Washington Post:

ABINGDON, Va. — A Washington County teacher accused of firing a blank gun in a welding class is facing criminal charges.

Police tell media outlets that 60-year-old Manuael Ernest Dillow is charged with 12 felony counts of brandishing a weapon.

Washington County Sheriff Fred Newman says the incident occurred April 4 at the William N. Neff Center in Abingdon.

Dillow is accused of lining up a dozen students near a garage door and firing the blank gun multiple times in their direction.

No students were injured. A motive hasn’t been released.

Washington County Schools Superintendent Jim Sullivan says Dillow isn’t working now but he couldn’t comment further because it’s a personnel matter.

Dillow is an amateur and obviously an amateur who doesn’t have very good judgement.  What was he thinking?    Rare you think?  Something similar happened right here in PWC about 20 years ago.  I don’t think any charges were brought against the show off that pretended to shoot people with the track starter gun.  Unfortunately, not everyone is born with good judgement.  Let’s leave the guns out of the hands of teachers.   Plus it’s obviously just too tempting for some of them.  think of the toads some deal with.

56 Thoughts to “A good reason to not arm teachers….”

  1. marinm

    I’m not prepare to take away people’s rights because some people make bad, terrible or tragic mistakes.

    That’s like telling all women they have to marry a man their father chooses because Brittney Spears made a mistake ‘that ruined it for everyone else’.

    “If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all.”

  2. Why do you think this lug head has the right to pack heat in school?

    Reality check, Marin. Most people don’t get to take their guns to work.

    I am sorry but you are simply losing credibility because your argumentation crosses over the common sense line that most of us have.

    I am not prepared to give amateurs the right to endanger America’s children.

  3. Emma

    So why is this nutcake a teacher to begin with? That seems to be the larger problem that needs to be solved, not taking away everyone else’s rights.

    1. @Emma, why do you and Marin keep talking about taking away someone’s rights? Teachers don’t have the right now to pack heat in school.

      As to your question about why he is a teacher…we don’t know the details. He might have been excellent up to the point where he fake shot the students…or maybe not. Why speculate.

      More importantly, whose rights are being denied?

  4. Your definition of “common sense” is not universal.

    He broke the law, bringing that starter pistol to school and using it that way.
    If it had been a real gun, he would have killed people.

    So… again, your examples point out that the bad guys will bring guns ANYWAY and the law only disarms lawful people. If he had been killing people, there was no one to stop him.

    Armed people are around children all of the time. CCW’s are one of the most law abiding and stable groups in the country. Of course, the main argument is allowing arms on college campuses, which is what I was writing about. You brought it to the K-12. But armed personnel there would stop trouble. Heck…..give anyone that carries in a school free training that helps with confrontation, take down, etc. Free shooting lessons.
    That is what militia is. Free citizens acting together for protection.

    1. The starter pistol was already at school. Remember, track teams. Are we talking about the local case which I know was a starter pistol or are we talking about this guy down in Abington?

      As for my definition of common sense, I expect that the rank and file person would say that it was incredibly inappropriate for a teacher to fire blanks at students or to have a gun at school.

      Let’s just stop 100 people randomly on the street and ask them. How many people do you think would agree that it was incredibly inappropriate? I am guessing at least 90 out of 100 to be on the conservative side.

    2. @Cargo, responding in 2 parts.

      There has been discussion of arming teachers at all grade levels is the reason I brought it up. I certainly think it is a horrible idea. The guy in the post was a high school teacher.

      It isn’t a matter of armed people being around children. It is a matter of armed people being in charge of large numbers of children. You read all the time about some teacher going off the deep end at some group of jerks. Armed teachers just exascerbates what could potentially be a critical situation. It’s a lousy idea and potentially dangerous, especially if the wrong person got hold of a weapon.

      As for college campuses, I grew up in a college town, fairly close to the campus. No. Alcohol and booze…lousy plan. Bad mix.

      I think I probably want to blow holes in your theory that CCWs are one of the most law abiding and stable groups in the country. Let’s start with the idea that no one really knows so it’s pretty difficult to have any real stats on that premise. I don’t have a problem with CCW. I just don’t think that permit holders have unfettered rights nor do I think concealed weapons can be taken anywhere.

      You can have all the “training” in the world. You are still an amateur. I don’t want amateurs “guarding” MY kids or grandkids. Free shooting lessons means nothing. Absolutely nothing. It has nothing to do with judgement and other skills that de-esculate potentially tragic situations.

  5. SlowpokeRodriguez

    Freakin’ liberals…..what’s the problem here…the starter/black gun? Or the nut/teacher? See if you can guess right!!

  6. Emma

    A pilot recently went a little berserk on a flight last month (although the incident didn’t involve a firearm. Pilots are armed. Would you want them all to be disarmed, too, because one or two of them might be a little loony? They could take out a whole planeload of people.

  7. I don’t have a problem with pilots being armed. Pilots don’t really come face to face with passengers all that much like a flight crew member does. Do you want your flight crew armed? I sure don’t. Not with some of the AHs I have seen on planes.

    Pilots are also tested routinely for alcohol, drugs, etc. Furthermore, do they even know if there is a sky marshall onboard?

    Why not give the bus drivers guns also. It would be good for crowd control. [sarcasm button on]

  8. Emma

    @SlowpokeRodriguez I know, I know!!! It’s the gun!!! Lock it up and throw away the key!

  9. marinm

    “As for my definition of common sense, I expect that the rank and file person would say that it was incredibly inappropriate for a teacher to fire blanks at students or to have a gun at school.”

    I think your right. I doubt you’ll find many that are ok with DISCHARGE of a weapon without good and sufficient reason. But I think that there is more support for carry – even in K-12 – than you think.

    Jut because someone goes crazy or makes a bad choice does not mean that we should take away rights of the whole.

  10. Emma

    Prohibition didn’t work. The war on drugs is a disaster and has cost countless lives. When has telling Americans what they can and can’t buy ever really worked out?

    1. The only point of this thread is about arming teachers while they are work. That’s it.

      No one has told Americans they can’t have guns. American teachers have been told they can’t have guns at work if they are teachers. Lots of other workers can’t bring their guns to work.

  11. Emma

    “have,” not “buy”.

  12. Elena

    Another ridiculous example of how common sense evades people! Public Schools are a gun free zone for a reason.

    Is there anything people won’t argue?

    1. NO. Not on this blog. If I said the sun rose in the east, someone would correct me.

  13. Emma

    So you don’t want debate and discussion here?

  14. marinm

    Elena if schools are gun free zones why do so many gun massacres occur in them?

    How do those guns get into this “zone”? If we have laws that protect us how are people dying?

    Common sense is evading this debate but not in the way that you think it is………

    1. Many is the wrong word. There are very few school incidents. One is too many. however, when you look at the number of kids in a school in America in any given day, the incidence is very rare.

      Want to make the incidence of violence in schools increase? Start arming people.

      We don’t need rank amateurs in the middle of a critical situation. When Law Enforcement goes in, they need to know that anyone with a gun is a bad guy. They need to know it isn’t Mr. Jones the biology teacher.

  15. So, you’re worried about the teachers? Too many teachers are nut jobs that should not mix guns and kids? Because that’s what I get out of that statement. Because if that’s the case, they shouldn’t be around the kids in the first place.

    Schools are gun free zones for one and only one reason. Because its the only thing that can be “done” without empowering a citizen. The zone does NOT protect ANYONE. It only disarms the law-abiding. We are arguing because YOUR common sense is not our common sense. And we’ve seen what happens under your rules, so now its time to try something different.

    I agree that firing ANY sort of firearm or simulacrum is inappropriate. That’s not the question. The question is if that teacher with a starter pistol had brought a firearm and used that….who would stop him, if not in class, from moving to OTHER class rooms.

