Carolyn Cain, Utah County Special Ed Teacher and Gun Worshiper Embarrasses Utah

This is why Utah is the laughing stock of the World.

The National Rifle Association countered with “arm the teachers.” Gun clubs claim hundreds of teachers are applying for free weapons training. Two hundred people showed up for a class in West Valley City, Utah, outside Salt Lake City, on December 27, 2012, for example. Not all of the people who took the course were teachers. But some were, including Carolyn Cain, who teaches special education kids in kindergarten to the 6th grade in Utah County, Utah.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

  1. #1 by utah chick on January 9, 2013 - 9:44 pm

    ……and THIS is one of the reasons I’m embarrassed about the redneck culture in Utah.

    SHOOT EM UP CAROLYN! I’m sure you’d wet yourself if faced with what happened at Sandy Hook, but go ahead and think you’re the female version of “John McClain” from “Die Hard”.

    Carolyn, you don’t strike me as someone athletic nor slender. So why in the world would I feel confidant you’d be able to pull a “Rambo” to take out someone with a weapon that has the capability to pepper a slew of bullets into six year-olds?

    SERIOUSLY. THE YOUNGEST VICTIM AT SANDY HOOK was hit with eleven bullets. The lower half if his face was blown off. DO YOU SERIOUSLY THINK ANY EDUCATOR COULD HAVE TURNED INTO A SUPER HERO AND PREVENTED THIS SLAUGHTER?

    Carolyn, you embarrass me something fierce.

  2. #2 by Mike Murphy on January 9, 2013 - 9:54 pm

    utah chick: Are you implying this teacher, Carolyn, is a redneck? I know people who consider themselves rednecks and they are not in the least similar to this teacher.

    What makes you think someone needs to be built and trained like “Rambo” to defend themselves? Pulling a trigger takes ~5-7lbs of pressure, not a major athletic feat. Sure, some people when under fire tend to freeze, others take action. Have you ever been in a situation where you found out which route you’d take?

    You should be embarrassed of yourself. This teacher stood up well to Ed’s silly questions. I’m proud of her.

  3. #3 by Richard Warnick on January 9, 2013 - 11:58 pm

    I suppose the gun lobby strategy at this point is to inundate us with nonsense until we give up. It has worked before, but maybe not this time.

  4. #4 by cav on January 10, 2013 - 12:22 am

    It’s not the schools. Not the malls. Not the mosques. It’s the culture. And, that the military and civilian leadership can’t see a better way of addressing our problems than to keep pulling those triggers, ain’t helping in the least. But since our economy is so heavily weighted to do just that (so long as it’s ‘Over There’), I don’t see much is going to change, even if the MOTU do gather up all of the high-capacity-clips. WooHoo, they’re working on imbuing killer drones with artificial intelligence for site selection. Beat THAT!

    THIS is the business they have chosen to give us.

  5. #5 by Bob S. on January 10, 2013 - 6:34 am

    Cav,

    I absolutely agree with you it is the culture but please don’t stop at your indictment of the military-industrial complex. Let’s look the entire culture of America.

    One thing you said stands out ”

    cav :
    . And, that the military and civilian leadership can’t see a better way of addressing our problems than to keep pulling those triggers, ain’t helping in the least.

    Every proposal by the ‘gun control crowd’ works to make sure only the thugs can pull the trigger. Antis oppose concealed carry, open carry, school carry, etc; so what is left? Nothing but the murderer with the gun with valiant people left no other alternative then to charge empty handed like the principal at Sandy Hook.

    How does that stop the violence? It doesn’t.

    Address the ‘thug’ culture predominate in inner cities; reduce the number of people joining gangs, running drugs – that will reduce violence.

    Address the poverty, education, economic issues so people can get good paying jobs — that will reduce violence.

    Address the mental health system (one ripped apart by the desire to ‘mainstream’ everyone, including those that can’t/will not function in society), address the Big Pharma hold on keeping prescriptions high, address the near impossibility of getting someone involuntarily committed — that will reduce violence.

    Limiting me to 3 ten round magazines instead of 1 thirty round magazine will do nothing.

    Banning firearms based on cosmetic features (thumb hole stock) or non-utilitarian features such as bayonet lugs (how many drive by bayonettings have there been?) will do nothing.

  6. #6 by Shane on January 10, 2013 - 9:10 am

    Remember, if one child on the playground throws a rock and hurts someone else, the obvious solution is to give all the kids rocks and let them defend themselves….

