School teachers — competent or morons?

I would suggest that unfortunately for us all, the threat of terrorist attack, whatever the motivation, is now simply universal — it exists in small-town Texas just as it does in New York or Paris or Kabul.

A Handbook for Ranch Managers And now there is talk about raising the “legal” age for owning a rifle to 21. Think about that.

Throughout all of its modern history, the government of the uSSA has been very “flitty” (cavalier) about sending young, peach faced kids off to fight, die and be maimed for life in its senseless, imperialistic wars.

Planned Grazing: A Study Guide and Reference Manual  Remember, these are the same kids that cannot go into a bar and drink a beer. Now they want to disallow their gun ownership.  That only makes sense to tyrants. — jtl, 419

By Smokey Briggs, owner-publisher of The Monahans News, can be reached at

Environmental & Natural Resource Economics: The Austrian ViewSo, which is it?

Are school teachers competent, responsible, intelligent, caring, human beings worthy of being entrusted with the care and education of children?

Or, are school teachers craven morons who should not be entrusted with anything sharper than a plastic spoon?

Reconnaissance Marine MCI 03.32f: Marine Corps InstituteBe careful how you answer that question, because the answer has some serious implications in this brave new world of zero responsibility and zero consequences we have allowed cultural Marxists of the leftist liberation movement to create over the past 60 years.

The majority of Americans seem to think that the answer to my question is that most teachers in America’s public schools are competent, intelligent, caring human beings worthy of being entrusted with the care and education and safety of children.

The Betrayed: On Warriors, Cowboys and Other Misfits But, if that is our answer, then there can only be one answer to this question: Should teachers carry personal defense weapons, including firearms, on campus?

If teachers are competent, responsible, intelligent and caring, then the only possible answer is not only “yes,” but absolutely “yes.”

Combat Shooter's HandbookPersonally, I think it should be required.

Here is an interesting statistic: Since 2009, 92 percent of mass shootings have occurred in “gun free” zones, AKA public schools.


The Essence of Liberty: Volume I: Liberty and History: The Rise and Fall of the Noble Experiment with Constitutionally Limited Government (Liberty and ... Limited Government) (Volume 1)  The Essence of Liberty: Volume II: The Economics of Liberty (Volume 2) The Essence of Liberty: Volume III: A Universal Philosophy of Political Economy (Liberty: A Universal Political Ethic) (Volume 3)  “Gun-Free Zone” is Joe Biden’s and George Bush’s euphemism for government-mandated killing field as it was Biden who introduced the Gun-Free School Act of 1990, and President George Bush (senior) who signed it into law.

There is a lot of blood on their hands by my way of accounting, along with the school boards who mandate children be undefended in the face of what has become a clear and present danger.

The first rule of self-defense is, “Don’t look like a target.” Professional criminals are looking for a pay check, not a fight. So, the best way to avoid being accosted by someone with criminal intent is to not look the part of an easy victim.

Predators do not usually select other predators as prey, and hence criminals generally avoid fit-looking young men who walk with an air of confidence.

Predators want their prey helpless, and in a location where help is not likely to arrive before he has collected his paycheck and made his getaway.

The average public school is the perfect location with hundreds of perfect victims. All that is missing is a bow on top of the package.

Criminals generally don’t drive to the local gun range looking for their paycheck. There is a reason — and it is not because everyone at a gun range is probably Wyatt Earp — it is because there is a chance that someone might decide to fight back — not a guarantee, but a chance. Criminals play the odds.

Just as a criminal looking for a paycheck will opt to attack the 50-year-old, 240-pound, overweight guy wearing a pressed shirt and slacks who looks like an accountant, rather than the 25-year-old guy that has spent some time in the gym, sporting a crewcut, who looks like he just got home from Afghanistan. Criminals are criminals, not stupid.

Terrorism is a different paradigm. Terrorists aren’t looking for a monetary paycheck, and are often motivated enough to engage in suicidal attacks to accomplish their mission.

Still they are looking for a paycheck of sorts, not just a fight. Generally terrorists select the softest of available target venues for the same reason as the professional street thug — he has a much better chance of collecting his “paycheck” if the target is soft.