    As for the “booze and guns” canard, carry would be by 21years old and up, already legally allowed to carry. And if they live off campus…. are perfectly allowed to own and carry. 18 year olds can buy or at least own pistols off campus. Why is being on campus so different? Will they be drinking while attending class? If an 18yr old carries concealed, and drinks….he’s ALREADY breaking the law. Prohibition of carry isn’t stopping him. But it is stopping a law abiding citizen.

    Don’t get me wrong. I understand your concerns. Booze, drugs, immaturity, and guns don’t mix. But, mixing them is already illegal. Prevent self-defense in certain locations only harms those following the law.

  16. Scout

    As of a couple of years ago, we know that bearing arms is a personal right (before that, the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court firmly anchored the Second Amendment in its introductory clause relating the maintenance of an effective Militia). So there you have it. It’s a personal right guaranteed by the Constitution. It is, however, a right subject to reasonable regulation (the Court tells us). So let’s have reasonable regulations. No guns in schools, thank you very much. Business proprietors should be able to require guns to be checked. And, most important, require weapons to be carried in plain view at all times. None of this concealed nonsense. Why in the name of heaven would we ever want anyone to carry a concealed weapon?

  17. Scout,

    You have stated very reasonable things. I may disagree with part of them, especially about disarming adults in schools, especially colleges. I won’t argue or fight very hard for guns in K-12.

    Business proprietors, along with ANY property owner can keep firearms off of their property. Recently the argument is not allowing guns inside cars on property.

    Concealed….not concealed. I would want to conceal the weapon as to not make IT a target. Surprise is a weapon. That said, a visible weapon is a deterrent. One argument against visible weapons is that retention vs a much stronger opponent can be difficult.

    Many object to visible weapons, like Moon. What is the problem with concealment? Again, if visibility is required, criminals will STILL conceal their weapons.

    I find the use of the terms “common sense” and “reasonable” to be problematic. Your reasonableness and common sense may not be mine. I find it reasonable to allow arms on college campuses and common sense shows that armed people can protect themselves better than unarmed. Your mileage may differ. Evidence shows that armed campuses do not have an increase in problems. PRIVATE schools can prohibit possession on their property. Public schools are public. The schools should have to follow state law. If a non-student can carry on campus, then students and employees should be able to, also.

    1. Common sense can be defined by using common sense. Don’t put your hand on a hot stove. Don’t stick a loaded gun in your mouth. Don’t give 2 year olds guns to play with.

      Again, campuses can hire cops. They need to upgrade from meter maids to real honest to goodness trained police officers in some situations.

      I don’t care if private schools allow their students to carry weapons. The school sets the rules there. I don’t believe there is valid evidence to prove any points about allowing weapons on campuses. The data isn’t there or is not really cause/effect type data. Weapons left in cars–whole different situation and interesting discussion except I don’t think discussion is possible. silly me.

  18. By the way… I just noticed that I used the world “reasonable” in the very first sentence.

    (facepalm)

    But, it IS a good example of the problem of using that word.

  19. @Scout
    Oh and I forgot….

    (before that, the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court firmly anchored the Second Amendment in its introductory clause relating the maintenance of an effective Militia)

    I’m not sure, but, I think that Heller is the FIRST time that the court had ruled on the right to KEEP arms. Previous rulings discussed WHAT TYPE of arms were suitable… ie Sawed-off shotguns, etc. The court kept dodging in actually opining on the right to own weapons.

    Personally, since the failure of the government to raise a militia is not my problem, I do not see where the gov’t has any power to prevent citizens from exercising their right to train to arms. Therefore, Shall Not Be Infringed, is still valid.

    1. Sounds like survivalist mentality to me. People will keep pushing and pushing and the pendulum will swing the other way. It always has.

    1. School resource officers are regular police officers assigned to a school. What teacher has that kind of training? It seems to me that once again, its time for communities to stop being cheap. Place resource officers in all schools. I am not speaking of school security. I am speaking of a police officer. Larger schools might need more than one.

      Sometimes those teachers who feel they are the best qualified as the one to pack heat might not see themselves as others do. Again, we are talking about amateurs thinking they can do the job of professionals. Hire professionals to do the job.

