If You Disarm Parents and Teachers, Only Bad Guys Will Have Guns: IMI Systems Quote of the Day

Newtown Elementary School door (courtesy nydailynews.com)

“It would make the police law enforcement’s job a heck of a lot more difficult because if they come to an emergency situation, how can they tell who is who?” Calvin Rivers, quoted in Bill would let certain employees carry guns at Florida schools [via clickonorlando.com]

Win IMI Ammo

comments

  1. avatar Shire-man says:

    Those people shooting at you. Them. They’re the bad guys.
    It doesn’t matter who is a teacher, parent or attacker. If you see a cop you drop it and hit the deck. If a parent or teacher or anyone turns and aims at a cop, well, they get what they get.

    It’s not rocket science.

    1. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

      I thought cops still subscribed to the “containment” method of dealing with mass shootings. Going into one seems a tad dangerous for a union employee, hard armored full auto ‘roid squad excepted of course.

      1. avatar Missouri_Mule says:

        “Containment”? I guess it worked at the Impulse night club…..

  2. avatar TrappedInCommiefornia says:

    I don’t know about the rest of you, but I for one would rather be the good guy with a gun who gets shot by police after stopping a mass murder than let a classroom full of children get murdered by some sick animal. But maybe I’m just weird like that.

    1. avatar Aaron M. Walker says:

      Unfortunately now a days…Especially in my state…The Left-wing, Paramilitarized Police commandos have trouble telling a lot of things apart–the truth for sure…In Eastern Bloc Communist Police-states you would NOT receive any support for CCW/Open carry/Constitutional Carry/The 2nd Amendment/Self-defense, or anything else for that matter…Recently, a DemoRAT Globalists (representative-not an accurate term) said the US citizens of this state didn’t have a 2nd Amendment Constitutional Right…That it was a privilege that is barely tolerated by (D) or (RINO) Politicians, and the Law Enforcement Community–(Police Commandos…) So my guess—Shot to pieces….An unfortunate truth of American freedoms going out the window…Because no one is stand up to this out of control Big Government…Heading fast into Authoritarianism….

      1. avatar Missouri_Mule says:

        Do you live in Nevada or Arizona? They seem be pretty quick to issue confusing commands and then shoot the suspect.

  3. avatar John in AK says:

    This article actually allows comments! Please be kind, yet firm. . .

    1. avatar Ranger Rick says:

      Good point, I was.

    2. avatar Geoff PR says:

      “This article actually allows comments! Please be kind, yet firm. . .”

      You have to be cruel to be kind.

      (In the right measure.)

      Choke on *that* earworm for the next few days…

      *evil snicker* 😉

  4. avatar BLoving says:

    By the time the police show up, the action should be long over. The armed citizens- the ACTUAL First Responders, have already neutralized the threat and the guns have been reholstered.
    That is how the situation would go in a free society, not the oppressed one we’re putting up with right now.
    The problem with these gun bigots is that they’re still working from the philosophy that self defense “isn’t their job” and shouldn’t be the job of any other individual citizen.
    Total lack of personal responsibility.
    🤠

    1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      ‘By the time the police show up, the action should be long over.’

      And on those rare occasions that it’s not they’ll surround the building and wait 90 minutes before entering, just to make sure.

      1. avatar Ranger Rick says:

        Slowly but surely this tactic is ending.

  5. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    Yes, it’s so much easier on law enforcement for you to exhibit yourself to be a non-threat by being dead. Although that’s still probably no guarantee they won’t put another bullet in you just to make sure. Whatever it takes to get them home at night, that’s the important thing.

  6. avatar Sam in Ohio says:

    Perhaps, the downfall of civilization will end up being “casual” thinking, I.e. the inability to think things through.

    Here, it is assumed that the person with a gun is “bad” and the person without a visible gun is “good”. Unfortunately, the reality is the officer isn’t able to rely on such a simple minded decision tree. Armed or not, you follow the officer’s instructions to put your hands up or you’ll likely regret it as the officer has no idea how many shooters there are, what they look like or whether the shooter(s) are concealing a firearm and hiding themselves among the survivors.

    While everyone has moments of idiocy, I regret the advances of medical science occasionally. Medicine has made the consequences of stupidity less severe/fatal and perhaps that’s not always a good thing…

    1. avatar Darkman says:

      Agree!!!

  7. avatar ATFAgentBob says:

    here’s the very simple formula we used in Iraq to differentiate between good Iraqis and Wahabi…
    1. Do they have a gun? Yes/No (If No skip to question 2)

    1B. If Yes what kind? AK/Pistol/RPK/PKM/RPG? (Answers other than AK require further investigation)

    2. Are they planting an IED? Yes/No (Answers other than No require ballistic interruption of person(s)’ activity)

    3. Are they cooperating and following instructions? Yes/No (If No smack the terp around a bit try again. If still No detain individual for further questioning.)

    4. Is their gun pointed at Coalition Forces? Yes/No (Answers other than No require further investigation and commands given to point somewhere else or relinquish weapon)

    5. Are they firing at you, Coalition Forces, or civilians? Yes/No (Answers other than No require ballistic response)

    See? Simple and in a mass shooting it will look something like this.

    1. Do they have a gun? Yes/No (Answers other than No require commands be issued to place weapon on the ground.)

    2. Did they follow that command? Yes/No (Answers other than No require re issue of command.)

    3. Is the weapon pointed at you, other armed citizen(s), or unarmed citizen(s)? Yes/No (Answers other than No denote a threat)

    4. Are they firing at you, engaging armed citizens, or firing at unarmed citizens of any age? Yes/No (Answers other than No require ballistic response.)

    NOTE: If at any point in this decision checklist the shooter offs themselves odds are they were the perpetrator and any other armed citizens should be informed that the situation is resolved as you clear the rest of the building of secondary threats or explosive devices.

    1. avatar BLoving says:

      TLDR…
      Just surround the building and wait for SWAT while listening to the screams of the unarmed victims to slowly die down.
      🤠

      1. avatar ATFAgentBob says:

        hmmmm you may be right…. Perhaps I should make their 4 step list into a pictograph or consider using brightly colored scented Crayola with glitter to write the list on black construction paper which would then be taped to the steering wheel in their cruiser.

  8. avatar JRPL says:

    It’s pretty easy actually, the good with the gun is using his body as a shield for the innocents. The bad guys are using the innocents as a shield. If they cannot tell the difference between defender and hostage taker, I will die happy knowing I did all that I could do to defend a bunch of scared children.

  9. avatar DJ says:

    Best thing about conceal carry…school administration don’t have to know….gun free zones are immoral and unjust.

  10. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    Call me “deplorable”, but I’m for people not getting shot, regardless of who doesn’t shoot them, or why. People getting dead bothers me, even when that’s done by murderous whack-jobs killing school kids to make a point. Bizarre, I know.

    In the implied “active shooter in a school” scenario I’m a tad more bothered by the kids n staff shot up b 4 police arrive than the cleanup crew’s confusion once they get there. Indeed, even assuming the uniformed responders ballistically perforate everyone who might have a gun (once they get there), net, still less people dead. That’s less bad.

    Do the worst case math. One armed citizen on site stops lots per drive-time minute from getting killed, less that same guy shot by the po-po cauze they can’t tell who’s who. Seems like a net gain. (The “shot by the po-po, after” count would be lower if they were a bit more measured, but the hypothetical presumes the cops are excitable & dumb. Besides, citizen-with-gun would be an irredeemable anyway – no loss.)

    It seems that for people who care about their kids, larms on site is a net gain whatever you assume about the cops. So, let people arm themselves to protect their kids. I think I’ll be bitterly clinging to that one.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email