Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 1:00:31 — 20.9MB)
Show Notes:
Gun-Toting Homeowner Catches Burglar In Boxers
Idaho boy, 11, shoots black bear on family’s porch
Police: LV Homeowner shoots, kills intruder
Police: Homeowner kills intruder
Oregon Court of Appeals denies Medford teacher’s gun request
Gun-toting man asked to leave community center
California News from Jerome:
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
I was disappointed by your reaction to the Oregon Supreme Court ruling on the Medford teacher. Haven’t these “criminal free-fire zones” killed enough people? From the school shooting you mentioned, to Columbine, to Virginia Tech, to Fort Hood, with all the terrible stops in between, the commonality has been that the criminals could treat these places as “free-fire zones” where they could blast away and no one could shoot back until the police showed up.
Another way to thik of it is that you have to trust someone. Either you will trust the teachers, staff, and administrators–people who generally have to go though background checks just to have their jobs….OR…. you will trust EVERY kook, crazy and criminal that lives in that town or might happen to pass through. If you say that good people cannot carry in certain areas, then you are saying that you trust EVERYONE to not carry–including people who have decided they want to commit murder.
End “Criminal Free-Fire Zones”.
Hey Lowell,
I agree that everyone with a ccw should be able to carry at school. However, in Oregon, employers can restrict you from possessing weapons at work. I don’t know why they think that will make them safer. If an employee is going to go shoot up his workplace, I don’t think he is really going to care what the employee handbook says. Gun free zones are not crime free zones. I wish the teacher best of luck if she decides to appeal.