Another school shooting...

[mobb_deep 917]

There are plenty of teachers out there that can handle a gun just fine...

 

It's a teachers job to educate, not protect kids from maniacs.

 

Armed guards, secure builds, etc. etc. I can get behind, although it's still an utterly sad state of society, that kids need to see armed guards or metal detectors at school. That's just the reality of the situation, and we're not getting 200,000,000 guns of the street.

[penultimatestraw 473]

At least point to the threads where you posted these links. We are not going to hunt down your post history.

 

He knows his links are horsesh!t, so he’ll continue to be vague. It’s one of his go-to moves in Internet slap fights, along with condescension and straw men.

[Strike 3,968]

 

At least point to the threads where you posted these links. We are not going to hunt down your post history.

 

In one of the Florida shooting threads IIRC. I'm not hunting down my post history either.

[Strike 3,968]

He knows his links are horsesh!t, so he’ll continue to be vague. It’s one of his go-to moves in Internet slap fights, along with condescension and straw men.

 

Nope. They were very good articles. Sorry I don't keep a list of the links I post here. Probably because, unlike a lot of people, I actually support my arguments with sources. And I go to great lengths to make sure those sources/articles are credible.

[penultimatestraw 473]

Nope. They were very good articles. Sorry I don't keep a list of the links I post here. Probably because, unlike a lot of people, I actually support my arguments with sources. And I go to great lengths to make sure those sources/articles are credible.

Of course you do. Too bad nobody else can find anything using the same internet.

[5-Points 2,727]

There are plenty of teachers out there that can handle a gun just fine...

I completely agree and I'm not opposed to teachers with CCL's having guns in class.

 

I think a lot of people assume that we're going to start arming teachers, who have never handled a gun before, after a "Gun Safety Seminar" and have them run through the halls hunting down a shooter. That is ridiculous and nobody should be in favor of that.

[mmmmm...beer 691]

Sure.. arm them, I don't care. Better than nothing...

[Strike 3,968]

Of course you do. Too bad nobody else can find anything using the same internet.

 

I posted the links. They're available at this very bored!!!!

 

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

 

I posted the links. They're available at this very bored!!!!

 

Sure you did.

[penultimatestraw 473]

Sure.. arm them, I don't care. Better than nothing...

Disagree. Likelihood they are used to cause harm > prevent harm

[mmmmm...beer 691]

Disagree. Likelihood they are used to cause harm > prevent harm

Yip disagree, properly trained and then quarterly requirements for requal, range time and I'd be fine with them.

[Cloaca du jour 2,064]

17 kids die in a school shooting and it takes months and millions of dollars in debate to find a solution.

 

A dog dies on an airplane...and legislation is hitting the floor within 48 hours.

 

https://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/dog-dies-united-airlines-flight-sen-john-kennedy-proposes-bill

[IMMensaMind 459]

This teachers with guns thing is just so fockin stupid it's not worth it. If you think it's a good idea you're equivalent to the guy who thinks smacking the TV will fix it.

Shutting down the debate over something you’re just POSITIVE about is pretty arrogant, wouldnt you say? Like “I know I could safely carry a sidearm in school, because I know I’m better than you” kind of arrogant.

 

Strike is 100% correct on his assertion: schools which have teachers who have volunteered to be armed - and have fulfilled the requirement to do so - are far more safe. It works in Israel, where it has been common practice for years, and it is working in multiple states now, including Ohio, where it has been in place the longest, iirc.

 

On another note: did anyone hear about the school that a kid attempted to bomb?

 

Not widely reported - and by “not widely”, I mean nearly not at all.

 

Because it clashes with the narrative being attempted atm. Banning guns will make us less safe, not more. If you want the kind of “safe” the gun banners want, I suggest you simply turn off the TV. It will net the same effect: the moment these creeps succeed in banning guns, any and all incidents with guns will cease to be covered, and you’ll never be the wiser.

 

Just like you are now.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,631]

Gun nuts are nuts. Have any of you met a large number of teachers? You guys keep saying it's not the guns, it's the people with the guns that are the problem. I agree. 100%. And having met and knowing teachers, they ain't the crew I'm looking to arm.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

Gun nuts are nuts. Have any of you met a large number of teachers? You guys keep saying it's not the guns, it's the people with the guns that are the problem. I agree. 100%. And having met and knowing teachers, they ain't the crew I'm looking to arm.

