Another school shooting....time to arm the teachers?

[BallsBrunswick]

I have plenty to say...I just don't expect it to permeate the thick skulls of imbeciles who try to float the notion that a shootout in the hallways that could halt a raving lunatic, would be a less desirable option to the outright slaughter of a few dozen completely unarmed and helpless victims.

But you g'ead and try to make that imbecilic argument...It amuses me.

How do you know the shootout would occur in the hallway? How do you know the teacher isn't one of the brain dead on this site such as yourself who talk a big game but could just as easily blow their head off or blow a kid away in such an incident. How do you know the teacher doesn't blow a little kid's head off in an accidental discharge just from having the gun at school? You're only allowing for one scenario that fits your world view which is frankly stupid.

Idotic attempt at logic. By that logic we should disarm our military because of possible friendly fire. If armed those who try to stop these shootings with their bare hands might have a chance to do so and live. You would deny them their right to self-defence, and our children their right to be defended for no better than your irrational fears. Shame on you!

By me saying I think it's dumb to have guns in the classroom you think I want the military to be disarmed? And then you say I have idiotic logic. Why don't you let the adults handle this conversation.

 

[Cecilie1200]

This year there has been a bad year for student shooting with about 60 shootings. I think we need to keep things in prospective. There are nearly 100 million students in schools in the US. Arming teachers would be insane.

School shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why? What've you got against school teachers?

 

[skookerasbil]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cqbv-aqoao&feature=youtube_gdata_player


I say yes. Of course proper precautions should be taken but lets allow administration officials to protect the children and themselves.

I usually agree with you Grampa but not in this case. Protection of the children in the schools should be the only thing we are talking about today, but it should be done by specially trained law enforcement professionals and there should be at least 2 in each school. It should be federally funded and start Monday morning. The whole program could have been funded just from the waste of 1/2 a billion dollars on Solyndra.

 

[Oddball]

How do you know the shootout would occur in the hallway? How do you know the teacher isn't one of the brain dead on this site such as yourself who talk a big game but could just as easily blow their head off or blow a kid away in such an incident. How do you know the teacher doesn't blow a little kid's head off in an accidental discharge just from having the gun at school? You're only allowing for one scenario that fits your world view which is frankly stupid.

Idotic attempt at logic. By that logic we should disarm our military because of possible friendly fire. If armed those who try to stop these shootings with their bare hands might have a chance to do so and live. You would deny them their right to self-defence, and our children their right to be defended for no better than your irrational fears. Shame on you!

By me saying I think it's dumb to have guns in the classroom you think I want the military to be disarmed? And then you say I have idiotic logic. Why don't you let the adults handle this conversation.

He was making an analogy not being literal, you meathead.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cqbv-aqoao&feature=youtube_gdata_player


I say yes. Of course proper precautions should be taken but lets allow administration officials to protect the children and themselves.

Okay folks, on top of your duties of educating these children so they can develop skills needed to usher them into life as an adult, you are also a security guard tasked with facing off against armed assailants.

It's a natural reaction to defend yourself unless you are less than a man. So why wouldn't someone want to be on equal footing with a person who has nothing but killing on their mind?

 

[BallsBrunswick]

Idotic attempt at logic. By that logic we should disarm our military because of possible friendly fire. If armed those who try to stop these shootings with their bare hands might have a chance to do so and live. You would deny them their right to self-defence, and our children their right to be defended for no better than your irrational fears. Shame on you!

By me saying I think it's dumb to have guns in the classroom you think I want the military to be disarmed? And then you say I have idiotic logic. Why don't you let the adults handle this conversation.

He was making an analogy not being literal, you meathead.

It's not my fault he has muddled thinking and expresses himself poorly.

 

[Immanuel]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cqbv-aqoao&feature=youtube_gdata_player


I say yes. Of course proper precautions should be taken but lets allow administration officials to protect the children and themselves.

I hate to say this, but there are teachers out there that I think are the last people in the world that should have guns around children. I think most teachers would be more than capable of having a gun in the room and nothing ever happening, but do you want to risk that your grandchild's teacher is not the one that "snaps" next?

Kids can be pretty hard on teachers and push them to the limit and you want to put a gun in their reach at the crucial moment? If you ask me, you need to think that through more.

Immie

 

[9thIDdoc]

Forgive me if this has already been asked, but do you think there'd be less people applying for teaching positions if applicants knew they'd be required to have a gun in the classroom or be required to attend firearms training as part of their formal training?

Arming teachers is idiocy.

Period.

Bullshit

Period

 

[Swagger]

Forgive me if this has already been asked, but do you think there'd be less people applying for teaching positions if applicants knew they'd be required to have a gun in the classroom or be required to attend firearms training as part of their formal training?

There probably would be some people who so fear or loathe guns that such a requirement would prompt them to go into a different line of work. But I think most would be willing to do it, and some would really welcome such a policy.

But I don't want a policy that requires everybody to be armed and proficient, at least outside of law enforcement and/or the military, any more than I want a requirement that everybody learn to drive or know how to rewire an electrical circuit or whatever. Such requirements take away our freedom of choice as much as would laws that would prohibit us from doing such things.

But I am now convinced that we do need a policy of arming qualified, trained teachers in our schools, and that would be a huge deterrant for such mayhem as happened yesterday, or if it does not deter, at least gives us the means to stop or reduce the carnage.

I should've made myself clearer. Although I accept that there are a great many out there who loathe and hate weapons of any description (I'm not among them), and as such would give them pause for thought in considering teach as a profession if it meant they'd come into contact with armed personnel on a daily basis, I was thinking more along the lines of those who may object to the potentially negative impact the open presence of weapons may have on the learning environment of young and impressionable children. They may think that children's innocence should be protected, especially in a learning environment where the presence of weapons could become a very negative psychological distraction.

I'm undecided on this particular catch 22. On the one hand I think - and this may come as a surprise coming from someone who lives in a country where an unhealthy paranoia towards fireamrs prevails - people should have the right to bear arms, and a consequence of that belief means that inccidents of his nature are bound to occur. But on the other hand I'd be rather sceptical on having armed personnel on school grounds who openly carry weapons, if open carry were the preferred policy, which, for legals reasons, leads me to assume would be the case on the grounds of it [weapons] being a potentially negative intrusion upon the learning environment.

Do you see where I'm coming from?

 

[Oddball]

By me saying I think it's dumb to have guns in the classroom you think I want the military to be disarmed? And then you say I have idiotic logic. Why don't you let the adults handle this conversation.

He was making an analogy not being literal, you meathead.

It's not my fault he has muddled thinking and expresses himself poorly.

What is your fault is that you're dumb as a brick if you can't understand that he was clearly using an analogy.

 

[Foxfyre]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cqbv-aqoao&feature=youtube_gdata_player


I say yes. Of course proper precautions should be taken but lets allow administration officials to protect the children and themselves.

I hate to say this, but there are teachers out there that I think are the last people in the world that should have guns around children. I think most teachers would be more than capable of having a gun in the room and nothing ever happening, but do you want to risk that your grandchild's teacher is not the one that "snaps" next?

Kids can be pretty hard on teachers and push them to the limit and you want to put a gun in their reach at the crucial moment? If you ask me, you need to think that through more.

Immie

Police officers receive extensive background checks and psychological evaluation before they are issued a firearm. There would be no problem with doing the same with any teachers who volunteered to be armed while on duty.

The firearms should be safely secured so that the teacher can get to them quickly but the students cannot. Any teacher who took a secured firearm out of its hiding place for any reason other than such an emergency as happened yesterday would of course be subject to immediate firing.

So to address your concern, there is no reason to think teachers are likely to be any more mentally unbalanced than professional security people. And I would think the risk to my child would be much less with a weapon in the hands of his/her teacher than it would be with a crazed gunman loose in the school and no means of stopping him.

