US teacher accidentally shoots self

[timewilltell]

Look, don't upset the gun lobby, let people get the point in their firearm cubicle of choice!

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa app

[honcho]

A teacher was legally carrying a gun in school!!! What the hell???!!!

The bizarre, archaic and utterly nonsensical gun laws in America absolutely beggar belief.

It's a different culture that you aren't expected to understand.

In my state I'm allowed to carry a gun into any school from preschool through uni, and I'm not a teacher or employee. The punk kids who've done school shootings don't qualify to carry guns. They are breaking the law just by possessing.

The countless teachers who carry guns do so to protect themselves and students from some nutter school shooter. To the best of my knowledge, no school shooting has been attempted in the presence of teachers who had guns.

If I was going to have a happy dream, it would be me standing on a street in London when some punk decides he's going to behead a soldier or an elderly woman, or to just happen to be in a school when some punk decides he's going to shoot the place up.

With freedom comes risk, but a different kind of risk than an unarmed population is taking.

Freedom isn't free, and some things are worth dying for, to paraphrase a couple of sayings.

But you wouldn't understand that.

ok so your freedom (not free) that you americans hold so dear encourages shoot outs at the abc corral? go figure...

no wonder you are so far ahead than the rest of us non gun totin citizens of the free (no cost ) world

[gazzman]

A new meaning to the term "shooting craps"

[NeverSure]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

You know everything about guns yet you asked why was the safety not on. Glocks, which are a very popular semi-automatic and carried by most US policemen don't have a safety that you can switch on. The OP didn't say what kind of gun she had yet your knee-jerk question is about "the safety."

As AnotherOneAmerican told you, if you don't know anything about guns (and you don't,) why post in this thread?

Blimey, so now from the OP I am also supposed to know that if she did not have a certain type of revolver, she had a 9mm but the 9mm was not a Glock your favourite 'did you know I have a Glock' weapon of choice. (Do you know how many times you have told us on TV that you carry a Glock!) I had a US Marine desperate to swop his crappy Glock for my Browning 9mm.

Can we remain adult on the thread and get some intelligent replies if you are going to take the time to sit at the keyboard. Otherwise please move along.

You're not weaseling out of this. In a totally uninformed knee-jerk comment about the OP, you said "Why was the safety not on etc etc."

That showed me that you know nothing at all about guns because so many modern firearms including many semi-automatics simply don't have a safety switch. Your thought/comment wouldn't even have entered the mind of someone who is familiar with firearms.

But then I don't expect your ignorance to slow down your comments.

A woman was accidentally shot. No one died. Yet it makes international news because of people who are afraid of their own shadows.

[sustento]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

You know everything about guns yet you asked why was the safety not on. Glocks, which are a very popular semi-automatic and carried by most US policemen don't have a safety that you can switch on. The OP didn't say what kind of gun she had yet your knee-jerk question is about "the safety."

As AnotherOneAmerican told you, if you don't know anything about guns (and you don't,) why post in this thread?

Blimey, so now from the OP I am also supposed to know that if she did not have a certain type of revolver, she had a 9mm but the 9mm was not a Glock your favourite 'did you know I have a Glock' weapon of choice. (Do you know how many times you have told us on TV that you carry a Glock!) I had a US Marine desperate to swop his crappy Glock for my Browning 9mm.

Can we remain adult on the thread and get some intelligent replies if you are going to take the time to sit at the keyboard. Otherwise please move along.

You're not weaseling out of this. In a totally uninformed knee-jerk comment about the OP, you said "Why was the safety not on etc etc."

That showed me that you know nothing at all about guns because so many modern firearms including many semi-automatics simply don't have a safety switch. Your thought/comment wouldn't even have entered the mind of someone who is familiar with firearms.

But then I don't expect your ignorance to slow down your comments.

A woman was accidentally shot. No one died. Yet it makes international news because of people who are afraid of their own shadows.

Some time ago you asked me on Thaivisa what I was afraid of. I replied that I wasn't afraid of anything enough to make me want to carry a gun. What are you afraid of that makes you want to carry a gun?

[Scott]

Please keep the discussion on topic and keep it civil.

[Ulysses G.]

What are you afraid of that makes you want to carry a gun?

Gangbangers.

[NeverSure]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

You know everything about guns yet you asked why was the safety not on. Glocks, which are a very popular semi-automatic and carried by most US policemen don't have a safety that you can switch on. The OP didn't say what kind of gun she had yet your knee-jerk question is about "the safety."

