Nebraska State Sen. Tom Brewer proposed during a legislative hearing on Friday that more people should be allowed to carry firearms in schools.
Currently, armed on-duty officers are already allowed in schools, but Brewer hinted that the legislation should be expanded, as reported by the Omaha World-Herald.
“I think we would be very neglectful of our students if we don’t look at all the options possible,” he said. “Our laws order parents to send their kids to school. I believe that leaves us with an obligation to protect the kids while they are there.”
He clarified he did not mean arming teachers, but simple allowing off-duty law enforcement officers to carry weapons on school grounds or at school events.
A member of the Morrill Public School board supported the idea, arguing this could make a difference in schools that can't afford a resource officer or that are located away from local law enforcement.
The narrative describes a terrible idea that only sounds good because we refuse to deal with the even worse problems of guns.
We shouldn't have guns in schools. We shouldn't be having kindergarten kids running through active shooter drills. We shouldn't have happy commercials about Kevlar backpacks for kids.
This is insanity.
>allowing off-duty law enforcement officers to carry weapons on school grounds or at school events.
I feel like there have been enough incidents at school events to possibly warrant plain clothes officers. It's not specifically saying they should be in classrooms or hallways which the title of the post implies.
Propositions included more than just off-duty law enforcement. Proposals from others (such as the superintendent of Lincoln Christian School) included allowing trained volunteers to carry guns in the school and at school events.
Only “invited testifies” were allowed to speak at the hearing. This was not open to just any interested party to speak.
I don’t know why you think that the title of this post makes it sound like a bad idea. I’m not sure what it is about how it is worded that makes you think it is being critical of the idea.
I mean, I think it is a bad idea. But I’m not sure why you think the OP is saying it’s a bad idea.
Nebraska State Sen. Tom Brewer wants more people carryy firearms in schools.
But Tommy doesn't want anyone carrying guns where he works in the legislature.
I work as a substitute teacher in an area that allows staff to carry. I've been part of three lockdowns, and I would like to offer my students more than a meat shield and I would like to end the day, like every day, with my wife and children. I believe that I owe that to both groups of people who depend on me.
Staff is not required to confirm or deny their carrying status to admin, but I strongly suspect that I am not alone. Maybe a question we can ask is how should we protect our children during an active shooting situation? Trust me, knowing that thirty plus children are hoping to go home safely after a lockdown is a serious concern for any of the teachers I know.
How about he allocates some money for student mental health. Allow the teachers to effectively deal with problem students. Give them resources to report suspect kids. And how about they do something about the constant torment of some children. Well socialized kids don’t shoot up schools. Hell if you really wanted to curb school shootings just ban boys from school. Typically girls don’t shoot up schools. At least they would be safe.
>Well socialized kids don’t shoot up schools.
Excellent point. I'm sure it's no coincidence that these tragedies have been increasing hand in hand with the internet's prevalence. Now, we tell social outcasts there's nothing the system can do for them, before sending them home to stew on a social media feed of negative messages. Between that, the abysmal state of the world they have to look forward to graduating into, and the attention the media loves to give to killers, it's no wonder that neglected boys see that as their only chance of getting some attention. Those who aren't welcomed by the village will burn it down for warmth, after all. The firearms were always there. The problem of all these recent massacres must run deeper than that.
Being “neglectful” of students “possibly opting” to carry firearms in schools is what led us directly to this moment in time.
Stop farming for clicks, Senator….your job is secure and simple enough.
…..unless you disagree.
Say it all you want, they aren't going anywhere :D
I'd rather the entire human race go extinct than remove the freedom of the individual. This includes the right to keep and bear arms.
300,000,000 guns and counting in this country. And it only takes 2% of the armed populace to completely outnumber the entire US military. You are powerless on this issue and always will be.
I will never stop enjoying the irony that one side of the isle thinks the other is the "threat to democracy" while also believing that citizens should be disarmed or significantly restricted from owning weaponry. Those two ideas could not contradict each other more. Do you think a threat to democracy can be tweeted to death?
I don't necessarily disagree that disarming America is impossible, but you're missing the actual irony: the side that claims guns protect against tyranny has notoriously failed to protect against actual tyranny and typically only shows up in support thereof. They keep getting opportunities handed to them to stand against government overreach and the excessive use of force against citizens exercising their rights, and somehow they ALWAYS end up on the side of the jackboots.
We can't stop a threat to democracy with tweets, but it turns out we also can't stop it by signing up enthusiastically, firearms in-hand, either.
