Bullet Head– The Teacher Who Could Kill With His Bare Hands

I am not making this up. I had a teacher in high school who bragged about how lethal he was. He claimed he was an ex-Marine.

Some of the fringe in Congress are talking about passing laws that require every teacher to carry a gun and be trained to shoot. They did not go to Pilgrim High School and sit in Bullet Head’s class, or they would have been grateful he did not carry.

I remember him vividly. Sadly, I have no recollection at all of what subject he was supposed to be teaching. Bullet Head– The Teacher Who Could Kill With His Bare Hands

About these ads

4 responses

  1. It seems remarkable that anyone would suggest that anyone willing and able to defend their own person, family, property or that of others from the onslaught of any looney, bully, would be killer, rapist, maimer, or terrorist is somehow daft and to be avoided. This attitude that being a perpetual victim, helpless and dependent of strangers who are far away for personal safety of self and others is a new attitude. It is not “progressive” and rather is destructive of one’s freedom from harm and in the end leads only to more criminal and crazy acts. There can be no freedom without an ability to secure one’s person, family and property. The Founders understood this.

    1. I do take self-defense very seriously. I consider self-defense not to be only a right but an obligation. If we do not stand up to bullies, they will harm us and more vulnerable people. My practice of self-defense is comprehensive, and I do not believe that acquiring guns will make me more safe. I have given this a lot of thought, and I do have friends who are in situations where they feel they need to own a gun.
      Those people are willing to be responsible and accountable, and have invested in training and safety.
      The NRA, at this point, is marketing guns. One is not enough, if you want to grow the industry. Fear drives the perception of a need for more lethal weapons than what your neighbor might have.
      I think a gun is much more effective for offense than defense. Preferably against people who are not expecting to be attacked. That’s how these weapons are being used by copycat murderers. Is the answer to keep pushing guns and removing restrictions?

      1. You like to harp on responsibility,training,and safety for gun owners.All good ideas.I wonder how many people you and I know who jump into their car or truck after “just a few”or a joint or two.I don’t think drunk driving related deaths are any more accidental than gun homicides.The lack of intent is replaced by reckless disregard.
        One of the commentors here,after referring to me as “paranoid”,”having a gun fetish”,etc then went on to suggest “compromise” and “common sense”.Of course with you people here that means your way or the highway.
        I have heard more ignorant BS about firearms on the media since the Newtown shootings than at any time I can remember.
        I disagree that a gun is more for offense than defense.That depends entirely on the owner or user.
        I have no problem with getting rid of the loophole for evading a background check.I also think more mental health data could be entered in the system,however,there are so many privacy issues surrounding medical histories that it is a difficult subject.I’m more concerned about mass shootings by mentally deranged people than by convicted criminals or illegal aliens,the other two major groups denied the right to possess firearms.
        Personally,I don’t know why anyone needs a Humvee,but i guess if you can afford it you can waste your money on it.
        I know people feel like they want to DO something after what happened in Connecticut,but I am fairly sick and tired of the insinuation that someone like myself has been less affected than you and your friends here.The difference is that I’m not sure there is anything that will stop a determined crazy or evil person from carrying out a horrendous crime again.
        We can’t arm teachers-that is ridiculous.Police in the schools might afford a degree of protection,but no guarantees.
        When I was in HS we had two cops assigned to the school-a uniformed one and a plainclothes one.We had gang problems of a serious nature and this was1960-63.We still had a girl get raped in the locker area when she came in to get her report card on a non school day-The uniformed cop was in the school-he was probably drinking coffee.The rapist was an intruder.He got arrested within the hour but it was kind of too late for the girl.
        I suspect that if you had your druthers no private citizen would own a firearm.I could be wrong but I’ve been reading this blog long enough to have learned something about the attitudes here.

  2. I do not think educators should be armed in the school setting.They are there to teach and sometimes counsel students.I do think armed security at schools could be provided by off duty and retired law enforcement officers in plain clothes with their weapons concealed.They could be hired on an hourly basis and wouldn’t need benefits because they already are receiving those via employment or retirement plans.They are trained,disciplined,and very unlikely to engage in “Wyatt Earp” behavior that might be the case with “rent a cops”.I also wouldn’t suggest these people engage in the internal disciplinary problems at the school short of a lethal threat.How does that sound?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 973 other followers

%d bloggers like this: