TexasCHLforum.com

This has been on my heart since we returned from the TSRA Convention on Sunday afternoon and I am hoping someone here can offer some more information.

On Saturday afternoon, I attended a seminar on Women and Concealed Carry. The speaker was Howard Nemerov, who is often featured on NRA News. He also wrote an article in the Jan/Feb. issue of the TSRA Sportsman. He offered some great statistics on women, rape, and the effect a concealed weapon has on those statistics. But anyways, to my point. . . After his presentation, there was a question and answer time. During this time, he mentioned how the pro-gun lobby was compared to the anti-gun lobby and that is was very inaccurate. I cannot remember his exact words, and I didn’t ask for clarification, but I was left with the impression that the National Education Agency (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) were very much in support of anti-gun legislation.

As a former teacher, I was a member of both the Texas Federation of Teachers (the state affiliate of the AFT) and the Texas State Teachers Association (the state affiliate of the NEA). As a teacher, these associations offered me liability insurance in an amount that we could not have afforded otherwise. With the way things are in schools today, I felt this insurance was absolutely necessary.

Does anyone know more about this? It was quite upsetting to both Jason and I that my yearly dues have been going to support policies we directly oppose. Does anyone know of any teacher’s unions that are not anti-gun? When I return to public education in the fall, I do not want to be without liability insurance, but I also do not have any intention of supporting anti-gun legislation.

Thanks in advance for the help!

Kimberly

jbirdswife wrote: Does anyone know more about this? It was quite upsetting to both Jason and I that my yearly dues have been going to support policies we directly oppose. Does anyone know of any teacher’s unions that are not anti-gun? When I return to public education in the fall, I do not want to be without liability insurance, but I also do not have any intention of supporting anti-gun legislation.

Thanks in advance for the help!

Kimberly

I don't know much advice because I share the same problem. I won't join the TSRA or NRA because they are anti-Libertarian. Maybe one of your options is to try to affect change from within.

I feel that is the higher ups that are running the NEA and AFT that are anti-gun. As a father of 2 teachers and a friend of several others the discussion of this has come up many times.
IMHO, most teachers are pro-gun or have no opinion. Very few are actually anti.
As in most cities, businesses, and groups it's the people in charge that set the rules, no matter what others may think. (does Bloomburg come to mind). This is one reason I have not joined AARP as their (the directors) view is anti. Even though in most states there is a large number of people over 50 that have some form of CHL.
Just my .02

Liberty wrote:
I don't know much advice because I share the same problem. I won't join the TSRA or NRA because they are anti-Libertarian. Maybe one of your options is to try to affect change from within.

Last time I really noticed, there was not a real big surge in Libertarians in any state house, congress or the white house.

I do not really like the way the GOP is headed, and I really don't like the Democrats.

I still value keeping my firearms.

If you don't stand with those who support you who are you going to stand with? Aren't you cutting your nose off to spite your face?

I will be supporting Ron Paul for president. I am not a registered libertarian, but I am an NRA and TSRA life member.

I apologize for hijacking the thread.

Anygun.

RPBrown wrote:I feel that is the higher ups that are running the NEA and AFT that are anti-gun. As a father of 2 teachers and a friend of several others the discussion of this has come up many times.
IMHO, most teachers are pro-gun or have no opinion. Very few are actually anti.
As in most cities, businesses, and groups it's the people in charge that set the rules, no matter what others may think. (does Bloomburg come to mind).

"This is one reason I have not joined AARP" as their (the directors) view is anti. Even though in most states there is a large number of people over 50 that have some form of CHL.
Just my .02

AGREE COMPLETELY
RPBrown, Totally correct. Of the great # of travelling retired, I believe upwards of 75%-80% & maybe more have a firearm in their RV for personal defense.
That is why AARP is not really vocal about their stand. They know they do not represent their members. They, like many others, dont want real people to know what they are hiding.
Fly your flags. At the same height

My .02 cents & some think it worth about half that.
RP, my .02 plus your .02 put together might nearly equal .02, reakon.

Anygun wrote:

I apologize for hijacking the thread.



me too.
Back to the teachers now.

Life is just like that. I pay taxes and vote, but I don't like everything that government (at any level) does with my money. I belong to a number of organizations, even though I don't agree 100% with them.

If you think it's in your overall best interest to belong to an organization, you should do so. You can express your views to the leadership, which will ignore them or think you're a lone gun nut.

If you have the energy, you can form a caucus within the organization and perhaps have a stronger voice. If some number of teachers openly advocate the RKBA and historically accurate teaching about the 2nd Amendment, it might lead others to come out of the closet.

- Jim

Unions are presented as representative organizations for specific-industry workers and are intended to benefit the membership. In some cases, these organizations have transformed into vote insuring machines. Politics makes strange bedfellows.

Actually there is an alternate organization ot the NEA for teachers.

I'm on the way out the door right now and can't recall it, but will try to post it later. It addresses your concerns.

Thank you all for your responses!

lrb - -I look forward to that information!

Have a great day!

Kimberly

Popshot wrote:Unions are presented as representative organizations for specific-industry workers and are intended to benefit the membership. In some cases, these organizations have transformed into vote insuring machines. Politics makes strange bedfellows.

I think its abusive when unions take their lobbying efforts beyond the direct well being and benefits of of its members. The line can be pretty fuzzy though. The NEA taking a stand about guns on campus may be within their charter. They are way out of bounds when they lobby for evil gun bans though.

I'm not an advocate of banning guns on campus, It is just that its a legitemate issue for them even if they are on the wrong side of the issue.

I'm a member of Texas Federation of Teachers (TFT), which gives me membership to AFT. I do realize that they have anti leanings, but they typically avoid the issue.
I'm on my local's board, and am vocal about my opinions on RKBA. (I'm very private about it at work for other reasons.) During board meetings or when meeting with people at the state-level, I let them know what I think. Teachers' unions are largely made up of democrats, the party that traditionally supports them. When people begin to align themselves with one party, they begin to see only that party's view. I want them to get the other side, and see what teacher's think about on a practical level.

jbirdswife, I believe you should join, but I also believe that you should remind them who's boss. You pay the dues; it's your union. They'll never know what they're members are thinking if you don't speak up.

Here's a link to a story about teh NEAs political drive. http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Re ... p?ID=18556
embedded in the story is this link to the Conservative Educator's Caucus within the NEA. http://www.ceccentral.org/
We have about 10 teachers in our immediate family in the Texas system.
Some of them have been assimilated, and are lost to us.