 

[squeeze berry]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cqbv-aqoao&feature=youtube_gdata_player


I say yes. Of course proper precautions should be taken but lets allow administration officials to protect the children and themselves.

I hate to say this, but there are teachers out there that I think are the last people in the world that should have guns around children. I think most teachers would be more than capable of having a gun in the room and nothing ever happening, but do you want to risk that your grandchild's teacher is not the one that "snaps" next?

Kids can be pretty hard on teachers and push them to the limit and you want to put a gun in their reach at the crucial moment? If you ask me, you need to think that through more.

Immie

kids might be more respectful to a teacher that has an open carry

 

[JakeStarkey]

And you will lose on the first day.

Thing is none of the weapons used were the type you just mentioned.

I don't have a crystal ball or anything but when the powers that be are forced to do something legislatively my guess is that based on priors they will go after assault weapons and big clips just for starters.

If the government is pushed into a corner over gun violence you can bet dollars to donuts that reason won't be a factor in what they end up doing.

You're wanting to ban weapons already ruled by the courts protected by the second amendment, and were not used in the mass murder.
But I will tell youy right now any attempt to ban fire arms will be the start of a civil war.

 

[Oddball]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cqbv-aqoao&feature=youtube_gdata_player


I say yes. Of course proper precautions should be taken but lets allow administration officials to protect the children and themselves.

I hate to say this, but there are teachers out there that I think are the last people in the world that should have guns around children. I think most teachers would be more than capable of having a gun in the room and nothing ever happening, but do you want to risk that your grandchild's teacher is not the one that "snaps" next?

Kids can be pretty hard on teachers and push them to the limit and you want to put a gun in their reach at the crucial moment? If you ask me, you need to think that through more.

Immie

Why wouldn't teachers be subject to the same kinds of screening processes that the general public is?

In fact, it's perfectly and validly arguable that a teacher with a weapon around a bunch of unarmed (you'd hope) children, would and should be held to the highest mental, training and safety standards.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Spurious logic. Denver proved that. Some schools already have armed officers. That does not stop shootings. If a deranged killer is on the loose, he will go where he wants, whether it be a theatre or a school.

A gun free zone is a magnet for the mass murdering shooters. Just like rental cars with logo stickers on them became magnets in Florida when they passed CCW laws. The Criminals figured only the tourist were un-armed. After the 1987 Florida CCW law passed an increasing number of tourists, most of them foreign, were victims of carjackings there. Because tourists in well-marked rental cars were common carjacking victims, Florida passed legislation in 1993 (F.S.A. § 320.0601) that outlawed company logos and license plates that made rental and leased cars obvious.

All we have to do is make everyone believe that teachers are armed & the schools will suddenly be safer. Only a few teachers actually need to be armed & schools are no longer a target.

 

[JakeStarkey]

False analogy. The military accepts friendly fire as a real event and trains for it. Over and over. Civilians don't do that.

I have plenty to say...I just don't expect it to permeate the thick skulls of imbeciles who try to float the notion that a shootout in the hallways that could halt a raving lunatic, would be a less desirable option to the outright slaughter of a few dozen completely unarmed and helpless victims.

But you g'ead and try to make that imbecilic argument...It amuses me.

How do you know the shootout would occur in the hallway? How do you know the teacher isn't one of the brain dead on this site such as yourself who talk a big game but could just as easily blow their head off or blow a kid away in such an incident. How do you know the teacher doesn't blow a little kid's head off in an accidental discharge just from having the gun at school? You're only allowing for one scenario that fits your world view which is frankly stupid.

Idotic attempt at logic. By that logic we should disarm our military because of possible friendly fire. If armed those who try to stop these shootings with their bare hands might have a chance to do so and live. You would deny them their right to self-defence, and our children their right to be defended for no better than your irrational fears. Shame on you!

 

[JakeStarkey]

He was misusing logical analogy as you are misdefining what it is.

Idotic attempt at logic. By that logic we should disarm our military because of possible friendly fire. If armed those who try to stop these shootings with their bare hands might have a chance to do so and live. You would deny them their right to self-defence, and our children their right to be defended for no better than your irrational fears. Shame on you!

By me saying I think it's dumb to have guns in the classroom you think I want the military to be disarmed? And then you say I have idiotic logic. Why don't you let the adults handle this conversation.

He was making an analogy not being literal, you meathead.

 

[Foxfyre]

Forgive me if this has already been asked, but do you think there'd be less people applying for teaching positions if applicants knew they'd be required to have a gun in the classroom or be required to attend firearms training as part of their formal training?

There probably would be some people who so fear or loathe guns that such a requirement would prompt them to go into a different line of work. But I think most would be willing to do it, and some would really welcome such a policy.

But I don't want a policy that requires everybody to be armed and proficient, at least outside of law enforcement and/or the military, any more than I want a requirement that everybody learn to drive or know how to rewire an electrical circuit or whatever. Such requirements take away our freedom of choice as much as would laws that would prohibit us from doing such things.

But I am now convinced that we do need a policy of arming qualified, trained teachers in our schools, and that would be a huge deterrant for such mayhem as happened yesterday, or if it does not deter, at least gives us the means to stop or reduce the carnage.

I should've made myself clearer. Although I accept that there are a great many out there who loathe and hate weapons of any description (I'm not among them), and as such would give them pause for thought in considering teach as a profession if it meant they'd come into contact with armed personnel on a daily basis, I was thinking more along the lines of those who may object to the potentially negative impact the open presence of weapons may have on the learning environment of young and impressionable children. They may think that children's innocence should be protected, especially in a learning environment where the presence of weapons could become a very negative psychological distraction.

I'm undecided on this particular catch 22. On the one hand I think - and this may come as a surprise coming from someone who lives in a country where an unhealthy paranoia towards fireamrs prevails - people should have the right to bear arms, and a consequence of that belief means that inccidents of his nature are bound to occur. But on the other hand I'd be rather sceptical on having armed personnel on school grounds who openly carry weapons, if open carry were the preferred policy, which, for legals reasons, leads me to assume would be the case on the grounds of it [weapons] being a potentially negative intrusion upon the learning environment.

Do you see where I'm coming from?

I think I do though if we were having coffee this afternoon, I might explore it more in depth with you. But you do raise an interesting visual here. Would armed guards on premises have a negative effect on school kids? I honestly don't know. I don't know whether having schools on perpetual lockdown and extreme caution about those allowed to enter the school has a negative effect on school kids. I do know that I highly resent that terrorists of whatever type or stripe are allowed to make us so paranoid and so restrict our freedoms and often inconvenience us in ways that would have been unthinkable just 15 or 20 years ago.

John Lott, Jr., one of the foremost 'experts' on this subject has some interesting perspectives and I recommend his book. Most Israeli teachers and even some of the students are armed and as a result, all attempted terrorist activities in Israeli schools have ended badly for the terrorist, and while all injuries could not be averted, they have been greatly minimized. And Israeli children don't seem to be unduly traumatized by the presence of guns in their schools.

I still would rather arm a number of teachers or give them access to protection and have the terrorists know that such condition exists than think one or two armed guards could provide an equal blanket of security. Maybe do both?

http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2008/01/armed-teachers-stop-terrorist-attack-in.html

 

[Immanuel]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cqbv-aqoao&feature=youtube_gdata_player


I say yes. Of course proper precautions should be taken but lets allow administration officials to protect the children and themselves.

I hate to say this, but there are teachers out there that I think are the last people in the world that should have guns around children. I think most teachers would be more than capable of having a gun in the room and nothing ever happening, but do you want to risk that your grandchild's teacher is not the one that "snaps" next?

Kids can be pretty hard on teachers and push them to the limit and you want to put a gun in their reach at the crucial moment? If you ask me, you need to think that through more.

Immie

Police officers receive extensive background checks and psychological evaluation before they are issued a firearm. There would be no problem with doing the same with any teachers who volunteered to be armed while on duty.

The firearms should be safely secured so that the teacher can get to them quickly but the students cannot. Any teacher who took a secured firearm out of its hiding place for any reason other than such an emergency as happened yesterday would of course be subject to immediately firing.

So to address your concern, there is no reason to think teachers are likely to be any more mentally unbalanced that professional security people. And I would think the risk to my child would be much less with a weapon in the hands of his/her teacher than it would be with a crazed gunman loose in the school and no means of stopping him.

Many, if not most people, who have guns are trained on how to use them and how to treat them safely. Would it surprise you to find out that Adam Lanza was trained in how to use them safely? It would not surprise me at all. From what I have heard, people who knew him are shocked that he would have done this. He simply snapped!

As to whether or not teachers would be anymore mentally unbalanced than professional security people, does it matter? You don't think professional security people can simply snap?

And as to the final bit about your child being safer with a teacher than a crazed gunman... well, first the chances of the teacher actually being able to stop him... remember, the guns are locked up and in this case I understand it was two classes in one room... how do you expect the teacher to get to the "gun cabinet", unlock the cabinet, prepare the weapon to fire (especially since the chances are very great that they would be required to keep the ammunition in a separate location) and shoot the assailant before he kills all the students and the teacher? Follow that up with the fact that a gun in the "home" school in this case, is more likely to hurt or kill a loved one than an intruder and I think you are opening up the floodgates to disaster rather than protecting the children.

Immie

 

[Cecilie1200]

Why do you think guys like this choose schools or theaters, could it be they know they won't be opposed. Creating gun free zones (free kill zones) are part of the problem. Having responsible armed citizens any where and every where would be a deterrent for these types of incidents. I have a CHL and pray I never find myself in a position where my gun would be needed, but I would not hesitate to protect myself or others if the situation called for it.

I tell you, if I owned a shopping mall or movie theater, the FIRST thing I would do is hired armed security guards. The SECOND thing I would do is put up signs saying, "Gun owners are welcome to carry in this establishment". Hell, I might offer discounts for customers with a firearm and a valid license for it.

Yep. Chicago has some of the most strict gun control laws in the country, but has one of the most violent record re gun crimes. So they are in the process of letting citizens lawfully carry. Will it make a difference? If the gun control advocates are not successful in reversing the new law, it will be really interesting to watch. Is the new law being so hotly contested because some fear it WILL significantly reduce gun crime?

BOILING SPRINGS, S.C. (AP) — A South Carolina sheriff is praising a man with a concealed weapons permit who helped disarm someone who kicked in the door of a church armed with a shotgun.
Sheriff: Concealed Weapon Saves Church From Man Armed With Shotgun « CBS Charlotte

Police say about 5:30 p.m. on Dec. 3, a man walked into Modern Nails at 2645 E. Second St. and asked a female employee if she wanted to buy some diamonds. The man walked toward the front desk area and the woman replied that she had no money to buy diamonds.
A witness said the man then reached into his coat pocket and began to take out a silver-colored pistol.

At that moment, a woman who was getting her nails done reached into her purse and got her own firearm. Police say the man never fully raised the gun and left the building after seeing the customer had her weapon out.
Casper Police: Nail salon customer packs heat, gunman leaves

Conversely, you have to hunt long and hard to find an instance of gun crime committed by anybody packing a visible weapon—legal in New Mexico for instance though few do—or anybody packing a legally licensed concealed weapon.

But does anybody believe that 20 kindergarteners and 7 staff would be dead today at the Sandy Hook school if a half dozen or so teachers had weapons and were trained in how and when to use them?

No, I think the lunatic would have found himself a nice shopping mall in which to stage the grand finale to his life instead.