  20. Emma

    Too bad the professionals in the Columbine incident did not enter the school until after 1 pm or so. The shooting started at 11:19 am. One teacher packing heat could have made all the difference. Instead, there were 15 dead students and teachers. The Secret Service 2002 report about the incident concluded that, “despite prompt law enforcement responses, most shooting incidents were stopped by means other than law enforcement intervention.” (from wikipedia)

    1. Common sense says that rather than arming amateurs (the teachers) it makes far more sense to use Columbine as the model for what NOT to do and keep law enforcement with the professionals.

      Who decides which faculty members to arm? Would we do it by popularity? How about the athletic dept (those that usually get the MAN’s job)? How about all the males? How about try outs? How about just the administration?

      Or perhaps just hand out heat to everyone and it they can’t cut it or don’t want to do it, dock their pay. After all, YOU (universal you) pay their salary. All I have been hearing all year is how teachers shouldn’t expect raises and how they should have to do more than rely on seniority to get raises. Additionally, there are too many fringe benefits and those teachers should have to all sorts of things to get a raise or advance to the next level. Why would anyone want to arm people who have this much bad press? If a group of people are too simple minded top get raises based on their experience, why on earth would anyone want to arm them?

      Actually, it sounds like an add on job. In addition to teachers having to be mothers, fathers, nurses, social workers, etc, now they have to be armed guards. Geez.

  21. Emma

    I wouldn’t require teachers to carry. I support their right to carry if they so choose, and if they do so legally.

    1. Oh dear God is all I can say to that. Match meet gasoline. I can just see who would be pistol packing pete right now. How many dead kids do we want? How about my riding instructor at college who used to do a fairly good impression of Adolph Hitler while in the college eatery?

      How about the teacher who used to force kids to recite the pledgte even though the courts clearly have stated that it is a first amendment issue to not do so? He was a bully and he decided what was patriotic.

      I don’t trust amateurs like that to hold a captive audience at emotional gun point must less real gun point.

      I don’t think you have thought through this one. There are just too many people with quirks out there. What makes a good cop does not necessarily make a good teacher and vice versa.

  22. Emma

    Then they shouldn’t be teaching. That’s the real problem.

  23. @Emma,

    You are telling me that teachers who can’t perform like cops when they have no field experience should not be teaching?

    Do you want cops or teachers?

    You are aware that some people are not comfortable with fire arms. Should that preclude them from teaching?

    i will agree that some people shouldn’t be teaching but not because they don’t qualify on the target range.

    This conversation has just gone from the sublime to the ridiculous.

    The leap in logic is giving me a headache. ” The teacher would not make a good cop so lets not let them teach.” yea Emma, makes perfect sense to me. NOT.

    Let’s all agree that the man in Abbington shouldn’t be teaching and he shouldn’t be in the classroom armed. I guess that will meet with some stupid argument also?

  24. You are equating an armed civilian with a cop.
    We are not.

    We are stating that IF a madman attacks a school, there will be someone that can shoot back. It is not the teacher’s job to talk down anybody, stop a fight, negotiate, etc. Heck, an armed person is not obligated to shoot back.

    But, allowing them to be armed gives them a chance.

    We can’t afford to put security in every class, or even multiple cops in every school. But allowing citizens able to carry everywhere but at school to carry at a school, gives them a chance to survive.

    1. I am 100% opposed to the idea of allowing teachers in school to come in armed. Teachers are amateurs in law enforcement at best.

  25. You know what? You’re right. This isn’t getting us anywhere.

    You want everyone in any school disarmed.
    We don’t.

    We’ll have to agree to disagree.

    1. Wrong, I want trained cops armed. I don’t want teachers armed. I know the very ones who would come in armed. Its a good way to get a kid(s) killed.

      If security is a problem, then we are going to have to bite the bullet and raise taxes to pay for cops. If you need math teachers, you hire them. If you need cops, hire them.

      @Cargo, I think you are overlooking the fact that not everyone is equipped to come to work armed. Yes, I mean emotionally.