As AnotherOneAmerican told you, if you don't know anything about guns (and you don't,) why post in this thread?

Blimey, so now from the OP I am also supposed to know that if she did not have a certain type of revolver, she had a 9mm but the 9mm was not a Glock your favourite 'did you know I have a Glock' weapon of choice. (Do you know how many times you have told us on TV that you carry a Glock!) I had a US Marine desperate to swop his crappy Glock for my Browning 9mm.

Can we remain adult on the thread and get some intelligent replies if you are going to take the time to sit at the keyboard. Otherwise please move along.

You're not weaseling out of this. In a totally uninformed knee-jerk comment about the OP, you said "Why was the safety not on etc etc."

That showed me that you know nothing at all about guns because so many modern firearms including many semi-automatics simply don't have a safety switch. Your thought/comment wouldn't even have entered the mind of someone who is familiar with firearms.

But then I don't expect your ignorance to slow down your comments.

A woman was accidentally shot. No one died. Yet it makes international news because of people who are afraid of their own shadows.

Some time ago you asked me on Thaivisa what I was afraid of. I replied that I wasn't afraid of anything enough to make me want to carry a gun. What are you afraid of that makes you want to carry a gun?

Good question. I normally don't carry a gun these days. It's a pick and choose situational thing.

What I'd be afraid of is a government that would take away my guns or my right to defend myself if needed. I'd be very afraid of any government that wanted its citizens unarmed.

I'd be afraid of losing the constitutional rights I have in the Bill of Rights which in many cases give me more power than the government has which is as it should be. Citizens should rule the government and not the other way around. I don't want to be ruled.

The only way I can be assured that those things won't happen rests with the 100 million Americans who own guns and plan to keep it that way.

[chooka]

Something for the Americans to watch. 3 Parts

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pOiOhxujsE&feature=player_detailpage

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYbY45rHj8w&feature=player_detailpage

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVuspKSjfgA&feature=player_detailpage

[submaniac]

What are you afraid of that makes you want to carry a gun?

Zombies. And maybe werewolves.

[arjunadawn]

The unarmed UK population seems to suffer alot less gun related deaths than the armed US citizens.

It is the nature of our constitution and way of life that we believe we as humans are each both with natural rights, irrespective of the state, to whom we grant authority, and among those rights is the right to bear arms and self defense. Are there contemporary issues that suggest this right can be difficult to manage in the modern age? Yes. However, it is far more apparent to me that ideas are far more virulent than individual escapades with guns. UK may suffer a lot less gun related deaths than americans, but not less deaths than armed american citizens. Armed american citizens are by and large honest, hard working people with no problems. The presence of arms consistently deters crime and in those populations where there is no gun control, gun crimes plummet.

Yet its hardly fair that you can so narrowly choose which data to use to make your false assertion. UK, without question, exports far more virulence in the form of muslim radical ideology than any western state on earth, indeed more than most countries. The radical infections that have plagued much of the west in the past 14 years can trace an ancestry to or through UK. Yea, no arms. Your smart!

The UK, with its unarmed population, turned with need to the USA when its unarmed citizens were under threat of annihilation in WWII. Or, has the UK since found it better to unarm their population, having needed help previously when armed they then presumed they would have a better outcome against a threat if they declared there were "no weapons present?"

[edwinchester]

Incredible uninformed claptrap and as for WW2 you appear to have forgotten about the British Army, the Royal Airforce and the Royal Navy.

[rijb]

I'm more worried about trigger-happy cops than an amateur who has never fired more than a 100 rounds.

And for you expats of 'civilized countries', get over it - and stay the hell out! The US will always have guns. The guns won't go away until Apple develops an iLaser weapon.

And enough with the pompous comments about the short existence (200+ years) of the USA. More has happened in the last couple of centuries (war, technology, population explosion, etc.) than ever before. And life is getting more advanced and complicated every year.

In the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years. - Abraham Lincoln

Edited September 13, 2014 by rijb

[rijb]

Incredible uninformed claptrap and as for WW2 you appear to have forgotten about the British Army, the Royal Airforce and the Royal Navy.

If there's something strange in your neighborhood

Who you gonna call? (clue: not the Brits!)

If there's something weird and it don't look good

Who you gonna call? (clue: not the Brits!)

[arjunadawn]

It is demonstrably proven over and over again that "NO GUN ZONES" areas in the United States are significantly plagued with more gun violence. Why is that? The same reason target threat assessment for terrorists always chooses "soft" targets opposed to "hard targets." It is human nature to want to increase survivability, even when the bad guy. When the citizens who are inclined to follow the law are unarmed (as the ones who follow the law... unarm!), then those with weapons will be the people who do not follow the laws (and the government, who increasingly is demonstrating they do not follow the laws any longer). This is so obvious. When targets are hardened by either personal deportment or personal carry of weapons (and others KNOW there are carry personnel in the vicinity), crime decreases.

Is it possible simply having weapons creates a dangerous environment? Yes, as this video shows:

But pay attention; do any of you really believe this clown was competent at anything? Really? (This guy later sued the DEA because his unprofessionalism was revealed on youtube, though he lost).

America has weapons and should have more, not less. There has rarely been a time in history when a people should be more heavily armed. Whether it is Missouri, Paris, London, Nigeria, Mumbai, Denmark, Mexico, AU or any number of numerous cities in the USA where law enforcement has already conceded they can no longer respond to all but the most significant calls; where law enforcement increasingly demonstrates (indeed, calls for the arming of citizens to defend themselves: http://www.infowars.com/police-stand-down-response-during-riots-shows-need-for-citizens-to-arm-themselves/ http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/aug/17/police-guns-detroit-crime-race-cost-issues) the woeful inability to discharge its single mandate- preserve the peace!

Americans do not have anywhere near the culture of weapons, weapons abuse, accidents, etc., as do the countries comprising the (OIC) Organization of Islamic Conference countries. Not remotely! Lets un-link the non-stop march of "terrorism" labeling from the actual tools that are found to be causing the carnage (arms) and we find that these massive numbers of deaths and genocide outside of the USA are actually concealed by the label "Jihad," and "terrorism." If we removed the labels and considered equally, the US behaves quite well. The western liberal apologists are not bemoaning this fact every day. They excuse it by commission; because... it is muslim? They excuse it by passive racism, because... ? What? They expect less from them? Expect more from the West? It is all pure BS!

There has never been a time in modern history when populations have become so divorced from the lessons of the past. Turning swords into plowshares is acted out repeatedly through history, and always with the same arguments, and same tragic ends. Arms are a fundamental right that has nothing to do with hunting or sport. The US Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights was to ensure the preservation of the other Rights (and to wage war on a despotic government, if necessary, as a last resort), and all powers not expressly delegated to the government constitutionally. For those of you who celebrate having your weapons taken away you miss something vital: Your rights were given to you by the State, and that is not simply your right to bear arms. Your rights devolve from leadership and in the case of UK- EU, your leadership is not even direct representation, is unaccountable, and fosters on you the average will of the dolts, the fools, and the wise equally. You have no guns because you have no Rights (with a capital "R"). Your rights are effectively permits.

So, the liberal heartthrobs want to end the lessons of the old world (the concept of the unalienable Natural Rights of Man); Ok, tell me what you are replacing it with? Tell me, by what tools are we to proceed into the dark night that is evolving in western civilization? Because, up till now, all the failings of the Rights and traditions that are now attacked by the liberal left or ignorant center are only faulty insofar as your policies have crippled anything resembling sound government, everywhere! (There are too numerous to count examples of the left using the Right to Bear Arms as a fulcrum to hoist alien policies on the US. On example is the Fast and Furious debacle; another example is the US Justice department threaten banks to apply laws, or be lax, if they comply and stop doing business with legitimate gun shops, sporting outlets, etc). There is a reason the US government is trying to eradicate privately owned weapons, at the same time the US is discovering their government is not remotely accountable or controllable any longer, and law enforcement nationwide has become militarized.

Its always sad when someone dies, but stop groveling to further a liberal bent or self loathing the ancestry that handed us the formula that provides the greatest good for the greatest amount of people.

Edited September 13, 2014 by arjunadawn

[apetley]

I'm more worried about trigger-happy cops than an amateur who has never fired more than a 100 rounds.

And for you expats of 'civilized countries', get over it - and stay the hell out! The US will always have guns. The guns won't go away until Apple develops an iLaser weapon.

And enough with the pompous comments about the short existence (200+ years) of the USA. More has happened in the last couple of centuries (war, technology, population explosion, etc.) than ever before. And life is getting more advanced and complicated every year.

In the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years. - Abraham Lincoln

.....yeah and he too was shot by an idiot with a gun.

[rijb]

I hope you don't have a gun. We don't need another idiot with one.

Edited September 13, 2014 by rijb

[apetley]

I hope you don't have a gun. We don't need another idiot with one.

Target shot guns off and on for nearly forty years.

Never felt the need to own or keep one at home.

[Somtamnication]

So Darwinism shows up its ugly face again. Nothing new here for the merkins.

[Scott]

Off-topic post deleted.

[peterb17]

The unarmed UK population seems to suffer alot less gun related deaths than the armed US citizens.

It is the nature of our constitution and way of life that we believe we as humans are each both with natural rights, irrespective of the state, to whom we grant authority, and among those rights is the right to bear arms and self defense. Are there contemporary issues that suggest this right can be difficult to manage in the modern age? Yes. However, it is far more apparent to me that ideas are far more virulent than individual escapades with guns. UK may suffer a lot less gun related deaths than americans, but not less deaths than armed american citizens. Armed american citizens are by and large honest, hard working people with no problems. The presence of arms consistently deters crime and in those populations where there is no gun control, gun crimes plummet.

Yet its hardly fair that you can so narrowly choose which data to use to make your false assertion. UK, without question, exports far more virulence in the form of muslim radical ideology than any western state on earth, indeed more than most countries. The radical infections that have plagued much of the west in the past 14 years can trace an ancestry to or through UK. Yea, no arms. Your smart!

The UK, with its unarmed population, turned with need to the USA when its unarmed citizens were under threat of annihilation in WWII. Or, has the UK since found it better to unarm their population, having needed help previously when armed they then presumed they would have a better outcome against a threat if they declared there were "no weapons present?"

Mm now this thread turns to how the USA won WW11- of course they did.

Tell that to my Dad who was a glider pilot when the American planes towing British gliders cut the tow lines when under attack, they had to ditch in the sea- he survived many didn't. Just a personal experience- he never forgave.

[rijb]

So Darwinism shows up its ugly face again. Nothing new here for the merkins.

Nothing new with your lack of wit either. It's spelled 'Americans'.

Edited September 13, 2014 by rijb

[arjunadawn]

Mm now this thread turns to how the USA won WW11- of course they did.

Tell that to my Dad who was a glider pilot when the American planes towing British gliders cut the tow lines when under attack, they had to ditch in the sea- he survived many didn't. Just a personal experience- he never forgave.

No, this has not changed the thread. I was only trying to address example in response to other posts addressing the fundamental reason Americans have guns in the first place.

My post was read by you, who have legitimate grievance, and it may have hurt. That was not my intention. You and your dad's anger seems quite valid. (Military operations are quite impersonal). I only sought to frame the contrast of why there are guns in the US.

[Kooweerup]

Something for the Americans to watch. 3 Parts

If it wasn't made by Americans it would be called American bashing. IT shows that Australia is a far more advanced and civilised society than the U.S. It also shows that U.S gun lobbyists are total uneducated morons and U.S politicians think about self interests before the country and it's citizens. Australia is definately more advanced in so many ways compared to the U.S.

[rijb]

Are you familiar with the Daily Show? It's satire. Americans are their own worst critics. They're not afraid to laugh at themselves.

It's good that you're proud of your country. But, why do you feel the need to compare your country to the U.S.? What's the point?

Many people in the U.S. like Australia. But, they don't try to compare Spiderman with Crocodile Dundee. It's stupid isn't it?

[chooka]

Are you familiar with the Daily Show? It's satire. Americans are their own worst critics. They're not afraid to laugh at themselves.

It's good that you're proud of your country. But, why do you feel the need to compare your country to the U.S.? What's the point?

Many people in the U.S. like Australia. But, they don't try to compare Spiderman with Crocodile Dundee. It's stupid isn't it?

oh please do you really think theses guys where following a scrpt and acting

[Ulysses G.]

If it wasn't made by Americans it would be called American bashing. IT shows that Australia is a far more advanced and civilised society than the U.S.

I've been to Australia a number of times and I like it, but there are plenty of racists and uneducated morons there too, so not sure what you are on about.

[Chicog]

US Teacher is very stupid. US gun laws are very stupid.

[rijb]

Are you familiar with the Daily Show? It's satire. Americans are their own worst critics. They're not afraid to laugh at themselves.

It's good that you're proud of your country. But, why do you feel the need to compare your country to the U.S.? What's the point?

Many people in the U.S. like Australia. But, they don't try to compare Spiderman with Crocodile Dundee. It's stupid isn't it?

oh please do you really think theses guys where following a scrpt and acting

I didn't say that. Grow up!

[Pete Beale]

If she wasn't already having a number two I bet she did when the gun went off.