School shooters seem to fall more into the terrorist category than the street thug category, except that so far, most do not seem prepared to die to accomplish their mission.

So far, at nearly every such attack, the school shooter surrenders when he meets armed opposition — or less likely, but just as good — he shoots himself when armed opposition shows up.

All of these events share two common characteristics:

At every one of these events the target was guaranteed by the government and local school boards to be utterly defenseless.

At every one of these events the attacker stopped once confronted with the threat of effective resistance.

Not effective resistance, but just the threat of effective resistance.

The only common sense reaction to these attacks is to harden the targets.

It is time to answer the question.

Simply allowing teachers and citizens with a concealed handgun license to lawfully carry their personal weapon on school grounds would make schools far less attractive to psychopaths — moving them from the realm of pudgy accountants into the realm of fit young men — whether any teacher or parent actually carried their weapon on campus or not.

Just the threat that the school building may harbor men and women who might shoot back is a real deterrent.

Or, we could just take up all the weapons right? Then we would be safe, right?

No. Disarming the world is unicorn thinking and nothing more, not fit for adult contemplation.

Just for the record, five guys with knives killed 33 and wounded 143 this week at a train station in China — with knives.

And there are far more dangerous weapons easily accessible to people everyday than guns and knives — think Chevy Suburban and school playground at recess. When that school attack occurs, and it probably will, do you want teachers trying to stop it with their iPhone, or their Glock?

No, the only solution to criminals of any sort is the threat of armed response — the threat that somebody might not cower like a sheep ready for slaughter,  but instead might just bite.

*** Addendum: I would suggest that unfortunately for us all, the threat of terrorist attack, whatever the motivation, is now simply universal — it exists in small-town Texas just as it does in New York or Paris or Kabul.

We have a choice — we can stick our heads in the sand and pretend it cannot happen “here,” and then cower like sheep when it does, or we can become a country once again skilled in the use of weapons, and train ourselves to fight back.

As far as I am concerned, every American has a duty to be armed, and to be trained in the use of that weapon.

Owning and carrying a firearm is simply not enough. The level of training required to obtain a concealed handgun license is not enough. It is nothing but a good start. Under high stress, human beings perform to their lowest level of training. Training is key.

Own a weapon. Learn how to use it competently. Train with it.

Be a threat.

That is the solution to street thuggery and terrorism of all varieties.


Check out our WebSite

Check out our e-Store

A Handbook for Ranch ManagersA Handbook for Ranch Managers.  In keeping with the “holistic” idea that the land, the livestock, the people and the money should be viewed as a single integrated whole: Part I deals with the management of the natural resources. Part II covers livestock production and Part III deals with the people and the money. Not only would this book make an excellent basic text for a university program in Ranch Management, no professional ranch manager’s reference bookshelf should be without it. It is a comprehensive reference manual for managing the working ranch. The information in the appendices and extensive bibliography alone is worth the price of the book.

You might also be interested in the supplement to this Handbook: Planned Grazing: A Study Guide and Reference Manual.

About Land & Livestock Interntional, Inc.

Land and Livestock International, Inc. is a leading agribusiness management firm providing a complete line of services to the range livestock industry. We believe that private property is the foundation of America. Private property and free markets go hand in hand—without property there is no freedom. We also believe that free markets, not government intervention, hold the key to natural resource conservation and environmental preservation. No government bureaucrat can (or will) understand and treat the land with as much respect as its owner. The bureaucrat simply does not have the same motives as does the owner of a capital interest in the property. Our specialty is the working livestock ranch simply because there are so many very good reasons for owning such a property. We provide educational, management and consulting services with a focus on ecologically and financially sustainable land management that will enhance natural processes (water and mineral cycles, energy flow and community dynamics) while enhancing profits and steadily building wealth.
This entry was posted in Gun Control, Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to School teachers — competent or morons?

  1. Pingback: School teachers — competent or morons? (via Land & Livestock International, Inc.) – Rural Redoubt

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s