2006-09-28 20:18:13 · 10 answers · asked by smileyman 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
P.S. was this the right catagory to put this question?
2006-09-28 20:18:46 · update #1
I agree with you because the teachers would just take out the shooters and be done with it, but that is never going to happen. There is no solution to violence, shootings will always exist. Our world and our society are messed up.
2006-09-28 20:22:49 · answer #1 · answered by adrian p 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm a supporter of gun-owners rights, and I say no. School shootings usually result from a reaction by the shooters to a particular social situation that they find despicable. In most cases, they care very little whether they die or not. So if they kill 2-3 students before being blown away by their English teacher, is that really progress? And why wouldn't their nefarious plans include a systematic elimination of all teachers before the latter had their chance to use their handguns?
2006-09-29 03:24:49 · answer #2 · answered by athedge 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Wake up people! We have the 2nd Amendment which prohibits infringement of the "right of the people to keep and bear arms". If all honest and decent law abiding citizens were not disarmed by our liberals in government, less crap like this would happen. If the government took away your right to free speech which is part of the 1st Amendment, would you accept that? Why is it any different when the government takes away your right to keep and "bear" arms? An armed society is a polite society! Armed citizens are free citizens, disarmed citizens are subjects! Just ask the people of England and Australia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
2006-09-29 04:26:03 · answer #3 · answered by The Infidel 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably. And if people could have had guns on the 9-11 planes thing would have been different.
It is a Constitutional right, I'm licensed to carry by two Governmental authorities, yet my right to protect myself is being infringed upon by restricting me from carrying on a plane.
2006-09-29 08:51:17 · answer #4 · answered by usaf.primebeef 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not really. It's quite possible we would hear about teachers shooting students instead of the other way around.
In addition to that, if a psychotic teenager has a mindset to commit murder, he will do it regardless of the consequences. He would just try to take out the teacher first.
2006-09-29 03:47:18 · answer #5 · answered by Samuel Crow 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
no i don't. what needs to take place is that schools need to be given the extra money that is been wasted on pork barreling by officials in Washington to impelement an high tech security system that can be used to protect our children while in school. school should be a place where children can learn with out any kind of outside interference.
2006-09-29 03:38:43 · answer #6 · answered by eddieteston 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
ya so then some pedophile teacher can put a gun to my head and force me to have sex with him? no teachers should have guns, it would be worse. there are so many psycho teachers out there who probably feel like pulling out guns half the time on their class because they cant handle them, and then if they actually had a gun they would probably shoot it! and then shoot themselves! i would refuse to go to school if my teachers had guns with them.
2006-09-29 03:28:46 · answer #7 · answered by Julie 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Lol ... Guns in teachers hands ??? haha we wanna make sure that there are no such incidents in the future. Not increase the ratio.
2006-09-29 03:26:53 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
absolutely not! The teachers would then shoot the students, and many deserve to be shot.
2006-09-29 03:50:44 · answer #9 · answered by wunderkind 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
no, I actually think that would increase school shootings.
2006-09-29 03:20:49 · answer #10 · answered by Miatia 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