As I’ve pointed out in the past, “Protect” Minnesota and their director, the “Reverend” Nancy Nord Bence, have never made an assertion about guns, gun owners, gun laws, gun crime, gun statistics, the Second Amendment or its history that is simultaneously:
- Original
- Substantial, and
- True.
You might get two out of three, sometimes.
This next howler?:
The “Reverend” makes three assertions. In reverse order:
Banks stopped using armed guards because they were being targeted: The “Reverend”, or someone she read, apparently thinks people rob banks for the same reason they climb mountains or skydive – to surmount a challenge, to defeat an obstacle.
It’s baked monkey doodle, of course. Banks found that it was cheaper to give bank robbers “bait” money than to resist them, in terms of civil liability.
School shooters, being “suicidal” and wanting to go out in a blaze of glory, would jump at the chance to attack a harder target: Which explains how many mass shooters go straight for the nearby cops when they launch their attacks.
Wait, what? That never happens?
The “Reverend” is making things up again.
While death is part of some spree killers’ fantasy narrative, it only comes after killing as many people as they can first.
If the “Reverend” can show us a single example of a spree killer specifically picking out an armed target, I’m all ears. I’ll wait.
And wait.
And wait.
Allowing teachers and staff to carry firearms would increase the number of shootings, thefts and accidental discharges: Here, the “Reverend” actually comes close to making a point. It’s possible that this could increase the number and rate of incidents.
Because when you’re at “Zero”, anything is an increase. And out of the thousand school districts that allow staff to exercise their Second Amendment rights to defend themselves and their charges, that’s how many incidents there have been in the past twenty years:
After the Columbine school shooting 20 years ago, one of the more significant changes in how we protect students has been the advance of legislation that allows teachers to carry guns at schools. There are two obvious questions: Does letting teachers carry create dangers? Might they deter attackers? Twenty states currently allow teachers and staff to carry guns to varying degrees on school property, so we don’t need to guess how the policy would work. There has yet to be a single case of someone being wounded or killed from a shooting, let alone a mass public shooting, between 6 AM and midnight at a school that lets teachers carry guns.
And how about accidents, or boistrous or larcenous students stealing teachers’ guns?
Again:
Fears of teachers carrying guns in terms of such problems as students obtaining teachers guns have not occurred at all, and there was only one accidental discharge outside of school hours with no one was really harmed. While there have not been any problems at schools with armed teachers, the number of people killed at other schools has increased significantly – doubling between 2001 and 2008 versus 2009 and 2018.
So, technically, the “Reverend” had a point, here – since in 20 years in 20 states there have been no incidents – none, zero, nada, nichevo – then the first incident would, literally, be an increase. And in a nation of millions, bad things happen. They’re inevitable.
But with a very significant sample, over a significant time span, we’re still waiting. Knock wood.
So The Final Score…: But we don’t give points for techical correctness, since it was in the furtherance of a lie.
So out of a potential three points for her statement being original, substantial and true, the “Reverend” rates…:
Regarding banks, I’m guessing that they stopped hiring guards about the same time that the interwebs made most dollars out of bits instead of paper, and hence there wasn’t a whole lot to hand out. Quite a different scenario from when the James gang could steal everyone’s nest egg from the vault, to put it mildly.
She’s probably thinking of this:
https://www.revealnews.org/article/fbi-bank-robbery-data-shows-armed-guards-increase-risk-of-violence/
Unilateral disarmament to reduce risk of violence sounds wonderful. But why limit it to teachers?
If we took away guns from ordinary beat cops, we would eliminate accidental discharges, loss, theft and racist shootings. Cops and criminals both would be safer because criminals – knowing cops are unarmed – would have no reason to shoot cops.
If we took away Mace and Tasers from women, same result. Women and rapists both would be safer because rapists – knowing woman are unarmed – would have no reason to threaten women with weapons.
If we took away guns from the Border Patrol, both narco-terrorists and Border Patrol officers would be safer because narco-terrorists, knowing Border Patrol officers are unarmed, would have no reason to shoot them with fully automatic weapons obtained through the Fast and Furious program.
The idea is genius. I can’t believe it took humanity this long to figure it out. All those wars throughout millennia of human history, completely unnecessary if only the peaceful people had turned their swords into plowshares. What a tragic waste.
Teacher guns might threaten students due to “accidental discharge, loss, theft and racism” What? Because the teachers are racist? Or the guns, being inherently evil, are naturally racist as well?
Or is it simply impossible to blurt a lefty trope without including the word “racist”, or claiming that Trump made you do it?
Going back to “armed guards cause bank violence”, I have to wonder where the correlation comes from. It is possible that when a guard fires, it tends to make things worse, or it is also possible that banks that post armed guards are precisely those most likely to be robbed.
It also makes me wonder; if the guards are not going to be armed, precisely why is the bank hiring them in the 1st place? Are the tellers not able to push the panic button anymore?
NW, she’s suggesting the teachers union is full of racist huwhite pepil, just itching for the opportunity to mow down some brown kids.
Nord’s a reprobate leftist; so are most teachers, so I guess that makes her an authority.
A friend of mine, used to work as an armed security guard at the data center of usbank, in the mid 90s. He said that the security firm that he worked for, held classes every other month on firearm safety, which included range time. He would never tell me what his instructions were from his management regarding responding to a threat, but usbank was also a customer of mine back then. The data center manager once told me that depending on the threat level, the bank expected the guards to use deadly force if necessary.
Swiftee, we already know those racist teachers suspend students of color more than whites in order to keep them down.