  7. #7 by Bob S. on January 10, 2013 - 9:31 am

    No Shane the obvious solution is to punish the one child.

    The antis solution is to try to take up all the rocks from the school property, the surrounding community and prevent new rocks from forming.

  8. #8 by Shane on January 10, 2013 - 9:36 am

    Really? Because I have never heard that proposal. The NRA proposal is actually to give everyone rocks….

    So you disagree with them then? Good. Now lets discuss actual solutions if you can just stop making up stories about imaginary boogiemen coming for your guns.

  9. #9 by Shane on January 10, 2013 - 9:51 am

    Hey Mike, speaking of being embarrassed of yourself, read the comment you responded to again.

    At no point does she mention the physical requirement of pulling the trigger. She does point to an idea we seem to have in the culture where we all watch a hero movie and assume we can do that. “If only I had been there and armed I would have stopped it!”

    As someone who blames teen sex on hollywood, I would think you would find a great opportunity here to point out that all that all that imaginary violence is the real reason that people like the jackass in the video clip think they can jump up and be heroes in a barrage of gun fire. Or would that require too much consistency?

    Instead, notice that while the poster mentions the amount of gun fire and the movie ideal she never mentions the difficulty in actually pulling a trigger. This would lead the intelligent reader to to surmise she is referring to some special athletic ability to dive and roll around a classroom under fire all while heroically returning fire and ending the shootout. It leads you to the conclusion she doesn’t know it is not a workout to pull the trigger.

    See the difference?

    While I may be placing words into the posters text box, she may also be referring to incidents like this:

    Aug 25, 2012 – A 56-year-old gunman on Friday morning shot and killed a former coworker … Nine bystanders were injured when police opened fire to take out the gunman. … He returned to the building today and shot his 41-year-old …

    Yes, the police, surely better trained than commando dipshit in the video clip there, managed to injure 9 people in the shootout. Does that help you understand why some people feel the “arm all the morons” approach is not really the answer?

    She may instead be bothered by facts like those that point out that even trained armed guards do little to stop mass shootings. Like say the fact that at the time of the columbine shooting the school employed armed guards.

    But don’t let facts or logic or thought get in your way. Tell her how embarrassed she should be!

    Clearly you speak from experience…

  10. #10 by cav on January 10, 2013 - 9:55 am

    Shane,

    That would be one way to change the culture. Another way of looking at the same playground scenario would be to speculate that by providing every child with a rock for defense, the rock throwing culprit would be cowed into giving second thought to his or her action in the first place.

    I’m not sure either of these will work – especially since the principle, other administrators AND the book and pencil sellers are all in denial about how the machinery we’re reliant on is, in fact, pretty much all about dropping rocks on anyone who happens to be sitting on any commodity that will enable mowing the school yard (we’ve grown quite accustomed to a well manicured lawn).

    No. I agree with Bob that what ever it is that makes the first child toss the rock – whether it’s a broken home, lack of breakfast, bullying by others for some small difference in pigmentation or stature – THAT individualized, but society wide glitch needs to be addressed first. There’s nothing about the rock per se. But, the direction of society guided by those who see rock throwing as a means to a particularly lucrative end is overlooked and needs to be recognized, accounted for, and modified.

    Giving the attention where it is initially required will mean those dollars now invested in tools for bombing the far-away ‘other’ will need to be redistributed thoughtfully.

    Big Job, but we wouldn’t want not doing it to be part of what we bequeath our kids and grand-kids – bundled along with other pressing issues.

    Already I’m feeling guilty for the crap we’re doing.

  11. #11 by Bob S. on January 10, 2013 - 9:59 am

    Shane,

    Show me the proposal of the N.R.A. to give everyone rocks. What they do say is everyone who wants to carry them should, right?

    How about these?

    In an interview with the Daily Times Herald in Carroll, Iowa, state Rep. Dan Muhlbauer said governments should start confiscating semi-automatic rifles and other firearms.

    or this one?

    Mr. Cuomo, a Democrat, will outline his proposal in his State of the State address, but even before he speaks, he has incited anxiety among gun owners by acknowledging in a radio interview that “confiscation could be an option” for assault weapons owned by New Yorkers.

    or this one from Piers Morgan?

    Obama should follow up by launching a Government buy-back for all existing assault weapons in circulation (as worked successfully in Los Angeles last week). I would go further, confiscating the rest and enforcing tough prison sentences on those who still insist on keeping one.

    Either you ban these assault weapons completely, and really mean it, or you don’t.

    Three examples out of the thousands or more for our firearms to be confiscated.

    Heck, Richard Warnick on this site has repeatedly stated that ‘no one needs’ an assault weapon. And that the 1994 Assault Weapon Ban didn’t go far enough….so explain to me what would be far enough sir?

    I’m still waiting for you to discuss actual solutions. What do you propose to do about the mental health system, the education system, the economy ?

  12. #12 by cav on January 10, 2013 - 10:01 am

    Principal.

  13. #13 by cav on January 10, 2013 - 10:13 am

    Defense base budget has increased 40% since 2000, *not counting wars. It’s gone from $295 billion to $549 billion.

    It costs $1.3 million PER SOLDIER to put troops in Afghanistan, because the country has no “infrastructure.” It got bombed back to the stoneage! Oops!

    It only costs $400 a gallon to get fuel to the troops. You can figure the contractor’s share…

    It would be a mistake to think much of that money is going into the soldier’s pocket to make life back home easier for his/her family. KBR and Halliburton and their share-holders have a bottom-line to protect and THEY ain’t gonna be losin’ any money, that’s for damned sure!

  14. #14 by Richard Warnick on January 10, 2013 - 10:14 am

    Bob S. —

    One Utah has hosted countless discussions about mental health, education and the economy. I’ve learned a lot from these.

    But the solution to the assault weapon problem is to regulate assault weapons like we already regulate machine guns.

  15. #15 by Shane on January 10, 2013 - 10:17 am

    Bob, so you missed the entire history of the NRA then?

    Taking away a particular type of gun is not taking away all guns. That is regulation. Quoting people speaking about assault weapons and treating it as if it is about all guns only makes you dishonest. Please stop.

  16. #16 by Bob S. on January 10, 2013 - 10:33 am

    Shane,

    I’ve asked you to show proof that the NRA wants to give guns/rocks to everyone. Failing to do so then repeating your claim is a logical fallacy known as ‘proof by vigorous assertion’.

    So as long as I have a single shot flintlock, I haven’t been denied my rights, is that correct?

    And this is coming from the person using the internet and a computer to exercise his first amendment rights. Surely you won’t object then if I request you revert back to parchment and quill pens, right?

    What if I only own semi-automatic firearms? Many people are in that position. I gave 3 examples of calls for confiscation, something you said people weren’t doing. Now you are moving the goal posts again — sad and pathetic tactic.

    Richard,

    But the solution to the assault weapon problem is to regulate assault weapons like we already regulate machine guns.

    And when select fire weapons were regulated, the cry then was ‘we need to reduce violence’ — so when the semi-automatic weapons are highly regulated, what will you call for next?

    You miss the point Richard — regulating firearms does not reduce the violence. Working to improve the mental health system will. You ask how can we stop the violence yet fixate on inanimate objects.

  17. #17 by questionfromtexas on January 10, 2013 - 11:07 am

    has anyone checked to see if what this woman claimed is true?

    in utah, can a public school teacher with a personal concealed carry permit, take a weapon into the classroom without notifying the school, the school district, parents, anyone?

  18. #18 by Richard Warnick on January 10, 2013 - 11:37 am

    Bob S.–

    The Gun Lobby doesn’t care about mental illness. They just want to sell more guns. Never mind that the United States, which has 5% of the world’s population, already owns 50% of the world’s guns.

    That’s the problem – easy availability of firearms for crazy people. Remember that a lot of mentally ill people are undiagnosed and able to pass a background check. Since there is no legitimate reason for anyone not in the military to have access to assault weapons, why not ban them?

  19. #19 by Bob S. on January 10, 2013 - 11:46 am

    Richard,

    The Gun Lobby doesn’t care about mental illness.

    I am stunned, simply stunned at your ability to know everything and not have to cite any evidence. It must be a super power — did a glowing meteor fall near you as a kid, teenager or adult? Or did you gain your powers through some freak science experiment/accident.

    Let’s talk about firearm possession, eh?

    If American’s ownership of firearms is the problem, then obviously we would have the most problems right?

    Because the U.S. is so big, it’s better to compare the frequency of firearm homicides per capita, usually expressed as firearm homicides per 100,000 in national population.