  26. marinm

    “i will agree that some people shouldn’t be teaching but not because they don’t qualify on the target range.”

    I question the ability of a teacher to supervise students generally if they feel they can’t trust themselves around a firearm. If they dont trust themselves around an inanimate object then I don’t want that adult near my kids.

    I see zero issue with lawful carry at K-12. Zero. Illegal carry already occurs so lets give law abiding personnel in that school a fighting chance to survive.

    1. @marin, until that lawful carry comes in and shoots your ass for giving little Johnny an F in reading. Then you will care.

      The problem with your premise is you aren’t in the position to evaluate someone’s stability that makes them gun worthy.

      Some teachers just don’t WANT to have to deal with guns. That’s ok. If you don’t want your children around people who don’t want to handle guns, then plan on home-schooling them. You can’t require people to like handling guns. There are a variety of reasons why teachers shouldn’t or couldn’t use weapons. Some might think they are fine but *I* don’t want them with a weapon around my child.

      But like I said, if ability to handle a gun and be a marksman is one of your qualifications for teaching, prepare to home school. Most colleges don’t include that in the coursework.

      I once had a friend who would come to my house with a .357 and he was all liquored up. I used to just hold out my hand and make him check his gun in with me before he got through the door. I don’t want drunks in my house packing heat. He got it back when he left and was on the other side of my door. If he didn’t like those rules, he had the option of not coming to my hosue.

  27. marinm

    “@marin, until that lawful carry comes in and shoots your ass for giving little Johnny an F in reading. Then you will care.”

    Again your point actually makes mine. No law will stop someone from discharging that weapon. Even a law that says you can’t carry and discharge are only words on a paper. Useless in real life when the situation occurs. I side with giving victims the chance to survive.

    “The problem with your premise is you aren’t in the position to evaluate someone’s stability that makes them gun worthy”

    The Constituion is clear. It shall not be infringed. I don’t make a judgement on who is “worthy”.

    “If you don’t want your children around people who don’t want to handle guns,…”

    That is NOT what I said. I said that I question the capabilities of a teacher if they don’t trust themselves around an inanimate object.

    WRT your comments about homeschooling I am looking into that option. I like what I hear generally about homeschooling or religious education and I find public education deficient.

    Why didn’t you turn in your friend? You knowingly let a drunk person have a firearm off your property and I assume drive?

    This all boils down to what rigs do victims have? You contend that they don’t have any and should simply wait for assistance that may never come. I respectfully disagree.

    1. There is no law against being drunk. You assume he was driving. You know what that makes out of you and me….He could have had a designated driver or he could have been a neighbor. Who said he was driving?

      fortunately, the gun amendment isn’t without restrictions. There need to be more and after listening to some of you all I think I will seek out some gun control groups to support. I had no idea things were as extreme with some of the guns rights people. What some of you all are espousing is insane.

      You might want to think about how you all come across to gun owners and people who aren’t clamoring for gun control. You have made a believer out of me–in favor of gun control. If you want to be trusted you have to suggest reasonable rights, not try to arm people who aren’t even stable. You need to suggest ways to keep those kinds of people from having access to guns rather than suggest it is their right to have a gun. Next think I know, some of you all will be defending Cho’s right to own a gun.

  28. DB

    Honestly, when I read this title (as a teacher) I thought you were talking about staff meetings.

    1. Staff meetings would be a secondary reason. 👿

  29. Emma

    Seriously, Moon? You’re interpreting what I said to mean that teachers should not be teaching if they won’t pack heat? That is utterly ridiculous, and you know it. You said there were bad teachers who shouldn’t be trusted with a gun. If they’re bad teachers, they shouldn’t be in the school in the first place. THAT’S the real problem. But go ahead and twist our words anyway.

  30. @Moon-howler
    Don’t use our statements as an excuse to seek out gun control groups. Go read their stuff. Examine their statements and falsehoods. See if you want to join with those that want to restrict rights, use atrocities to advance their agenda, and lie.

