Teacher Fights for RKBA at School

[Lady Di]

I saw a story this morning on Fox News about a teacher who is taking her school district to court to fight for her RKBA while at school. She is concerned for her safety because she believes her ex-husband is a threat. She also has cited safety concerns because of the Columbine and Va. Tech massacres. It was interesting that the two men hosts on Fox & Friends had a clear understanding of the 2nd amendment while the woman on the show was thinking with her emotions. She did not want those "nasty guns" in schools. I loved Brian Kilmeade's retort, "Funny thing about that 2nd amendment. It keeps getting in the way of people like you." I was also encouraged by the results of the call in poll. Nearly 80% of the callers were supportive of the teacher's right to carry a concealed weapon while on school grounds. This case will be heard before a judge on Thursday. Please keep this woman and a case that will affect all freedom lovers in your prayers. Here's a link if you would like to read the details of her case:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,300180,00.html

[VegasGeorge]

Please keep this woman and a case that will affect all freedom lovers in your prayers.

Yes! I thank God for good citizens like this lady who are willing to step up and make an issue of demanding their rights. If it weren't for them, the enemies of freedom would have won years ago.

And, Lady Di, thank you for reminding us to pray for this lady and our cause. Of course, our Constitution is for all Americans, regardless of their faith. But, as a Christian, I feel a special duty to take my concerns to God in prayer, and I will certainly include this brave lady and her case.

[Raccoon]

Well, here are my thoughts on this subject.

I think that anyone that has a CCW permit should be able to carry on a school campus. Some of you will disagree with me, but here is why. Where do you draw the line between what age can carry? What about a 21 yera old? What about a 30 Yr old going back to complete a degree? So where is the line? 23? 25? Also, you ARE going to have a problem with someone, sometime that has a CCW. These should be dealt with on an individual basis. You cannot ban the whole group because of one bad apple. If you say schools should not be considered here because there are too many people, then do you outlaw a downtown area? How about a mall? There have been active shooters in malls before and one I remember in particular was stopped by an off duty officer from another state that happened to be armed. I dont know how many would have died that day if he had not been there.

So, you cannot ban every ccw holder if one had a problem. What you should do is ban criminals from coming in and shooting citizens. Oh wait, that is already against the law. Well, maybe we should double the punishment. I'm sure the badguy would take that into consideration before he tried anything.

Lawful carry on school grounds should be allowed. If you dont think that active shooters should be met with armed response, why do we have police? Society recognizes this as a whole. . .

[Bill of Rights]

Well, here are my thoughts on this subject.

I think that anyone that has a CCW permit should be able to carry on a school campus. Some of you will disagree with me, but here is why. Where do you draw the line between what age can carry? What about a 21 yera old? What about a 30 Yr old going back to complete a degree? So where is the line? 23? 25? Also, you ARE going to have a problem with someone, sometime that has a CCW. These should be dealt with on an individual basis. You cannot ban the whole group because of one bad apple. If you say schools should not be considered here because there are too many people, then do you outlaw a downtown area? How about a mall? There have been active shooters in malls before and one I remember in particular was stopped by an off duty officer from another state that happened to be armed. I dont know how many would have died that day if he had not been there.

So, you cannot ban every ccw holder if one had a problem. What you should do is ban criminals from coming in and shooting citizens. Oh wait, that is already against the law. Well, maybe we should double the punishment. I'm sure the badguy would take that into consideration before he tried anything.

Lawful carry on school grounds should be allowed. If you dont think that active shooters should be met with armed response, why do we have police? Society recognizes this as a whole. . .

A great big, huge +1 on this, Raccoon! Well stated and reasoned. I wish that the person involved at the Trolley Square Mall had not been an off-duty officer but rather a CCW citizen, only because it would have better furthered the cause of promoting the RKBA, but for those who claim that only police and military should be armed, I wonder how long it would be, if they achieved their goal, before those classes would be trusted while on duty and not otherwise.

I also wonder if they say Police and Military Only, does that mean that armored car drivers and bank security guards should not be armed either? It doesn't? Oh. So in other words, it's OK to be armed to protect someone else's money but not to protect your own life and those of your children. I see. Thanks for setting the priorities straight.

Cogito, ergo porto!

Blessings,
M

[Raccoon]

There are different levels of everything. I have seen police officers that I would not want on a call with me. I have seen CCW people that are more aware of what is going on than many LEO people. Of course, I have seen boogerheads that are CCW and evcellent tacticle people on the police department too. There was a post about CCW people who stopped shooters on many college campuses and saved the day. We dont hear about them in mainstream media very much though.

In a poem called, "Desirata - Child of the Universe", there are some good points. . . "Remember there will always be the greater and lesser persons that yourself." We have to strive to better ourselves and that is all that we can control. Then we do what is right, and everything else will fall into place.