    According to the U.N., the U.S. had 3.0 firearm homicides per 100,000 in population in 2009. But there were 14 other nations that had higher rates in 2009, primarily in Latin America and the Caribbean: Honduras (57.6), Jamaica (47.2), St. Kitts and Nevis (44.4), Venezuela (39.0), Guatemala (38.5), Colombia (28.1), Trinidad & Tobago (27.3), Panama (19.3), Dominican Republic (16.9), Bahamas (15.4), Belize (15.4), Mexico (7.9), Paraguay (7.3) and Nicaragua (5.9). Three other nations had higher rates in 2008: El Salvador (39.9), Brazil (18.1) and Ecuador (12.7).

    So the U.S. doesn’t rank no. 1 when firearm homicides are adjusted for population.

    Turns out not to be true.

    So again….how does regulating firearms reduce violence?

    Hasn’t worked for Mexico has it?

  20. #20 by Shane on January 10, 2013 - 11:53 am

    Hey Bob, there was a recent shooting, you might have heard about it. After it, the wackjob who leads the NRA gave a talk. See that talk for the reference you can’t find.

    I did not say there was no call for confiscation of a type of gun. I said no one is trying to take all guns away. The goal post movement is yours.

    Using the internet for free speech vs a quill pen is hardly comparable to gun rights. When people use the internet or any other form of speech to break laws, we often put regulations in place to regulate the tools used and stop the law breaking from occurring again. When people use guns to kill people (a breach of law) we do nothing to regulate the guns.

    BTW, we are up to at least 695 since Sandy Hook now.

    PPS, when you tell Richard that regulating firearms does not reduce violence you are ignoring the experience of dozens of countries where gun regulation has reduced violence. Your ignorance of reality is the sad and pathetic tactic.

    We now have more guns than people in the USA. Exactly how many do we need to make us safe? No mass shooting has ever been stopped by “a good guy with a gun” as the asshat at the NRA said. Is that because our gun laws are too strict? It is currently easier than ever before to get a gun in the US. Two recent attempts to stop mass shootings by armed heroes ended in the heroes being seriously wounded or dead. No armed hero civilian has ever stopped a mass shooting. Several have wounded other bystanders.

    http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/09/mass-shootings-investigation

    Lastly, lets ask law enforcement. They overwhelmingly prefer not to have armed citizens involved. And even they, much better trained than your average school teacher using a weapon in such circumstances, often injure more people than they protect.

    The NRA is wrong. Accept it.

    Sadly, this teacher will, at best do nothing, and at worst endanger those in her care.

  21. #21 by Shane on January 10, 2013 - 11:55 am

    BTW, I bet a smart guy like you can, given tools like google, figure out what external circumstance Mexico has that increases their gun violence. Try it. You might surprise us…

  22. #22 by Richard Warnick on January 10, 2013 - 11:57 am

    Gun rights advocates are not straight shooters when it comes to statistical game-playing. By cherry-picking homicide stats, you can ignore the fact that trauma centers in the U.S. are so much better at saving the lives of gunshot victims.

    In Medical Triumph, Homicides Fall Despite Soaring Gun Violence

    The reported number of people treated for gunshot attacks from 2001 to 2011 has grown by nearly half.

    “Did everybody become a lousy shot all of a sudden? No,” said Jim Pasco, executive director of the National Fraternal Order of Police, a union that represents about 330,000 officers. “The potential for a victim to survive a wound is greater than it was 15 years ago.”

    More Guns = More Killing

    Scientific studies have consistently found that places with more guns have more violent deaths, both homicides and suicides. Women and children are more likely to die if there’s a gun in the house. The more guns in an area, the higher the local suicide rates. “Generally, if you live in a civilized society, more guns mean more death,” said David Hemenway, director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center. “There is no evidence that having more guns reduces crime. None at all.”

    After a gruesome mass murder in 1996 provoked public outrage, Australia enacted stricter gun laws, including a 28-day waiting period before purchase and a ban on semiautomatic weapons. Before then, Australia had averaged one mass shooting a year. Since, rates of both homicide and suicide have dropped 50 percent, and there have been no mass killings, said Ms. Peters, who lobbied for the legislation.

  23. #23 by Bob S. on January 10, 2013 - 12:15 pm

    Shane,

    When people use guns to kill people (a breach of law) we do nothing to regulate the guns.

