Ohio School District Votes To Allow Non-Teaching Staff To Carry Firearms

gun free zone sign

A step in the right direction, I think:

An Ohio school board has unanimously voted to place armed custodians on their K-12 campus in an effort to better protect their students from a future mass shooting.

Following Wednesday’s believed unprecedented 5-0 vote in the state, four male janitors were the first to volunteer to arm themselves with their own handguns on the rural Montpelier campus, the Toledo Blade reports.

The vote will permit only non-teaching employees to carry the firearms on the campus, so long as they complete a weapons training course.

‘It’s kind of a sign of the times,’ Superintendent Jamies Grime said on Friday.

The move comes as districts and lawmakers across the nation weigh how to protect students following the December school massacre in Newtown, Connecticut.

One fact that doesn’t get mentioned nearly enough in the gun control debate that has been ignited since the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting is the fact that, since 1950, every single mass shooting in America (with the exception of the shooting of Rep. Garbrielle Giffords and others in Tucson) has taken place in a “gun free zone” such as a school or college campus.

When are we going to admit that shooters looking to rack up big body counts to satisfy whatever mania or religious/political agenda is motivating them gravitate to “gun free zones” as places where they can shoot the longest without being shot back at?

Gun free zones are targets. We need to change that.

Rob Port is the editor of SayAnythingBlog.com. In 2011 he was a finalist for the Watch Dog of the Year from the Sam Adams Alliance and winner of the Americans For Prosperity Award for Online Excellence. In 2013 the Washington Post named SAB one of the nation's top state-based political blogs, and named Rob one of the state's best political reporters. He writes a weekly column for several North Dakota newspapers, and also serves as a policy fellow for the North Dakota Policy Council.

Related posts

  • Hal109

    This is good news! Volunteers protecting the children!

    • two_amber_lamps

      Now we just need to send Ms. SuzyBeehler down there as a volunteer bullet catcher since she’s so anti-gun….

      • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

        I think she will have to put on weight. “The broader the beam, the better the blocker.”

        • two_amber_lamps

          Give them hollow-point boat-tails something to expand in….

          • SusanBeehler

            You are sick

          • two_amber_lamps

            Actually I’m fine… but thanks for your concern! :p

        • SusanBeehler

          Ha Ha

      • SusanBeehler

        I am not anti-gun, I am against gun violence. I believe it is overzealous gun owners not wanting to believe any of their actions, their belief system or their morals or what they say in front of their sons have contributed to the problem we are having with the semi-auto gun slayings happening throughout our country. Think about what a child hears when someone says you need armor piercing bullets to protect against the police, or what a child hears when you say you need a gun to protect yourself; as a kid punches them at school. It is about teaching personal power, personal defense with or without a gun. Guns are just an easy way to settle a dispute, or get someone to comply or as some think on this site, a way to defend when the government is going to get you. Think about it schools are government controlled some gun owners say they need guns to defend themselves against government, what message was just sent to a kid hearing this, maybe they feel they are being tyrannized by the school and so in their distorted immature thinking they believe they are doing what gun owners say “we need guns to protect against the tyranny of government” Gun owners have contributed to the problem they just don’t want to admit it.

        • two_amber_lamps

          Ummm, clearly you don’t understand use of force and what is considered “reasonable” use of force. But that’s a nice strawman argument you make there with presenting the problem with guns as some kind of power/ego trip for the owner and blaming father-figures for violence. Ever consider the fact that the LACK of father figures in many of these violence cases significantly contributes to the mentally unbalanced condition of these fruitcakes who go on shooting sprees?

          Sounds like you have a little misandry complex going? Or do you just have low regard for EVERYONE and their ability to make rational decisions?

          {guns are} a way to defend when the government is going to get you.

          Frankly Ms. Suzy that’s a stupid statement. Anyone with a gun and half an ounce of rationality knows that if/when the state decides to focus it’s energy against you (ie arrest you) and take you into custody… there’s not much a damn thing you can do to alter that fact. Equipment/weapons/manpower have the common man completely outmatched and for the most part that’s a suicide pact.

          But you assume all gun owners aren’t rational…. so I guess I can follow your insane reasoning…. crazed as it is.

          But thank YOU for contributing time and again to the false premises and talking points of leftists. I’m sure they appreciate your support.

          • slackwarerobert

            I have a very simple and reasonable standard. I live, you don’t. If you don’t like it go rob a cop instead. As for the cops coming for you, you only need to shoot a few to break through the lines, then you are free to pay the boss a visit. If shooting leaders is good enough for der fuehrer it is good enough for me.

      • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

        Maybe she just needs to do a little plinking with a fine handgun. I have introduced a couple of very wimpy women to the pleasures of shooting. At first they will shy away, but once they get the gun in their hands, they turn it from side to side, feel its heft, stroke it, become calm and receptive—even comment on how nice it feels. It makes me blush, and that takes something! Once they squeeze off a couple and blow holes in a tin can, they are converted. And they talk about guns compensating for men’s feelings of sexual inadequacy! Hoo-hah! Other guys have had similar experiences with their wives and girlfriends.

