(03-21-2018, 10:47 AM)rollerjag Wrote: [ -> ] (03-21-2018, 08:27 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think anyone is saying that all teachers are mandated to be armed, at least I haven't seen that position anywhere. The platform I do see is that teachers who possess a CCW should be permitted to carry on the job (i.e. eliminating the concept of "gun free zone"). Since those permits require a training class and demonstration of competence I believe that platform has merit. I don't favor making your pothead hippy Sociology teacher go out and buy a gun to carry to work.
The hippie Sociology teacher may be less likely to have an itchy trigger finger than the ex-Marine Math teacher with PTSD.
Stereotypes are fun.
Anyone carrying a weapon in a crowded school as part of an effort to make said school safer should receive more training than what's taught in a CCW class.
No, they shouldn't. It's a simple exercise of the 2nd Amendment, no different from a mall, grocery store, the beach or library. Nothing extra needs to be done other than what is done everywhere else.
Isn't it odd that the schools alternately want to restrict or enforce the 1st Amendment based on the political leanings of the speaker to the point of allowing the outright skipping of classes, but want to ardently restrict the 2nd Amendment. Well, not really odd I guess, since we all expect them to act like lefties all the damn time.
(03-21-2018, 11:37 AM)pirkster Wrote: [ -> ] (03-21-2018, 11:28 AM)B2hibry Wrote: [ -> ]No way, no how should teachers be armed at school. Their job is to teach and they can barely do that. The idea is to minimize the issues and not to escalate. There is additional and unacceptable risk involved with arming teachers in an inherently aggressively charged environment.
State and Federal need to stop leaning towards the cheapest alternatives when it comes to school safety/security. You set a federal standard for school design and set aside funding to upgrade those legacy facilities. We have all these codes for bridges, highways, buildings, etc., why not schools as it pertains to security? There also needs to be a study to determine the proper number of armed school resource officers required per the population. If money is an issue, deputize volunteers after significant training. There are Reserve officers on the streets, why not in schools? Heck, I know several retired military that would willingly do it for a ham sandwich if it meant making the kids safer.
IMO, the better of the ideas shared is that those teachers would be allowed to apply and qualify voluntarily for that responsibility and not required to do so.
I agree that armed resources not including teachers should be a staple of any safety plan, I just feel qualified and trained volunteer teachers would make such a plan even safer. If it's a small school without any qualified or interested participant teachers, then that's not a problem. Armed resources would still be staffed. I see teachers as a supplement, and not the core security force. I would be surprised if that wasn't the intent of those who are supporting the idea as well. Those opposing such ideas can be extremely (and purposefully) misleading and misrepresentative of the facts.
I can see it as an alternative for after-school activities perhaps, but really see it introducing more issues than help during school hours. How many times do we see in the news some teacher getting the snot beat out of them in a classroom setting? Imagine a student discovering that teacher had a sidearm in that very situation. In reality, no armed individual should be alone in an environment that thrives on a pack mentality. Also, most of these shooting take place going from the outside-in, where teachers aren't. Perhaps just arming willing and qualified administrators? What I can appreciate in all this, is that a discussion is being sparked to how best to finally address a situation that isn't new and doesn't automatically assume no guns, no knives, no bats= no problem.
(03-21-2018, 11:49 AM)B2hibry Wrote: [ -> ] (03-21-2018, 11:37 AM)pirkster Wrote: [ -> ]IMO, the better of the ideas shared is that those teachers would be allowed to apply and qualify voluntarily for that responsibility and not required to do so.
I agree that armed resources not including teachers should be a staple of any safety plan, I just feel qualified and trained volunteer teachers would make such a plan even safer. If it's a small school without any qualified or interested participant teachers, then that's not a problem. Armed resources would still be staffed. I see teachers as a supplement, and not the core security force. I would be surprised if that wasn't the intent of those who are supporting the idea as well. Those opposing such ideas can be extremely (and purposefully) misleading and misrepresentative of the facts.
I can see it as an alternative for after-school activities perhaps, but really see it introducing more issues than help during school hours. How many times do we see in the news some teacher getting the snot beat out of them in a classroom setting? Imagine a student discovering that teacher had a sidearm in that very situation. In reality, no armed individual should be alone in an environment that thrives on a pack mentality. Also, most of these shooting take place going from the outside-in, where teachers aren't. Perhaps just arming willing and qualified administrators? What I can appreciate in all this, is that a discussion is being sparked to how best to finally address a situation that isn't new and doesn't automatically assume no guns, no knives, no bats= no problem.
In my perspective, not knowing which teachers were armed - but knowing the possibility that the teacher could be, would likely deter and curb aggressive behavior towards teachers.
Students attacking teachers is an indicator of a problem administration who can't keep school order, because they've slowly lost their ability to keep order over time. In that case, they need to clean house on that administration and start over. It's always easier to ease up than tighten down. So, to change a culture of no discipline you have to make wholesale changes to the administration and staff. That's not a gun issue, it's a poor school discipline/management issue.
(03-20-2018, 04:39 PM)The Drifter Wrote: [ -> ]But you won't hear about it on the national news, the weapon was a handgun not an "assualt" rifle and only 2 students were wounded. The Shooter, well, a School resource officer Shot him and killed him so...... None of the above fits the national narative on gun control.....
Here's the story......
Gunman dead, two injured after shooting at Great Mills High School in Maryland
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/03/20/gun...yland.html
Are you really this blinded by ideological stupidity? It's been all over the news.
Stop feeling so sorry for yourself.
(03-21-2018, 12:01 PM)pirkster Wrote: [ -> ] (03-21-2018, 11:49 AM)B2hibry Wrote: [ -> ]I can see it as an alternative for after-school activities perhaps, but really see it introducing more issues than help during school hours. How many times do we see in the news some teacher getting the snot beat out of them in a classroom setting? Imagine a student discovering that teacher had a sidearm in that very situation. In reality, no armed individual should be alone in an environment that thrives on a pack mentality. Also, most of these shooting take place going from the outside-in, where teachers aren't. Perhaps just arming willing and qualified administrators? What I can appreciate in all this, is that a discussion is being sparked to how best to finally address a situation that isn't new and doesn't automatically assume no guns, no knives, no bats= no problem.
In my perspective, not knowing which teachers were armed - but knowing the possibility that the teacher could be, would likely deter and curb aggressive behavior towards teachers.
Students attacking teachers is an indicator of a problem administration who can't keep school order, because they've slowly lost their ability to keep order over time. In that case, they need to clean house on that administration and start over. It's always easier to ease up than tighten down. So, to change a culture of no discipline you have to make wholesale changes to the administration and staff. That's not a gun issue, it's a poor school discipline/management issue.
Sure thing. It sounds like you've spoken to what I think is the root cause of all this hu-bub in the media lately. Not a gun issue, it is a cultural issue that festers at school because funding has created an environment where school boards/teachers/administrators just don't have the resources necessary to go beyond basic teaching, let alone discipline or pinpointed attention. School discipline and management are issues in nearly every medium to large school throughout the country. Precisely why an additional responsibility like a firearm being introduced to teachers could be something other than a deterrent. I know there are schools in Texas and Washington State that have implemented the gun/teacher thing and are doing well but not sure there is correlation considering these schools are mostly in rural areas not typically hampered by the issue of school violence.
(03-21-2018, 12:01 PM)pirkster Wrote: [ -> ] (03-21-2018, 11:49 AM)B2hibry Wrote: [ -> ]I can see it as an alternative for after-school activities perhaps, but really see it introducing more issues than help during school hours. How many times do we see in the news some teacher getting the snot beat out of them in a classroom setting? Imagine a student discovering that teacher had a sidearm in that very situation. In reality, no armed individual should be alone in an environment that thrives on a pack mentality. Also, most of these shooting take place going from the outside-in, where teachers aren't. Perhaps just arming willing and qualified administrators? What I can appreciate in all this, is that a discussion is being sparked to how best to finally address a situation that isn't new and doesn't automatically assume no guns, no knives, no bats= no problem.
