Do white people benefit the most from gun-control?

Us civies have no unions to protect us when we wrongfully shoot someone (like school kids) out of fear, confusion, misunderstanding. Cops do.

 

And they should. They risk their lives for us

 

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/08/...first-and-he-will-answer-questions-later.html
http://progressnownm.org/2014/03/05...duces-shoot-first-policy-for-new-mexico-cops/
http://m.santafenewmexican.com/news...df1-f301-591c-ad09-e5fb6731c6d1.html?mode=jqm

 

So you think your kids are safer around an armed officer who has substantial legal protections against accidentally or misunderstandingly shooting your kids than an armed civilian with the same safety and accuracy training but whom has no special legal protections against being liable for wrongful shooting...

are you joking right now?

 

Yes I do. And no that civilian dies nit have the same training and is part time.

 

Lets be clear on the training for cops. They must pass an extensive psychological and FBI background check and then face an oral and written test. They then have a three month academy (fulltime) followed by a year fulltime with a field training officer.

A CCW must take a class.

 

This has too any logical fallacies to list.
You've also repeated this claim a number of times - you ought to ask for new talking points.

 

Facts always remain true

 

Really.
Tell us the effect of strong gun control laws on gun-related crime.

 

And thus, there is no loophole.

You made this up.

The law is unenforceable, and therefore a useless and unnecessary restriction on the right to keep and bear arms.
Useless and unnecessary restrictions on rights specifically protected by the constitution violate the constitution.

 

You made this up.

Mass shootings with 'assault weapons' is the rarest form of murder in the US.

 

It reduces it

 

the academy and year of training/probabtion is largely for LE training, not firearms safety. Cops spend very little of their training at the range.
Theres no reason that teachers couldnt be expected to go through the precise same criminal vetting (which is already done in part for the CCW), psych vetting (some schoold already do this for *all* teachers) range training, safety classes etc that law enforcement goes through. Teachers dont need to know the legalities of making arrests, investigstive practices, LE protocols, or need to meet the physical fitness requirements of LE, so they could skip 95+% of what cops train for, and still get the same firearms competency certification with relatively little trouble. And many of them would *happily* submit to such in order to protect their students.

This is not a difficult concept. It almost like you have a hardon for a uniform, and anyone not in one isnt worthy...

 

Look it's fine if you want less for your kid. Not in my kids school. We pay to protect our kids

 

The threat against civilians is usually different for LEO's. In addition hit rates for civilians in gunfights are as good if not better than LEO's with less shots fired and fewer blue on blue incidents. The comparisons are just not equal.

 

I think many of us are not advocating for training teachers to be some sort of covert active shooter response force in schools, but merely be given the opportunity to excersize their 2A rights if they do choose to defend themselves rather than be cast as fodder or the next whacko wanting to rack up scores in search of a record body count by the most vulnerable among us.
I have trained several teachers now, waiving my fees and in two cases, gifting the ammo. One, notable one, a fairly young and petite, about 5'1-2" and maybe 100lbs, primary school teacher regularly participates in force on force training and I would stack against many... she's very good, keeps her cool, and not easily intimidated armed or not. She also, as I understand, trains regularly in Krav Maga. She carries a LCR with a Laser (she has rented, enjoys and did very well shooting other platforms in 9mm and .45 but likes the certainty of reliability of a revolver) and has spent time selecting CC carry wear designed for women where she can hide the gun seamlessly. Her school is going to allow (ok under our state law) selected volunteers teachers/staff to CC, if they are licensed under a pilot program; she will be one of the volunteers. While they are not expected to be that elite active shooter response force, knowing her, she has fortitude and skill, and I have little doubt would insert herself between a shooter and any children as would many of us here.
My team and I regularly discuss what elements of training we would figure applicable, specifically for a training curriculum for teachers... no one has ever suggested a 'seek and destroy' approach which is what I think many BMs think is being advocated. We advocate more of a lockdown, barricade and wait for LE response approach if safe and rapid evacuation, with cover, isn't an option. I'd be happy to share elements of our curriculum, our recommendations for making schools safer.
And, how to arm 6 year olds...Lol -- let's see how many think I am serious on that one.

 

affluent white liberals are the only ones who benefit that I am aware of...

 

VG regularly advocates a training and other standards for getting a CCP, but he has been asked what such a training curriculum standard would be and what psych tests would be required but never offers that... just the vague, everybody undergo both... what constitute traning? Knowing how to load your gun? Pschyc test... are you sane?... answer... yes...ok then... I love the idea of a pscyc eval for 1st A rights.

 

Why do you guys hate cops doing their job?

 

Nice try Mr disingenuous, but thats not hate against cops. Its just not putting them up on the pedestal of being gods. Cops are people too. Some of em are good guys, some bad guys. Some rock, some suck.

And *again* (and again and again) having armed teachers DOES NOT mean you cant have cops. You can have *both* if the school wants.
Having armed teachers DOES NOT mean that they wont be trained, screened or vetted. They can be quite easily if the school desires, and to whatever competency the school desires.
Given all that, what, precisely, is your beef with having armed teachers, given that they can be trained, screened and vetted to whatever level is required? Is there a level at which you would find armed teachers acceptible?

 

Or we could just have cops who are professionals. You want a teacher doing this? Let him go thru a year of full time training and I will consider it. Or we could just have cops. I don't want to do this on the cheap. Because I care about my kid

 

fair nuff

You really think people who advocate for allowing teacher concealed carry care less about their kids than you do? Why?

 

I think you want to do it on the cheap. Or maybe this is just about more gun rights. You accuse me of having a hardon for cops....maybe you should check your own package

 

Also, instead of assuming you're just an elitist prick who thinks only rich people care about their kids... are you willing to cover the extra cost of a full compliment of police at ur kids school for those who cant afford to chip in for the extra security?

 

No where in there is an answer to the question.

Why do you think people who advocate for allowing teachers to be armed care less about their kids than you do?
Do people who dont have bodyguards for their kids love their kids less than people who can afford bodyguards?

(i said 'teacher open carry' in my last comments, that was a mistake, i meant teacher concealed carry, sorry if there was confusion)