Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee signs into law bill allowing armed teachers

SO now you’re seeing what I have been saying. ITS NOT THE GUN, it’s the person carrying it.

OK, so how many people should die before we accept that waiting on the someone to help them is AWLAYS going to happen in active shooter situations, unless we have sensible gun laws ?

 

And yet there are plenty of times that an armed citizen stops an active shooting. Here is a pretty comprehensive list complete with links to each case. Feel free to disprove any of the individual cases. You have plenty to choose from.

https://crimeresearch.org/2023/08/cases-where-armed-citizens-have-stopped-active-shooter-incidents/

The list of active shooting cases that were averted by people legally carrying guns that were missed in the FBI Active Shooting reports. The FBI’s definition of active shootings is narrow: it involves cases where a gun is fired in public and not part of some other crime like a gang fight over drug turf or a robbery. It includes cases from one person being shot at and missed to a mass public shooting. Our original write-up on this problem is available here. Specifically, just those cases where just mass public shootings were stopped is available here.

 

It proves that gun-free zones serve killers with easy victims. The reason police stations and gun stores are not targeted is because these cowards don't want opposition. Once they know teachers may be armed, they will choose easier targets.

 

you showed 35 out of the 627 that happened in the US in 2023 alone.....

And BTW, they weren't averted, they were stopped. Now to be clear, most of them were stopped AFTER the original shooter walked away, or had finished their attack

 

AGAIN, you want to "arm" someone, and teach them HOW to shoot, but not WHEN to shoot. Situational awareness and training is not somethign you do in a couple of 2 hour s "shooting courses"

 

To be clear they were stopped because someone was there with a gun and returned fire. Each case includes all of the details for those who are interested in actually reading it.

And to be clear I didn't say they were averted I said that they were stopped.

The Uvalde cops remind me of the dumbass Florida cop who opened fire on his own patrol car with a suspect inside claiming that shots had been fired because an acorn fell on his hood.

He emptied his magazine into the vehicle but fortunately didn't hit the poor innocent suspect inside because the cop was scared to death of a damn acorn.

 

It's really common sense for rational adults who understand the concept of self-defense.

You only shoot or even pull out a gun if your life or the life of those around you is in genuine danger of great bodily harm or death.

That really is all there is to it. You don't pull out a gun because someone break checks you and cut you off in traffic and you don't pull out a gun because someone said something that hurt your feelings..... You pull out a gun when there was a genuine and immediately impending sense of great bodily harm or death.

Although I guess that concept really is a challenge for some and those are the ones that shouldn't be carrying a weapon

 

You were saying ?

Again, even that cop shouldnt have a gun then....

 

Which is a subjective decision....

Agree 100%

So what is the test for that when someone applies for a permit ?

 

I said they were stopped. The link said averted but you really want to parse word so badly to think you have a point.

Someone with a gun put a stop to their ass

 

My state doesn't require a permit, bent over a year now since all you progressive said that change in the law was going to cause Florida to become the wild wild West and it still hasn't happened yet.

 

Ummm. When my parents were in school they could buy a firearm mail order with no background check and have it delivered to their doorstep.

There is a strong correlation between additional restrictions on firearm purchases and mass shootings. More gun laws, more mass shootings.

No. I’m not proposing causality. I’m simply pointing out availability of firearms isn’t related to mass shootings in schools. In my state many kids own their own firearms at a young age. More students have died of eating granola bars at school than have died in school shootings. One from granola bar, zero from school shootings.

 

Armed teachers and staff will be required to undergo 40 hours of training, which Sen. Jeff Yarbro, D-Nashville, at one point likened to less hours than children are sent to summer camp. Approved carriers will be allowed to carry handguns in their classrooms and in most campus situations without informing parents and most of their colleagues they're armed. The legislation also requires criminal and mental health background checks.

https://www.tennessean.com/story/ne...ns-arming-teachers-bill-into-law/73467826007/

40 hours of firearms training is close to what some police officers receive in some states.

Ongoing training should be required, but 40 hours is a good start.

 

So the new Tennessee law requires the strapped teachers to have a minimum of 40 hours of training along with criminal and mental background checks. Sounds reasonable. Why do you reckon that law doesn't exist for any Joe blow that walks into a gun store and makes a purchase in Tennessee?

