Common Sense Gun Legislation

FINALLY!! Someone got their head out of their a$$ and made one of those "common sense gun laws" we have been hearing so much about. But, we all are very well aware that "common sense" is not all that common among our politicians and legislatures.

www.foxnews.com...

My question here is why did this take so long? Why is this not something more states are doing? Does this make TOO much sense for some legislatures to get through their thick skulls?

Why do we not want to protect the students? Clearly these "gun free zones" are not doing the trick. Arm those that want to protect the youth they are teaching and let them defend the schools, lord knows the police aren't always going to do it. *cough* Uvalde *cough*.

Giving these teachers the OPTION and right to carry a firearm, after the proper certification and training of course, is a no brainer in my book. If they are already at schools they obviously care about the future of our children, why would they not want to protect that?


How long until more states get on board and start thinking about keeping our youth safe?

I approve of this - As long as the teachers take a safety course and go out on the range - they already have background checks done on them - then give them special certification to be able to carry in a school.

a reply to: FlyersFan

Luckily, that is one of the stipulations they put on this. They must complete 40 hours of handgun safety/training before being allowed to carry in school.

a reply to: PorkChop96

Honestly that is kind of in the lower end of training but its better than not carrying at all. Just like teachers occasionally have continuing education, I think a weekend refresher every 3 or 4 months would be better...

a reply to: RickyD

I would agree, maybe a qualification at the range every 6 months or at least every school year.

Show proficiency and safe handling with your firearm.

Teachers don't have the right to carry arms, and protect themselves and their students. The idea is preposterous.
But LGBTQ+ people? That's a different story!

a reply to: ColeYounger2

All fine and dandy until they admit to doing this in a place they shouldn't be.

originally posted by: RickyD
I think a weekend refresher every 3 or 4 months would be better...

Why? It's really not that complicated. Just point and click.

a reply to: 5thHead

I really hope that is sarcasm......

originally posted by: RickyD
I think a weekend refresher every 3 or 4 months would be better...

That's extreme.
I was in the Army and only had to go to the range once a year.
Every three months? Nah.

Put 200 rounds through it each quarter to qualify.
Give them a 5% pay bump.

Where’s that freakin manifesto?
It’s harder to get than the Epstein client list?

I strongly support the 2nd amendment. I used to head our church security and still participate. Also former LEO and Corp security director.

With that out of the way, it is more than point and click. Verify a lethal threat, what is behind them or on the other side of the wall... etc. Realizing every bullet come with a lawyer wrapped around the outside.

I support this. Linking the training to state standards for LEO's would let the requirements change as theirs update.

From experience I can say most would be shocked at how easy those requirements are. Not the bigger city departments standard but the state typically has a minimum that small and rural departments can meet.

I personally use a certified LEO trainer and qualify yearly. If I ever have to go to court I have an expert who can testify I met the state requirement for law enforcement.

Not every CCW needs this but if you're serious or protecting others it's 6 hours, and a couple hundred rounds well spent. We do about 150 rds. In drills, then qualify with 50. His qual. is actually a bit tougher than required.

a reply to: PorkChop96

I absolutely love this. I'm shedding a star spangled tear right now. As long as they demonstrate the ability to use the firearm effectively and safely, I am in total support of this. Honestly, I think we need to push for as much safe carry as possible for all groups.

a reply to: PorkChop96

They don't pay teachers enough for this.

Why can't we pass laws mandating the study of mass shootings to look for answers to prevent them in the first place?

Maybe it's time to raise the gun ownership age to 21. Just like we did with drinking. With exception for gun use if you're with a family member over 21. A good number of the mass shooters are under the age of 21.

originally posted by: grey580
They don't pay teachers enough for this.

It's voluntary. And I'm willing to be there will be many teachers who would like to be able to protect themselves and their students this way.

Maybe it's time to raise the gun ownership age to 21.

Why? The kids shooting the guns in schools are all under 18 and too young to buy now as it is. A new law would do nothing. It's not like the shooters are paying attention to it, they are getting their guns elsewhere rather than in gun stores. Raising the age would only disenfranchise 18-21 year olds and not give them their Constitutional right to bear arms and protect themselves.

a reply to: grey580

That is why it is not a mandate, it is optional and you have to meet the requirements to do so. Don't get me wrong, teachers are very much underpaid but I would venture to say that any teacher willing to carry to protect a kid already carries outside of the workplace so it is no skin off their back to do it at work.

We know why "mass shootings" happen, gun free zones. Ever notice how there is never one at a sporting goods store or any place where you can legally carry a firearm?

Raising the minimum age is not going to accomplish what you might think. Yeah, most people get their guns legally but as has been said in thousands of other threads on this topic, criminals are going to get them no matter what. I don't think it's a terrible idea to raise the min age to 21 for all firearms but at the same time, we are sending guys and gals across the globe to fight and die for the country but they can't come home and buy a 22 to go plinking on the weekend with their friends. Something to be said there.

The biggest deterrent for these events is to have it known that if you come in here with intent, you will not leave here alive.

a reply to: FlyersFan

I didn't really put much thought into how often but I don't think it should be one and done. If you don't go to the range and practice and go a whole year not shooting or practice drawing when the time comes under stress you won't perform very well. Accuracy means a lot when shooting guns in a school full of kids.

a reply to: Vermilion

That sounds reasonable...show competency in your aim and draw once a year so no one shoots themselves drawing or a kid missing your target.

a reply to: FlyersFan

80% of mass shooters responsible for K-12 steal guns from family members. Another issue that needs to be addressed.

Parents need to securely lock their guns up.

We recently had a scare at my kids school where someone threatened to shoot up the school. And they had easy access to firearms.

a reply to: grey580

What good is a locked up gun when you need it? Maybe being a better parent is teaching gun safety and raising children who value life...

Edit: In my family there was many guns at my and most relatives houses that where never locked up...like the 12ga behind the front door or the .38 under the seat of the car. Never once did I think it was ok to mess with them without asking.