    Our positions seem to be gaining strength.
    Gun restrictions are dropping across the country.
    Colleges across the nation are allowing adults to arm themselves.
    State after state is becoming a “shall issue” or Constitutional carry state.
    Gun sales are up.
    The NRA convention was at record levels.

    Your statements about how to restrict unstable people wasn’t even part of the discussion.
    We did not suggest arming unstable people.
    You’ve stated that we’ve argued in defense of a teacher that misused a starter pistol when we did the exact opposite.
    As for Cho, he’s the perfect example of why college students and employees should be allowed to arm themselves for self-defense.

    There is no such thing as a “reasonable right.” There are only rights. You seem to already be with the rights restriction groups since you’re already using their vocabulary. “Common sense” and “reasonable” are both terms with which they spread propaganda. Of course, their belief is that doing it their way is the only “common sense” path. Not one gun banner has been able to state what gun laws should be enacted without needing more. Not one gun control group has been able to state where THEY would compromise. Every time that a gun restriction is passed, they want more.

    Chicago and DC are the two most restricted locales. And yet, they are also very crime ridden. Philadelphia, the same.

    All adults should be able to exercise the right of self-defense. Do you disagree?

    1. I don’t need an “excuse” as you call it to do what I think is right.

      Funny, crime has been downtrending for 15 years. As for colleges across the nation allowing students to arm themselves, I don’t think that is happening in Virginia. Good. Liquor and guns don’t mix. If you aren’t discussing how to keep unstable people from having access to guns then you sure should be. Do you think that a person who fires a blank gun at students is stable? I sure don’t. That is pretty much what the post was about. I want a little weeding out before I want to see Grizzly Adams parading around the meat counter near me.

      Basically, what I consider to be irresponsible statements have made me rethink my position on people in general and guns. Free speech doesn’t have limits, freedom of religion doesn’t have limits and freedom to bear arms isn’t without limits. If all those people standing around guffawing over what Ted Nugent said didn’t convince me that something is wrong, I don’t know what would.

  31. marinm

    You have that right. You can spend as much of your monies on gun control groups as you want.

    I will only mention that you may want to look into the racist angles of gun control laws in general and maybe racism within gun control groups specifically before signing a check.

    You can read Cramer via JPFO http://jpfo.org/filegen-n-z/ngn-download-view.htm

    A video is also available; “No Guns for Negroes” via that website or on youtube.

    I’ll reiterate that the reason I got a gun was because of the PWC crackdown on illegals. As a brownie myself I needed a way to protect myself from the government.

    Have fun and I will enjoy protesting you at the rallys. 😉

  32. We weren’t discussing how to keep firearms from unstable people in THAT thread. We’ve done that discussion before.

    I don’t think that a person that fires a starter pistol at students is stable. HE committed a felony and will be put into jail. But if he had decided to use a real pistol and go farther, there was no one to stop him. Are you stating that because he broke the law, no one should be allowed to carry? How exactly are you deciding who is stable and who is not? What do you want to use to “weed out” people? In Cho’s case, it was obvious through his actions but the proper authorities refused to act. This idiot showed no signs of instability. And the gun free zone laws did nothing to safeguard his students.

    You believe that rights should be restricted because of another man’s hyperbole? Because he said what you feel to be insulting words?

    Please tell me of the restrictions on the freedom of religion. That’s a new one. Congress shall make NO law…..is pretty clear. And the only restrictions that I see on speech are slander and threats, both of which are covered under other laws. The SCOTUS has said that locales have the power to restrict 2nd Amendment freedoms. The scope of that is what the fight is about now.

    One thing that I don’t understand…you keep stating that liquor and guns don’t mix while talking about college. Yes, I understand that college age people drink. But in our context…. the gun carriers would be 21 years or older, or be teachers. As of right now, nothing is preventing off campus ownership of firearms and we don’t see problems. I think that your concern is unwarranted. What Marin and I have been saying is that there is empirical evidence that armed campuses do not have a problem.

    1. No, I am saying that faculty shouldn’t be allowed to come to work armed and he is an example of why not. Don’t mix the cause and effect relationship here. @Cargo

    2. Name a few armed campuses that someone might have heard of before please.

      This is the first i have heard of age 21 mentioned. I am not sure age 21 makes you all that mature. The problem is lots of people the same age living in a confined space. Check out student behavior after a winning basketball game. Just because you live off campus doesn’t necessarily mean you have the right to be armed. Some campuses yes, some no.

      As for faculty at the college level….again, why do we assume that those people are of the temprament to carry a weapon in a crowd? I can think of at least 2 jerks I had when I was in school that should not have access to any weapons, in my opinion.

      I don’t understand your hyperbole question. If you are speaking of Nugent, it has nothing to do with him. He is a loud mouth.

      Religious restrictions–restrictions on Santeria with regard to animal sacrifices, smoking of Peyote, polygamy, snake handling, just to name a few.

      The reasons I am rethinking my tolerance is because of extremism. You want no restrictions whatsoever if I am reading you correctly.

  33. SlowpokeRodriguez

    If I think of the pros and cons of “arming” teachers, I think of two statements:

    1. Teachers are largely liberal, complete with unions that serve to protect the worst elements of the profession.
    2. There are two kinds of people: the armed, and victims.

    I say, do not arm teachers.

  34. @Moon-howler
    We’ve mentioned 21 before. That is the minimum age for concealed carry.
    If you live off campus and are legally allowed to own a weapon, the campus cannot say anything.
    I still don’t understand how you are going to test for “temperament” since those same people are allowed, I assume, to carry off campus.
    Animal sacrifices are allowed. Location is the key. Peyote is allowed to certain people. Polygamy happens all the time. They are not married LEGALLY, but not arrested etc for being married within their church. Snake handling still occurs down South. People still get bitten.

    I want the 2nd to be treated the same as the first Amendment. I want adults to be able to exercise their rights wherever they may be.

    And from CampusCarry.org

    At the start of the 2010 fall semester, 14 Colorado community colleges (38 campuses) began allowing licensed concealed carry on campus. Since the fall semester of 2006, Utah state law has allowed licensed individuals to carry concealed handguns on the campuses of Utah’s nine degree-offering public colleges (20 campuses) and one public technical college (10 campuses). Concealed carry has been allowed on the two campuses of Colorado State University (Fort Collins, CO, and Pueblo, CO) since 2003 and at Blue Ridge Community College (Weyers Cave, VA) since 1995. After allowing concealed carry on campus for an average of more than three years (as of June 2011), none of these 26 colleges (71 campuses) has seen a single resulting incident of gun violence (including threats and suicides) or a single resulting gun accident.

    1. I am very surprised to see the Virginia school included. Is that a private school or part of the community college system? I just went to the website and yes, it is part of the Virginia Community College system. I looked at their policies and it seems that carrying a weapon is not just for everyone. They apparently have law enforcement classes and those people may carry weapons. If I went there and took a history class, I could not carry a weapon. (If I understand their policies correctly.)

      I think the fact that there are community colleges involved makes a huge difference. In general, the student population is older and therefore more mature. There isn’t the drinking, partying, frat house stuff that has been known to get out of hand.

      Let me just ask a normal question or two…did you see the student uprisings after the NCAA final, in Kentucky? There was outrageous behavior displayed. Drinking, immaturity, testosterone, drugs and extreme immaturity seemed to be ruling the post game antics. Do you want any of those people armed? I am sure some of them were but they should not be.

      As for those living off campus in Virginia….your behavior while a student is very much governed by the college. You had better not have that gun anywhere on or near the campus or you are toast. In Charlottesville, where I grew up, good luck figuring out which was the campus proper. There is a school that should not permits guns. John Mosby found out the hard way and that was back in the day when guns were far more common place. He was jailed for shooting a student who had been bullying the slight boy. He was also only 16.

  35. Elena

    I am just wondering how an article about a teacher behaving like a moron morphed into “pry my gun from my cold dead hands” discussion?

Comments are closed.