 

In addition to the criminal background check, my daughter and her colleagues were required to undergo 2 psych evals - one by a shrink who consults for the Sheriff's dept, and another who has no connection to law enforcement. The NCIC check has to be spotless; not even a misdemeanor. In addition to the initial training, they also agree to annual recurrent trainings to keep their certifications current. Some of that training is more rigorous than even the Sheriff's deputies go thru, principally because it's specific to the layout of the school. Contrary to knee-jerk lefty tantrums, my daughter and the people she works with are not being asked to be Rambo. The planning and training is configured to funnel the shooter into a confined space where even Stevie Wonder could put him down.

 

Do you think 40 hours of training will make a school shooter more or less dangerous?

 

Because that's not required by the 2nd Amendment.

 

You are again, moving farther from the truth. I shoot along side of law enforcement on a regular basis. Most are just middle of the road marksman. Do you have any firearm experience?

 

Do you think 40 hours of training with mental and criminal background checks makes teachers qualified to deal with active shooter situations? How come I don't hear the NRA and ultra pro 2nd supporters screaming that these required 40 hours of training along with the mental and criminal background checks isn't imfringing on these teachers rights?

 

How are these teachers 2nd amendment rights not being infringed with these requirements in this new Tennessee law?

 

For the same reasons a police officer or armed security guard has to have training as a condition of employment.

 

Where in their contracts does it state that their 2nd amendment rights must be infringed upon to be teachers?

 

@WalterSobchak

Once again, I note you don't have the balls to answer the question. Color me unsurprised. I'll try to show you how it's done, and not follow your "lead."

Yep.

Apples & oranges. Actually, more like apples and carburetors. My daughter didn't need 40 hours of approved training nor a mental health screening to keep & later carry the pistol I gave her when she got her own place. Personal self defense isn't like driving a car; it's a fundamental right SCOTUS continues to uphold. Using a deadly weapon to defend large numbers of other people in a confined space is a different animal, and training/screening is appropriate.

The psych evals you insist everyone submit to is nothing more than one of the left's favorite smokescreens to deny guns to anyone it doesn't like. I've been called a "terrorist" for not kowtowing to woke gender jive; exactly the kind of "extremist" the Holy Church of Woke would like to see disarmed and defenseless.

Too many gun crimes are committed by felons for whom gun ownership is already illegal. Enforcing existing and more relevant laws is a much better place to start.

 

Ah, so 40 hours of training for your daughter makes her as qualified as the police force that handle active shooter situations. Maybe she should give up her day job and be a cop since she's just as qualified as they are now after just 40 hours of training.

I'm confused on your stance here. You 100 percent support your daughters 2nd amendment rights being infringed upon, forcing her to have a psych and criminal background check along with the required 40 hours of training, but are 100 percent against it for you and I because of woke reasons.

Odd stance and hypocritical at the same time.

 

Kindly cite where I have ever stated, suggested, or implied anything of the kind. If you can be bothered to re-read post 229 to this thread (as reading comprehension is clearly not your strength), you'll note where I have stipulated precisely the opposite. But I can certainly understand how much easier it is for posers to lie about anyone they disagree with. I might suggest it's the tactic of a coward, but this board frowns upon name calling. PF mods: I am not calling WalterSobchak a coward. I trust the mods are comfortable allowing members to draw their own conclusions, as long as those conclusions are not stated publicly, so as not to bruise certain tender sensibilities.

Unlike the police - who are legally indemnified from protecting anyone not in their custody - which, in turn, entitles them to fiddle while Rome is burning (see: the Uvalde Police Department and the 74 minutes they allowed the shooter to commit mass murder inside their perimeter), my daughter and her colleagues believe they are morally obligated to behave more proactively. You and your ilk preaching how she and her fellow targets should never be trained and equipped to repel a lunatic with a gun isn't just wrong, it's [adjective deleted to appease the mods].

Reading comprehension and common sense - or lack thereof - rear their adorable heads for the umpteenth time. A cop/prison guard/MP/security guard/armed teacher, et al, never have their 2nd amendment rights compromised when they undergo screening/training for elevated assignments requiring them to defend other people. I can drive a car. Requiring me to get a CDL to drive a city bus isn't an infringement.