|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
IN: Indiana Teachers Hurt by Airsoft guns Used in Active Shooter Drill Say Sheriffs Went too Far
Submitted by:
Corey Salo
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
An Indiana teachers union is demanding change to active shooter drill protocols after teachers at an elementary school reported that they had been injured when they were shot by Airsoft guns during a recent exercise.
"During active shooter drill, four teachers at a time were taken into a room, told to crouch down and were shot execution style with some sort of projectiles — resulting in injuries to the extent that welts appeared, and blood was drawn," a statement from the Indiana State Teachers Assoc. on Wed. said.
"The training was meant to be realistic — to show what happens if you don't act," he said.
Video available |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(3/23/2019)
|
Link is to current KABA page.
???????????????? |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(3/23/2019)
|
Correct link:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/indiana-teachers-hurt-airsoft-guns-used-active-shooter-drill-say-n986176 |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