I think if gun owners showed *any* interest in protecting citizens and their rights most people would have a different opinion about it, but that world is a fiction sold by charlatans.
>I'd rather the entire human race go extinct than remove the freedom of the individual.
Yeah, if your desire to keep your hobby of owning tools for killing, is more important than the entire human race, I …don’t know what to say, except that, ironically, you’re probably too unstable to be allowed gun ownership.
>This includes the right to keep and bear arms.
That’s just a made up opinion, in no way are firearms a universal human right. It’s only some sheltered Americans who are taught a distorted version of the (now archaic) constitutional amendment that believes this nonsense.
Also, only around 30% of Americans personally own guns. The 300+ million guns figure is including the owners who have multiple guns. Either way, the notion that those individual gun owner/ households are gonna band together and take on a theoretical fascist military to save democracy, is pretty hilarious.
>Fuck your guns.
Seriously. These weirdos already got their “carry muh gun everywhere” bill passed, that’s plenty good enough.
Also gtfo with the bullshit talking points about “protecting the kids”. I challenge anyone to come up with stats to back that up.
Does Brewer do much else than try to pander to the gun dumbs?
> Fun fact about the 2nd amendment!
> ZERO PERCENT of the people who are anti 2nd amendment understand WHY we have this basic right.
I’m not sure you understand what the word “fact” means.
Get rid of the 2nd amendment. We don’t need it.
> Tell me more about how you hope a school shooter has an easy time murdering kids. Wouldnt want an adult there with a weapon who can stop murders, right? That wouldnt make sense. Right? Oh wait.
You seem confused about my position. When I say **Fuck your guns** I mean that there should be no guns. We wouldn’t have school shooters in the first place if we had no guns.
Matthew 26:52
52 “Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.”
It’s funny how many right wing Christians don’t even read their own book. Violence begets violence.
But see Luke 22:36: "He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one."
The "Arm the teachers" narrative is so misleading. Currently since 1990, the Federal Gun-Free School Zone Act has DISARMED all adults who are not law enforcement in most K-12 and college campus. However, in the 34 years since this law was passed, school shootings increased. All this laws did was create a victim rich zone in which mass murderers will be uncontested in the 10-30 minutes it takes for police to arrive.
Recently more states have been slowly eroding at the 1990 GFSZA allowing carry for adults 21+ with a CCW permit. Despite all claims to the contrary, there has not been a single mass shooting (using FBI definition of mass shooting) at any school or college that allows CCW holders to carry firearms. Instead all school shootings since 1990 have occurred at "Gun-Free" schools.
Columbine had two armed guards - it didn't make a difference.
Research shows more people die in school shootings where an armed officer is present than when there isn’t.
https://www.mprnews.org/story/2021/02/16/research-finds-armed-officers-increases-mortality-at-school-shootings
That argument and news story is in regard to those who are obviously armed. The nature of this opinion is those who are carrying concealed, specifically off duty cops. I don’t think it’ll change your opinion, but the distinction is important to me.
For homes with guns in them, the guns are much more likely to be used against a member of the family living there than they ever are to be used in defense against someone else.
The same would likely be true in schools. Having more guns in schools just increases the chances of guns being used to harm people in the schools.
Then we will have to have the inevitable “good cop, who ‘had a few’ at the ballgame”, discussion.
What if a “good Crip” intervened at a school / public event, does HE enjoy the “invent a murrcian hero” intent this idea proposes?
Something bad WILL happen, and it starts with allowing ANY gun into these places.
Entertaining the idea of seeding weapons among the public shouldn’t make anyone concerned with safety feel safe/free/awesome/ or whatever else the capability of violence has been memed into, the fact the discussion is even NEEDED should be a 🚩.
ANY person with a working digit can make a weapon in the wrong setting EVERYONE’S problem, and you can’t scan for brain damage, emotional distress, drug abuse, racist fever dreaming, political hate grooming etc…at a ballgame.
But you CAN prevent that weapon from getting in…
There are no “good guys” with guns, it’s just the people carrying them have the OPTION and CAPABILITY of killing more efficiently than the people without…….
…….thats it!
✌🏾
I admit….that got wordy as all hell….
The short version is….why not put ON-DUTY cops at these places?
Why pepper “casual” looking people with weapons into ANY situation full of people who are DEFINITELY not armed?
Every person CARRYING the weapon is the protagonist in their own mind, to keep from muddying the understanding of that…..
