Re: Legislature and schools

[Erikus4@aol.com]

>Who are those you refer to as being oppressed?

A free people who are denied the right to self-protection.  Our government
CANNOT prevent all crime.  Case law holds that, generally, the government has
no obligation to protect a citizen personally.  In a situation such as this,
many people take it upon themselves to provide for their own protection.
Concealed carry allows for that.  Yes - maybe it is a little paranoid.  Maybe.
But, wait until you're a victim of a random, violent crime, and THEN decide
for YOURSELF.  (My wife and I met that criterion February of 1996 in Boise.)
You don't have to decide to carry, but don't decide that for everyone.

Would you deny me the right to defend myself from a criminal?  Gun control
works ONLY against the law-abiding citizen.  It doesn't prevent criminal from
possessing firearms. We can't even keep tons of drugs from coming into our
country - how can we prevent firearms?

>What kind of example or model 
>is being displayed to parents and children? 

Concealed carry, done properly, does not alert ANYONE to the fact that you are
carrying.  There is no element of "role modelling" here.  No one needs to
know, or should know.  The absolute last thing anyone carrying at a school
should do is, for some dumb reason, exhibit their firearm . . .

> The "right to bear arms" ...  How does such a right extend into the midst of
a 
>civil society and an educational setting? 

The 2nd deals with the "security of a free state," evidently, since that's how
our courts have come to view it.  We're talking about personal protection
right?  So ignore the 2nd for the purpose of this discussion.  (As to how the
"right to bear arms" extends to a "civil society and an educational setting" -
in a constitutional government, law does not become obsolete.  Law is law as
long as it is law.  The 2nd, whatever its interpretation, extends to our
society because it has not been repealed.  That's your civics lesson for the
day.)

Any criminal who wants to go shoot children already knows that we keep them in
schools.  Allowing LAW-ABIDING people to carry on school property does not
create a problem.

If you think differently, what problem is created?  Shouldn't we at least have
an actual problem, or a quite likely possible problem, before we start
legislating the actions of people?  I ask again, what problem is created by me
carrying at my non-existent child's parent-teacher conference?