[junglebob]

Remember that mall shooting in Utah. The mall had a no guns allowed policy. The guy who stopped it was an off duty LEO. However several people might not have died if carry was allowed there. I think something like 5% of the Utah population has CCW permits. Do the math if 200 people were in the mall 10 others might have been able to stop the guy. They were as defenseless as we are in Illinois.

[Bill of Rights]

Junglebob: With respect, I believe that the Trolley Square Mall to which you refer may have had a building policy (ie: without force of law) which would have allowed the CCW public to carry until specifically asked to leave, at which point their refusal would be grounds for trespassing (maybe armed trespassing) charges. I do not know Utah law, but based on the Google-cached page from the now-defunct packing.org:
Places off-limits while carrying
Date updated: Aug 8, 2005 @ 10:14 pm

From the state's Firearms FAQ:

It is unlawful for a person with a firearm permit to carry a concealed firearm in the following locations:

*Any secure area in which firearms are prohibited and notice of the prohibition is posted
*A secure area of an airport
*Any courthouse, courtroom, mental health facility or correctional facility that may provide by rule that no firearm may be transported, sold, given, or possessed upon the facility. At least one notice shall be prominently displayed at each entrance to a secure area in which a dangerous weapon, firearm, or explosive is restricted
*What about private business, can they post signs prohibiting someone from carrying a gun into their business even though the person may have a firearm permit? Naturally, private property owners may apply what ever restrictions they want, whether or not these restrictions violates ones personal rights is for the civil courts to decide. But the only statutory restriction on a permit holder is secured areas such as airports and federal buildings.

The issue here is twofold: One: Those of us who carry do so within the law-the criminals don't. Many people don't distinguish between a building policy and an actual law, so yes, while the estimate I read was that there were perhaps 300 or so Utah citizens there, only the one LEO (who broke the mall rules to do so) had a gun to effectively fight back.
Two: I can speak for no one but myself. For myself, I will say that if I see signs here in Indiana, I can safely ignore them in most places and remain armed. That said, I don't see many signs. When I do, however, if the owner of the business attempts to enforce them by telling me to leave, I do so peaceably, but only after informing him or her that not only has he or she just lost my business, but that of every other peaceable, legal carrier that I can influence. When I can afford to do so, I'm going to have some cards made up to carry with me along the same lines as those by Ohioans For Concealed Carry, indicating that if my gun is not welcome, obviously neither is my money.
https://secure.ohioccw.org/catalog/images/no_guns_cards.gif

If I am not in violation of the law to do so, I carry. If I'm not, it's because I've made a conscious decision not to. I've slowed down and carefully considered, "This is why I'm not carrying my gun here, today." and if I can't give myself a good reason, like "carrying here is a violation of the law", like a school, then the gun stays in my holster.

If I need it, they can charge me with trespassing, but I'll be alive to face the charges.

Blessings,
M

[Raccoon]

Some interesting points.

Carrying here is also the same. You cannot be charged with anything unless you refuse to leave.

I consider off duty carry the same as CCW carry. Let me explain. I have a CCW permit and off duty status. There is a national law that now allows me to carry anywhere in the US, except Federal and governement places and then you still can in some places. But in general, if I have a concealed weapon. I really am about the same as a CCW carry. I do have a higher expectation from the citizens to take action if I see a felony being committed, but in general, I have a weapon and it is concealed.

I have not been "made" except once in the 6 years that I have been carrying. It was at a bass pro store, and the sales lady just said, "oh" and walked away. At least I think she realized I had a concealed carry because of her actions and the fact I was asking about concealed holsers and if they sold them. Anyway, I have not had one other person notice I was carrying in all the time I have been doing this. I keep my PD badge in my pocket, (I have to carry concealed for off duty as well) and so if someone saw a print in my shirt, they might ask me to leave too. But it has never happened.

My biggest concern is that if I do have to shoot someone, that another CCW person might shoot me.

[Bill of Rights]

There's an interesting point, Raccoon: When you are off duty, as much a misnomer as that is, you still are required by your community to be armed. So, if "Joe's Meat Market" has a ghostbuster sign, does your badge pre-empt the sign or do you just go to the pro-CCW "Jim's Meat Market", his competitor?

Cogito, ergo porto.

Blessings,
M

[VegasGeorge]

My biggest concern is that if I do have to shoot someone, that another CCW person might shoot me.

Now that's one I hadn't thought about. In the movies undercover LEOs are always yelling, "I'm a cop, I'm a cop," and waiving their badges around. I suppose that's about all you could do. On the other hand, we CCW permit holders who are not cops probably wouldn't do that. But, we are just as likely to get popped by another CCW permit holder who thinks we are the bad guy as you are. Maybe I could yell, "Honest citizen, honest citizen" and waive a copy of my last tax return around? Hum ....

