A great question for anyone who thinks we need to start arming teachers...

[Playinghardball]

[The Magistrate]

1. The Answer, Sir, Is: More Guns! That is The Answer To Every Question In the U. S. of A....

Guess you just have not been paying attention in class....

[99Forever]

5. 'Cept when the answer is...

... "cut taxes on the rich."

[on point]

2. And now with a new skill, shoouldn't they get paid like police?? (ie increase wages?)

[GeorgeGist]

3. And ...

[RC]

9. +100,000,000,000

You just know they haven't. Not by a long shot.

[Robb]

22. LOL awesome.

[lastlib]

30. Evidently...Not.............

[MrMickeysMom]

4. Abso-didily-dutily...

and fucking-lutely!

[Demo_Chris]

6. My opinion on arming teachers

* Armed teachers are not the SOLUTION to school mass-shootings

* I trust teachers with weapons. Teachers now, unarmed, are facing armed lunatics and shielding their children with their bodies. This is valor deserving of a Congressional Medal of Honor.

* If a teacher is in that situation, if an armed gunman is coming, I would far rather that teacher be armed with a gun she got from a wall safe than armed with nothing but her sense of honor and her love for the kids she knows she will soon die to protect.

As for the OP, we can afford all these things and more, but we cannot afford them if we refuse to tax the tremendous wealth that's out there. We have made a choice, both parties, that it is more important that the wealthy enjoy their wealth than anything else. It's more important than roads and bridges, it's more important than feeding and housing the poor, it's more important than healthcare, it's more important than anything.

Our national priority under both parties is and has been ensuring that the wealthy become wealthier still. It's sad, but you can see that mindset expressed by quite a few posters here. They've got theirs and fuck everyone else.

Anyway, I trust teachers. Nuff said

[RiverNoord]

19. I don't trust anyone to be actively engaged with large numbers of children....

to actually possess a firearm, concealed or otherwise, and not:

1) Intimidate the hell out of many children just by the knowledge that the teacher has a gun in the classroom.

2) Potentially abuse the firearm as a disciplinary tool, even without prior intent.

or

3) Shoot a kid or kids.

Teachers are people just like any others. They get frustrated and angry at times. They like certain students and can hate others for making their job of managing an organized and peaceful classroom difficult. Some, like some people in any other career, are mentally imbalanced. Why on earth would anyone want to bring guns closer to children as a way of preventing gun violence against them?

The entire idea of 'arming' teachers, or allowing teachers to possess firearms in school, as anything other than an exceedingly rare history or civics class example, is bonkers.

[Demo_Chris]

21. Anyone who places their body between children and danger

Deserves nothing less than our absolute confence and support. That's just how I see it.

I understand your argument, you presented it perfectly, I just disagree

[RiverNoord]

32. I could be wrong...

and thanks for your kindly and thoughtful reply - the world needs much more of such considerate dialogue in the midst of disagreements.

I have a sister teaching Kindergarten, a brother-in-law teaching high schoolers, 3 college-era friends (around 20 years ago - yikes) teaching - one is the president of the Minnesota Art Educator's Association, and two direct their schools' theater programs. The points I made came from them - each one made the same points, without deviation. Each of them said that they'd really rather not have a gun on the occasional bad day (only half-jokingly). Three of them said they'd probably not dare leave their classroom (or theater) if certain colleagues were carrying guns. So... well, the point is that some of those armed teachers would not be placing their body between children and danger - they'd be the danger.

I would never have allowed one of my kids to attend a class with a teacher actually in possession of a firearm. Not a chance.

I think one poster here may have had a good point about a biometric lockbox or access card sort of thing. Would have to be accessible only upon system-wide admin authorization. That would be similar, at least in some respects, to a fire extinguisher box.

Still, the sensible solutions are all gun control ones. The 2nd amendment certainly isn't absolute - the 'yelling fire in a crowded theater' scenario isn't controversial with respect to the 1st amendment, and 'Free Speech' has been interpreted with time, place, and manner limitations, most of which are pretty sensible. You can't just congregate any number of people wherever you want to, whenever you want to, but the 1st amendment provides that Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to peaceably assemble. It has (limits on Westboro Baptist loonies quietly picketing soldiers' funerals on public land, for one). Also, you can't just walk into the floor of Congress, for example, and demand that it stop an eminent domain action against your land. You'll be grabbed by security, arrested, and charged with something, depending on your behavior. Why can't you - the 1st Amendment provides that Congress may make no law abridging the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

So - fewer loose guns, less gun violence - it's simply math and is virtually crystal clear when looking at charts of gun ownership in industrialized countries and gun violence.

For some reason, the American people love having the potential to buy military-grade weapons and ammunition enough to put up with lots of kids being horribly massacred every now and then. Really, the problem of gun violence in schools is only therefore insoluble.

[Demo_Chris]

35. I was actually picturing a safe in each classroom, with an electronic lock controlled from the offic

It would require the office to release it and then a key to open it.

It's not perfect, but in some of these incidents the teachers have had time to even hide some of the kids.

I agree though, it's a crappy solution to a crappy situation. I was just saying that I trust teachers more than just about anyone else.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

33. That is some very refreshing reasoning and I absolutely agree. +! (nt)

[justanidea]

7. I don't think that many mean arming in that sense.

I don't think when people say "arm the teachers" they mean buy them guns but rather allow teachers who already own guns and have a carry license to carry in the school.

[Lizzie Poppet]

8. One of my best friends is an educator.

She's not a classroom teacher these days (got bumped up the org chart a bit to vice-principal...it's a mixed blessing in her view), but she certainly understands what it's like in classrooms, at all levels through HS. She's also a gun owner, reasonably avid shooter, and CCW permit holder (not at work, I should point out).

She's quite strongly against the idea of armed teachers in classrooms. We've had some discussions on the proposition (which I've also always opposed), and she brought up a number of points I hadn't considered. One was that while there is no one "teacher mindset," many, many people drawn to education are "nurturing types," people to whom violence does not come easily. They would not necessarily be able to use deadly force in such a situation, making arming them a very bad idea indeed. She also pointed out that if it's widely known that teachers may be armed, spree killers (who might be crazy, but are seldom stupid or unprepared) will make a point of targeting them first, reducing the chances that they might be able to get some children to safety, etc.

We also discussed some of the more common objections, namely that educators simply don't have the time it takes to receive adequate training for this (which is much more than a matter of marksmanship and gun safety). They already have a job, and one that makes serious time demands on them.

There are so may other objections...but it was interesting to discuss this with someone with a lot of classroom experience.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

10. I don't think teachers should be armed by the state or be forced to be armed.

Last edited Fri Jan 25, 2013, 08:20 PM - Edit history (1)

What you could do is allow teachers that don't want to be forced to be unarmed to volunteer for training programs and supply their own firearm and suitable safe/etc. Training programs could easily meet or exceed civilian pistol carry permit requirements and even be on par with law enforcement requirements.

For example, require them to attend deputy-reserve officer training (on their own time) and to have them supply their own biometric safe and suitable pistol. Reqiure regular documented training with proof of competency. This would ensure that not only is the teacher trained as officers, but that they have the weight of law and arrest powers as well. But I think its important that not only would the teacher need to WANT to be enrolled in something like this, the the training requirements would need to be through/stringent to weed out poor candidates.

Bio-metric drawer safe, securely installed into a desk drawer.... $200 (about half the price of the gun)
A key could be needed to access the drawer and then a fingerprint is required to open the safe.

[Robb]

24. If they don't want the gun, can the teachers have $600?

Because I know a lot of teachers who do back flips and fill out paperwork for months to pick up a lot less scratch than that for supplies and PD.

Offer a choice, and see how many guns you hand out.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

25. I was saying that the teachers who volunteer for any such program should supply their own.

Someone who is serious about carrying a firearm in a school should be able to supply their own firearm and safe - both of which would have to be approved. Why have the school district or government pay for it? Think of it more or less CC for teachers in schools... 100% voluntary and self-funded (like other public CCW) but with much more stringent training and storage requirements.

I guess if other teachers who don't want to get a gun can save up that $600 of their own dollars and spend it on something else. No hoop-jumping or paperwork required!

[Robb]

26. The depth of your misunderstanding about teachers is astounding.

Let them eat cake, eh?

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

31. No. Teachers willing to go through stringent requirements will probably already

be shooting afficianaos, own some firearms, or already have a concealed carry pistol permit.

And if they don't own a suitable firearm, perhaps they could petition local NRA-ILA chapters to start a local gun & safe loaner program for well qualified teachers. NRA has deep pockets and they'd probably wet themselves if you gave the chance to put their guns into schoolhouses. Maybe the police department has a few unused range pistols it can loan. Of course, the logical solution is that $600 for a gun and safe really isn't all that much money and could easily be saved up...It's like $50/mo for a year.

I just don't think that the government should outlay the costs for such a thing nor that any teacher should be forced to submit to such a program. If a teachers WANT to carry, they shouldn't have a problem with supplying their own stuff. If a teachers want to but then truly can't afford it, they'll either have to find a solution or go without fulfilling that want.

[loli phabay]

28. well thought out. we have been talking in my county of similar plans to allow concealed carry by te

Teachers if they want. Personally i have ko problem with it especially if its overseen by the sro's.

[Stonepounder]

11. Here's another question.

If it is OK to arm female teachers, so they can engage in a firefight in the event of a 'hostile' in the classroom or the school, why are Republicans so horrified at the idea of female military serving in combat positions?

[Starry Messenger]

15. Bing-fucking-o

Thank you. I've been trying to think of a way to articulate that, you nailed it.

[azalia]

12. I live in Dallas and they want to arm teachers

As I have said all along you are much better off having armed police than a armed citizenry. The reality is that regular people cannot be trusted with guns. The government under Obama recognizes this and that's why school districts these days almost always have their own armed police. I know the Dallas school district has its own police force, so the gun nuts better stay away!

[goclark]

14. Retired Teacher and Principal

Arming Staff is a BAD IDEA for many of the reasons stated above.

Example: Teacher at Chalk Board and gun at his/her desk.
Some unknown person comes into the room -- do you wonder if he/she has a gun and rush and get your gun? Or, is that Little John's new Babysitter that you have not met?

Most schools require checkin at the office -- unless there is a lockdown at all exits most schools have at least 4 entry/ exit doors.

Do you stop and rush to your desk , unlock it and get your gun?
Do you carry it on you all day? Be a Cowboy and have it visible all the time?
Don't think so!


If someone comes into the hallway when you are walking the children to Gym Class, do you pull out your gun and start acting like a Cowgirl/Boy/girl?


Those are just some of the visuals that I can think of ----

Do I think they should have a Scanner of some type at the front door--- maybe.
What would you have at the Bus Stop when all the children are getting ready to go home?
Most schools do have Door Monitors for the Main Doors--- some have a sign in and a "Walkie Talkie" sp.? Usually, the janitors have W/T's/
Believe they come with a Silent " Emergency Alert-- not sure about that one. If so, that would be worth $$$ in my opinion.


There are so many exits /entrances to schools and still it could happen unless -- TRAINED armed guards were stationed all around.

Should the Principals carry all the time?
I would not feel comfortable doing it -- imagine a school with 200 plus students. You may know Mom , Dad for most of the children -- but what about Uncle Jake that just came to visit the family and wanted to pick up the child, uncle Jake may be Nuts and he has his gun on him.


What if you were having a school assembly and in walks the shooter ????

How would you know and what would you do as Principal and /or Staff ?

Tell all the children to " Duck and Cover?"
Start having a shoot out with each staff member shooting at the Shooter -- get the visual, bullets would be flying all over the place!!

Just my thoughts

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

13. I can haz silly pikshure, too?

[bongbong]

17. LOL

Your silly pikshure assumes that the gun-equipped teacher will be just like the lead character in those Rambo movies that you've watched 4,882 times.

[sulphurdunn]

20. I'd be happy to tell you more.

After the shooter enters the building and starts shooting everything in sight, the trustworthy armed people converge on the shooter and start shooting everything that moves. About this time the other trustworthy armed people arrive and start shooting everyone with a gun, only to later discover that the original shooter has already shot himself. Most if not all of this goodness could be avoided with improved lock down procedures. It would be even gooder to keep shooters out of the buildings in the first place. Double door security foyers would be good for this and not create the potential for a circular firing squad by having large numbers of trustworthy armed people in the building.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

27. Why do you assume "trustworthy armed people converge and start shooting everything that moves"?

If that does not even rarely happen in the real world, if at all, then why would it happen at a school. How often do the police show up and simply "start shooting everything that moves"? Did the police show up to the shootings in aurora, columbine, snady hook, or virginia tech and just shooting at anything that moved? How often have civilians carrying (legally permitted) concealed weapons shown up to a mass shooting event and just started shooting at anything that moved? Sure, such outrageous events would be well documented in the media.

Even the guy with the concealed weapon at the Gabby Giffords shooting (yes, there was someone in the vicinity with a permitted concealed handgun) didn't pull his gun out and start blasting. According to the interviews, he never drew it from his holster because he was uncertain exactly who/where the shooter (loughner) was. If you've ever attended a state-certified course for concealed carry licensing, these kinds of topics are covered. I assure you, "don't run in and start blasting anything that moves" advice is thoroughly taught.

DU has enough shit-logic and fallacies floating around without you having to make up more red-herring excrement for the rest of us to wade though.

[sulphurdunn]

36. Becasue swat teams

usually arrive after she shooter has killed himself. Because trustworthy armed resource officers are unlikely to stop a school shooting. Because the more people running around with guns the more likely more people will be killed. Because the swat team told me once that if they ever entered my school for real they hoped no one but the shooter would be moving around and especially no one with a gun, and I understood exactly what was meant. The country is full of idiots who think that because they've been to a gun class with their shiny new weapon and have put holes in a paper target that they're competent to fire a weapon at someone who fires back or even to determine who that might be when frightened, confused and under duress. I'd be better off defending a classroom of kids with a baseball bat than to depend on such a person with a gun, especially one who thinks like you.

[loli phabay]

29. yup the problem is these mass shootings are over fast. a lot of times faster than the response can

Get there. Having someone outwith the sro who can at least attempt to stop it in the first minutes is better than waiting the ten or twenty minutes it takes the first cops to arrive.

[sulphurdunn]

37. No it's not.

The best defense is to keep intruders out of the building, and failing that to have quick and efficient lock down procedures. Furthermore, schools are not all the same and modifications of these procedures are to be expected. Having armed school staff or even students moving about a school building when the SWATS arrive is not a good idea

[samsingh]

16. very good question

[krispos42]

18. Because it would likely be teachers that already have a CCW permit.

The real question is why is that we have plenty of money for useless fighter jets and profitable, deliberate inefficiencies in our national health insurance plan but not enough money for schools?


Why is it we have the national will to ban rifles with pistol grips, but not the national will to get out of the WTO and break up corporate monopolies, so our economy can become dynamic again?

[kenny blankenship]

23. How are we going to fire all the teachers if they are armed?

Shouldn't we at least postpone this move until we have destroyed the teachers' unions, ripped up their contracts and hired them back as at-will hourly employees?
Gobama!

[noamnety]

34. I left a military job to become a teacher.

When the issue comes up of how much of a pay cut I took, I always tell them there's a lot more money in killing people than teaching them.