If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   It appears that the school districts that want to arm teachers have encountered a small snag: Insurance companies don't plan on covering armed teachers   (nytimes.com) divider line 158
    More: Interesting, school districts, Jackson County, private schools, concealed handgun, security service, teachers, National Conference of State Legislatures, risk pools  
•       •       •

1192 clicks; posted to Politics » on 08 Jul 2013 at 8:48 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



158 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-08 06:59:27 AM
Absolute safety is not profitable to insurance companies. Real risk is not profitable to insurance companies.

What they desire is safety masquerading as risk. That makes sheep buy policies that never get cashed in. A fine racket any mob would be proud to call their own.

Thus they've deemed it one or the other.
 
2013-07-08 07:38:44 AM
See? Checks and balances. The system works
 
2013-07-08 07:43:21 AM
The only reasonable solution is more heavily armed administrators to keep the armed teachers in check. And then of course a superintendent with the authority to call in an air strike on any school where things get really out of hand.
 
2013-07-08 07:44:50 AM
I can't imagine why anyone would think that taking an area full of volatile teenagers and adding weapons would change the risk profile.
 
2013-07-08 07:49:11 AM
i1079.photobucket.com

 Now they will know why they are afraid of the dark.
 Now they learn why they fear the night.
 
2013-07-08 07:50:25 AM
Moar GUNZ!
 
2013-07-08 08:50:23 AM
Let the free market decide! Until it does, then piss and moan that your paradigm was followed.
 
2013-07-08 08:51:31 AM
See, but I'm the gun-grabbing fascist for pointing out that putting guns there increases the daily risk of a relatively minor harm by at least a little bit, even if it reduces the once-in-a-millennia risk of a relatively great harm.

Shame on me.
 
2013-07-08 08:52:45 AM
Free-market solutions meets 2nd Amendment solutions in a bloody showdown... this week on WWE RAW!
 
2013-07-08 08:54:53 AM

doglover: Absolute safety


Yeah, people never ever have gun mishaps.  That would never happen. Who would refuse to provide coverage over such a sure thing?

And a bunch more sarcasm I am too tired to type.
 
2013-07-08 08:56:38 AM
I'm sure all the parents and community members who support this will open up their wallets and help pay for the increase in premiums.

Probably should raise the pay of teachers too, since they now have "engaging in a gun battle" as part of their duties.

Any moment now.
 
2013-07-08 08:57:47 AM
Insurance companies don't cover armed police officers either.  Their employer does.
 
2013-07-08 08:58:43 AM
Commie, librul, pussy insurance companies don't know nuthin. They are just all about the money.
 
2013-07-08 08:59:17 AM

Aarontology: I'm sure all the parents and community members who support this will open up their wallets and help pay for the increase in premiums.

Probably should raise the pay of teachers too, since they now have "engaging in a gun battle" as part of their duties.

Any moment now.


I'd love to see a levy on the ballot that said "For the purchase and upkeep of seventy handguns for Indianapolis city schools."
 
2013-07-08 09:00:10 AM
I can't believe that this is even being considered by people with a functioning neo-cortex.
 
2013-07-08 09:01:12 AM

See You Next Tuesday: doglover: Absolute safety

Yeah, people never ever have gun mishaps.  That would never happen. Who would refuse to provide coverage over such a sure thing?

And a bunch more sarcasm I am too tired to type.


If that's your idea of sarcasm, you should really ask the Groundlings for a refund.
 
2013-07-08 09:01:14 AM
Corporate death panels!
 
2013-07-08 09:01:54 AM
Stupid actuaries with their facts based on reality. What we need are faith-based insurance companies.
 
2013-07-08 09:03:18 AM

Whiskey Pete: I can't believe that this is even being considered by people with a functioning neo-cortex.



They just want to believe so desperately that more guns = more safety, that they're willing to actually try it.  It's pretty sad.
 
2013-07-08 09:04:09 AM

doglover: See You Next Tuesday: doglover: Absolute safety

Yeah, people never ever have gun mishaps.  That would never happen. Who would refuse to provide coverage over such a sure thing?

And a bunch more sarcasm I am too tired to type.

If that's your idea of sarcasm, you should really ask the Groundlings for a refund.


If that's not your idea of sarcasm, you should be in a band with Alanis Morrisette.
 
2013-07-08 09:04:25 AM
Can you charge someone extra for exercising a constitutional right?
 
2013-07-08 09:07:33 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Can you charge someone extra for exercising a constitutional right?


Still can't bring a gun to school, or to a bar, or on an airplane. OMG CONSTITUNTALESRS RITES!!!1!!
 
2013-07-08 09:07:46 AM

Chummer45: Whiskey Pete: I can't believe that this is even being considered by people with a functioning neo-cortex.


They just want to believe so desperately that more guns = more safety, that they're willing to actually try it.  It's pretty sad.


Because armed police can dissuade criminals in the area from committing crimes, but that behavioral change won't happen if anyone else could be carrying a gun, right?
 
2013-07-08 09:08:03 AM

See You Next Tuesday: in a band with Alanis Morrisette


www.reactionface.info
 
2013-07-08 09:08:57 AM

doglover: See You Next Tuesday: in a band with Alanis Morrisette

[www.reactionface.info image 536x480]


That's ironic.
 
2013-07-08 09:09:00 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Can you charge someone extra for exercising a constitutional right?


Can you exempt something from any form of repercussions because it's a "right"? Otherwise, you can charge for INSURANCE for the FALLOUT of that right, because there, you know, might be some.

If there was nothing to insure, it wouldn't matter.
 
2013-07-08 09:11:20 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Chummer45: Whiskey Pete: I can't believe that this is even being considered by people with a functioning neo-cortex.


They just want to believe so desperately that more guns = more safety, that they're willing to actually try it.  It's pretty sad.

Because armed police can dissuade criminals in the area from committing crimes, but that behavioral change won't happen if anyone else could be carrying a gun, right?


I'm sure it will stop people intending to kill themselves.
 
2013-07-08 09:11:39 AM

See You Next Tuesday: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Can you charge someone extra for exercising a constitutional right?

Still can't bring a gun to school, or to a bar, or on an airplane. OMG CONSTITUNTALESRS RITES!!!1!!


Do you really believe that's an accurate comparison?  You believe it's reasonable to compare our lack of a legal right to do what we want on someone else's property with being charged money for doing something that is within our legal rights?  Go drink some coffee and come back later, your brain hasn't booted up yet.
 
2013-07-08 09:13:01 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: You believe it's reasonable to compare our lack of a legal right to do what we want on someone else's property with being charged money for doing something that is within our legal rights?


Know how I know you don't understand the situation at hand?
 
2013-07-08 09:13:01 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: See You Next Tuesday: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Can you charge someone extra for exercising a constitutional right?

Still can't bring a gun to school, or to a bar, or on an airplane. OMG CONSTITUNTALESRS RITES!!!1!!

Do you really believe that's an accurate comparison?  You believe it's reasonable to compare our lack of a legal right to do what we want on someone else's property with being charged money for doing something that is within our legal rights?  Go drink some coffee and come back later, your brain hasn't booted up yet.


No need to get nasty. 

Nowhere in the Constitution is it required for insurers to back things that will lose them money. Free market.
 
2013-07-08 09:13:18 AM
Why not require insurance companies to provide coverage? Isn't that a thing we do now?
 
2013-07-08 09:14:43 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: You believe it's reasonable to compare our lack of a legal right to do what we want on someone else's property with being charged money for doing something that is within our legal rights?


Man I dunno where you're going with this, we're charged to do things within our legal rights every day.
 
2013-07-08 09:15:14 AM

HotWingConspiracy: BraveNewCheneyWorld: You believe it's reasonable to compare our lack of a legal right to do what we want on someone else's property with being charged money for doing something that is within our legal rights?

Man I dunno where you're going with this, we're charged to do things within our legal rights every day.


Gee, I guess your brain needs more coffee or something.
 
2013-07-08 09:15:54 AM

See You Next Tuesday: doglover: See You Next Tuesday: in a band with Alanis Morrisette

[www.reactionface.info image 536x480]

That's ironic.


I wonder how she's aged.
 
2013-07-08 09:18:11 AM

doglover: See You Next Tuesday: doglover: See You Next Tuesday: in a band with Alanis Morrisette

[www.reactionface.info image 536x480]

That's ironic.

I wonder how she's aged.


Not so well, my Farking friend.
 
2013-07-08 09:19:35 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Chummer45: Whiskey Pete: I can't believe that this is even being considered by people with a functioning neo-cortex.


They just want to believe so desperately that more guns = more safety, that they're willing to actually try it.  It's pretty sad.

Because armed police can dissuade criminals in the area from committing crimes, but that behavioral change won't happen if anyone else could be carrying a gun, right?


If you want to put guns in a school fine, but at least put them in there in the hands of semi-trained professional, who has proven he won't produce a hail of gunfire the first time some kid jumps behind him and yells "Boo". Letting teachers bring in personal pieces...

- That they didn't even have to attend the most basic of training courses to purchase
- That may or may not have been properly cleaned or maintained at any point in the past X number of years
- That the teachers may or may not have any earthly idea how to properly holster, handle, or secure

...is just stupid beyond belief.
 
2013-07-08 09:21:57 AM

See You Next Tuesday: doglover: See You Next Tuesday: doglover: See You Next Tuesday: in a band with Alanis Morrisette

[www.reactionface.info image 536x480]

That's ironic.

I wonder how she's aged.

Not so well, my Farking friend.


Not that bad, considering her age.
 
2013-07-08 09:22:32 AM

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: Aarontology: I'm sure all the parents and community members who support this will open up their wallets and help pay for the increase in premiums.

Probably should raise the pay of teachers too, since they now have "engaging in a gun battle" as part of their duties.

Any moment now.

I'd love to see a levy on the ballot that said "For the purchase and upkeep of seventy handguns for Indianapolis city schools."


IPS already employs 71 armed officers across 62 schools.
 
2013-07-08 09:24:22 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Chummer45: Whiskey Pete: I can't believe that this is even being considered by people with a functioning neo-cortex.


They just want to believe so desperately that more guns = more safety, that they're willing to actually try it.  It's pretty sad.

Because armed police can dissuade criminals in the area from committing crimes, but that behavioral change won't happen if anyone else could be carrying a gun, right?


Look, it's one thing if you want to play lawman around the trailer park but essentially mandating that a teacher carries a firearm is stupid even by NRA standards and that's pretty stupid.
 
2013-07-08 09:25:22 AM

Sybarite: The only reasonable solution is more heavily armed administrators to keep the armed teachers in check. And then of course a superintendent with the authority to call in an air strike on any school where things get really out of hand.


This.  More good guys with guns makes things safer.  I think think the administrators should get a tank... just in case.
 
2013-07-08 09:25:24 AM

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: I'd love to see a levy on the ballot that said "For the purchase and upkeep of seventy handguns for Indianapolis city schools."


That should be everywhere. Let them put their money with their mouth is and see how dedicated they are to "protecting the children" when they have to annually pay more in taxes or through annual bonds or something.
 
2013-07-08 09:26:17 AM
Evidently there is no litigation  in Cheney's new utopia.
 
2013-07-08 09:27:25 AM
PhiloeBedoe:
[i1079.photobucket.com image 450x171]

 Now they will know why they are afraid of the dark.
 Now they learn why they fear the night.


Kinda fearing your hairdo there, Thulsa.
 
2013-07-08 09:27:32 AM

jayhawk88: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Chummer45: Whiskey Pete: I can't believe that this is even being considered by people with a functioning neo-cortex.


They just want to believe so desperately that more guns = more safety, that they're willing to actually try it.  It's pretty sad.

Because armed police can dissuade criminals in the area from committing crimes, but that behavioral change won't happen if anyone else could be carrying a gun, right?

If you want to put guns in a school fine, but at least put them in there in the hands of semi-trained professional, who has proven he won't produce a hail of gunfire the first time some kid jumps behind him and yells "Boo". Letting teachers bring in personal pieces...

- That they didn't even have to attend the most basic of training courses to purchase
- That may or may not have been properly cleaned or maintained at any point in the past X number of years
- That the teachers may or may not have any earthly idea how to properly holster, handle, or secure

...is just stupid beyond belief.


Know what's stupid, the fact that you don't seem to realize that every day, there's CCWs all around you, and groups of children as well.  So why do your 3 points suddenly become more relevant if for no other reason that you're completely ignorant of reality?
 
2013-07-08 09:28:45 AM
Amend the Second: "...Bears bearing shall not be sued or pay restitution of any kind."
 
2013-07-08 09:31:00 AM
Gosh, Golly, is it coincidence that he avoids questions that require firm answers, and just bats around making blanket statements? Hmmmmmm.
 
2013-07-08 09:32:23 AM

To The Escape Zeppelin!: Why not require insurance companies to provide coverage? Isn't that a thing we do now?


they still get to set the premium and school districts are likely to balk at the price.
 
2013-07-08 09:32:33 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Know what's stupid


I do now.
 
2013-07-08 09:36:02 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Know what's stupid, the fact that you don't seem to realize that every day, there's CCWs all around you, and groups of children as well. So why do your 3 points suddenly become more relevant if for no other reason that you're completely ignorant of reality?


Someone going about their business while carrying a pistol is in no way obligated to use it to defend others.

An armed teacher would be required to use the gun as part of their duties, particularly in a situation where a missed shot could hit a child. Therefore, they need additional training and their equipment must be properly maintained and kept it top working order. Seeing as how the entire point of teachers carrying firearms is to protect children, certain safeguards must be met. Just handing out pistols randomly and hoping it works out for the best is even more dangerous than the possibility of some Lanza wannabe attacking.
 
2013-07-08 09:36:42 AM

Whiskey Pete: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Know what's stupid

I do now.


It's cute how the "terrified of guns" crowd thinks insulting the opposition is an argument in and of itself.
 
Displayed 50 of 158 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report