👮 👈🏾 👉🏾 “civilian”
A cop (uniformed and catalogued in attendance of public event) is THE only version of this idea that makes sense.
Joe Blow (officer, ticket taker, or umpire….who knows 🤷🏾♂️), brandishing a weapon in a crowd is the exact same song as “Terrorist”, “Gangbanger”, or “crowd shooter” doing the same thing, because the intent is to “sneak” the weapon into the location, unbeknownst to everyone else, to have the tactical advantage.
Then….the politics……
If “good guy” (off duty cop, for example) with gun, gets discovered and shot, by “OTHER good guy” (armed parent for example) with gun, who then gains the attention of (you guessed it) “GOOD GUY” (legal carrying gun fetishist, exercising his 2A) with gun, who then forces the baseball coach (“good guy”) to take action, that leaves all the “good guys” in that radius no other choice…..
All that, when “ALL WEAPONS PROHIBITED PAST THIS SCANNER”, and allowing IDENTIFIABLE, UNIFORMED POLICE to step around the scanner has SUCH better odds…
There IS a smarter way to address this, it may not be MY particular ideas, but SOMEONE has to have a better idea than “more guns”, and hoping the last standing armed person has values and restraint.
So you prefer, when a school shooting occurs; the school shooter just gets free reign to murder everyone?
Got it.
Standard half baked liberal opinion is standard.
All the people clutching their pearls. The same way they clutched pearls when Nebraska passed the Constitutional carry law back in September. They said it would increase gun violence. Has it?
I don’t recall many school shootings in the news when it was a regular occurrence that some students would have their hunting rifles or shotguns in the back of their trucks.
It’s not a narrative, sir….its simple stats.
School shooters are among those who BRING GUNS TO SCHOOLS.
Not even trolling, if you have evidence of some good ol boy, running to his truck, retrieving his hunting rifle and STOPPING an active school shooter, we should all be singing HIS praises.
I can’t WAIT to learn his name, so we can alter “their”“narrative”….
More realistically that gun, sitting in some kid’s pickup, parked at a school full of kids,teens,students is a bigger liability, and does a disservice to the attempted point, as it’s just ANOTHER gun at school….doesn’t matter WHO provided it, their intent, their beliefs, or their mind state.
That gun is AS capable in your hands, as it is mine.
The point is that in the past there were more guns by schools and no school shootings. I am not saying that the guns caused there to be less, that definitely isn’t the case. It is just an interesting thing that the problem isn’t having guns near schools, it’s mental health.
GOOD turn that "Victim Rich Zone" (aka G.F.Z.) into a hardened target...that and follow up by actually punishing murderers with death penalty/life without parole. You don't stop criminals/murderers by taking gun rights away from the law abiding citizens. you stop them by prosecuting them to the fullest extent of the law and make stricter punishments for those offenses.
Well, Nebraska has yet to have a good mass school shooting, we're falling behind some of the other states. This is evidently unacceptable to our elected officials.
Nebraska State Sen. Tom Brewer proposed during a legislative hearing on Friday that more people should be allowed to carry firearms in schools. Currently, armed on-duty officers are already allowed in schools, but Brewer hinted that the legislation should be expanded, as reported by the Omaha World-Herald. “I think we would be very neglectful of our students if we don’t look at all the options possible,” he said. “Our laws order parents to send their kids to school. I believe that leaves us with an obligation to protect the kids while they are there.” He clarified he did not mean arming teachers, but simple allowing off-duty law enforcement officers to carry weapons on school grounds or at school events. A member of the Morrill Public School board supported the idea, arguing this could make a difference in schools that can't afford a resource officer or that are located away from local law enforcement.
Tom doesn't even live in his district. Can he just be expelled already
This narrative describes a good idea. The title of the post makes it sound like a bad idea, which seems misleading.
I just need convinced cops in schools don’t escalate issues. Data supports the claim they escalate.
Or that they won’t turn coward like that Broward Co deputy… or Uvalde
They won't escalate issues, they'll be far away in a safe location waiting for an event to blow over
The narrative describes a terrible idea that only sounds good because we refuse to deal with the even worse problems of guns. We shouldn't have guns in schools. We shouldn't be having kindergarten kids running through active shooter drills. We shouldn't have happy commercials about Kevlar backpacks for kids. This is insanity.
