|
|
 Originally Posted by OngBonga
If banana was arguing that training teachers will cost nothing, then that is indeed absurd. However, as I recall, he was talking about guards (even you said officers, not teachers), who already undergo training, therefore the additional cost of training guards should be zero because they should already be being trained to a high standard. What extra cost is there? The extra cost is the salary of the guard.
Teachers, well if we're training them, then sure that costs more money, but it might be less than an "officer" whose sole duty is to guard the school, as opposed a teacher who has duties beyond being a guard, such as teaching. Perhaps there will be greater value.
One way or another, I don't see that cost is really a relevant issue. The morality and sanity of arming teachers is open to debate, but surely you take the extra cost on the chin? It'll be peanuts compared to what governments collect in tax revenue.
Even you have been deluded by the propaganda man. Fortunately though, you're not hopelessly lost like some others.
The phrase "arm teachers" is literally incorrect. No one is talking about drafting teachers to some kind of task force, training them like soldiers at boot camp, and then unleashing them as Gestapo hall monitors. That's what the left wants you to believe. They want you to think that schools are going to ask frail, timid, white-haired english teachers to get strapped. They want you to imagine this whole new ominous responsibility being imposed on educators. That's not the case at all.
Lots of teachers already own guns. All they want to do is bring their guns to school. If they can demonstrate a record of responsibility and a knowledge of appropriate safety measures, then why wouldn't the school let them? Furthermore, why wouldn't the school WANT that?
And how the fuck does that cost money?
|
Reply With Quote