You Can’t Fix Stupid When it Comes to Gun Banners Like Moms Demand Action

Opinion

Oklahoma chapter of Mom's Demand Action
You Can't Fix Stupid When it Comes to Gun Banners Like Moms Demand Action

USA – -(AmmoLand.com)- “Our teachers are trained to be educators, not law enforcement, and increasing the number of teachers carrying guns in our schools will not make our kids safer.”

This was the statement made by an unnamed representative of an Oklahoma chapter of Mom's Demand Action (what a stupid name that is, when you think about it) in response to Oklahoma House Bill 2336 which would allow teachers with CCW permits to carry firearms in school to defend themselves, and students should the unthinkable occur on their watch. I spent a fair amount of time breaking that down yesterday on Armed American Radio's Daily Defense broadcast.

 

When I hear someone say something like this, I have to wonder what is going through their mind, or for that matter, if they are even thinking at all. At this stage of the game, with everything we know about mass killers entering gun-free zone schools and having their way until someone else with a gun shows up, I shake my head in disbelief when I realize there are still people who feel this way.

Let's break the reality down into simple terms for these mental sloths.

Of course, we must remember who we're dealing with in the first place – an orange shirt clad activist who has either swallowed the Kool-Aid pill and believes herself or is too stupid to figure it out in the first place. My experience tells me it's the latter. Either way, the person has failed to accept that keeping teachers defenseless means dead kids until the killer decides to stop. Oh yeah, and dead teachers, too.

To me, it is unconscionable and tells me that more likely than not, this person is putting an agenda in front of a child's life, possibly even mine or yours. How can I make that claim when I don't even know who said it? How can I get into that person's head to tell you here that this person is likely stupid? Well, that's easy. Let's re-write that statement altogether, just for kicks and try to determine what any sane, rational, honest person would think.

What if she had said the following instead? “Our pilots are trained to be pilots, not law enforcement, and increasing the number of pilots carrying guns in our airplanes will not make the flying public safer.” Would she make that statement, especially with 9/11 in the rear-view mirror? I think it's legitimate to ask. Would she feel less safe on a flight to Paris or Las Vegas, for example, knowing her pilot is capable of defending the aircraft? I wonder, would she feel better knowing that nobody could stop someone who would want to take it to the ground, disintegrating her body, or at the very least leaving bits and pieces of it dangling and burning from whatever was left after it slammed into a neighborhood? Likely not. I would bet all the money in the world that if she were sitting on a hijacked flight, (in need of a pair of adult diapers), that she would rather there be a dead hi-jacker with a couple rounds in his head being dragged out of the cockpit by the flight crew than the alternative.

I would also bet that the pilot who saved the aircraft and its occupants would be hailed as a national hero and given an award by a President of either party at a White House ceremony. Oh, and I can also imagine her showing up for the said ceremony because she is not dead with her remains in a shoe box because her body exploded when she disintegrated upon impact.

I think it's safe to say her husband and children, mother and father, siblings, in-laws, and extended family would also be happy that the pilot had a firearm in the cockpit to save their loved one.

What you still don't get it!? Here' let's try it another way.

“Our nations mothers are trained to be moms, not law enforcement, and increasing the number of mothers carrying guns in our homes will not make our kids safer.” That makes me wonder if she read the story about the single mom in Burlington, North Carolina who heard some noises emanating from her kitchen area at approximately 4 AM a couple of days ago? That mom grabbed her gun and went toward the sounds in her house when she was confronted by an armed intruder in her kitchen who fired a shot but missed, thankfully. That enabled the mom to return fire and send the dirtbag fleeing, thereby saving herself and her child from an unthinkable fate.

Does the unnamed orange short clad woman who made that statement feel any less safe when standing in line at a grocery store? How about her bank? What about a Home Depot register, hair salon, restaurant, or gas station? Certainly, this person must know that the odds are in favor of people with guns, including many women, surrounding her as she goes about her daily business of being an orange shirt clad gun prohibitionist? I don't have the answer to that question; I'm merely asking it. I also feel pretty confident that if she were standing in one of those places when a violent individual with a gun burst in threatening to blow her head off unless she “gives it up,” that she would probably thank the woman who pulled her weapon and killed the dirtbag threatening her life.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure her family would thank the woman for saving her life so she could go on being a mom, wife, friend, sister, aunt, daughter and all of the other things living women get to do with their lives because they aren't dead. I'm also pretty darn sure that local law enforcement would hail her savior as a hero and maybe even present that woman with a civic award at a ceremony attended by the still breathing orange shirt clad mom.

Imagine the look on the face of the still living and breathing orange shirt clad woman when she found out that the woman who saved her life was also an elementary school teacher.


About Mark WaltersMark Walters

Mark Walters is the host of two nationally syndicated radio broadcasts, Armed American Radio and Armed American Radio's Daily Defense with Mark Walters. He is the Second Amendment Foundations 2015 Gun Rights Defender of the Year award recipient and co-author of two books, Lessons from Armed America with Kathy Jackson (Whitefeather Press) and Lessons from UnArmed America with Rob Pincus (Whitefeather Press)

  • 44 thoughts on “You Can’t Fix Stupid When it Comes to Gun Banners Like Moms Demand Action

    1. I think that forcing teachers to be armed would be hazardous. Some want nothing to do with a gun or the responsibility that comes with it. Arming those that would be responsible and have some experience would be a good thing. At the same time get rid of the kill free zone signs and replace with signs that say “armed personnel inside”. That reminds me of a sign that says: This business is protected by a well armed individual five nights a week. If you are going to break in it is up to you to decide when he isn’t there. Tennessee just shelved that law until next legislative session so we still have police and sheriffs deputies roaming the hallways, but I don’t think they would hide behind something outside and listen to the carnage.

      1. OK, so are you trolling or do you REALLY misunderstand what has been said about arming teachers EACH AND EVERY time it has been suggested. Only trolls and anti-gun people, redundant-I know, have suggested that teachers would be FORCED to be armed. The reality is that it would be an option for those who want to be trained and armed. They would be ALLOWED to be armed, something very different from being forced.

        1. @ Dave in fairfax Take a chill pill dude. I did not see anything in this article that said anything about a voluntary armament. You jump to conclusions with little reading comprehension. I assure you I am not a troll and have been commenting on this site long before you ever started running your opinion. If I am correct you are in NJ and no chance of anyone being armed there, in fact no shootings in gun free zones because no one can have guns. Don’t you wish!

          1. Tomcat, I know that you aren’t a newbie, that’s why your statement, “I think that forcing teachers to be armed would be hazardous.” made me wonder what was going on. It was out of character for you.
            It’s in the 2nd paragraph. “This was the statement made by an unnamed representative of an Oklahoma chapter of Mom’s Demand Action (what a stupid name that is, when you think about it) in response to Oklahoma House Bill 2336 which would allow teachers with CCW permits to carry firearms in school to defend themselves, and students should the unthinkable occur on their watch.”

            You’re wrong, BTW, Fairfax is in VA, and it’s too blue for me. I deal with angry and dangerous people frequently, so an assumed lack of risk is incorrect. I suspect that you’ve misjudged me.

            It’s hard to hear voice in text, that’s why I asked initially if it was a misunderstanding of the issue. I agree, FORCING, despite the CPR analogy, is a bad idea.
            The article is about the refusal to allow teachers to be armed, not about forcing them, I understood that, my reading comprehension is unimpaired. Your first sentence is what made me wonder.
            I understand that some people think that teachers, and others, should be forced to do things to protect students, whether they are alright with it or not. I think that taking on a non-teaching role should be a matter of choice. Not everyone is able to kill another person, they may be great teachers and lousy killers. Fine and good. Their primary role is to teach. If a person can fulfill both roles that’s great, but it shouldn’t be a requirement for teaching. By analogy, it is not required that everyone who witnesses a crime step in to stop it. A person may choose to, at risk to themselves, but it is not a legal requirement.

            I hope that clears up the confusion. No chill pill needed.

        2. Well Dave, I would disagree. I think every teacher should be required to carry and those that don’t can turn in their resignation papers. 2WarAbnVet has it just right: “becomes even more imperative when the lives of children are put in their charge.”

          1. Ansel, I agree that children’s lives make things more imperative, but people go into teaching to teach. Their other abilities are secondary. They may be desirable, but they remain secondary.

            Having the teachers who are willing to be armed, be allowed to do so, would have the needed effect. Consider it a sort of herd immunity. If enough people are carrying, and which ones are unknown, the cowards who attack free fire zones will be too scared to do so.

            Blackstone is one of the sources that I use routinely to explain the foundations of our legal system. I appreciate 2WarAbnVet referencing him, and there is no question about the primacy of self defense. Nonetheless, there are those who will not defend themselves, or others, for a variety of religious or moral grounds. That is their right, and it should not be conflated with the requirements for being a teacher.

          2. Requiring teachers to carry would definitely be a nonstarter for most people including me. I don’t know why you would suggest putting a firearm in the hands of someone unwilling or unable to competently perform with it. I support their right to choose to carry, everyone should have a choice!

          1. I’ll assume (yes, I know) that the reply is what shows up, up above. It takes time for moderation. If anything, the proof of how willing Ammoland is to allow ridiculous postings can be seen by the resident trolls not being silenced. It is HIGHLY unlikely that a conservative, pro-gun/2A poster would be deleted w/o some very good reason. Just my dos centavos, YMMV.

            1. Wild Bill, I know, we all get moderated. Sometimes I get the pop up, but I figure out what I did and fix it , then I can post. Usually it’s an ad hominem because I got pissed off. No, really, it happens. %-)

      2. You moron! No one is “FORCING” anyone to carry or have immediate access to a firearm. Any and all would be duly trained VOLUNTEERS (!!!) who had passed an extensive background check. STFU if you can’t stick to the facts!

    2. There is a sentence from Blackstone’s 1789 Commentaries that has always stuck in my mind, “The right of self defense is the first law of nature.”. Teachers need not be trained in law enforcement to be granted that right of self defense, and that right becomes even more imperative when the lives of children are put in their charge.

      1. I seriously doubt that these so-called “Moms” were actually born that box-of-rocks stupid – which means that they had to work REAL damnably hard to get there! Think about that…

        Police cadets do not spend five months learning to carry/use handguns… they spend that time learning how to enforce laws. Handgun licensees have no need of (or use for) most of the training received by police officers… such as how to drive police cars at high speeds, or how to wear a uniform, or how to kick down doors, or how to conduct traffic stops, or how to make arrests, or how to use handcuffs, or how to preserve evidence, or how to testify in court. And license holders definitely do not need to spend weeks memorizing radio codes and traffic laws.

        Handgun licensees (particularly including teachers) do not require extensive tactical training. A license holder simply needs to know how to use a handgun to stop an immediate threat of death or serious/crippling injury… and that type of training can indeed be accomplished in one eight-hour day. Not surprisingly, in most states the shooting test for a handgun license is identical to the annual qualification test for police officers.

        1. In regards to your last paragraph you should just stop, because you are embarrassing yourself. I would never put an undertrained person into a gunfight and expect a good outcome. Shooting a qualification score such as required for CCW is a joke. In Oklahoma it is 25 rounds at five yards and 25 rounds at seven yards with most of the rounds being somewhere in the black of a full sized B27 target. At least it was about twenty years ago. When I a dealing with something important I don’t settle for the lowest common denominator. Do You?

    3. The author is being disingenuous concerning the difference between a airliner pilot’s required training to be able to legally carry a firearm on board a plane and the average person with a CCW. The proposed law gives the School Board the final authority to set training requirements for the school employees with CCWs and carrying in the school.
      My main problem with the law as written is that it indemnifies against civil and criminal charges for those employees as long as they, “acted in good faith.” That is quite a bit different than someone acting “reasonably and prudently.” It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

    4. Strange !!
      When I was in High School IN OKLAHOMA, we students brought Firearms to school in our vehicles with no problems and NO school shooter/killers.

      1. Ditto KANSAS…rifle’s on full display in back windows of our pickup trucks . Don’t recall ever hearing of any theft either . Our biggest problem was some wise acre liked to pull spark plug wires !

      2. Oregon as well. Up to a 6″ blade allowed at any time and place on the High School campus.
        Despite fairly frequent fist fights, not a single shooting or stabbing.

        1. Every truck in the parking lot of my Oregon high school had a gun rack and at least one long gun. We never went anywhere without them. Never had any problems.

    5. 98% of All Mass Shootings Occur in GUN FREE ZONES And the other 2% occur in areas that are immediately adjacent TO “GUN-FREE zones”. Resend the “GUN-FREE Zones, Lets Arm the Teachers who are willing to Train and Conceal Carry Responsibly.

    6. All this crap is the result of the liberals efforts to play on the emotions of the people who really do not have a clue. It will never stop. If they ever achieve their goal of taking away all your guns then they will have to get rid of all the fertilizer and crock pots too.

    7. Please read! I’m a career law enforcement officer. Several years ago, I received a frantic phone call from my mother, who was a teacher’s aid in a Kindergarten class at a public school. Mom, the teacher and 20, 5-year old children were crouched inside a coat closet in the classroom. Mom, the teacher and children were all COWERING IN FEAR, while the school was in lock-down because of a suspected gunman having been seen inside the school. Mom was terrified and was crying. She said she knew I was a hundred miles away, but did not know who else to call. Mom told me that her teacher had a CCL and could have surely protected the class, but the teacher was prohibited from carrying her pistol in school. Mom had to stop talking, but left the line open, because everyone had to be quiet during the lock-down. The lock-down was subsequently lifted, after it was discovered that the reported gunman was an off-duty police officer, who had entered the school with a holstered pistol and a badge attached to his belt.
      Anyone who professes that arming school teachers is not a viable option to combat an active shooter has clearly never experienced the genuine trauma of having COWERERED IN FEAR with no means of defending themselves or the children they love.

    8. Very well done Mark. So let me get this straight… these ass-clowns are clearly stating that trained armed teachers can in no way make schools safer, however, “gun-free zone” signage in the doors has and will continue to do so? How can this be stated so factually, when there has not been any data presented, such as the 90+% of all mass shootings have occurred in “gun-free zones”. Their “facts” have so obviously been proven false multiple times, so my question is why in the hell are the statements of these mental midgets still reputable in any fashion to anyone? Even Stevie Wonder can see this is BS.

    9. “Our teachers are trained as educators” what an ignorant statement! (I am a Junior High teacher) I have several areas that I am skilled at AND am willing to add additional training constantly in numerous areas.. I hope this lady’s children never need anything from her child’s teacher, such as CPR, because we teachers are untrainable in any except teaching! She likely believes (we educators) only work 8:30 to 3, 9 months per year too. Arm the educators that are willing to protect someone else’s children now!

    10. These women need to be at home taking care of the husbands and families. Oh, that’s right, most of them no longer have husbands if they ever did, and typically have dumped their kids in day care or don’t have any.

    11. The people of MDA and Everytown are useful idiots in the grand schemes of the gun-grabbing, one-gov’t elitists (who all think they will be the ones to rise to the top when all this is over). We, the conservative, thinking and God-fearing right need to come up with better ways of communication and longer-reaching goals. They are not the real enemy. Someone convinced these people that guns were bad, abortion was good and the gov’t can provide for all your needs. They can be convinced to the contrary, I believe, but it’s gonna take someone smarter than me. They have a vision of utopia while we want status-quo. We need a better strategy. This is like our war in Vietnam where we just wanted to be left alone and didn’t take an aggressive and well planned stance. We will eventually lose if we don’t go on the offensive. …and I don’t mean with violence.

    12. These women are like puppets who strings are being pulled by others with not-so-hidden agendas. As long as they get to play dress up and others are paying for them to them to have “fun” they see nothing wrong with it. Yet there are thousands of gun laws in the U.S. and they couldn’t name ten of them if their lives depended on it. They expect to protest and someone will magically wiggle their nose and come up with the “perfect” law that they can take credit for! This would “prove” they are good moms even if they don’t know laws don’t prevent anything, they only provide a punishment.

    13. The orange shirt clad woman would probably testify against the person who saved her life. How dare they act as judge, jury, executioner. These prohibitionists are very likely worse than you portray. Question for everyone is do we protect them when the need arises? Do we take the chance?

    14. What else does one expect from a small group of a few paid Bloomyberg women.
      Shakespeare??
      If there was one or maybe 2 armed civilians around. There would have been less carnage at the school.
      Id like to think the LEOs here in Bocas schools would have done their jobs……..Ive met a few, they seem to be more earnest then their Coward County counterparts.

    15. I have no issues with NOT arming teachers BUT then we MUST put police officers in the school and more then one if it is a good size school.

      1. I see that you are another one of the “only ones” crowd that think only law enforcement should have guns. If police officers can be trained to work with school children, highly educated teachers can certainly be taught how to defend themselves and their students, and how to responsibly handle the carry and use of a gun. Go back to your safe space before you melt, snowflake.

    16. As the left is diseased,a mental disorder and study/treatment of mental disorders are sadly lacking by the medical field in this nation,who would want to get into the head of a UnAmerican Demanding Commie Mommy.

      1. My only thought/comment is from a famous individual.
        “Life’s tough. It’s even tougher if you’re stupid!”
        Michael Marion Morrison aka: John Wayne

        1. U cant argue with John Wayne. Thx hippybiker. Never heard that one before. Moms demand action is perfect example of why very few women qualified to be in politics. Also nutless men. Cant have it both ways. Corruption is usually started by greed. Followed by power. Need to find the source of money. Cant tell me they cant prosecute Soros, Bloomberg, and others on RICO ACT or mail fraud etc. Need to impeach all Congress and Senate and start over. Trump needs to uphold his promise for second amendment also. Not doing good job so far. Supreme court picks only positive so far. Seems like they want to let out the criminals to make room for law abiding citizens.

    Leave a Comment 44 Comments

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *