Replies

"Nope. Like I said, she wasn't just holding it.

Was this a harmless photo, too?"

I see at least two logical fallacies in your argument. And yes, the photo itself was harmless and hasn't physically injured any viewers. People post all kinds of photos in efforts to make all kinds of jokes and artistic/political points. Nearly all of the people posing in Internet images with firearms are harmless and only intending to do so for hobbies, jokes and various artistic reasons. There are photos posted of people holding knives and covered in blood with no harm intended toward anyone.

I've seen no evidence or testimony showing that the teacher threatened or intended to harm anyone.

24 posted on 02/07/2009 10:31:55 PM PST by familyop (combat engineer (combat), National Guard, '89-'96, Duncan Hunter or no-vote, http://falconparty.com/)

Nearly all of the people posing in Internet images with firearms are harmless and only intending to do so for hobbies, jokes and various artistic reasons.

Not all?

37 posted on 02/07/2009 11:08:07 PM PST by Ol' Dan Tucker (While the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power.)

Pointing a gun directly at a camera is a rather offensive image. It's visually akin, as I and many others see it, to photos of lynching, holocaust executions, etc. It's shocking, and unnerving. It's "gun porn" in the most literal sense of the term. If it gets her off, good for her, but putting it on Facebook for the world to see exhibits rather poor judgment. Should she be fired for it? Of course I don't think she should, but of course leftist moonbats think she should. Suppose she were a church schoolteacher moonlighting as a stripper in the local t-bar? That's about the equivalent comparison for a gun owner in a leftist moonbat bastion like public schools.