 

I don't know. I am thinking that we want to have a few teachers in every school who are just great with guns. Totally prepared, practiced with getting things done with a gun and not afraid to pop a student who happens to want to kill a lot of people.

 

Of course, maybe, just maybe, we would have teachers who were good at teaching first and foremost since we already have a problem with that fundamental portion of their job. Then, I have a whole different group of people (maybe 1, maybe 2, maybe more) who are really good at keeping my kids safe in school and elsewhere. They are good with guns and tactics to reduce the risk of life. Maybe these people do this as their sole profession and they have access to others who do the same thing. I know that there is a name for these type of people. I just can't remember what it is. They could even have a motto, like "To serve and protect" or something like that.

[mmmmm...beer 691]

 

I don't know. I am thinking that we want to have a few teachers in every school who are just great with guns. Totally prepared, practiced with getting things done with a gun and not afraid to pop a student who happens to want to kill a lot of people.

 

Of course, maybe, just maybe, we would have teachers who were good at teaching first and foremost since we already have a problem with that fundamental portion of their job. Then, I have a whole different group of people (maybe 1, maybe 2, maybe more) who are really good at keeping my kids safe in school and elsewhere. They are good with guns and tactics to reduce the risk of life. Maybe these people do this as their sole profession and they have access to others who do the same thing. I know that there is a name for these type of people. I just can't remember what it is. They could even have a motto, like "To serve and protect" or something like that.

It's all about timing. The 5 or 10 (or longer) minutes it takes to get to the school from where ever you are in town the damage is done. Yes you go in immediately... but how long does it take to kill someone with a revolver... bang... bang.. bang...

 

Someone there engaging immeditely can end it way before we even arrive.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

It's all about timing. The 5 or 10 (or longer) minutes it takes to get to the school from where ever you are in town the damage is done. Yes you go in immediately... but how long does it take to kill someone with a revolver... bang... bang.. bang...

 

Someone there engagimg immeditely can end it way before we even arrive.

 

That is my point. Many schools had police liaison officers (some were part of DARE programs) at the schools on school days. It covered the safety aspect and it provided good relations between the kids and the police. Why are they gone? Funding. So instead of the Federal government coming up with some stupid rule to train and arm teachers (with no funding from the Fed, I am sure), why not take some of our tax dollars going to the Federal government and give it back to the local communities to have those officers provide more than just safety in the rare chance that something bad happens. God forbid we have our tax dollars going to local needs.

[mmmmm...beer 691]

 

That is my point. Many schools had police liaison officers (some were part of DARE programs) at the schools on school days. It covered the safety aspect and it provided good relations between the kids and the police. Why are they gone? Funding. So instead of the Federal government coming up with some stupid rule to train and arm teachers (with no funding from the Fed, I am sure), why not take some of our tax dollars going to the Federal government and give it back to the local communities to have those officers provide more than just safety in the rare chance that something bad happens. God forbid we have our tax dollars going to local needs.

I'm all for "School Safety Officers". We have them with my agency.

 

Bad thing is an officer is pretty expensive to train and maintain, 100k a year probably. Teachers are already there...

[mobb_deep 917]

I'm all for "School Safety Officers". We have them with my agency.

 

Bad thing is an officer is pretty expensive to train and maintain, 100k a year probably. Teachers are already there...

 

Because they're "teachers". They went to college to learn how to educate people. They didn't become teachers to play cops and robbers.

 

You might find a few teachers that want to pack heat at school, but 95% of them want nothing to do with this most dumbest of ideas.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,631]

Access control. If that's not the very first thing that is done then it's just not a serious attempt to protect against the problem. How we skipped past that is mind boggling.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

I'm all for "School Safety Officers". We have them with my agency.

 

Bad thing is an officer is pretty expensive to train and maintain, 100k a year probably. Teachers are already there...

So, here is where I was hoping this would go:

- Discussion that having those school resource officers is a local/state thing and not a Federal thing (because it isn't a Federal thing)

- now that we know that this is not a Federal thing, we have the Fed actually do what is their thing which is to address the access to guns issue (they are deflecting) and the mental health issue (they are deflecting here as well).

 

This is just deflecting by Trump because they don't want to deal with the things that they are supposed to deal with. They get everyone all jazzed up about arming teachers because it will end up being like "No Child Left Behind" where the Fed mandates something and then doesn't deal with it or fund it.

 

Oh and I agree with HT that we have to address the access control issue, but if we don't address the access to guns and mental health issues, then the target is just going to shift from schools to somewhere else even if every teacher is carrying an Uzi and no bad guys can get in.

[Strike 3,968]

 

That is my point. Many schools had police liaison officers (some were part of DARE programs) at the schools on school days. It covered the safety aspect and it provided good relations between the kids and the police. Why are they gone? Funding. So instead of the Federal government coming up with some stupid rule to train and arm teachers (with no funding from the Fed, I am sure), why not take some of our tax dollars going to the Federal government and give it back to the local communities to have those officers provide more than just safety in the rare chance that something bad happens. God forbid we have our tax dollars going to local needs.

 

How'd that work in the recent Florida case?

[mmmmm...beer 691]

 

Because they're "teachers". They went to college to learn how to educate people. They didn't become teachers to play cops and robbers.

 

You might find a few teachers that want to pack heat at school, but 95% of them want nothing to do with this most dumbest of ideas.

Don't need 95%... just one dude.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

 

How'd that work in the recent Florida case?

... not great, which is why I don't think that this issue requires having someone with a gun there ready to stop it. There are other factors that are being ignored (access to guns, mental health, follow up from FBI and access control in the school, etc.) because it is easier to deflect towards something that won't fix it.

[Strike 3,968]

... not great, which is why I don't think that this issue requires having someone with a gun there ready to stop it. There are other factors that are being ignored (access to guns, mental health, follow up from FBI and access control in the school, etc.) because it is easier to deflect towards something that won't fix it.

 

Do you think it might have helped in Florida if there had been a few teachers who were packing and had appropriate training?

[wiffleball 4,639]

The Irony Gods are laughing their butts off.

 

I think we just found a job for barrel roll cop.

[wiffleball 4,639]

And by the way, my kids in that school, let alone in that class, I'm kicking the shyt out of more than a few people. That dude is never setting foot back in that school again. You think that principle and I districts not going to hear about it? For fucksake, we should have a reasonable expectation that I kids can go to school without some dumb pulling a Barney Fife.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

 

Do you think it might have helped in Florida if there had been a few teachers who were packing and had appropriate training?

 

Maybe, but I would only be speculating, just like you. Here is what I do know:

- If he couldn't get into the building, then more people would have been saved (although if there is a fire alarm, they are all coming out the front door)

- If he didn't have the gun, then more people would have been saved

- If the FBI had followed up on the warnings, then more people would have been saved

 

I could also hazard to guess that the event would have been less likely if he had received some mental help when he first starting acting weird.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,631]

 

Maybe, but I would only be speculating, just like you. Here is what I do know:

- If he couldn't get into the building, then more people would have been saved (although if there is a fire alarm, they are all coming out the front door)

- If he didn't have the gun, then more people would have been saved

- If the FBI had followed up on the warnings, then more people would have been saved

 

I could also hazard to guess that the event would have been less likely if he had received some mental help when he first starting acting weird.

Well, due to Obamas policy as far as arrests in schools, when he started acting "weird" (committing crimes) it wasn't documented and he wasn't arrested. So getting him help was circumvented by another dopey Obama crybaby policy.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

Well, due to Obamas policy as far as arrests in schools, when he started acting "weird" (committing crimes) it wasn't documented and he wasn't arrested. So getting him help was circumvented by another dopey Obama crybaby policy.

 

So fix it. Trump has rolled back every other Obama policy, why would he leave out one that was so blatantly harmful? Again, instead of deflecting towards things that are not really good Federal policy, let's have the Fed actually do something that helps and is part of their area of control.

[Strike 3,968]

 

Maybe, but I would only be speculating, just like you. Here is what I do know:

- If he couldn't get into the building, then more people would have been saved (although if there is a fire alarm, they are all coming out the front door)

- If he didn't have the gun, then more people would have been saved

- If the FBI had followed up on the warnings, then more people would have been saved

 

I could also hazard to guess that the event would have been less likely if he had received some mental help when he first starting acting weird.

 

I agree with everything you said above. Access to guns is very hard to deal with because with have this pesky thing called the constitution. I mean, yes we could restrict "assault rifles" but then the kid would have just used some other form of gun. Maybe it lessens the death toll but it's not going to stop these incidents from happening.

 

The problem with "resource officers", or even having cops at the schools is that you can't have a million of them there. Schools are big places and the limited number of cops can't be everywhere at once. And that's assuming they're not cowards as was the case in Florida. The thing about teachers is......they're already there. So you don't force them to take on this responsibility but if there are teachers willing to do the training and pass appropriate background/psych tests I'm for letting them help. Schools that have teachers armed don't publicize which teachers it is so there's no way for the perp to know who is and isn't packing. That uncertainty and knowing any adult in the place may be armed acts as a deterrent. And if the perp isn't deterred he may actually get stopped by one of these people. Did you know that CC holders have a lower crime rate than cops do? CC holders by and large are very responsible gun owners. See the following LINK!!!

 

https://www.dailywire.com/news/8255/report-concealed-carry-permit-holders-are-most-law-aaron-bandler

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

 

I agree with everything you said above. Access to guns is very hard to deal with because with have this pesky thing called the constitution. I mean, yes we could restrict "assault rifles" but then the kid would have just used some other form of gun. Maybe it lessens the death toll but it's not going to stop these incidents from happening.

 

The problem with "resource officers", or even having cops at the schools is that you can't have a million of them there. Schools are big places and the limited number of cops can't be everywhere at once. And that's assuming they're not cowards as was the case in Florida. The thing about teachers is......they're already there. So you don't force them to take on this responsibility but if there are teachers willing to do the training and pass appropriate background/psych tests I'm for letting them help. Schools that have teachers armed don't publicize which teachers it is so there's no way for the perp to know who is and isn't packing. That uncertainty and knowing any adult in the place may be armed acts as a deterrent. And if the perp isn't deterred he may actually get stopped by one of these people. Did you know that CC holders have a lower crime rate than cops do? CC holders by and large are very responsible gun owners. See the following LINK!!!

 

https://www.dailywire.com/news/8255/report-concealed-carry-permit-holders-are-most-law-aaron-bandler

 

What about lunch ladies and janitors? They are there, too.

[Strike 3,968]

 

What about lunch ladies and janitors? They are there, too.

 

If they can pass the appropriate checks and are willing to do the training, etc....why not? Wow, I put what I thought was a thought out, well reasoned response to your post and this is all you have to say in response? I'm a bit disappointed.

[parrot 789]

You think that principle and I districts not going to hear about it?

PrinciPAL. He's your PAL.

[IMMensaMind 459]

Gun nuts are nuts. Have any of you met a large number of teachers? You guys keep saying it's not the guns, it's the people with the guns that are the problem. I agree. 100%. And having met and knowing teachers, they ain't the crew I'm looking to arm.

Oh, that’s flat goofy. No one is looking to arm all teachers.

[MDC 5,890]

I dont care if teachers / staff who already have CC permits want to carry in school. These are people who already have a comfort leve with guns and most of them would handle their firearms safely.

 

I have a big problem with incentivizing teachers in every school to carry. Now youre Encouraging a group of people who dont have that familiarity to start packing in schools. And youre bound to get yahoos doing this specifically to deal with a threat (school shooting) that wont likely ever happen. Seems like a recipe for disaster.

 

I also wonder whether even trained CC permit holders are qualified to assess and deal with an active shooting situation? How are these people supposed to when and how to engage a shooter? In at least one of these campus shooting situations (college in Oregon) there were several armed CC permit holders who didnt engage the shooter because they were on the opposite end of campus and were concerned law enforcement would mistake them for the shooter. How would a school situation be much different?

 

Seems like the possibility of accidents, misplaced weapons, false alarms etc. would pose a far greater threat than the infinitely small chance that there is an active shooter, the teacher can access a secured gun, and he/she is in position to fire with a high degree of accuracy. Law enforcement trains for these situations for years and even the pros botch it sometimes. Now we want to encourage school teachers to get involved?

 

Again, focking dumb. Or genius, when you realize the POTUS threw this red herring out so we would all debate arming teachers instead of talking about sane gun control.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

 

If they can pass the appropriate checks and are willing to do the training, etc....why not? Wow, I put what I thought was a thought out, well reasoned response to your post and this is all you have to say in response? I'm a bit disappointed.

 

Granted, it was quick and dirty. I am trying to work here. I apologize.

 

I will give you a more thoughtful response later. In the meantime, I think that the point is that worrying about arming teachers as the solution is silly for the Fed to get involved in. It is a local issue if they want to do it (both the state and the school district have to allow it). I think that it would cause more harm than good and would give people a false sense of security.

 

Let's have the Fed focus on fixing the things that are in, you know, the Constitution. They can regulate who has access to weapons. Heck, they regulate who can get on a freakin plane more heavily. Most of the laws on the books would be more effective if they were actually enforced. That is part of the problem. We make laws that we either don't or can't enforce.

[Strike 3,968]

 

Granted, it was quick and dirty. I am trying to work here. I apologize.

 

I will give you a more thoughtful response later. In the meantime, I think that the point is that worrying about arming teachers as the solution is silly for the Fed to get involved in. It is a local issue if they want to do it (both the state and the school district have to allow it). I think that it would cause more harm than good and would give people a false sense of security.

 

Let's have the Fed focus on fixing the things that are in, you know, the Constitution. They can regulate who has access to weapons. Heck, they regulate who can get on a freakin plane more heavily. Most of the laws on the books would be more effective if they were actually enforced. That is part of the problem. We make laws that we either don't or can't enforce.

I agree about the feds. My only comments about this topic have been about the concept, not who implements it. But I am not in favor of the feds doing it. This should be a decision made locally.

[parrot 789]

I dont care if teachers / staff who already have CC permits want to carry in school. These are people who already have a comfort leve with guns and most of them would handle their firearms safely.

 

I have a big problem with incentivizing teachers in every school to carry. Now youre Encouraging a group of people who dont have that familiarity to start packing in schools. And youre bound to get yahoos doing this specifically to deal with a threat (school shooting) that wont likely ever happen. Seems like a recipe for disaster.

 

I also wonder whether even trained CC permit holders are qualified to assess and deal with an active shooting situation? How are these people supposed to when and how to engage a shooter? In at least one of these campus shooting situations (college in Oregon) there were several armed CC permit holders who didnt engage the shooter because they were on the opposite end of campus and were concerned law enforcement would mistake them for the shooter. How would a school situation be much different?

 

Seems like the possibility of accidents, misplaced weapons, false alarms etc. would pose a far greater threat than the infinitely small chance that there is an active shooter, the teacher can access a secured gun, and he/she is in position to fire with a high degree of accuracy. Law enforcement trains for these situations for years and even the pros botch it sometimes. Now we want to encourage school teachers to get involved?

 

Again, focking dumb. Or genius, when you realize the POTUS threw this red herring out so we would all debate arming teachers instead of talking about sane gun control.

[BLS 313]

I dont care if teachers / staff who already have CC permits want to carry in school. These are people who already have a comfort leve with guns and most of them would handle their firearms safely.

 

I have a big problem with incentivizing teachers in every school to carry. Now youre Encouraging a group of people who dont have that familiarity to start packing in schools. And youre bound to get yahoos doing this specifically to deal with a threat (school shooting) that wont likely ever happen. Seems like a recipe for disaster.

 

I also wonder whether even trained CC permit holders are qualified to assess and deal with an active shooting situation? How are these people supposed to when and how to engage a shooter? In at least one of these campus shooting situations (college in Oregon) there were several armed CC permit holders who didnt engage the shooter because they were on the opposite end of campus and were concerned law enforcement would mistake them for the shooter. How would a school situation be much different?

 

Seems like the possibility of accidents, misplaced weapons, false alarms etc. would pose a far greater threat than the infinitely small chance that there is an active shooter, the teacher can access a secured gun, and he/she is in position to fire with a high degree of accuracy. Law enforcement trains for these situations for years and even the pros botch it sometimes. Now we want to encourage school teachers to get involved?

 

Again, focking dumb. Or genius, when you realize the POTUS threw this red herring out so we would all debate arming teachers instead of talking about sane gun control.

 

I actually agree with almost everything you said.

There are a lot of issues to be concerned with, and I fully agree it should be a volunteer scenario, not mandated. And yes, training is very important.