Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: randita

“I don’t think that arming school personnel is the answer either. Their job is to teach. It’s the duty of parents and law enforcement to protect children.”

More errors in fewer lines than I have seen in quite a while, hence the deconstruction of those errors.
1. “I don’t think that arming school personnel is the answer either.”

Got something against some 40 years of 100% sucess in preventing school attacks?

If not, consider that the Israel had an attack by Muslims (who else) and decided that watching their children being thrown off the roof of the school and dying a crumpled mass of bloody tissue was not going to happen again.

They armed their teachers and the older students.

From 1973 to today, not one school attack occurred - can you now comprehend the message of arming teachers?

2. Parents and law enforcement can’t arrive in time, but armed teachers are there already.

By not disarming teachers, you no longer force teachers to confront an armed killer as did the helpless Jews in Germany.

Conclusion: The premises in your posted sentences are faulty, the conclusions are therefore invalid.

May I suggest you need to revise your premises.


37 posted on 12/18/2012 7:01:22 AM PST by GladesGuru (In a society predicated upon freedom, it is necessary to examine principles."..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]


To: GladesGuru

You want us to have gun laws like Israel? I don’t.

http://www.jta.org/news/article/2012/07/24/3101546/despite-militarized-society-israels-strict-gun-laws-keep-civilian-violence-down


67 posted on 12/18/2012 10:34:57 AM PST by randita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson