TexasCHLforum.com

Taypo wrote:

Jim Beaux wrote:

jmra wrote:So, it would be perfectly fine for teachers to break the law and carry in schools as long as they don't get caught until they have to use the gun on an active shooter?
I have no doubt what the response would be on this forum if a teacher with a CHL was busted with a gun in school if there was not an active shooter, but somehow it all becomes ok once a shooter shows up?
I think some of us need to research situational ethics and see if that is a road we want to travel.

You should try comparing apples to apples.

There is a difference between the duties, purpose & training of a soldier & those of a teacher. Disarming a soldier on duty is as outrageous as banning a teacher from talking in the classroom - both serve no logical purpose.

#1: How many serving members of the military have ANY pistol exposure? Now, take your answer and subtract the MP's, the officers, the MI guys and the SF guys. I'll gladly stand behind putting armed guards on entrances of any federal/state/military installation, but allowing the rank and file to carry concealed is asking for trouble. In this instance, its an officer we're discussing so he, at minimum, had M9 exposure.

#2. Your comparison to a teacher not talking is also moot - that's part of the job description, or mission. A recruiter doesn't need a weapon to fulfill the mission.

We're rapidly approaching the point where we need to follow the Israeli model of troops behind armed all the time, but until that changes the law is what it is.

"Stories of Navy personnel being charged with an offense are not true. There is still a long way to go in reviewing the facts of this tragic incident, but at this time we can confirm no service member has been charged with an offense," the Navy said in a statement posted to social media.