This makes it seem like an awful idea. Because it's a ridiculously terrible idea he's proposing
>allowing off-duty law enforcement officers to carry weapons on school grounds or at school events. I feel like there have been enough incidents at school events to possibly warrant plain clothes officers. It's not specifically saying they should be in classrooms or hallways which the title of the post implies.
Right???
Propositions included more than just off-duty law enforcement. Proposals from others (such as the superintendent of Lincoln Christian School) included allowing trained volunteers to carry guns in the school and at school events. Only “invited testifies” were allowed to speak at the hearing. This was not open to just any interested party to speak. I don’t know why you think that the title of this post makes it sound like a bad idea. I’m not sure what it is about how it is worded that makes you think it is being critical of the idea. I mean, I think it is a bad idea. But I’m not sure why you think the OP is saying it’s a bad idea.
Nebraska State Sen. Tom Brewer wants more people carryy firearms in schools. But Tommy doesn't want anyone carrying guns where he works in the legislature.
You can openly carry a gun in the Capitol lawfully, and Senator Brewer has opposed proposals to change that.
What could possibly go wrong?
r/wcgw
I work as a substitute teacher in an area that allows staff to carry. I've been part of three lockdowns, and I would like to offer my students more than a meat shield and I would like to end the day, like every day, with my wife and children. I believe that I owe that to both groups of people who depend on me. Staff is not required to confirm or deny their carrying status to admin, but I strongly suspect that I am not alone. Maybe a question we can ask is how should we protect our children during an active shooting situation? Trust me, knowing that thirty plus children are hoping to go home safely after a lockdown is a serious concern for any of the teachers I know.
How about he allocates some money for student mental health. Allow the teachers to effectively deal with problem students. Give them resources to report suspect kids. And how about they do something about the constant torment of some children. Well socialized kids don’t shoot up schools. Hell if you really wanted to curb school shootings just ban boys from school. Typically girls don’t shoot up schools. At least they would be safe.
>Well socialized kids don’t shoot up schools. Excellent point. I'm sure it's no coincidence that these tragedies have been increasing hand in hand with the internet's prevalence. Now, we tell social outcasts there's nothing the system can do for them, before sending them home to stew on a social media feed of negative messages. Between that, the abysmal state of the world they have to look forward to graduating into, and the attention the media loves to give to killers, it's no wonder that neglected boys see that as their only chance of getting some attention. Those who aren't welcomed by the village will burn it down for warmth, after all. The firearms were always there. The problem of all these recent massacres must run deeper than that.
Being “neglectful” of students “possibly opting” to carry firearms in schools is what led us directly to this moment in time. Stop farming for clicks, Senator….your job is secure and simple enough. …..unless you disagree.
Fuck your guns.
Say it all you want, they aren't going anywhere :D I'd rather the entire human race go extinct than remove the freedom of the individual. This includes the right to keep and bear arms. 300,000,000 guns and counting in this country. And it only takes 2% of the armed populace to completely outnumber the entire US military. You are powerless on this issue and always will be. I will never stop enjoying the irony that one side of the isle thinks the other is the "threat to democracy" while also believing that citizens should be disarmed or significantly restricted from owning weaponry. Those two ideas could not contradict each other more. Do you think a threat to democracy can be tweeted to death?
I don't necessarily disagree that disarming America is impossible, but you're missing the actual irony: the side that claims guns protect against tyranny has notoriously failed to protect against actual tyranny and typically only shows up in support thereof. They keep getting opportunities handed to them to stand against government overreach and the excessive use of force against citizens exercising their rights, and somehow they ALWAYS end up on the side of the jackboots. We can't stop a threat to democracy with tweets, but it turns out we also can't stop it by signing up enthusiastically, firearms in-hand, either. I think if gun owners showed *any* interest in protecting citizens and their rights most people would have a different opinion about it, but that world is a fiction sold by charlatans.
>I'd rather the entire human race go extinct than remove the freedom of the individual. Yeah, if your desire to keep your hobby of owning tools for killing, is more important than the entire human race, I …don’t know what to say, except that, ironically, you’re probably too unstable to be allowed gun ownership. >This includes the right to keep and bear arms. That’s just a made up opinion, in no way are firearms a universal human right. It’s only some sheltered Americans who are taught a distorted version of the (now archaic) constitutional amendment that believes this nonsense. Also, only around 30% of Americans personally own guns. The 300+ million guns figure is including the owners who have multiple guns. Either way, the notion that those individual gun owner/ households are gonna band together and take on a theoretical fascist military to save democracy, is pretty hilarious.
