Presumably those teachers would be armed in situations outside school. Throwing a few million people who carry concealed on a daily basis onto the streets would probably have some major effects outside of schools. (Whether net-positive or net-negative is left as an exercise for the reader)
Partially that. Partially, I don’t want to presume to answer in a parenthetical aside a question that this thread is about figuring out how to answer in the first place. I figure LW is about the worst possible place to vomit cached thoughts on controversial issues onto the page.
(Also, I get a kick out of playing the neutral moderator in Internet debate—it always cracks me up how much people flip out on you when you make no statements of opinion whatsoever and merely posit viewpoints and mock bad arguments. Abortion is especially good for this.)
it always cracks me up how much people flip out on you when you make no statements of opinion whatsoever and merely posit viewpoints and mock bad arguments.
Some probably would, but many would probably only carry the guns at all under sufferance, so it’s worth considering also what impact it would have on the population that’s interested in teaching.
True, adding an irrelevant-but-mandatory criteria for taking up a job is bound to have some effect on the population in that job. I wonder what the result would be on the perceived leftist bias of the education system if you forced the system into 100% gun ownership(which is, these days, one of the strongest Republican indicators).
Is it? I’ve read recently that 40% of gun owners are Democrats, although I couldn’t remember where at the moment. I could think of more reliable indicators.
Well, actually, I thought I could, but in fact I could think of more reliable Democrat indicators but I’m not sure about R ones.
Presumably those teachers would be armed in situations outside school. Throwing a few million people who carry concealed on a daily basis onto the streets would probably have some major effects outside of schools. (Whether net-positive or net-negative is left as an exercise for the reader)
In the standard I-have-no-idea-either sarcastic sense?
Partially that. Partially, I don’t want to presume to answer in a parenthetical aside a question that this thread is about figuring out how to answer in the first place. I figure LW is about the worst possible place to vomit cached thoughts on controversial issues onto the page.
(Also, I get a kick out of playing the neutral moderator in Internet debate—it always cracks me up how much people flip out on you when you make no statements of opinion whatsoever and merely posit viewpoints and mock bad arguments. Abortion is especially good for this.)
I used to do that on WP:Requested moves.
Some probably would, but many would probably only carry the guns at all under sufferance, so it’s worth considering also what impact it would have on the population that’s interested in teaching.
True, adding an irrelevant-but-mandatory criteria for taking up a job is bound to have some effect on the population in that job. I wonder what the result would be on the perceived leftist bias of the education system if you forced the system into 100% gun ownership(which is, these days, one of the strongest Republican indicators).
Is it? I’ve read recently that 40% of gun owners are Democrats, although I couldn’t remember where at the moment. I could think of more reliable indicators. Well, actually, I thought I could, but in fact I could think of more reliable Democrat indicators but I’m not sure about R ones.
I’m getting my data from http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/18/in-gun-ownership-statistics-partisan-divide-is-sharp/
Also, I meant demographic indicators—if opinions count, “I am a (Republican/Democrat)” seems the most accurate.
Advocacy of teaching Creationism or Intelligent Design in schools? Opposition to both gay marriage and civil partnerships?
Yes, probably. Homeschooling, perhaps, as well, though maybe only if you stick to a D/R dichotomy.