Florida Approves Bill Allowing Classroom Teachers To Be Armed

Sure, there is. Since employers can permanently replace striking workers, the law would be meaningless if workers could quit (strike) en masse.

Employers can except for protected classes of workers.

 

They don't make law?

Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company, 118 U.S. 394 (1886)​

You're in waaayyyyy over your head.

You didn't take high school civics?

You never studied Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803)?

Baloney. Calling someone a "leftist" on this forum is like associating them with Antifa.

Well, I think you're a crypto-fascist, but I'm not allowed to say so.

 

Correlation does not necessarily equal causation

 

That's the point I was making. I'm glad that you picked it up

Leftist believe that because there is a correlation between the amount of guns available and gun violence, that it must means that there is a causation.

That's why I said:
"If there was a direct causation between the amount of guns available and gun violence, then Chicago, which has some of the strictest gun laws in America, would be one of the safest."

 

Good for Florida. Its about time the lives of children are treated with the same importance as the contents of armored vehicles.

 

If you knew anything about how we've done on standardized tests over the years, you'd be aware that our performance is largely unchanged. Other developed countries have in many cases caught and passed us.

If you want to see how we're doing: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/

Why we're not doing well, or as well as I think we should, is a complex matter. There's plenty of blame to go around--indulged kids, indulging parents, poor teaching, dumb administration, state government bureaucracy and unfunded mandates, values problems where school sports gets money that should be spent in educating students, underfunded inner city schools, and on and on. It's a true socialist system.

You're guessing and guessing wrong. Local public schools are often run by conservative community school boards who hire conservative administrators. Teachers don't make the big decisions. I'm not saying teachers (or liberals) would do better, but the fact is they're not all that often steering the ship.

 

Yes. Thank you for making my point

They rule on cases and make decisions in accordance with the constitution and existing law based on legal interpretation. They aslo overturn unconstitutional laws.

All things that you posted are cases. Creating legal precedent based on existing laws and constitution is not the same thing as creating laws. Courts dont make laws. Congress does. Anyone with a legal degree will tell you that. Mr. "I've been a teacher for three decades"

All the things you listed were cases in which legal precedent that was established based on the constitution and existing laws

 

There is a time & place for everything, but schools are NOT the place for guns, at any time.

 

Except when a bad guy walks in and has the run of the place until the cops show up. Which is usually measured in double digits of minutes. By then the guy is out of ammo.

 

Says you. Leftists are willing to protect our airports and courthouses with guns. But not what matters most. Our children. Our future.

I guess that they think that protecting our airports and powerful elites is more important than protecting our children

 

Fighting that possibility with more guns in the hands of more individuals, is NOT an answer.

 

No one is saying our children shouldn't be protected. The thread was responding to the idea of arming teachers & possibly students themselves, which I think is ridiculous. but having armed security guards who are highly trained, would be a legitimate possibility.

 

Neither is leaving kids helpless..

 

So you aren't against having guns in schools then.
Security is expensive and our schools are terribly underfunded as it is. Unless you think that the teachers will start killing their students, what's the problem in arming qualified teachers?

It's more cost effective.

 

See my post #337 above.

 

I was a public school teacher for several years. Putting a gun on a teacher changes the relationship between teachers & students in a negative way. I wouldn't want that if I were still teaching.

 

Yeh. Fighting guns with guns isn't the answer. You must use your fists. Lol

Try using that logic in banks, courthouses, and airports.

"Yeh. I know that people might rob you and try to kill you with guns. But defending yourself, and protecting innocent lives with guns isn't the answer." Lol

I'm guessing you guys have never heard of force prevention and deterrents. There is a reason why virtually all mass shootings happen in gun free zones.

 

That's not a fact. That's your opinion.

And even if true, that's better than dead children

 

Sorry on my samsung there are no post numbers.

 

I know, heaven forbid that a teachers takes responsibility for their class.

 

You really think SCOTUS didn't stretch things a bit when it decided to treat corporations like people.

 

Why should teachers arm themselves to defend students when taxpayers could hire security guards to do the job?

 

The vast majority of teachers feel this way.

 

And the first teacher that accidently shoots and kills one of his/her students will see the city or town who's school system they work for sued for multi millions.All to be paid by the city or towns tax payers, unless they have bought extremely expensive insurance to cover such an occurrence.

 

So now Illinois, California, and Maryland are Republican States because they've had a few moderately Republican governors in the past century... Wow, what a horrible argument. Shockingly bad.

Stating facts is demagoguery? Interesting hypothesis.

There is simply no getting around it. The overwhelming majority of gun crime in the US is localized inside cities controlled by Democrats, whereas rural and suburban America have gun crime rates that are comparable with other industrialized nations. Cities controlled by Democrats are the ONLY reason the US as a whole seems to have a terrible gun crime problem. I've lived in the suburbs of Chicago most of my life and there is basically ZERO gun crime where I live. Yet you drive thirty minutes down the road into Chicago proper and suddenly it's a crime-infested cesspool. To the reasonable mind, the answer to the question of WHO runs that crime-infested cesspool is of great importance. But to the partisan mind, it's an answer that must be avoided and suppressed. Clearly, we know which category you belong to!