^ This....you need to talk to the principal, i wouldn’t even bother talking to the teacher. A debate would be where the class is divided and each group is assigned a side to debate. This is not a debate, it’s an anti teacher singling out and bullying a minority based on their personal beliefs.
Nutters I need Your Help !!!! Emergency !!
- Thread starter Live2Crawl
- Start date
^ This....you need to talk to the principal, i wouldn’t even bother talking to the teacher. A debate would be where the class is divided and each group is assigned a side to debate. This is not a debate, it’s an anti teacher singling out and bullying a minority based on their personal beliefs.
Explain to your daughter that the term assault rifle is a term for a gun capable of full auto fire , the Teacher is more than likely referring to a modern semi auto sporting rifle explain that these are used in competitions across the country by legal owners who have passed background checks on a daily basis in order to maintain public security . Disarming legal owners will do nothing to stop the criminal element from acquiring these guns .But it will keep thousands of competitive athletes from a sport which they enjoy.
I think that whole situation is so upsetting to you, that you are over focusing on unimportant details, and not realising what is really going on here.
Teacher is using his/ her authority to enlist rest of the class and turn your child in object of ridicule.
Your child is being blatantly bullied by that teacher.
This is not about debate and education- this is about you going to principal and demand that your child is protected from further abuse!
Right now!
Debating this subject is a fools errand. The only way to win is to refuse to debate such a foolish situation.
That teacher deserves a serious dressing down by an outraged parent. The teacher, an adult I a position of authority makes a statement and then asks the class to divide itself into groups, those who agree with the teachers statement or are too weak minded to object and those who are willing to go against not only the adult but the majority of the group.
That is not only not fair, it has nothing to do with debate and it is a disgusting method of "teaching" via social or peer pressure. All that teacher is teaching those kids is to not question authority. And that is NOT the mission of schools.
Everytime I read something like this I am so glad I do not have children. Otherwise I'd be in to tell at the principle weekly I think.
That teacher deserves a serious dressing down by an outraged parent. The teacher, an adult I a position of authority makes a statement and then asks the class to divide itself into groups, those who agree with the teachers statement or are too weak minded to object and those who are willing to go against not only the adult but the majority of the group.
That is not only not fair, it has nothing to do with debate and it is a disgusting method of "teaching" via social or peer pressure. All that teacher is teaching those kids is to not question authority. And that is NOT the mission of schools.
Everytime I read something like this I am so glad I do not have children. Otherwise I'd be in to tell at the principle weekly I think.
Did teacher know anything about your interests already? Sounds like a planned operation to me, and that spells intimidation, ostracism and harassment. Time to talk to the principal alright, but first talk to your daughter and find out exactly what the lead up to this was, if any. Also find out if she has been tricked into speaking about this before. One of my daughter's teachers played a bit of this game: "Hands up whose parents have guns in the house". That kind of thing.
Wear a suit, be quiet spoken, but be very persistent with your questions. Plan what you want to ask beforehand, and what you want them to do, and then pursue it. Don't allow them to sidetrack you or fob you off with BS. Record the conversation, inform the principal you will do so, if you think it is necessary or it is legally required. Your wife should be present if you can rely on her to support you and not undermine you or confuse matters. Otherwise, have an intelligent, presentable friend with you. Someone with a presence preferably. You should decide if you want to threaten legal action should that become necessary, in fact, or as a negotiating tactic, or simply to upset and alarm them.
I would also start digging into the background of that teacher and the principal, and perhaps others on staff as well. You may find something that will "put a cat among the progressive pigeons" in a big way.
Wear a suit, be quiet spoken, but be very persistent with your questions. Plan what you want to ask beforehand, and what you want them to do, and then pursue it. Don't allow them to sidetrack you or fob you off with BS. Record the conversation, inform the principal you will do so, if you think it is necessary or it is legally required. Your wife should be present if you can rely on her to support you and not undermine you or confuse matters. Otherwise, have an intelligent, presentable friend with you. Someone with a presence preferably. You should decide if you want to threaten legal action should that become necessary, in fact, or as a negotiating tactic, or simply to upset and alarm them.
I would also start digging into the background of that teacher and the principal, and perhaps others on staff as well. You may find something that will "put a cat among the progressive pigeons" in a big way.
Last edited:
Runningfool
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- SW Ontario
I hate to say it but your daughter could have the best and brightest in the gun community coach her all week but I'm afraid the odds are good she is going to come out of that debate feeling gut-kicked. Too bad Ted Nugent couldn't drop by the school, he'd straighten that 8th grade teacher out in a hurry 
I must say kudos to your daughter for being brave enough to stand up for herself AND her friend for standing by her...not many friends would stand by you when 31 take an opposing view!
I must say kudos to your daughter for being brave enough to stand up for herself AND her friend for standing by her...not many friends would stand by you when 31 take an opposing view!
NONE OF THE TEACHERS BUSINESS.
This brings up an interesting point tho'. We should maybe remember to teach our children that this information is none of anyones business, and suggest that they not really talk about it outside the house.
I'm bumping this. It's what I was trying to say, but he said it better.
Couple of things.....
- It is nice to have a best friend like that.
- The debate with the current setup........33 vrs 2 with the teacher being an anti would be unfair so it should not take place. Maybe suggest to the principal that you would volunteer to talk to the class and possibly debate the topic with the teacher. Principal would probably shut the whole thing down pretty quick.
- It is nice to have a best friend like that.
- The debate with the current setup........33 vrs 2 with the teacher being an anti would be unfair so it should not take place. Maybe suggest to the principal that you would volunteer to talk to the class and possibly debate the topic with the teacher. Principal would probably shut the whole thing down pretty quick.
The better question is why is the teacher associating current political issues with grade school teaching? I would have a VERY stern talking to with her. How does this debate have anything to do with schools main purpose to teach kids the fundamentals of life, work, etc.?
31 to 2? The teachers mind appears to be made up and I agree with farmer47 - simple bullying.
Damn, I only got out of the educational system in 2002, and I don't ever remember it being that liberal. I mean, there was certainly the odd hippy left-swinger, but not anything to this extent.
I don't like the path Canada is heading down.
I don't like the path Canada is heading down.
Assault weapons are already banned in Canada. Nonetheless, bans are a cop out and only punish & oppress decent & responsible people. There are legitimate sporting & defensive needs for assault rifles.
Furthermore, by supporting a ban on assault weapons, you're affirming you're either a blind follower or you aren't competent, responsible or trustworthy - you're violent & would likely kill other people if you had one. Classic projection.
Furthermore, by supporting a ban on assault weapons, you're affirming you're either a blind follower or you aren't competent, responsible or trustworthy - you're violent & would likely kill other people if you had one. Classic projection.
Last edited:
^
This!
I am a parent, and my boot print is on the principal's door for how his staff conducts business. To have 13 year olds debate this is just an uneducated educator with a personal agenda. Short that $hit out.
Hakx
This is insane, WTF is wrong with these schools, the parents should demand they close the school as in put it in lock down they said gun in class.... Ohhh the stupidity.
They want to brain wash kids into hatting and forming a opinion by teaching them that all firearms are bad... this is sad and something must be done.
I came up with my own thought on how to fight these morons and for that matter next time there is a push for a protest we should use the same tactic the US military used in Panama get together a bunch of your own and use loud speakers and blast music like say Were not going to take it from twisted sister or something along those lines at them day and night, funny how that get's into peoples heads fast.
Maybe the school needs you to get your hunting/target shooting buddies together and any other people who support you or your ideas and go and place some nice large speakers on there front lawn and blast them tunes for them all day then go back the next day and repeat until the principal reprimands the teacher for his/her actions and gives a formal apology from both teacher and Principal.
That would change the bar a little not to mention you would become famous on TV/media very quickly
They want to brain wash kids into hatting and forming a opinion by teaching them that all firearms are bad... this is sad and something must be done.
I came up with my own thought on how to fight these morons and for that matter next time there is a push for a protest we should use the same tactic the US military used in Panama get together a bunch of your own and use loud speakers and blast music like say Were not going to take it from twisted sister or something along those lines at them day and night, funny how that get's into peoples heads fast.
Maybe the school needs you to get your hunting/target shooting buddies together and any other people who support you or your ideas and go and place some nice large speakers on there front lawn and blast them tunes for them all day then go back the next day and repeat until the principal reprimands the teacher for his/her actions and gives a formal apology from both teacher and Principal.
That would change the bar a little not to mention you would become famous on TV/media very quickly
Assuming that we are talking about "assault rifle" in terms of "anything with a picatinny rail that looks scary"
Here's the problem:
The ban is only effective to honest day-to-day "law abiding citizens". First let's get this out of the way; the argument could be thrown out there that if there is more circulation of tactical weapons in the market, there is a more likely chance that they will be readily available for the wrong reasons. I would love to see statistics on people with PAL/RPAL who are involved in illegal activities in direct relation to tactical weapons like illegal distribution / traffic - that use the actual legal market to fill their orders. I would venture to say: It doesn't happen much. People who want weapons for the purpose of crime will get their weapons from questionable and untraceable sources. So that is moot. Second point: it could be argued that people with sudden mental issues that plan to or proceed with a shooting have at their disposal a better amount / selection / more effective weaponry. Sure they will, but they often have NO training and don't even know what they are doing with the weapons they have (most shootings have ended with improper operation / stoppages etc..), and even if there is a band on any type of tactical weapon, those types of people WILL find something as effective to proceed with their plans anyways. So that is moot as well.
Now comes the main argument: law abiding citizens. There are many reasons for someone to own a tactical type weapon, and we can explore a few;
1. Fun/Entertainment: People who buy those types of weapons enjoy shooting them and collecting them in the same way someone would enjoy playing golf and collecting guitars. They are either functional art, a fun hobby or a means to hang out with friends with the same interest.
2. Hunting: Let's face it. A good tactical rifle or shotgun with the right configuration or setup is capable of being a much more enjoyable walk in the woods and at the end of the day might help get the meat on the table that your family will enjoy. It is a tradition for many people and also is a way of life for many others. I know some old folks with new tactical rifles / shotguns that prefer the ergonomics and portability of them even though their trophy rifles hang on a wall somewhere looking proud.
3. Self-defense: I have never heard of anyone have to use any rifle in self defense - that I know of. Canada is actually quite a safe country and the only issues I have EVER encountered were on Jane and Finch in Toronto. The main problem there was with conceiled weapons, like pistols. Were they legal pistols? HELL NO. They were illegal and the one I was shown had no serial number markings on it. But the question remains: Who do you want to prevent from having a tactical weapon; the bad guys or the good guys? By the current standards bad guys have full-auto weapons and can take over houses easily and shoot up your entire family by the time you load your rifle. And then you want to remove more options for the good guys? Yeah...
The question is utterly wrong. Although the teacher probably meant well, and/or wanted to get a debate in class, it should have been done so the kids would split at least sort of evenly.
The question is wrong in class, but it stems from the question being wrong in the media, which also stems from the question being wrong within government parties:
Instead of "what weapons should be banned?", the questions should be "what are more effective ways we could prevent someone else from going insane and shooting up a school? And how do we do so without taking away from a law abiding citizen from having access to self-defense or rights to carry.
This argument could go on forever.