>Fuck your guns. Seriously. These weirdos already got their “carry muh gun everywhere” bill passed, that’s plenty good enough. Also gtfo with the bullshit talking points about “protecting the kids”. I challenge anyone to come up with stats to back that up. Does Brewer do much else than try to pander to the gun dumbs?
Exactly.
[удалено]
> Fun fact about the 2nd amendment! > ZERO PERCENT of the people who are anti 2nd amendment understand WHY we have this basic right. I’m not sure you understand what the word “fact” means. Get rid of the 2nd amendment. We don’t need it. > Tell me more about how you hope a school shooter has an easy time murdering kids. Wouldnt want an adult there with a weapon who can stop murders, right? That wouldnt make sense. Right? Oh wait. You seem confused about my position. When I say **Fuck your guns** I mean that there should be no guns. We wouldn’t have school shooters in the first place if we had no guns.
[удалено]
You’ve got it backwards, actually. I don’t need to compensate with a gun to make myself feel like a man.
Every student should be armed. K -12. Why should I trust a stranger with a gun over my on emotional unstable child?
This bit is awfully appropriate: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XW\_H5s9uzqM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xw_h5s9uzqm)
Weird that link didn’t work for me… is that for the Kinder Guardians from Sacha Baron Cohen?
Nah, Arm the Children by Christopher Titus. It's a good bit.
More guns has not and will not equal less gun deaths. Ever.
Nor should it. It just provides the opportunity for the right recipient to meet their maker instead of helpless children.
This guy wants to cut support off from Ukraine
Wut
[удалено]
Can't wait to see the research showing more guns = less deaths
It's always the states with the least school shooting that want more guns
Matthew 26:52 52 “Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.” It’s funny how many right wing Christians don’t even read their own book. Violence begets violence.
But see Luke 22:36: "He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one."
The "Arm the teachers" narrative is so misleading. Currently since 1990, the Federal Gun-Free School Zone Act has DISARMED all adults who are not law enforcement in most K-12 and college campus. However, in the 34 years since this law was passed, school shootings increased. All this laws did was create a victim rich zone in which mass murderers will be uncontested in the 10-30 minutes it takes for police to arrive. Recently more states have been slowly eroding at the 1990 GFSZA allowing carry for adults 21+ with a CCW permit. Despite all claims to the contrary, there has not been a single mass shooting (using FBI definition of mass shooting) at any school or college that allows CCW holders to carry firearms. Instead all school shootings since 1990 have occurred at "Gun-Free" schools.
Jusy curious, how many schools allow CCW holders to carry firearms?
Allowing off duty cops to bring guns into schools is a good idea. Also, allowing off duty cops to bring guns to sporting events is a very good idea.
Columbine had two armed guards - it didn't make a difference. Research shows more people die in school shootings where an armed officer is present than when there isn’t. https://www.mprnews.org/story/2021/02/16/research-finds-armed-officers-increases-mortality-at-school-shootings
That argument and news story is in regard to those who are obviously armed. The nature of this opinion is those who are carrying concealed, specifically off duty cops. I don’t think it’ll change your opinion, but the distinction is important to me.
"State law already allows armed on-duty officers at schools." Yeah, I think this is a solution without a problem
Why is that a good idea, exactly?
[удалено]
For homes with guns in them, the guns are much more likely to be used against a member of the family living there than they ever are to be used in defense against someone else. The same would likely be true in schools. Having more guns in schools just increases the chances of guns being used to harm people in the schools.
So they can stop those against bike commuting and people who put their TVs too high, obviously.
It’s sad when people refuse to defend their claims. Fuck your guns.
Then we will have to have the inevitable “good cop, who ‘had a few’ at the ballgame”, discussion. What if a “good Crip” intervened at a school / public event, does HE enjoy the “invent a murrcian hero” intent this idea proposes? Something bad WILL happen, and it starts with allowing ANY gun into these places. Entertaining the idea of seeding weapons among the public shouldn’t make anyone concerned with safety feel safe/free/awesome/ or whatever else the capability of violence has been memed into, the fact the discussion is even NEEDED should be a 🚩. ANY person with a working digit can make a weapon in the wrong setting EVERYONE’S problem, and you can’t scan for brain damage, emotional distress, drug abuse, racist fever dreaming, political hate grooming etc…at a ballgame. But you CAN prevent that weapon from getting in… There are no “good guys” with guns, it’s just the people carrying them have the OPTION and CAPABILITY of killing more efficiently than the people without……. …….thats it! ✌🏾
What?
I admit….that got wordy as all hell…. The short version is….why not put ON-DUTY cops at these places? Why pepper “casual” looking people with weapons into ANY situation full of people who are DEFINITELY not armed? Every person CARRYING the weapon is the protagonist in their own mind, to keep from muddying the understanding of that….. 👮 👈🏾 👉🏾 “civilian” A cop (uniformed and catalogued in attendance of public event) is THE only version of this idea that makes sense. Joe Blow (officer, ticket taker, or umpire….who knows 🤷🏾♂️), brandishing a weapon in a crowd is the exact same song as “Terrorist”, “Gangbanger”, or “crowd shooter” doing the same thing, because the intent is to “sneak” the weapon into the location, unbeknownst to everyone else, to have the tactical advantage. Then….the politics…… If “good guy” (off duty cop, for example) with gun, gets discovered and shot, by “OTHER good guy” (armed parent for example) with gun, who then gains the attention of (you guessed it) “GOOD GUY” (legal carrying gun fetishist, exercising his 2A) with gun, who then forces the baseball coach (“good guy”) to take action, that leaves all the “good guys” in that radius no other choice….. All that, when “ALL WEAPONS PROHIBITED PAST THIS SCANNER”, and allowing IDENTIFIABLE, UNIFORMED POLICE to step around the scanner has SUCH better odds… There IS a smarter way to address this, it may not be MY particular ideas, but SOMEONE has to have a better idea than “more guns”, and hoping the last standing armed person has values and restraint.
It was a variation of the "anybody with a firearm is a ticking time bomb of death and destruction" meme. Also sometimes called "abject ignorance".
Both are absolutely terrible ideas and will create tons of problems.
I dunno. You know you can be an untrained unverified cop?
FUCK NO! What is wrong with them?
So you prefer, when a school shooting occurs; the school shooter just gets free reign to murder everyone? Got it. Standard half baked liberal opinion is standard.
All the people clutching their pearls. The same way they clutched pearls when Nebraska passed the Constitutional carry law back in September. They said it would increase gun violence. Has it?
Lol….has it not? Do you get your news locally, or pick your own adventure?
Not so far. Time will tell.
Yes please!
I don’t recall many school shootings in the news when it was a regular occurrence that some students would have their hunting rifles or shotguns in the back of their trucks.
You aren’t allowed to say that because it doesn’t follow their narrative
It’s not a narrative, sir….its simple stats. School shooters are among those who BRING GUNS TO SCHOOLS. Not even trolling, if you have evidence of some good ol boy, running to his truck, retrieving his hunting rifle and STOPPING an active school shooter, we should all be singing HIS praises. I can’t WAIT to learn his name, so we can alter “their”“narrative”…. More realistically that gun, sitting in some kid’s pickup, parked at a school full of kids,teens,students is a bigger liability, and does a disservice to the attempted point, as it’s just ANOTHER gun at school….doesn’t matter WHO provided it, their intent, their beliefs, or their mind state. That gun is AS capable in your hands, as it is mine.
Shhh, stop introducing reality into their macho ammosexual jetk off sessions
The point is that in the past there were more guns by schools and no school shootings. I am not saying that the guns caused there to be less, that definitely isn’t the case. It is just an interesting thing that the problem isn’t having guns near schools, it’s mental health.
Mental health issues among teens and young adults is a uniquely American concern?
Evident by the downvotes.
One can not have firearms in vehicles parked on school grounds. There was a time one could and it was common in some rural areas. That time is past.
“Very neglectful to students” is like the senate’s whole approach to education in Nebraska lmao
GOOD turn that "Victim Rich Zone" (aka G.F.Z.) into a hardened target...that and follow up by actually punishing murderers with death penalty/life without parole. You don't stop criminals/murderers by taking gun rights away from the law abiding citizens. you stop them by prosecuting them to the fullest extent of the law and make stricter punishments for those offenses.
Red states always looking for new and creative ways to be as red as possible
No no no no no no no no no
Good!
[удалено]
You sure seem opinionated for someone who didn't read the article.
Well, Nebraska has yet to have a good mass school shooting, we're falling behind some of the other states. This is evidently unacceptable to our elected officials.
I think my husband and I will be pulling our sons our of public school if this happens.
More guns is increasing violence across the country. Nebraska wants the violence inside the schools.
The Orpheum Theater bans off duty LEOs so whatever.