Pantagraph.com | News | Teacher sues for right to bring gun to school

Note: All views and opinions expressed in reader comments are solely those of the individual submitting the comment, and not those of the Pantagraph or its staff.

Sox 05 wrote on Oct 12, 2007 3:30 PM:

" I just wish after all these blogs that correct spelling was guaranteed under the constitution. "

NRA all the way wrote on Oct 11, 2007 6:20 PM:

" What bothers me is all the anit-NRA posts. Most NRA members do not carry semi-automatics. Most NRA members want the right to bear arms for hunting, shooting clay pigeons or being able to fend of a skunk or two on their property, we may even want one to protect our own families. he kind of guns you are worried about are owned by criminals who are more than likely not NRA. "

Disturbing... wrote on Oct 11, 2007 5:07 PM:

" What is truly disturbing about this is the message it sends to our kids. I know our schools are learning about anti-bullying. We have enough of that going around in the schools and this teacher's comment above is, "I have that (concealed weapons) permit. I refuse to let my ex-husband bully me. And I am not going to let the school board bully me, either." So what are we telling our kids? It's okay, if you have a gun permit, to carry a gun around in school to keep others from bullying you?!!!! Come on people! Make our jobs as parents that much more difficult. NO GUNS...PERIOD. As a parent and tax payer I think I have a right to tell this woman to find another way to protect herself. A gun is not the way. So FRED, you know what you can do with your anti-gun people comment. We are talking about an institution for educating our kids not a shooting range. "

Fred wrote on Oct 10, 2007 12:24 PM:

" To: All you anti-gun people: If you want to be like sheep, that's fine with me, but I refuse to be a victim and that is my right.....and leave that right alone! "

Joe wrote on Oct 10, 2007 6:50 AM:

" TO: TO Joe: You can't have decompression at only a few thousand feet. Even if you did, I would rather be decompressed in the air than compressed in the side of a building! Oh, by the way, what is a prision? And also, shots may not have been needed during the highjackings. "

Teacher wrote on Oct 10, 2007 6:35 AM:

" I hearby give the supporters of this man an F with your faulty logic and arguments. Please come up with an original argument that doesn't make you sound like a small town gun-totting lunatic. Yes we all know we will be safe if a kid brings a gun to school right? Oh wait... Remember folks, these people obviously haven't been to college recently or ever. Because anyone who thinks college kids should be totting concealed weapons obviously hasn't been on a college campus or seen a bunch of drunken college kids running around. Finals is a stressful time... I doubt a gun would make people more at ease. "

To: To: To: Mr 14 - Teachers wrote on Oct 9, 2007 7:53 PM:

" You destroy your argument by making it. For one thing, Oregon State didn't have the "Tirgina Tech" shooter, now did it? For another, the Virginia tech guy didn't need a conceal and carry permit. He walked in with lots of unconcealed guns and went on a rampage without anyone with a conceal and carry to stop him. Had the teachers been armed, perhaps he wouldn't have gotten so far. Here's a crazy idea - had they been armed, perhaps he wouldn't have even tried it. "

To: Max Sniler Impersonator! wrote on Oct 9, 2007 7:48 PM:

" Its called "Sarcasm". "

Just what wrote on Oct 9, 2007 6:45 PM:

" Is this poor lady to do? I guess, according to the ultra-liberal people on this board who want to criminalize someone who feels threatened with her life, she should trust the police to help her...I shake my head and wait for the obituary notice. All the police would be good for in her case is to pick up her body. The only other option would be for her to run, far far away. My frustration is that somehow she appears the villian in this case for wanting to defend herself. I don't agree with the gun in the school; that goes too far. However, she should be allowed at home to defend herself. Thankfully she lives in an area where that is understood and is allowed. "

Leland Lesher wrote on Oct 9, 2007 5:54 PM:

" Hey NRA Nutcases, I can guarantee your safety if you are standing near me and I am carrying my concealed firearm and you need defending. Shucks, I can probably protect you if I am not carrying, but that is just me. You should listen to those that have told you what the 2nd Amendment stands for. I am a retired police officer and current member of what you mistakenly think is the militia of today. I can tell you that you are wrong on both counts, and on your interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. And NO, I am not a member of the NRA. "

To: pitdogg wrote on Oct 9, 2007 5:28 PM:

" Wonderful quote too bad it 200 plus years old. Back then they had single shot guns and not AR15's that can carry a magazine with 30 plus rounds. Yea quote to founders as much as you want but in real life today there are Too many nutcases that use this law to carry weapons, too many nutcases that shoot people and too many nutcases that think the only way to protect is to carry a gun themselves. The NRA is nothing but SPIN SPIN SPIN. "

Teacher is back wrote on Oct 9, 2007 4:17 PM:

" Perhaps there have been so many school shootings because people who did bring their gun to school to kill and maime knew that the good citizenry or sheeple as earlier put by someone else would be easy pickings. Perhaps if teachers were trained and allowed to carry schools would no longer be targets of nut cases. But hey lets do what sheeple want to do...more cameras. Cameras are excellent tools to record the events as they unfold and watch on Fox News but I have yet to see a headling where a camera stopped a shooter. I think if you look at any safety precautions for schools you need to also look at conceal carry for teachers. Look at all the choices and learn what will really stop a rampaging shooter. Easy...another shooter will stop the shooter "

pitdogg wrote on Oct 9, 2007 4:17 PM:

" The right to keep and bear arms..."The Constitutions of most of our states(and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed" Thomas Jefferson taken from the second amendment.....clearly plain and simple. "

NRA Nutcases wrote on Oct 9, 2007 4:03 PM:

" You are so right lets all own guns. That is the only solution. The NRA and you fools want it that way and you interprt the 2ns Amendment which ever way you chose. By the way DC stil has a gun ban, they are arguing in court. I know your next argument is the criminals will get their guns. Answer this moron, how can you tell that the genius that wants to take her gun to school is not like the 20 year old cop in WI. Answer: You can not, the same way you could not tell the kid that shot up VT was going to do what he did. The answer is not more guns and making it easier to carry concealed because none of you NRA nutcases can guarantee my safety because you have what you consider your right. You also can not say that others will protect those who do not carry. THE LESS GUNS THE BETTER. "

Re-To: To: NRA Nutcases wrote on Oct 9, 2007 3:55 PM:

" You said "Can you not understand that this applies to the creation of a militia not to you to be able to keep and bear AR15's and AK47's to repel who the govenrment (sp) and outsiders from other countries." Well, it means EXACTLY that. If you look at the reasons for incorporating this amendment into the constitution, you would realize that it did not limit the type of arms FOR A GOOD REASON. The best way to subjugate a population is to keep them ignorant and unarmed. Your post indicates that they have succeeded with the first part in your case. "

support freedom wrote on Oct 9, 2007 2:59 PM:

" Folks if you are going to defend freedom and scream George Bush is taking away our liberties, then you can't turn around say this woman does not have a right to carry a gun. We seem to tote our Founding Fathers on some spiritual pedastal when it is convenient. But these same Founding Fathers defended the right to bear arms and...by the way....they also defended the freedom to make as much money as you can and be as stingy as you want. So we can't defend some of these freedoms when they fit the liberal party line, but then not defend freedom and liberties because they are more conservative in nature. Taxes are the biggest infringement of our freedom yet the liberals don't want to address the fact that this county allows people to make as much money as they want and have the right to do whatever they want with it. Socialism would tell us these people need to pay more for society's welfare, but freedom says they can do whatever they want. "

Jimmy wrote on Oct 9, 2007 2:59 PM:

" How could she possibly be worried about her safety when this is a gun free zone. Surely someone bent on shooting her would realize this and abandon their plans. Everyone knows school shootings simply don't occur. All schools are gun free zones which have been proven to deter even the most determined psycopath. Massacres often occur in areas where guns are allowed such as gun shows, Nascar races and at skeet clubs. "

Max Sniler wrote on Oct 9, 2007 2:53 PM:

" Exactly, kids are safe because guns are not allowed at school, just ask students at Columbine or Virginia Tech... errr nevermind. "

DO YOU HEAR THAT? wrote on Oct 9, 2007 2:50 PM:

" I THINK IT IS SOCIETY CRUMBLING AND GASPING IT'S LAST BREATHE "

To: To: NRA Nutcases wrote on Oct 9, 2007 2:44 PM:

" You just confirm your lack of understanding. At that time as you stated the people were the militia. That is not the case now. Can you not understand that this applies to the creation of a militia not to you to be able to keep and bear AR15's and AK47's to repel who the govenrment and outsiders from other countries. Our militia is the National Guard, US Military and Police. Those organizations were not present at the time of the constitution and now they are. The purpose of this ammendement applied in 1780-90 but now I do not know of too many invaders of the US. "

To NRA Nutcase wrote on Oct 9, 2007 2:25 PM:

" The Bill of Rights, of which the 2nd Amendment is one, were not ratified by the Congress until 1789, well after the Revolutionary War. There was already a standing US Army. The militia no longer exists. The Army National Guard has its roots in the militia, but it is not the militia. The police officers of our nation are not the militia. The militia only exists if able bodied US citizens are armed. The militia is the last line of defense for American citizens if the Army, which is comprised of the Active, Reserve and National Guard, is overwhelmed by opposing forces. OR if the Army is employed to suppress the freedoms of American citizens by some despot coming into power in the USA. If you think neither can ever happen in the USA, thank a gun owner. "

to: NRA nutcases - LDT wrote on Oct 9, 2007 2:14 PM:

" You may consider yourself an expert at constiutional lawl, but you arent. Most courts of law (Supreme Court included) have established that the "right to keep and bear arms" applies to individual citizens. At the very least they wont rule one way or the other. You believe that the right to bear arms applies to the states and gives them power to form militias. However, on March 9 2007, US Court of Appeals case 04-7041 (Parker V District of Columbia); established that a gun ban in the District violated an individual citizens right to bear arms. If you still wish to protest that the 2nd amendment does NOT apply to Individuals, take a look at most STATE CONSTITUTIONS. The IL constitutionfor example states in Article 1 section 22..."subject only to the police power, the right of the INDIVIDUAL CITIZEN to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". Note how the state constiution explicitly states the word "Individual" in front of citizen. AMAZING! So it does apply to individuals. In fact, almost every state with a constitutional amendment that protects the right to bear arms, stipulates that it is an "individual right". "

to joe wrote on Oct 9, 2007 2:11 PM:

" A~freaking men!!!!!!! that is such a good point the debate should STOP right there, not that it will LOL but great point non the less. "

To: NRA Nutcases wrote on Oct 9, 2007 1:48 PM:

" I am gonna try this again...You really ought to do a little research before confirming your lack of understanding. Our founders used the English Language of the times to write the constitution. At that time, "regulated" meant equipped. So, a well equipped militia being necessary...I think you will also find that at that time the militia was considered to be any citizen. It did not mean that he had to be a "member" of any military organization. The founders recognized that every citizen was necessary and should be available to repel invaders, and keep the government from becoming totalitarian. So here is a modern translation of the second amendment-A well equipped (armed) population being necessary for the security of the nation, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed. "

to:joe wrote on Oct 9, 2007 1:17 PM:

" Mr Rogers owns the Land of Makebelieve "

To: To: Mr 14 - Teachers wrote on Oct 9, 2007 12:56 PM:

" Did you read the entire article. The article reads "In Oregon, a sheriff can grant a concealed-weapons permit to anyone whose criminal record is clean and who completes a gun-safety course." This would have applied to the nutcase that shot up Tirginia Tech also. He had no criminal record. There is no background check for mental issues or other checks to prevent others from carrying a gun. You NRA nutcases need to wake up. This chick is case and point for metally derranged. Everyone is after me, the govenrment is going to get me, you do not realize how stupid those arguments sound. "

To: joe wrote on Oct 9, 2007 12:51 PM:

" Yes Joe there may have been people cause massive decompression of the plane at altitude resulting in serious injury, possibly for no reason. Standard bullets would have pierced the skin the planes. You sound like the typical NRA nut job. Lets just make it madatory that everyone carries a gun from the age of 5 or 6 years old, if your found without a gun you are thrown into prision for sane people. "

maybe wrote on Oct 9, 2007 12:38 PM:

" coloumbine wouldnt have happened if the teachers had a concealed carry permit "

support freedom wrote on Oct 9, 2007 12:32 PM:

joe wrote on Oct 9, 2007 12:03 PM:

" TO ALL: Just think what could have been avoided on 9/11 if there were law abiding citizens on the airliners carrying weapons. "

Kim wrote on Oct 9, 2007 11:29 AM:

" I am not going to get into a gun carrying debate. What I will say is that there are so many more proactive things an employer can be doing to keep an employee safe at a workplace aside from the gun. They could even go so far as putting her on paid leave if she really feels in so much danger because frankly at that point, if the danger is so high, she is a risk to the safety of the rest of the workplace. "

Guy wrote on Oct 9, 2007 11:08 AM:

" "The whole point of carrying concealed is no one should know you're carrying," she said. "So I feel like my carrying concealed on campus now sets me up as a target."........ A target? She sound like a conspriacy theory, "I always feel like somebody's watchin me", nut job. Oh and if the NRA supporters would have read the article, how ironic that she brings this up during a bitter custody battle with her ex. She takes her "plight" public then maybe she DOES have a fear from of ex, and maybe he IS a threat. So maybe she SHOULD have custody. That's it, she wins. This is ridiculous. "

To: Mr 14 - Teachers wrote on Oct 9, 2007 11:05 AM:

" No genius it is you that needs the leason in constituional law and NOT from the NRA. That phrase in the Constituion establishes at that time a militia which was of itself the people of the US. It does not guarantee you the right to keep and bear arms. It does state that "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State." Is that not the military and police departments of the current US. I beleive so. "

Thank goodness wrote on Oct 9, 2007 11:03 AM:

" The majority of people do not fall for the small town psycho babble gun talk by our NRA loving neighbors. "

NRA Nutcases wrote on Oct 9, 2007 10:59 AM:

" You fools miss the point. You and the NRA use the 2nd amendment to make your case. Nowhere and I repeat NOWHERE, does it state that you as an indiviual citizen can own a fire arm. It states a WELL REGULATED MILITIA". At that point in our history we did not have a federal army as we do now, so we had a militia, which were citizens that were called into service. That does not exist today. Today we have police and the military, they are the well regulated militia, not you nutcases running around with your AR15's AK47's and other guns. "

Carrying a gun wrote on Oct 9, 2007 10:43 AM:

" ...is asking for it to be swiped by a student or another teacher to use against her or anyone else in the school for that matter. I'm with the student mentioned in the article. "

Mr 14 - Teachers wrote on Oct 9, 2007 10:07 AM:

" Right on! To NRA Nutcases, you need a lesson in Constitutional Law. The phrases you cite are separated by a comma. Two thoughts. In context of who the militia was at the time of the writing, every able bodied citizen was the militia. It is intended to keep American citizens safe from government overstepping Constitutional protections, by force if necessary. The current "militia" does not have access to weapons nor ammunition at a moments notice. They are both kept locked behind multiple layers of security locks, bolts removed, and separated by miles of distance. No armory nor reserve center has any ammunition stored on site. So the militia is going to protect you from the government how????? "

OK wrote on Oct 9, 2007 10:03 AM:

" i am all for being able to carry a weapon. The simple fact is when you take the right to carry one away, make it a LAW to NOT have one the only ppl with guns will be the criminals!!! LOL hello. not something i want. HOWEVER i think its just a bit silly to carry a weapon to school. i would not like to know that a teacher at my childs school had a gun in her purse! i think that is just risky. we have had too many school shootings as it is. it makes me shake in my boots just THINKING about when MY kids have to go to high School. Kids are out of control these days, letting teachers carry guns is only an accident waiting to happen, some kids will know she has it, steal it and all the sudden we have more children being shot when they are just trying to get and education. so NO she should NOT be able to take it to school but YES she (and anyone else qualified) should be able to carry a weapon. "

Max Sniler wrote on Oct 9, 2007 10:00 AM:

" The kids are all safe because guns are not allowed in school. "

to: Mr 14 wrote on Oct 9, 2007 9:52 AM:

" If we could only get the rest of our society to think the same way. "

TeacherK wrote on Oct 9, 2007 9:49 AM:

" Maybe it is time for the school system to possibly look into some psychiatric counseling for this lady. I think although she has a right to bear arms, she also has a right for her students to feel safe. Look at her picture, she looks a little off key anyway! "

ITS ABOUT TIME wrote on Oct 9, 2007 9:43 AM:

" Good for her! "

To NRA Nutcases wrote on Oct 9, 2007 9:26 AM:

" First of all they're called firearms. Anything can be called a weapon. Secondly, why SHOULDN'T everyone be able to own a firearm? Mr 14 put it perfectly and his argument is very valid. How about you try forming arguments that are based on fact rather than emotion. Go take an Intro to Handguns course at your local gun range and enlighten yourself. Once you get rid of your fear of firearms perhaps you'll be able to think rationally. "

To NRA Nutcases wrote on Oct 9, 2007 9:19 AM:

" "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed." Your post included the section of the Second Amendment that allows her, and all citizens the right to carry and protect themselves. It is Sheeple like you that want to bow to the left and keep the people helpless and vulnerable. It is you who are attempting to twist the words into something they do not say or mean. "

RE:TEACHERS wrote on Oct 9, 2007 9:14 AM:

" I think the fact that you couldn't even control the caps lock on your computer speaks well for the people who think teachers should carry guns into the classroom. Must make you feel pretty angry to be antiquated and draconian. "

to:NRA Nutcases wrote on Oct 9, 2007 9:12 AM:

" Bravo on that post. I can't wait to see the rednecks get all angry about that one. If they even get a little angry it is worth it! Now just wait for them to carefully construct some select and random rare facts and act like they are in the majority. "

NRA Nutcases wrote on Oct 9, 2007 9:00 AM:

" "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed." That is what the 2nd amendment states. Please tell me where she is part of a "Well regulated Militia" then she can carry a weapon to school. The NRA has taken this amendment and twisted to their opinion that anyone and everyone should be able to own a weapon, it does not state that, enough said. "

a reader wrote on Oct 9, 2007 5:33 AM:

" So, this women thinks that its ok for HER to bring a gun to a public school with all the publicity about school shootings?! And she is teaching, "educating" children...WOW! "

Re: "TEACHERS"........ wrote on Oct 9, 2007 12:45 AM:

" A one-word comment in reply to your comment: AMEN!!!!!!!!!! "

TEACHERS wrote on Oct 8, 2007 10:33 PM:

" SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO CARRY GUNS AS LONG AS THEY ARE TRAINED WITH THEM AND REGULARLY QUALIFY WITH THEM. DONT MAKE THEM AN INNOCENT VICTIM. TRAIN THEM, ARM THEM USE THEM. "

Mr 14 wrote on Oct 8, 2007 9:36 PM:

" When you ban guns, those who follow the law become the victims. The criminal does not respect the law and will do whatever they want. If more responsible citizens were allowed to carry concealed then the criminals may be more reluctant to use violence because they never know when they will encounter an armed citizen who may make the criminal pay right then and there. "

Snuggle wrote on Oct 8, 2007 8:38 PM:

" People keep demanding the right to bear arms...isn't that hard on the bear population? "

the right wrote on Oct 8, 2007 7:16 PM:

" the right to bear arms is one of our rights garented under the constition "

paaalease! wrote on Oct 8, 2007 6:46 PM:

" Someone smack her in the head...she has lost her sense! "

Ads by Yahoo!

Online Degrees