    When was the last time a law was passed requiring a background check for the purchase of a computer, a printer, a camera?

    Never in America. We punish the person committing the crime and move on. We don’t call for the ban of high speed printers because someone committed fraud on one.

    We don’t ban computers because some scammer fleeced someone out of their money on one.

    As far as what you said, I’ll quote you.

    Good. Now lets discuss actual solutions if you can just stop making up stories about imaginary boogiemen coming for your guns.

    There are calls for confiscation of any firearm with a magazine or ability to take a magazine with a capacity greater then 10 rounds.

    I own more then one such firearm. People are calling for that firearm to be confiscated…so in your terms, yes the boogiemen are coming for my guns.

    Exactly how many do we need to make us safe? No mass shooting has ever been stopped by “a good guy with a gun”

    Unfortunately you are wrong

    Five people — including Murray — were killed, and five others wounded Sunday in the two eruptions of violence 12 hours and 65 miles apart. Police said Monday that forensic evidence found at both crime scenes linked both shootings to Murray.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,316322,00.html

    The murderer killed two people, then went to another location killed two more. A church volunteer with a concealed carry permit shot and stopped the murderer. He took his own life after that.

    Then we have the Appalachia Law School incident, the Pearl Mississippi High school incident and many more.

    What do they have in common? A lower body count!!!

    Often the presence of an armed civilian keeps the death toll from reaching “mass murder” status.

    Lastly, lets ask law enforcement. They overwhelmingly prefer not to have armed citizens involved.

    Why is it you make claims like this but aren’t able or willing to provide citations to back it up?

    Let’s see some evidence Shane.
    Concealed carry for civilians drew almost unanimous support from the respondents. A whopping 94% said they support civilian concealed carry laws. In a follow-up question, 82.4% said they support expanding concealed carry to more places.

    Asked where concealed carry should be restricted and given a list of possible locations from which to choose, 51% of respondents said private property owners should have the right to prohibit carry on their property. Another 32% said that carry should not be prohibited in any location, including churches or schools. In the wake of the Aurora, Colo., “Dark Knight” massacre only 10% of respondents said that carry should be prohibited in movie theaters.

    http://www.policemag.com/channel/patrol/articles/2012/09/police-readers-overwhelmingly-support-concealed-carry-romney-for-president.aspx

    and

    Many people believe the police would oppose concealed carry, but the facts don’t support it. In fact, 66% of police chiefs support concealed carry laws (National Association of Chiefs of Police, 17th Annual National Survey of Police Chiefs & Sheriffs, 2005.)

    And even they, much better trained than your average school teacher using a weapon in such circumstances, often injure more people than they protect.

    Really? Are you sure about that? Because at least in Texas the qualifications for Concealed Handgun License holders are very similar to the qualifications for basic law enforcement officers…..so pardon me if I doubt your word.

  24. #24 by Richard Warnick on January 10, 2013 - 12:26 pm

    “There are calls for confiscation of any firearm with a magazine or ability to take a magazine with a capacity greater than 10 rounds.”

    Who is calling for this? Google search came up empty.

  25. #25 by Shane on January 10, 2013 - 12:29 pm

    BTW Bob, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/01/10/1177729/-So-Guns-Don-t-Kill-People-eh#

    Also: “How do law enforcement authorities view armed civilians getting involved? One week after the slaughter at the Dark Knight screening in July, the city of Houston—hardly a hotbed of gun control—released a new Department of Homeland Security-funded video instructing the public on how to react to such events. The six-minute production foremost advises running away or otherwise hiding, and suggests fighting back only as a last resort. It makes no mention of civilians using firearms.”

    You are full of shit.

    I was going to respond to that entire post, but based on a short search of news archives I can’t seem to find any evidence that a lot of people are killed with printers.

    Then I saw that you mention several shooting with armed heroes. All of which are also mentioned in the article I linked to. For example:

    “Appeals to heroism on this subject abound. So does misleading information. Gun rights die-hards frequently credit the end of a rampage in 2002 at the Appalachian School of Law in Virginia to armed “students” who intervened—while failing to disclose that those students were also current and former law enforcement officers, and that the killer, according to police investigators, was out of bullets by the time they got to him. It’s one of several cases commonly cited as examples of ordinary folks with guns stopping massacres that do not stand up to scrutiny.”

    I could also point to your church member story, who was a cop and an hired armed guard. Or, or, or….

    So I guess the question isn’t why I can’t point to evidence, since I did, but why you insist on using misleading “evidence.”

    Honestly, having heard your thought process, it would probably better for us all if someone did come for your guns.

    And heaven help us you even quote Fox…

  26. #26 by Bob S. on January 10, 2013 - 12:32 pm

    Hello Richard !!!!!

    Is your nick name “The Ostrich”? ‘Cause you certainly have your head buried in the sand if you don’t admit there are calls for confiscation.

    I listed 3 already. Read the comments sections, the editorials, thousands of blogs — people all over the country are calling for confiscation.

    Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said that she and other gun control advocates are considering a law that would create a program to purchase weapons from gun owners, a proposal that could be compulsory.

  27. #27 by Bob S. on January 10, 2013 - 12:46 pm

    Shane,

    Never said people were being killed with printers.
    Nice straw man. You argued when people commit crimes ‘we often put regulations in place to regulate the tools used and stop the law breaking from occurring again. I’m pointing out how wrong you are.

    Point to me laws making background checks required on printer sales, outlawing private sales of computers.

    You can’t because we aren’t doing those things with the ‘tools’ of other crimes like you want to do with firearms.

    I could also point to your church member story, who was a cop and an hired armed guard. Or, or, or….

    She was an ex-cop, not a currently employed cop and she was not ‘hired armed guard”

    Jeanne Assam, who is being hailed as a hero, served as a volunteer, armed security guard at New Life Christian Church in Colorado Springs, CO when the shots rang out.

    http://www.huliq.com/44441/jeanne-assam-me-gunman-and-god

    I’m glad there were law enforcement officers on the scene but the fact they were cops does not change a thing. Time and time again, crime after crime we see regardless of status armed people stopping crimes and murders.

    Here is another link — for you

    http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2012/12/mass-killings-stopped-by-armed-citizens-2515074.html

  28. #28 by Shane on January 10, 2013 - 1:01 pm

    Yes, we do put regulations in place to curb or stop law breaking. For example criminal hackers are often restricted from computer use. Further, some software that is usable only for criminal purposes have also been made illegal. Lockpicks are another example.

    Further, what is being discussed, despite your constant straw man argument, is regulation of guns. We regulate cars, who may own them, use them, or purchase them. And not because they are used in crimes but because they are dangerous.

    Printers have other uses. We don’t allow them because they not only have other uses but are not considered essential to any crime they are used in.

    As you say, a strawman. Yours, but hey, at least you are half right.

    Guns, unlike cars, have one use only. They are made to kill. And they are being used to do so. Often.

    “The gunman was shot by a church female security officer and was found dead when police arrived at the scene, said Colorado Springs Police Chief Richard Myers.”

    Again, misleading information from you. Its like you are a serial liar.

    Maybe we should set a background check for your being able to open your mouth…

    I guess brewski disease is contagious.

  29. #29 by jdberger on January 10, 2013 - 1:26 pm

    Guns are regulated, Shane. We have regulations on who can purchase them, own them, where they can be sold, where they can transport them, how they must be transported, how they must be stored, where they can be shot, how long they are, what kind of accessories are allowed, how they must be manufactured, how paperwork regarding sales must be kept, what taxes must be paid on them….

    What else are you looking for?

    If “guns have one use only – and that’s to kill” then mine (and Joe Biden’s) are defective. I’m pretty sure that Ole Joe hasn’t shot anyone with his shotguns. Neither have I. Ted Kennedy’s car has killed more people than my guns.

    Finally, the woman at the New Life Church in Colorado was a parishoner who, because she had a permit to carry concealed, volunteered to do security for the church. She wasn’t paid as a security guard. She didn’t wear a uniform. Bob was correct in his assessment.

    as a side note, you seem much angrier than you were a couple years ago (when I last visited this site). I hope that everything is all right.

  30. #30 by Bob S. on January 10, 2013 - 1:47 pm

    Shane,

    Yes, we do put regulations in place to curb or stop law breaking. For example criminal hackers are often restricted from computer use. Further, some software that is usable only for criminal purposes have also been made illegal. Lockpicks are another example.

    But because some people hack we don’t implement mental health screenings on every computer owner, do we?

    Nope the penalty is applied to the criminal. Just as currently felons are unable to own firearms.