In my perspective, not knowing which teachers were armed - but knowing the possibility that the teacher could be, would likely deter and curb aggressive behavior towards teachers.
Students attacking teachers is an indicator of a problem administration who can't keep school order, because they've slowly lost their ability to keep order over time. In that case, they need to clean house on that administration and start over. It's always easier to ease up than tighten down. So, to change a culture of no discipline you have to make wholesale changes to the administration and staff. That's not a gun issue, it's a poor school discipline/management issue.
How would the armed teachers carry their weapon? They'd always have them on them, wouldn't they? If so, they'd be easily identified.
Gun locked in their desk? That has obvious problems.
Require every teacher to wear a jacket? What about women (yes, you know some will volunteer).
It's an issue.
As far as arming teachers, I happen to have a friend who is a teacher. She is very well trained and experienced with firearms and has her CCW permit. In fact, she carries most everywhere she goes except at work. I'm certainly sure that she isn't the only one of many teachers with training and experience.
Another thing that I've mentioned in the past. When I was in 5th grade I took a Hunter's Safety course after school AT the school taught by our PE Coach. We were taught safe handling, cleaning, storage and use of many different types of firearms. From lever action, bolt action and semi-automatic rifles, to shotguns, to revolvers, to semi-automatic hand guns, etc. We handled and eventually fired all of those types of guns throughout the class. After completing the course I was able to legally purchase a hunting license and carry a rifle as well as a hand gun... at 10 years of age.
I point that out because the course was taught by a teacher who was qualified and had the credentials to teach that class.
I by no means am suggesting that ALL teachers should be armed. What I am suggesting is that teachers and/or administrators and school employees who are qualified and properly trained should be allowed to carry while on the job.
(03-21-2018, 12:31 PM)Adam2012 Wrote: [ -> ] (03-21-2018, 12:01 PM)pirkster Wrote: [ -> ]In my perspective, not knowing which teachers were armed - but knowing the possibility that the teacher could be, would likely deter and curb aggressive behavior towards teachers.
Students attacking teachers is an indicator of a problem administration who can't keep school order, because they've slowly lost their ability to keep order over time. In that case, they need to clean house on that administration and start over. It's always easier to ease up than tighten down. So, to change a culture of no discipline you have to make wholesale changes to the administration and staff. That's not a gun issue, it's a poor school discipline/management issue.
How would the armed teachers carry their weapon? They'd always have them on them, wouldn't they? If so, they'd be easily identified.
Gun locked in their desk? That has obvious problems.
Require every teacher to wear a jacket? What about women (yes, you know some will volunteer).
It's an issue.
You really haven't thought this through, which is par for your course.
Conceal carry and access are not issues. It can and has been done for a long, long time. It's a concept called best practices. Were you a successful person, you would be well versed in this concept.
You can train all the teachers you want but who's paying for all the guns? How will these teachers react when the situation actually arises? What happens when a stressed out to the max teacher is dealing with an upset student? Teachers have millions of things to worry about but now we also have to train them on how to shoot a gun?
It sounds nice and dandy to arm thousands and thousands of teachers but all it takes is one bad teacher who was trained to get upset or feel threatened by a student, they pull their gun and kill an unarmed student. It would happen whether you think it would or wouldn't. I am around these teachers every day and giving teachers guns is a bad idea.
Put more armed security guards in schools but don't give a classroom teacher a gun.
(03-22-2018, 10:08 AM)pirkster Wrote: [ -> ] (03-21-2018, 12:31 PM)Adam2012 Wrote: [ -> ]How would the armed teachers carry their weapon? They'd always have them on them, wouldn't they? If so, they'd be easily identified.
Gun locked in their desk? That has obvious problems.
Require every teacher to wear a jacket? What about women (yes, you know some will volunteer).
It's an issue.
You really haven't thought this through, which is par for your course.
Conceal carry and access are not issues. It can and has been done for a long, long time. It's a concept called best practices. Were you a successful person, you would be well versed in this concept.
Are you as slow as you write? Babbling about "best practices". What insight! Go back to sleep.
The question was about teachers being targeted because they are known to be armed. Apparently you haven't an answer so you babble.
And why are you so insecure?
(03-21-2018, 12:31 PM)Adam2012 Wrote: [ -> ]How would the armed teachers carry their weapon? They'd always have them on them, wouldn't they? If so, they'd be easily identified.
Gun locked in their desk? That has obvious problems.
Require every teacher to wear a jacket? What about women (yes, you know some will volunteer).
It's an issue.
It's actually a non-issue, as anyone familiar with firearms can explain to anyone who is open-minded enough to listen.
There are numerous holster designs currently available for concealed carry; ankle, thigh, waistband, underarm, etc., as well as many specialized garments for women.
Biometric gun safes, which open in one second on a fingerprint scan, can easily fit into a desk drawer or can be bolted to any solid surface.
(03-22-2018, 01:19 PM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ] (03-21-2018, 12:31 PM)Adam2012 Wrote: [ -> ]How would the armed teachers carry their weapon? They'd always have them on them, wouldn't they? If so, they'd be easily identified.
Gun locked in their desk? That has obvious problems.
Require every teacher to wear a jacket? What about women (yes, you know some will volunteer).
It's an issue.
It's actually a non-issue, as anyone familiar with firearms can explain to anyone who is open-minded enough to listen.
There are numerous holster designs currently available for concealed carry; ankle, thigh, waistband, underarm, etc., as well as many specialized garments for women.
Biometric gun safes, which open in one second on a fingerprint scan, can easily fit into a desk drawer or can be bolted to any solid surface.
Sounds great. Who's paying for it? Teachers don't have money from schools or counties for paper. Now they have enough for biometric safes and guns?
(03-20-2018, 06:47 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ] (03-20-2018, 06:01 PM)DragonFury Wrote: [ -> ]How sad is your argument when the fact a school shooting happened at all is a GOOD thing?
What’s your argument then?
I'd say my argument is two fold. First of all, if you celebrate the death of another person (and the wounding of two) because it helps prove a point in a political discussion, you need to stand up and admit you've failed as a human being. Second of all, if school shootings are such a persistent issue that arming teachers is considered to be a viable countermeasure, you need to stand up and admit you've failed as a society.
(03-22-2018, 10:36 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ]You can train all the teachers you want but who's paying for all the guns? How will these teachers react when the situation actually arises? What happens when a stressed out to the max teacher is dealing with an upset student? Teachers have millions of things to worry about but now we also have to train them on how to shoot a gun?
It sounds nice and dandy to arm thousands and thousands of teachers but all it takes is one bad teacher who was trained to get upset or feel threatened by a student, they pull their gun and kill an unarmed student. It would happen whether you think it would or wouldn't. I am around these teachers every day and giving teachers guns is a bad idea.
Put more armed security guards in schools but don't give a classroom teacher a gun.
So what you are alluding to is not all teachers are mentally capable of being responsible with a firearm. Key word here, "mentally"
(03-22-2018, 01:40 PM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ] (03-22-2018, 01:19 PM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ]It's actually a non-issue, as anyone familiar with firearms can explain to anyone who is open-minded enough to listen.
There are numerous holster designs currently available for concealed carry; ankle, thigh, waistband, underarm, etc., as well as many specialized garments for women.
Biometric gun safes, which open in one second on a fingerprint scan, can easily fit into a desk drawer or can be bolted to any solid surface.
Sounds great. Who's paying for it? Teachers don't have money from schools or counties for paper. Now they have enough for biometric safes and guns?
Great to hear you're on board.
Single handgun safes start a less than $100 at Walmart or on Amazon. Not exactly a budget buster.
I would anticipate most teachers/school personnel would wish to carry their own. If not, prices start at about $200. Again, not an obstacle.
(03-22-2018, 09:24 PM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ] (03-22-2018, 01:40 PM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ]Sounds great. Who's paying for it? Teachers don't have money from schools or counties for paper. Now they have enough for biometric safes and guns?
Great to hear you're on board.
Single handgun safes start a less than $100 at Walmart or on Amazon. Not exactly a budget buster.
I would anticipate most teachers/school personnel would wish to carry their own. If not, prices start at about $200. Again, not an obstacle.
lol Not an obstacle?
There are 3.2 million teachers across america. So thats 300 dollars for a safe and gun. Then what about the training? Who is paying for that? How long should a teacher train for before being considered competent enough to shoot an active shooter? 6 months? A year? Can't have teachers using their own guns as well because that's a safety concern for the counties. Gotta make sure all guns are the same.
So we got 300 bucks at minimum for gun and safe. Then whatever it costs to train someone for 6 months (I have no clue how much this would cost but doing anything for 6 months isn't cheap) so let's just say another 300 bucks per person. 600 bucks total to train 1 teacher.
Now let's say we only train half the teachers in America. So 1.6 million. So that means we need $960 million dollars.
(03-23-2018, 09:18 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ] (03-22-2018, 09:24 PM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ]Great to hear you're on board.
Single handgun safes start a less than $100 at Walmart or on Amazon. Not exactly a budget buster.
I would anticipate most teachers/school personnel would wish to carry their own. If not, prices start at about $200. Again, not an obstacle.
lol Not an obstacle?
There are 3.2 million teachers across america. So thats 300 dollars for a safe and gun. Then what about the training? Who is paying for that? How long should a teacher train for before being considered competent enough to shoot an active shooter? 6 months? A year? Can't have teachers using their own guns as well because that's a safety concern for the counties. Gotta make sure all guns are the same.
So we got 300 bucks at minimum for gun and safe. Then whatever it costs to train someone for 6 months (I have no clue how much this would cost but doing anything for 6 months isn't cheap) so let's just say another 300 bucks per person. 600 bucks total to train 1 teacher.
Now let's say we only train half the teachers in America. So 1.6 million. So that means we need $960 million dollars.
Hardly an obstacle and even so, one worth the cost of security don't ya think? FYI, your numbers are quite inflated and assuming we are going to arm every paid school employee. You're also assuming this isn't rolled out in a limited trial basis to figure out best practices and hurdles. Here is an honest question... Assuming you pay taxes would you be okay having an additional $2 taken to address spending $960 million to reinforce school infrastructure, implement metal detectors, and/or additional armed school security?
For some perspective, Duval county has a corporate tax base of $58 Billion and general tax base of $395 Million (down from $500 Million). In addition, there are school bonds estimated at $415 Million just for such expenses as described. If the Federal Government kicks in a few bucks, the financial aspect is really a non-issue.
https://flauditor.gov/pages/pdf_files/2017-119.pdf
(03-22-2018, 01:19 PM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ] (03-21-2018, 12:31 PM)Adam2012 Wrote: [ -> ]How would the armed teachers carry their weapon? They'd always have them on them, wouldn't they? If so, they'd be easily identified.
Gun locked in their desk? That has obvious problems.
Require every teacher to wear a jacket? What about women (yes, you know some will volunteer).
It's an issue.
Biometric gun safes, which open in one second on a fingerprint scan, can easily fit into a desk drawer or can be bolted to any solid surface.
That's a good idea. It's a lot better than teachers carrying guns around on them, where they can be used on impulse, or taken away in a fight.
If I was running a private school, not subject to the kind of regulations public schools are subject to, I'd be doing this already.