I hope and pray that someday our school officials across the board will come to this logical conclusion. But I ain't holding my breath for it.srothstein wrote: ↑Tue Oct 18, 2022 8:49 pmIf I were hired as the new chief, I would make consulting with the school safety center at Texas State University my first priority. But a Guardian and a school marshal program would be among my highest priorities. With the costs of training for either paid for by the ISD.
And in Uvalde, I would definitely recommend a written policy allowing parents and school volunteers who had an LTC to carry at the schools.
Search found 2 matches
Return to “Uvalde School shooting”
- Tue Oct 18, 2022 9:57 pm
- Forum: The Crime Blotter
- Topic: Uvalde School shooting
- Replies: 385
- Views: 382319
Re: Uvalde School shooting
- Mon Jun 13, 2022 2:44 pm
- Forum: The Crime Blotter
- Topic: Uvalde School shooting
- Replies: 385
- Views: 382319
Re: Uvalde School shooting
This, sir, is quite possibly the best thing I’ve read all month.srothstein wrote: ↑Mon Jun 13, 2022 12:45 amI have argued that this last part does make it absolute, no matter what Biden claims.The Annoyed Man wrote: ↑Sun Jun 12, 2022 8:45 pmThus, you do not lose your RKBA simply because you are beyond the age of 45—which was 25 years ago for me personally. The 2A doesn’t say your RKBA is age dependent. It says it shall not be infringed.
The First may be not absolute because it simply says Congress shall make no law, which leaves other possible restrictions allowable. The Third is not absolute because it says "except in a manner prescribed by law." The Fourth is not absolute because it only forbids unreasonable searches and seizures. Similarly, there are exceptions or unusual clauses making most of the others not quite absolute. But "shall not be infringed" is an absolute restriction on the government.