    Lock picks are still available for purchase without a background check, without LEO Purchase.

    We also don’t ban certain classes of cars because someone killed someone or themselves in them. Despite the fact that ‘no one needs’ a V-8 or a car that can go 120 – highest speed limit in the country is 85.

    Further, what is being discussed, despite your constant straw man argument, is regulation of guns.

    No, no no no.

    What is being discussed is the further infringement of our rights. Firearms are already regulated.

    We regulate cars, who may own them, use them, or purchase them. And not because they are used in crimes but because they are dangerous.

    Wrong again. Any child can purchase a car. (S)he has to have parental permission to put the title in their name. (Varies by state )

    I also do not have to title my car, have it inspected, insured or anything else IF I keep it on my own property.

    And while we are at it, if your goal is to save lives; why not require mental health screenings for the purchase of a car, background checks, etc? Motor vehicles are involved in more fatalities then firearms.

    Guns, unlike cars, have one use only. They are made to kill. And they are being used to do so. Often.

    Yes guns are ‘made to kill’ – I’ve used mine to kill reams of paper. They are also used in self defense. Even the most conservative estimate puts Defensive Gun Uses at 108,000 per year (National Crime Survey data).

    “The gunman was shot by a church female security officer and was found dead when police arrived at the scene, said Colorado Springs Police Chief Richard Myers.”

    Information erroneously published by the press doesn’t change the fact she was a volunteer.


    Assam, a former police officer, was working as a volunteer security guard at a Sunday evening service at a Colorado Springs mega-church in 2007 when a 24-year-old man began firing at churchgoers in the parking lot, killing two people and wounding three.

    http://www.breitbart.com/system/wire/DA3NGNQO1

    Not misleading information. Factual cited and confirmed.

  31. #31 by Shane on January 10, 2013 - 2:45 pm

    jd, your concern trolling is touching.

    What I am looking for is our matching the regulations that have been shown to work elsewhere being used here, and taken seriously, without childish cries from gun nuts that someone is coming to take away their overcompensation for their tiny manhood.

    Bob, we have gone through, and through, and through the defensive gun stats. They are, were, and remain, bullshit listed by the NRA, as you should well know.

    Just like we have gone through most of this argument before. And I and many here have listed the facts that show that there are very good reasons to better regulate guns. And sure enough, next mass shooting (so every few weeks now?) you return to post the same arguments and demand we link sources and prove blah blah blah blah…

    No matter how many times we point out that you are full of shit on the same argument, you just wait a few weeks and make it again.

    Maybe this time enough people noticed the dead children and got sick of shit from tools like you to change it. Maybe not. We will see.

  32. #32 by Shane on January 10, 2013 - 2:49 pm

    Jesus I just saw that you linked to breitbart and called it “factual.” Fox is more honest! Do you have some links to the World News Daily as well? This would be funny if it werent so pathetic…

  33. #33 by Larry Bergan on January 11, 2013 - 4:11 pm

    The answer to this dilemma can be found in Arizona, because Sheriff Joe speaks for all of us whether we want him to or not – because he can.

    Posse’s will protect our children. What could go wrong?

    Almost thought Arpaio was in trouble recently. These guys always bounce back somehow, don’t they?

  34. #34 by Larry Bergan on January 12, 2013 - 5:19 pm

    Carolyn Cain keeps bringing up the fact that Utah teachers don’t have to say whether they’re “packing” or not, even if a parent wants to know.

    This couldn’t have anything to do with ALEC, could it?

  35. #35 by Larry Bergan on January 12, 2013 - 5:26 pm

    Seems like I heard something about something called ALEC, but something called the fiscal cliff or debt ceilings have taken over the liberal media landscape.

    Christ!

  36. #36 by Mike on February 9, 2013 - 8:24 pm

    Utah chic, just a fyi Carolyn is my sister. Though she may not seem to be athletic she can move when she needs to. She is a very strong mental person and physical. She is also very accurate with a fire arm as are all the members of my family.. I would be more then happy to take you a gun range and show you how accurate we are with guns and fire arms.. Please note she cares deeply for her students, I am would love to have a teacher that is willing to put their life on the line to protect their students. Also one who is willing to take training to become proficient in protecting her students. This is much better then just sitting back and watching children die.. Redneck she is not, I have never seen any car parts disassembled car parts on her table. By the way it takes a real woman to talk crap on someone you don’t know.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: