CPAPtalk.com

49er wrote:

DreamStalker wrote:

49er wrote:

LinkC wrote:No one is suggesting that EVERY teacher is physically, mentally or emotionally equipped to take on a protective role in the classroom (even without a broken finger.) But for those willing and able...

Link,

You're missing the point as the situation I described had nothing to so with whether a staff member was prepared to carry a gun. I was pointing out why doing so would have been very dangerous.

49er

I guess for me ... I've always realized that living life is hazardous to you health, crap happens, look at all the security just to fly on a plane and yet driving your car is way more dangerous. The POINT is that there are many and much more dangerous issues facing us than school violence.

Ok, I am confused, are you now agreeing with VG, EMS, and me?

Don't even get me started on having to deal with security just to fly on a plane.

49er

I'm not confused. This whole school violence is media propaganda. It is a diversion to keep people from thinking about real more serious issues like why is our government trying to start war all over the planet? Why is our government printing over $3 billion each and every day out of thin air and giving it to corporate and central banks around the world thus manipulating bond interest rates and destroying the value of the US dollar? Why are we allowing our government to disregard the US Bill of Rights, our basic civil liberties and not just the second amendment but all 10 amendments? Did you know that any US citizen can be made to disappear under the National Defence Authorization Act of 2013? Anyone of us can be declared an enemy combatant and we have no way to prove our innocence in a court of law ... they can just whisk you away to some foreign country, throw in a jail cell, torture you, without due process. Did you know that Martial Law can be declared now just for suspecting that national security is in jeopardy and the government can take control of all power utilities, agricultural goods, water, air waves and telecommunications, peoples homes and businesses, and all infrastructure? Did you know that our government is monitoring each and every byte of information that we correspond with over the internet under the FISA act and storing it in a database for immediate or future use?

Yes, all ten of our US Bill of Rights are being disregarded right now and we are already in a police state and yet people act as if they don't even know it? Why? Because they are using the media propaganda to keep people arguing about petty little non-issues like immigration, abortion, gay rights, gun control, taxes, jobs, liberals, conservatives, and just about every divisive issue they have programmed us to respond to.

So people are emotional/passionate about kids getting gunned down in school? How many kids have been shot dead while at school? Now compare that to how many kids die riding their bicycle?

Y'all can make all the brooo ha ha over this trivial school shootings issue compared to REAL issues facing this country. But I'm not playing that game cuz I have my eye on a more dangerous ball.

greatunclebill wrote:concealed weapon permits are issued by state governments. they are not valid on federal property. it's not justr federal buildings. it also pertains to military bases, us post offices, etc.

So how is it justified by the feds that weapons can't be taken into those areas? Why does that not apply to schools or other public places? Is federal land somehow immune from the type of people that engage in mass shootings so that it is not necessary for average people to carry?

greatunclebill wrote:

Conrad wrote:You didn't have to attend a class or undergo any type of training?

nothing. basically a clear background check and a twenty dollar bill. and it is recognized in 19 other states with similar requirements/lack of requirements.

Its about the same in indiana, with the exception you are fingerprinted. the bad thing only good for 5 years and you have to be fingerprinted each time, it seems at the state level law enforcment thinks many people grow new fingers.

I however am over qualified to carry, years in the army, one in Viet Nam, shot my first rifle at age 9, safely. One rule, Never point a gun at anything you arent ready to kill. Second rule, Remember you must be able to live with actions. Colt made the good and bad equal. Jim

Gerald? wrote:

greatunclebill wrote:concealed weapon permits are issued by state governments. they are not valid on federal property. it's not justr federal buildings. it also pertains to military bases, us post offices, etc.

So how is it justified by the feds that weapons can't be taken into those areas? Why does that not apply to schools or other public places? Is federal land somehow immune from the type of people that engage in mass shootings so that it is not necessary for average people to carry?

Federal property breeds the reason average people need to be armed, self preservation. Jim

Conrad wrote:

greatunclebill wrote:

Conrad wrote: The process for acquiring a concealed carry permit is very rigorous, they don't just give those permits to anyone.

not z'actly. in alabama my wife and i got concealed permits by going to the sheriif's office, showing our drivers license, answering a few questions and paying $20. they run a criminal background check and we have our permit. the whole thing takes 10 minutes. not z'actly rigorous. i know some states make you jump thru hoops and pay alot

You didn't have to attend a class or undergo any type of training?