        • two_amber_lamps

          Doubtful… My money is put a gun in her hand and I think Ms. SuzyB would have something on the order of a phobic response.

          May be better off starting with a CO2 BB pistol and work your way up from there… but I’m thinking she’d have a nervous breakdown first, with delusions that somehow the bullets from the pistol she shot were somehow responsible for the deaths at some movie theater halfway across the country.

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            I dunno … put it together with her attention needs & you might see something that would shake you in your boots.

  • mickey_moussaoui

    Don’t mess with the janitor…I know what you’re thinking. “Did he fire six shots or only five?” Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kind of lost track myself. But being as this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and would blow your head clean off, you’ve got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?

  • dakotacyr

    why have police officers when you can hire a bunch of janitors to patrol our streets and clean them while we are at it? Insane! School district too damn cheap to do what is needed.

    And just to push back on the “gun free zone” meme, schools have always been with out guns, malls have always been with out guns, churches have always been without guns, movie theaters have always been without guns. Always.

    • two_amber_lamps

      And that’s why you have shootings in schools, malls, movie theaters, churches….

      Your leftist ideology creates happy hunting grounds for crazed leftists. They thank you!

      • tomorrowclear

        Arm the priests and pastors!!!

        “Blessed are the peacemakers…(bang, bang, bang)”

        • two_amber_lamps

          How about this, sharkbait? Let the congregation arm/protect themselves…. or have you no faith in your fellow man Comrade Misanthrope?

        • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

          Who knew that being religious meant you have to leave yourself open to be a victim?

          • tomorrowclear

            You do realize that they are free to pack heat, yes, Robert? Why do you think virtually none of them choose to bring guns into houses of God? Think hard on this, Robert.

          • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

            It’s their choice.

            But nice spin from your original insult, troll.

          • slackwarerobert

            Because then they would add a gun charge to the molestation of the altar boy charges. An 8 year old altar boy can keep his outie working as it was designed to when they have a gun.

        • $8194357

          Colt was a very good choice..
          Blessed? I dunno.

          • Dan

            Now, THAT’S funny, right there!!

          • $8194357

            tee hee

        • StanB

          one of my future best friends is a Luthran pastor who helped push through wisconsins CCW. Shepard and protector of his flock.

          • mickey_moussaoui

            Good man

      • SusanBeehler

        Court houses have always have armed guards, why do they still have shootings? The argument of no zone has some holes in it. Schools, malls, movie theaters and churches and court house all have something in common, and the commonality is not the type of “gun” zone they are.

        • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

          So you’ll let the perfect be the enemy of the good?

          There are far fewer court house shootings then school shootings, and perhaps the guards have something to do with it, no?

          Talk about holes in an argument.

          • SusanBeehler

            I don’t know what you mean by the “perfect”. You say the guards have something to do with fewer shootings, maybe, but I think it has more to do with the age of the shooters and the places they frequent. I believe if gun owners would be more responsible for their guns, by not letting their children use them and if we would not allow children access to semiautomatic weapons I believe those would be a better approach. We can shoot holes in each other arguments all we want but it is coming to a common ground which will help solve a problem. Armed guards is not the only answer and may not be the most effective and economicly feasible. As gun owners would you be willing to pay $100, $200 or $$$$ when purchasing a gun or ammo to pay for these guards?

          • Onslaught1066

            “I don’t know what you mean by the “perfect”.”

            That is because you have a great deal of fat where your brain is supposed to be… and even more fat where your brain is actually lodged.

          • slackwarerobert

            I already paid the money for the gun so I don’t need the guards. If you want to pay for redundant less security then you pay for it. Not disarming people is the solution, and it costs NOTHING.

          • SusanBeehler

            YOU< YOU <YOU Now why weren't you at Sandy Hook?

        • camsaure

          Wrong, Court houses were NOT always guarded, and it has not been that long since they were.

          • SusanBeehler

            Where are most jails? Who guards jails?

          • Hal109

            I take back my comment that your posts are thought provoking. WTF happened?

          • $8194357

            The diseise of liberalism strikes varous groups and/or causes radicaly and incurably every hour, everyday some where in America, huh.

          • camsaure

            Boy, you are stubborn, even someone as yourself should know that jails are not put in courthouses for the purpose of guarding the courthouse. Besides many jails are not in courthouses, not now or in the past. I am willing to bet that you cannot even pronounce or spell the words”I am wrong” Sheesh.

          • SusanBeehler

            Okay some court houses do not have guards and the purpose of the people who have the guns in the court house is not to guard, but they will shoot on people outside the courthouse if they start shooting people outside the court house building. They are not guards they are workers in uniform with guns.

        • slackwarerobert

          Because the cops keep giving their guns to criminals as holder orders them to, so they can say we need to ban guns. There is no problem when the people are carrying in the court house.

          • SusanBeehler

            What are “holder orders them to”? Cops are in on the conspiracy to ban guns?

    • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

      “And just to push back on the “gun free zone” meme, schools have always been with out guns, malls have always been with out guns, churches have always been without guns, movie theaters have always been without guns. Always.”

      No, not always, but setting that aside, the reality is that the gun free zones are targets because they’re gun free zones.

      Why do you want our schools to be vulnerable?

      • dakotacyr

        Yes, Rob, always.

        • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

          Really? You know this for a fact that every single school in America has been gun free for the entire history of the country, along with every privately-owned shopping mall?

          Not only is this irrelevant, it’s simply not true, as my uncles who used to leave their shotguns in the corner of the school house they went to right here in North Dakota will tell you.

          • SusanBeehler

            And those same Uncles probably never played a video game on TV and may have never had a “color” TV; times change. Young people today are bombarded with technology; things to take up their time. Your uncles may have not frequented a mall as a teenager. Things we did in the past do not necessarily apply today. Guns of the past are not the popular guns of today. The family of today is not the family of the past. Gun usage of today may no longer be the same as it was in the past. As society evolves so should our policies and laws.

          • Hoth

            What you’re really saying is that as society Devolves we should do away with the things that are in no way responsible for that devolution. I reject that idea. Completely.

          • slackwarerobert

            Actually it isn’t the video games, it is corrupting darwin by saving those that should never have lived to reproduce. case in point obama, should have been aborted when his gene pool ran off and wouldn’t support and nurture him. Get rids of the defective genes, and you get rid of the defective nuts.

          • SusanBeehler

            Are you a liberal? Most conservatives do not believe in abortion. Now who do you sound like? Do I hear Hilter?

          • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

            Yet, again, add violence in mediums like video games has proliferated, America has become less violent.

            That’s the data point you seem determined to ignore.

          • SusanBeehler

            Less violent, your definition. Data? kindergarten children are not just data.

          • mickey_moussaoui

            the worst mass murder in America involving a school was in 1927 in Bath Township, Michigan that killed 38 elementary school children and six adults, and injured at least 58 other people. Now ignore that data SuziQ

          • camsaure

            So, you are admitting then that liberalism has made people more violent.

          • mickey_moussaoui

            When I was in high school we could bring our deer rifles to school in a case and leave them in the office where we would pick them up afterwards. Although most of us just left them in the car trunk. Hell, most of the men teachers were hunters. But that was back before the feminization of public education and PC politics.

          • $8194357

            2 dang tru 4 skool mickey.

        • Hoth

          No, they haven’t. I was in high school in the early 90’s. Students brought guns to school regularly. On any given day there was at least one truck with a gun in the back window. Students brought guns to school for use in demonstrations for speech class. During waterfowl/upland season I regularly had a shotgun in my vehicle because I went hunting before and after school. Lots of students did. It wasn’t a secret and nobody cared.

          • camsaure

            In the 60;s we had to have them cased and left by the driver on the schoolbus, when we were going to a friends house to hunt after school.

          • $8194357

            Same in the 70’s.

          • dakotacyr

            you make my point, there were no guns in schools!

          • Hoth

            That’s funny. I could have sworn I saw the principal walking down the hall carrying an M1 Garand… and a Remington 700… and a Winchester 1200. All on different occasions of course, but they were all most certainly IN THE SCHOOL you fuck wit. Are all you libs born retarded or do you become retarded through some (as yet) poorly understood process?

          • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

            Approve.

          • mickey_moussaoui

            Our local DNR sponsored “Hunter Safety” classes are taught in the local grade school. These classes include gun safety with REAL guns.
            Those crazy conservatives keep doing it right

        • Spartacus

          I carried a .22 rifle and a 12 gage shot gun in the back of my vehicle to school during hunting and trapping season. Occasionally the sheriff’s department would set up check points at the two ways in and out of school property to check that everyone driving to school was licensed to do so. They never batted an eye over the guns or asked any questions about them.

          Perhaps you should stick to subjects you’re actually familiar with. But then that would put a severe limit on the entertainment value your comments provide, so do carry on.

          • dakotacyr

            again, no guns in the schools.

          • Spartacus

            I wouldn’t bet on that semantic you’re going after either. My U.S. History teacher was also employed as a reserve officer on the police force, later became Town Marshall. I’d have to ask him sometime, but I’m pretty sure that since he was licensed, authorized and required to respond when needed and has always been a strict Constitutionalist he was carrying while in the class room.

          • PK

            I was allowed to bring a shotgun into school for a speech presentation on how to clean the firearm when i was a sophomore. My classmate did one on shooting his Mathews bow outside. This was in 2000, not long after Columbine. It wasn’t a big deal. We all had hunting rifles in our vehicles right next to the building. Nobody was worried about a Columbine happening in that small school in North Dakota.