[Bill of Rights]

My biggest concern is that if I do have to shoot someone, that another CCW person might shoot me.

Now that's one I hadn't thought about. In the movies undercover LEOs are always yelling, "I'm a cop, I'm a cop," and waiving their badges around. I suppose that's about all you could do. On the other hand, we CCW permit holders who are not cops probably wouldn't do that. But, we are just as likely to get popped by another CCW permit holder who thinks we are the bad guy as you are. Maybe I could yell, "Honest citizen, honest citizen" and waive a copy of my last tax return around? Hum ....

LOL!!! But wouldn't waving your tax return around mean you'd have to yell, "Government slave! Government slave!" :lol:

I suppose you're on the right track though. Maybe we can get little metal reproductions of the Constitution to carry in our pockets. (j/k) Thanks for the laugh, and have a great day.

Cogito, ergo porto.

Blessings,
M

[Lady Di]

The teacher won round one! Let's hope common sense and the 2nd amendment continue to prevail.

Medford teacher wins first round in legal fight to bring gun to school

08:20 AM PDT on Friday, October 12, 2007

Associated Press

MEDORD, Ore. -- South Medford High School English teacher Shirley Katz won the first round of her legal bout for the right to carry a pistol onto school grounds Thursday.

Jackson County Circuit Judge G. Philip Arnold dismissed a motion by the Medford School District to dismiss the case because she has not actually broken the school policy prohibiting teachers from bringing guns to school.

The judge told Katz he will issue a written opinion on her claim that the policy violates state law that gives concealed weapons permit holders the right to take guns into schools and other public buildings.

Outside the courtroom, Katz said it would be "naive" to think no one is carrying guns to school, she is just the first person with a concealed weapons permit to assert her rights in public.

Her attorney, James Leuenberger, argued in court that the Legislature never intend to give cities, counties or school districts power to regulate guns.

School district attorney Tim Gerking countered that the school district policy does not fall under that prohibition, because it only applies to employees and not the general public.

Gerking added that if Katz wins, "school districts ... could be reduced to armed camps," and school officials could be blamed for gun accidents at schools

[Bill of Rights]

Gerking added that if Katz wins, "school districts ... could be reduced to armed camps," and school officials could be blamed for gun accidents at schools

And blood will run in the streets! And parking space disputes will turn into murder scenes! The sky will turn black as sackcloth and the moon will run blood red! The sky is falling, the sky is falling! Mithter guvvinmint man, wiww yoo pweeze pwoteck uth?

Pardon me while I laugh in hysterics-it's just so I don't empty my stomach all over my keyboard. :-b

No, we don't want "armed camps"...After all, it's enough that our school campuses now have metal detectors, chain link fences, iron bars, locked doors, "school security" (which here is off duty police, moonlighting), cameras, visible IDs.... the off-duty cops being the only one of which adds any security. Why would we want to actually have people there that could make a real difference in our children's safety?

Cogito, ergo porto.

Blessings,
M

[Lady Di]

"Mithter guvvinmint man, wiww yoo pweeze pwoteck uth?"

I only wish we had an audio link of you saying this, St. Michael. :lol:

[Bill of Rights]

I only wish we had an audio link of you saying this, St. Michael. :lol:

:roll:

[VegasGeorge]

One of the problems here is that the idiot liberal anti gun crowd doesn't want to see violent criminals, or homicidal maniacs killed. They want to treat these offenders as some kind of victims of society. They want all of us to wear ashes and sack cloth, and flagellate ourselves for having failed these offenders so horribly that they were driven to their desperate acts. You know, child abuse, broken homes, discrimination, and all those other lame excuses used to justify and explain criminal behavior and psychopathology. It's an expression of collective guilt. Their guilt is exposing the rest of us to untold dangers.

The anti gun crowd are afraid that CCW permit holders might actually kill some of their pet offenders. No trial, no appeal, no death penalty protests. Just: "Bang, you're dead. Next case." They find that to be unacceptable. They would actually prefer to see any number of dead innocent victims killed by one of their "victims of society," than a dead criminal or psychopath, killed by one of us. Their wussy conscience cannot sanction cold, rational, homicide, even when it is legal and justified and necessary to save the lives of innocents.

They disgust me.

[Lady Di]

Tell us what you really think, Vegas George. :lol:

Ditto. I'll second what you just said.

[Bill of Rights]

Nice to see someone who's solid in his opinions and doesn't mince words, George. +1 all the way.

Cogito, ergo porto.

Blessings,
M