I'm from Alabama and it took longer then 10 minutes to get mine. I did paperwork, had 3 people sign it, and waited more then a week for a background check. Also had to have a better reason than protection to get it. I carry everywhere I legally can, that includes my DME. It is a private business with no sign saying I cannot.

mattd65636 wrote:

Conrad wrote:

greatunclebill wrote:

Conrad wrote: The process for acquiring a concealed carry permit is very rigorous, they don't just give those permits to anyone.

not z'actly. in alabama my wife and i got concealed permits by going to the sheriif's office, showing our drivers license, answering a few questions and paying $20. they run a criminal background check and we have our permit. the whole thing takes 10 minutes. not z'actly rigorous. i know some states make you jump thru hoops and pay alot

You didn't have to attend a class or undergo any type of training?

I'm from Alabama and it took longer then 10 minutes to get mine. I did paperwork, had 3 people sign it, and waited more then a week for a background check. Also had to have a better reason than protection to get it. I carry everywhere I legally can, that includes my DME. It is a private business with no sign saying I cannot.

in alabama concealed carry permits are controlled/issued by the county sheriff, not the state. the local county sheriff sets his own requirements. mobile county is obviously looser than your county. the whole process took ten minutes including the background check and making the card. i required no signatures from other people and was not asked why i wanted it.

It took me 3 months to get my concealed weapons permit in Florida. Paper work to fill out, had to have a passport size photo, if you don't have a military dd214 you have to show you attended a concealed weapons class. Then fingerprints from the Sheriffs office, then put it all together and mail it to Tallahassee, FL. Prints go to the FBI for a check and back ground check, when everything is done in about 90 days you get your concealed weapons license, all this cost a little over $100.

NONE of you have explained to me how a handgun would fare versus an AK-47. It would not have stopped Columbine or Virginia Tech tragedies.

VikingGnome wrote:NONE of you have explained to me how a handgun would fare versus an AK-47. It would not have stopped Columbine or Virginia Tech tragedies.

DUH, One correctly placed round from a handgun will shutdown a perp with a Ak 47! A large number of bullets dont move any faster than one well placed round. Consider it explained to you. A assault rifle allows many rounds to be fired in a short time, most time its pray and spray to keep incoming fire suppressed, firing 3 round bursts is more effective. I kept my M-14 A2 on full auto because my chance of getting out of my truck alive was slim, really its preferred to drive out of the fire zone.

Back in 1966, I could fire the M-14 A2, set on full auto, one shell at a time, most people cant get less than 3 or 4 shots before release ing the trigger. Jim

VikingGnome wrote:NONE of you have explained to me how a handgun would fare versus an AK-47. It would not have stopped Columbine or Virginia Tech tragedies.

Potentially quite well in the hands of a practiced shooter, especially given the elements of surprise and tactical advantage when the perp(s) are completely unaware of the reciprocal threat.

Additionally, an AK-47 (or one of its many military or civilian variants/copies) was not used in either of the two tragedies you mentioned. Nor was any high-powered rifle ammunition.

VikingGnome wrote:NONE of you have explained to me how a handgun would fare versus an AK-47. It would not have stopped Columbine or Virginia Tech tragedies.

I would think a handgun would have a much better chance against an AK than Janet Reno Napolitano's suggested pair of scissors!

It's right there in the DHS video.

VikingGnome wrote:NONE of you have explained to me how a handgun would fare versus an AK-47. It would not have stopped Columbine or Virginia Tech tragedies.

Without a shooter, the handgun and the AK-47 would never hurt anyone...

It's not just about how well a handgun might fair against a coward like the shooter at Sandy Hook elementary school, or the others mentioned above, but also about deterring such shootings. These cowards chose their targets because they knew the targets would be soft and that no one would be shooting back at them. If these cowards thought for one second that someone might be shooting back at them, my bet is that they would have either picked another easier target or not done it at all.

Caught on Camera: Joe Biden Admits Gun Control Will Not Stop Mass Shootings Or Save Lives

Check it out on CNN - http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestof ... sacres.cnn

Conrad wrote:

VikingGnome wrote:NONE of you have explained to me how a handgun would fare versus an AK-47. It would not have stopped Columbine or Virginia Tech tragedies.

Without a shooter, the handgun and the AK-47 would never hurt anyone...

It's not just about how well a handgun might fair against a coward like the shooter at Sandy Hook elementary school, or the others mentioned above, but also about deterring such shootings. These cowards chose their targets because they knew the targets would be soft and that no one would be shooting back at them. If these cowards thought for one second that someone might be shooting back at them, my bet is that they would have either picked another easier target or not done it at all.

Conrad, exactly! And if it the cowardly shooter was too messed up to realize that, or to care, if the victim(s) was armed, the cowardly shooter wouldn't last nearly as long, if at all.