http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0j3kWarNjpM
Americans have a Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. Why that right would end at the school gates is beyond me. The antis argue that “allowing” teachers (or any other law-abiding Americans) to carry a concealed firearm in a school is a slippery slope. “Where do you draw the line?” California Senator Leland Yee demanded during a recent TV interview. “Supermarkets? Playgrounds?” Keep going. Meanwhile, it’s important to accept the antis at their word: schools are simply ground zero in their ongoing campaign to disarm civilians. Equally, their willingness to put armed police into schools should be seen not as a concession. It’s a way to preserve their “gains” . . .
After all, if cops have guns in schools, citizen’s don’t need them. If citizens don’t need them, they shouldn’t be allowed to have them. See how that works? Make no mistake: the hard left understands this dynamic.
Responding to a report on Harrold ISD’s armed teacher program [described in the video above], Clay Robison, spokesperson for the Texas State Teachers Association (TSTA), issued the following statement:
TSTA would rather the state spend the money to restore the $5.4 billion (more than $500 per child) cut from public school budgets two years ago. Lt. Gov. Dewhurst’s proposal would add more guns to the public schools, and we need fewer guns in the schools. Teachers signed on to teach, not to be armed security guards. We don’t object if the state wants to pay for additional, professional security officers, but not to arm teachers. The answer is reducing the number of guns, particularly assault rifles, too readily available to people who have no use having them.
People like . . . teachers? If my instruction at SIG SAUER’s Active Shooter Instructor’s Course taught me one thing it’s this: the best defense against a school shooter (or two or more) is a good guy armed with an “assault rifle.” Quickest resolution. Fewest casualties.
The idea of having an AR-15 available inside a school is simply too horrible to contemplate—for those who trade common sense for a deeply misguided belief in the state as the ultimate authority protector. Gun control advocates can’t even wrap their heads around the idea of a concealed firearm on a person who’s dedicated their life to educating children.
In the post-Sandy Hook hysteria, gun rights advocates have a long way to go to defend and extend their 2a-protected rights. Putting armed police in our schools is not the best way to get there.
Well said.
As a resident of the People’s Republic of “New” New York ( New slogan – I heart NY. The Constitution, not so much) I am looking forward to seeing The NY Daily News twisting his words into making him sound like a lunatic.
Just when I think someone on our side says something intelligent and incontravertable the NYDN comes along and proves me wrong.
While I’m really glad this worked out the way it did, I’m really sad that this guy is a “reserve police officer,” because that makes him a “more equal pig.” I wouldn’t want him to lose his job, but I’d much prefer he hadn’t been a reserve police officer, but simply a carry permit holder, that way we could use this situation to expose the lunacy of the existing system. As it is, it will be dismissed as “yeah, but he’s a cop.”
What exactly does a 70 year old “reserve police officer” do, anyway? I’d be a reserve police officer, too, if it let me carry when and where I felt appropriate, as opposed to having someone else dictate it to me. Matter of fact, I think I’m gonna inquire into what it takes here where I live.
Very good article, yet I’m still left angry and sick after reading the hoplophobes’ comments about this. What is their mental disconnect…