from where we should be focused if we actually want to address the issue. There are plenty of clear as day obvious reasons that arming teachers is ****ing insane and won’t solve anything without litigating this one guy’s level of commitment to his job. It will not be the tipping point for the argument.
I had this experience today, not for the first time:
Gun owner: “The second amendment blah blah blah...founding fathers...”
Later on same gun owner: “you can kill people with a hammer. A gun is just a tool like a tire iron. No different. Depends on the user...blah blah blah”
Me: Then why isn’t there anything in the constitution protecting other tools? Are guns different or not?
Gun owner “ It doesn’t actually say “gun” in the second amendment. Chessmate.
So no, getting into a discussion about the specific cop in this case serves as.an out and a distraction for the disingenuous far better than a data point for logic.