I ran across this story today and found that, much to my surprise, I had seriously mixed feelings about it.
In a nutshell, a teacher in Ashland, Oregon, who has a restraining order against her obviously violent ex-husband, wants to be able to bring her gun to school. She has a concealed-carry permit and I can truly understand her need to protect herself. However, as the school district reminded her, their policy prohibits anyone, except a law enforcement officer, from bringing a weapon onto a campus.
As a person who has, more than once, been on the receiving end of violent behavior, I immediately understood why this teacher carries a gun.
Statistics show that, outside Seattle, restraining orders provide very little protection against a person who is determined to do harm. I mean, think about it. When facing an attacker, flashing a legal document isn't going to stop a bullet or a beating.
However, as a parent, I don't want weapons to get into my child's school - no matter why. Talk to a law enforcement official about the wisdom of keeping a gun in your home and they will tell you that, in too many cases, these weapons end up being used against the owner. And then, after you're dead, there is one more gun in the wrong hands. Unless you are well-trained and
truly prepared to kill someone, you have no business with a gun - personal opinion.
Then, of course, there's the Second Amendment argument, about the right to keep and bear arms, that I just knew would come into play. However, I believe that the argument is incorrect in this usage.
"In the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries, in England and the British Colonies, the militia system was based on the principle of the Twelfth Century Assize of Arms, where there was general obligation of adult males to possess arms and cooperate in the work of defense."
^ Osgood, Herbert Levi : The American Colonies in the Seventeenth Century , Page 499. Macmillan & Co., Ltd., 1904."United States federal courts have consistently interpreted the federal right to bear arms in United States as the modified collective right, not an individual right."
Holder, Angela Roddy: The Meaning of the Constitution, Page 64. Barron's Educational Series, 1997. ISBN 0764100998What do you think?

Don't forget to visit JMark Afghans and My Gallery at Zazzle
We also have a page on Squidoo that supports the Genocide Intervention Network.
We look forward to seeing you online.
God Bless!
Jules
Labels: News, Politics