          • two_amber_lamps

            Then you shall have more Sandy Hooks.

            Bury your head in the sand but you by extension share the responsibility for those murders.

          • camsaure

            Hey cryer, where they are outlawed at schools that includes the schoolgrounds, which you have overlooked so conveniently in your bogus arguing.

          • slackwarerobert

            Tell that to the shooters, not us. I am fine with deranged killers not being able to have guns in schools.

          • SusanBeehler

            How old are you? Where did you grow up?

          • two_amber_lamps

            What, do you need help with your argumentum ad hominem?

          • Spartacus

            50. Various locations. Why are either relevant? Explain.

          • SusanBeehler

            I say age is relevant because it is from your perspective of what you as a child experienced a couple generations ago; what happened to you as a child is not very relevant to what is happening to children now. I remember my parents saying I use to have to walk to school in a blizzard, and I thought it was irrelevant for me as a child, because times had changed my parents did not have a car nor did the other children’s families. You ever hear of the generation gap, you are now it. Various locations is relevant to the discussion because cultural what is acceptable in some areas is not in others. A fag in England was a cigarette. Do you see the relevance? The answers to problems does not just revolve around your world or mine or just the gun owners world either. We all have to work together to at least try to prevent gun violence.

          • $8194357

            Brought my first non military deer rifle to school and brought it in and showed the biology teacher my new 30-30 lever action Marlin.
            That old 1898 30-40 Krag and 03 Springfiled would be worh some serious cash today.
            Had my 12 ga. in the back seat every fall for hunting on the way home as well.

      • camsaure

        Yeah, why do the libs hate the kids?

        • $8194357

          They abort them by the tens of millions..

          • Spartacus

            Averaging one every 94 seconds according to the last report. Give the liberals one hour and they’ll be responsible for killing more kids than were killed in the Newtown incident. Give them 8760 hours (a year) and they’ll stand on the Newtown kids graves and lecture you about how you’re immoral and that we need for more gun laws so that they can save the lives of the children they weren’t successful at aborting.

          • $8194357

            Yes sir.

        • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

          The anti-gun lib arguments seem to me to point to an unconscious desire to kill young children. The libs feel this might be made harder to do. They have a huge track record of killing small children as it is. It’s called “abortion.” Inside many libs is a child-killer screaming to get out. They love gun-free zones. They are convicted out of their own mouths and behaviors.

          • two_amber_lamps

            Yet another example of leftist cognitive dissonance… their entire ideology is based on it.

      • SusanBeehler

        They are targets because they are the places families and young people frequent. Like the gun enthusiasts state the most popular guns are used. Most “frequented” places are where gun violence happens, you know places besides your home, like where you work or spend the most time outside the home, and in cases of the court, where decisions of the “home” are decided. You say the no gun zone is the reason, I say the places we will most likely frequent is more of a reason. These type of shooters are not going to go where there are no groups of people especially those places they are comfortable going to. They go to a school because it is school where they have spent a good chunk of there time. Who attends movies more than any other age group?

        • mickey_moussaoui

          I can only figure that maniacs are as stupid as you and require an official notice of a “gun free zone” sign on the door to figure out where the public is most vulnerable. Because like you, w/o that sign they wouldn’t have a clue.

          • slackwarerobert

            Then why haven’t they attacked the police station? It has a no guns sign on the door. Could it be they know that inside they ignore the sign?

    • Hal109

      The janitors won’t be patrolling the streets. They will be doing their regular duties while possessing the training and tools to defend defenseless children.

      It’s all about the children!

      • dakotacyr

        and the school district won’t compensate them for being police officers or carrying their own guns. I don’t even want to think about the liability.

        • Hoth

          You don’t want to think, period.

        • Spartacus

          That’s what insurance is for. There have been incidents where home invaders have been shot and wind up paraplegics or quadriplegics where the intruder sues from prison. More often than not the intruder looses, but in the cases where they win the insurance company just settles on giving the sap enough to buy a few cartons of cigarettes while serving sentence. It’s less expensive than the other possible pay out for the insurance company had the home owner not defended their property properly.

        • Hal109

          Airline pilots fly armed without extra compensation. If you have no solutions, get lost.

        • slackwarerobert

          I wouldn’t want them carrying a gun just to get another $25 in the paycheck. I want them carrying a gun because they don’t want to be killed. Police’s job is to file paperwork, I want a citizen who’s duty is to stop threats from harming him. So why is the school not liable for letting these kooks kill the children now, but would be for killing the kook?

    • Just me

      I carry a gun in every church I’ve ever been in since age 30. I do it legally, safely, and because I won’t be the one who could have stopped a gunman and didn’t. So this just reiterates the maxim that absolute statements are absolutely always wrong.

      • Just me

        And I’ll add every mall and every movie theater as well.

        • slackwarerobert

          How do you enjoy the movie? I can’t relax as I constantly have to stop myself from eating popcorn with my strong arm. Can’t risk the buttery goodness causing a slippery grip.

      • dakotacyr

        You all talk big when you are online, but in the heat of a chaotic situation, it is entirely different. Most of you wouldn’t take the shot, IMHO because you couldn’t. The target won’t stand still, the screaming parishioners, students, general public won’t stand still.

        • Hal109

          You talk big but never have any workable solutions. Get lost unless you have something of value to add to the debate.

          • dakotacyr

            Oh, I have something of value to add to the debate, you just don’t want to hear them, Hal.

          • dakotacyr

            And you all talk as if you could stop a shooter in a mall, church or school. You all talk as if you are expert shooters.

            But in reality few of us are mentally prepared, or would be properly positioned or skilled enough to take out a body armored killer in a smoke filled and panicked theater, school, church or other publicly occupied building .

            I seem to remember the police office in at the Empire State building shot at an armed assailant and hit 9 bystanders, and these are trained and competent police office.

            My point is you think that just any volunteer carrying could do the same thing and I disagree.

          • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

            And you all talk as if you could stop a shooter in a mall, church or school. You all talk as if you are expert shooters.

            But in reality few of us are mentally prepared, or would be properly positioned or skilled enough to take out a body armored killer in a smoke filled and panicked theater, school, church or other publicly occupied building .

            A) Most shooters aren’t armored.

            B) People who have CCW’s are very proficient with their guns.

            C) Just a warning shot, or the appearance of a gun, can be enough to get a shooter to take cover, and diminish the body count.

            D) Are you really arguing that it’s better for gun free zones to make targets out of unarmed citizens because not every armed citizen might be able to get a clear shot at the shooter?

            I’m glad opinions like yours about guns are in the minority.

          • Dakotacyr

            Now you are just making stuff up.

            Most people with CCW have not been tested under the conditions I stated above.

            And a warning shot would be enough to make a shooter take cover, really?? Most, if not all these shooters are suicidal.

            And I may be I the minority in this blog but even the vast majority of NRA member want reasonable sensible gun safety laws.

          • mickey_moussaoui

            Anytime a lib uses the words “most”, “all”, “consensus”and “every” then you know the rest of the story is conjecture. Don’t bother reading their clap

          • Hal109

            Now you are just making stuff up.

            “Most people with CCW have not been tested under the conditions I stated above.” Neither have most police.

            “warning shot” Warning shot… Are you serious? Warning shot?

            Everyone wants reasonable safety laws, not the BS you advocate.

          • $8194357

            Warning an armed perp is stupid..
            Don’t pull it unless ya mean to use it and put a person down.

          • Hal109

            Exactly. Cryer has been watching too many movies. When is the last time you heard of a police officer firing a warning shot? I can only imagine the discussion with a superior afterward. “Well, sir, I fired one warning shot, he didn’t care so I fired another, and another….then I had to reload my 30 round magazine so I could fire more warning shots.”

          • $8194357

            The only way I wouldn’t shoot to kill is if friendlies
            were caught in the cross fire.
            Warning shots and shooting to wound are both just ways to
            make a bad situation worse IMO..

          • slackwarerobert

            That is what had me confused with zimmerman. Why only one shot? Then I heard they were struggling and though Yea if I reached around them to shoot them in the back towards myself, I would only fire once. Now I know that isn’t what happened, so did his gun jam, did he freeze, or didn’t he practice? Shooting to wound is a good way to become homeless.

          • $8194357

            I would rather explain in court why I shot someone than
            see them do violence on innocent folks…
            Lawyers..
            Politicans…
            and Bankers….
            The un-holy trinity of state…

          • slackwarerobert

            Well, if you are just to damn tired to wait around for the cops you don’t shoot. Had an idiot with a box cutter changed his mind and all I did was unholster the gun. Didn’t even point at him, just let him know I was ready for him. Scum didn’t even report me to the police for being in a gun free zone. That really burned me up later.

          • $8194357

            Exceptions to every rule, true..
            I put a round in the chamber of a 30-30 from behind the seat one night
            when a drunk pulled a pistol on a friend of mine…I heard it hit the ground as the idiot started screaming…
            It isn’ even loaded…It isn’t even loaded…
            My friend picked it up and told me its empty…
            I put mine back behind the seat went over and b!tch slapped
            him one hard one across the face…
            I told him “Mine was you dumb f— and I
            had a good bit of pressure on the trigger.”
            He cried and said he was sorry and I got the adreninalin shakes from dang near seperating his head from his body with a 170 grain soft point….
            Stupid folks do stupid things and drunk folks to the extreme..
            Closest call I have ever had to the use of deadly force..
            Glad it worked out the way it did….

          • slackwarerobert

            The first warning shot is the chest center mass, unless I believe you are wearing armor, then it is between the eyes center mass. Or you give me time to switch mags for the AP rounds then you get two center mass. I would love to be tested, but they don’t allow us to go hunt down thugs and get tested. But if you think the alternative of being shot is going to deter me from shooting you are as crazy as these nuts.They are idiots. Otherwise they would have responded “You can’t do a background check” when asked about making them for all sales. They haven’t thought about what you do when holders people are rioting becasue zimmerman got a fair trial and was set free.

          • camsaure

            You forgot the part about “smoke filled theaters” when you effetivly whupped him. LOL

          • $8194357

            (I’m glad opinions like yours about guns are in the minority.)
            So where the Nazi’s but they took power anyway.

          • Guest

            Yes, yes and yes. Certified.

            Bullet proof mind. 2 and 1.

            Apparently not.

            Not any volunteer, dumb a$$.

        • Just me

          So rich! The equivalent of sticking your tongue out and saying “Nah, nah, nah.” You have no ideas of my capabilities or my intentions so you create a strawman that comports with your view of the world. Fortunately for you, I’m one of the chosen few that liberals believe should be allowed to carry weapons since I’m a law enforcement officer. I concur with what seems to be a major trend on this thread – you sir are without merit on the topic of guns. Go troll somewhere else.

          • dakotacyr

            and if you read my entire comment, I wrote that “most of you wouldn’t take the shot”. Can you honestly say, as a trained law enforcement officer, that anyone carrying a gun in a crowded movie theater, church, mall, will have the skills in a chaotic scene with gun fire and people scattering all over the place to know who is armed and shooting to protect and who is shooting to kill. Do you really believe that because I certainly don’t.

          • slackwarerobert

            I don’t have to decide who is who, that is for the cops, I only have to shoot anyone endangering me. If he is shooting out the upper deck, it is not my problem unless he turns the gun my way. Why can’t you understand I have no interest being the cop.

          • tomorrowclear

            Really? You’re a law enforcement officer? From where did you get your degree in police science? What training have you had in these types of situations?

            Wait, I’ll bet you can’t reveal where you were educated, ‘cuz that would give away your identity. Kind of like the right-wingers who claim to have served but steadfastly refuse to reveal where and when they served, unlike every vet I’ve ever met in person.

            There isn’t a police officer in this nation who would be saying the things you’re saying. Why is it that I have more respect for cops than the man-in-uniform fetishists?

          • Hal109

            tomorrowclear,

            When did you develop your “man-in-uniform” fetish? You are full of crap, as usual. The only thing you know about the police is that they ask you, “sir, how much have you had to drink this evening?”

          • slackwarerobert

            How much training does it take to sit outside eating donuts till the shooting stops? Have you even gone down to the range and watched them shoot? I wouldn’t trust my life to them. How many people do they have to kill before you wake up, they can’t shoot any better than these nut cases. I train for 2 dirty cops and one or two dupes who didn’t enforce the law before I had to shoot the bad ones.

        • Dan

          Speak not of things you cannot possibly know. I wouldn’t hesitate to take the shot because I’ve been on the receiving end of violent crime. NO WAY I’ll allow anyone to suffer the emotional crap I went through, if it’s within my power to prevent it.

          Pipe down & quit speaking from a position of ignorance.

          • dakotacyr

            Let’s say there are five of you in a crowded movie theater who pull their guns. How will you all know that you are not the shooter? In a chaotic scene with the lights out, people running and screaming, I simply do not believe you would be able to handle the situation. Again, unless you are a trained law enforcement officer who receive ongoing training in these types of situations, they are the only one who could do this. Anything else would be pure luck and could lead to more carnage.

            And no, I won’t pipe down because your testosterone increases while carrying a gun. I grew up with guns in our home and have the utmost respect for them but I also know that there are many men out there whose testosterone gets the better of them.

          • slackwarerobert

            If 4 other people are shooting at the killer, it is not an issue, I am not in danger. You don’t stand there and wave your arms at the killer yelling “Over here, over here!”. You are using what cover you have, and shooting at the bad guy, others shooting at him is not going to be a problem, just ensures he goes down with lots of bullets in him, and why would you shoot a dead guy so the bullets would stop. If he has a partner, at least I killed the SOB before I got shot in the back. But I will risk the second shooter being a better shot than his buddy over hoping I don’t spill my popcorn before I die unarmed.

          • $8194357

            10X

        • camsaure

          Cryer, not everyone, even women will pee their pants like you would. You should be thankful someone could be there to save your sorry a$$.

          • slackwarerobert

            If peeing your pants gets you more time to draw a bead on them and kill them, I will piss my pants without a second thought. Whatever it takes to win is what your mind set should be.

      • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

        Would you have fired at Scott Roeder?

        • slackwarerobert

          I would shoot anyone who threatens me and my family. The only thing I won’t know til it happens is weather I would shoot obama if his goon squad threatens me. If only one I would probably shoot the goon, but if more than one goon, I might have no choice but shoot the thug who gave the order instead to be sure I get the right guy. That is the only question, do you shoot the hit man, or the one who gave the order? Ideally you shoot both, but you may not get the chance.

  • Bird dog guy

    The 1st responders do the best they can, but are often too late to help, that is why I have a gun and a defibrillator in my home.

  • $8194357

    BIG inconsistencies about Sandy Hook in Conn…

    Seems FEMA was in the area the day before

    running exercises on disasters involving children

    and filming was faked..Facts distorted and outright lies told..

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wx9GxXYKx_8

  • SusanBeehler

    The other thing that does not get mentioned out of 40 school shooters, only one was female;only 2 were over 18 years old; 4 also killed one of their parents or both; and where it was stated 2 used their fathers or grandfathers guns; 8 committed suicide; 8 occurred before 1990. Where are your guns tonight? Why do our children have access to guns? Men what are you teaching your children about guns, that they think they could bring them to school and now you want guns allowed at school? What message will this send to the boys? Guys are you talking about your right to shoot people, your right to defend yourselves in front of your little boys, because it boys who are doing the killing? Do your boys understand when deadly force if ever is warranted? Every gun owner needs to look at the example, the message they are sending their sons, because it is the sons who are doing the killing? What are you doing in your home to eliminate gun violence?

    • Spartacus

      I’m not getting your point Susan. As I mentioned above I brought guns to school with me and there was not a problem. No shooting incidents, ever, at the school I went to.
      Perhaps it has more to do with the way you’re rearing your kids these days that’s actually causing the problem. Guns have been a part of our culture for over 250 years, semi automatic guns have been around for over a century. No such incidents have occurred until recently. And what has happened within society recently is over zealous parents pamper their children, children grow up then realize life isn’t as fair as mom and dad lead them to believe. Imagine their disappointment in both life and their parents who have lied to them for all those years leaving them ill equipped to deal with the harsh realities of life.

      • SusanBeehler

        “the harsh realities of life:brought guns to school and not a problem. No shooting incidents, ever, at the school I went to.”

        When and where did you go to school? How old are you? Your reality does not sound the same as what many children are facing today, maybe not here in North Dakota, but media has made what happens in CT could happen anywhere, children hear what is said and they develop their beliefs from the adults around us. Technology and media along with the availability of semi-automatic weapons has changed the school of today. The point is if we want to keep our freedom of gun ownership, we have to start discussing the issue differently and addressing exactly what we are teaching our sons! Children should not be shooting our schools up if they are living in the same reality as you state your childhood was. Until we get a grip on the complexity of the problem the situation will continue down the path of gun violence. If you don’t get the point maybe you have spent too much time thinking of yourself and your childhood. When I went to school, I walked to school.

        • slackwarerobert

          Well we did have one other thing besides guns, we had idiots flunked. How many of these nuts should have been passed out of the 6th grade even. The problem is no one can shoot back, that doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out the solution, allow us to shoot back. assault rifle in closed in environment is not that difficult to stop with a handgun. There is no surprise, you don’t whip it out of your pocket, even if the rifle in his hands fooled you, there is the body armor, cammo, and face mask. that should give him away. If not shooting out the front door should give it away to even these liberal nuts.

          • SusanBeehler

            “we had idiots flunked.” “have been passed out of the 6th grade even.” Did you flunk?
            Did you listen to the superintendent of the Sandy Hook elementary school in front of congress? She stated she felt very offended when it has been suggested that somehow the principal could have protected herself or the children if she would have had hand gun. You may think you would be able to protect yourself against an “assault rifle” with your hand gun. How many people have you killed with your hand gun while they are shooting at you with an “assault rifle”? Talk is easy, being in a similar situation ???? Nobody is NOT “allowing” you to shoot back. Someone shooting at you now?

          • slackwarerobert

            And the NURSE said he was standing in front of her desk, she was looking at him through a hole in it. So there is someone who could have killed him very easy. And that was before he went down the hall to kill the kids. Why would I give anyone a fair chance. I don’t need to stand at the end of the hall and wait for the bell to draw. I am going to kill him before he knows what happened. I can protect myself against an assault rifle, because I know what it is capable of, and what it’s weakness is, and close quarters is it’s weakness. You can’t sweep a room anywhere near as fast as a pistol. Yes I can stop them, because the alternative is being DEAD. Avoiding death is a great motivator. And it is better to take them with you than let them get away with killing you.

          • SusanBeehler

            And no matter how much you wanted to be that NURSE you were not. “I am going to kill him” you have made up a “video game” in your mind and you are the winner. You may think you can stop “them” but until you have been in there place, you are just “playing”. ” Avoiding death” for YOU may be a great motivator someone considering suicide not so much. Actually your last line sounds pretty “suicidal” . “If you try and kill me, I will kill you”, sounds like it is a “love” story. You love to talk about what YOU could or would. YOU are disrespectful to those who survived. I bet you are the kind of guy that wants to blame the victim of a rape too.

      • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

        Beehler talks pure bullshit all the time. She is, like hanni, an attention-hound. It would be better she have a sit-down with her husband or boyfriend on more personal issues.
        It would take one unpleasant encounter with a violent rapist or an attack on her family to get her head straight. She would then understand, body and soul, what the issues are. Otherwise she is just crapping up the blog.

        • Spartacus

          I see that. She’s not even very good at talking a good ball game. It’s very clear that when she mentions tripe such as “if we want to keep our freedom of gun ownership, we have to start discussing the issue differently and addressing exactly what we are
          teaching our sons” she’s actually saying she want’s to abolish, of put severe limitations on the second amendment; completely aware of the fact that the second amendment was crafted to allow us to protect ourselves from people like her.
          My grandfather didn’t risk his life fighting Nazism and fascism in Europe just so that she and her ilk could introduce it here 75 years later.

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            Beehler is a textbook case of what is referred to in the psychological literature as “animus-possessed.” It is like having an inner low-life drunk in charge of the way one expresses oneself: Utterly nonsensical assertions delivered with full confidence, complete obliviousness to the facts and what they indicate, and forever irritatingly beside the point in their responses. One runs into such creatures on campus all the time. In young women (at least) it is an odd form of mating ritual. Corner a guy, get into a stupid argument with him of the sort described, and then—since women love to heal an antagonistic situation—resolve it in the bedroom. If you can tolerate it, you can recognize the signs and score in such situations. Don’t tell anyone I told you this. …

      • dakotacyr

        Yup, you brought you go to school for show and tell.

        • Spartacus

          “you brought you go to school for show and tell.”

          Huh? Did you leave out some punctuation or something?

      • $8194357

        The femination of the modern male is a PC/physco babble
        communist tactic put into practice long ago..
        Metro sexuals/homo sexual rise proves the “program”
        was a indoctrinational success.
        The black male was the new obvious communist proletariat
        replacement in cultural marxism. Social justice anger is rightous
        in the “victims groups” but those dang red necks and other males
        needed some leftist “enlightenment and feminization”.

      • slackwarerobert

        You forget we also had freedom and responsibility when we went to school. If the government would restore our freedom, and demand responsibility there would be no problems with guns in school or out.

        We would see who could put a dent in the steel of our range at school, damn stuff had to be 2″ thick, nothing phased it.

    • Dan

      Ya know what else isn’t mentioned, Suzie?

      ALL of them were taking one or more psychoactive drugs – prozac, ritalin, zoloft, luvox, effexor, paxil, etc – so, why don’t you lose the sanctimonious, holier-than-thou attitude. This has little to do with guns and MUCH to do with f’ing up the minds of our boys with drugs…IOW, how about we demand an end to “chemical parenting”?

      • SusanBeehler

        I would not say ALL of them, and I have no evidence any of them were on drugs. Shootings were happening before the popularity of the drugs you mention. Also some of the drugs you mention are given to treat depression and clearly many shooters are struggling with the idea of suicide. Here is a list of shootings
        http://sitemaker.umich.edu/356.dolan/list_of_school_shooters

    • slackwarerobert

      My children have access to my guns because bad guys don’t call ahead so I can be waiting for them. What sort of idiot would leave a six year old unable to defend themselves? They know there had better be blood splatter inside the doorway, unless they yell police, then load the armor piercing and shoot through the door at several levels (chest, knees, head) till it is quite outside. I am training them to jit what they shoot at. Why would you want children firing guns without that skill? Because I can’t trust obama I had to give my 10 year old the 50 cal sniper rifle in case I am not allowed to in the future. So hide behind a VERY THICK wall when he goes nuts.

  • Spartacus

    Am I the only one that finds it ironic that Liberals insist upon top down rules and regulations from governmental authority but also insist upon bottom up authority in the business and economic world? They always want to let the inmates run the asylum.

    • slackwarerobert

      It is even funnier when you think about how they are denying women the right to choose their gun.

  • Snarkie

    Now we can have rampaging elementary school janitors. Legally.

  • Guest

    Maybe it is the media you are reading: Bismarck Tribune January 2 “North Dakota Highway Patrol Sgt. Tom Iverson said the 2012 traffic statistics can be attributed in part to more people driving and more miles being driven in the state.”

  • DanielHsu2

    One day, liberals will get their wish and no one will carry guns legally.

    Then when another maniac starts a massacre with bombs or an illegal gun, no one will be able to help.

    • slackwarerobert

      I think you just figured out why the dems are not worried about SS and medicaid. The loons will kill them off before they can demand a check.

Top