Not sure where to post this

[jljr1944]

I thought this was interesting in view of recent school shootings. I would be curious to know if other people favor this approach. No forum for this topic so decided to post here.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/tex ... 38129.html

[chetr1200c]

my daughter is in the elementry school system. she is very afraid of that appoach as an answer to the tragic events that have occured and, might happen again. she will not be part of it. we don't have a solution, but we believe that is not it.
there are schoold districts now that are taking the security of our kids more serious. albiet more expense to the taxpayers but it needs to be done. one schoold district just spent over $150,000 for a system that involves bulletproof glass and a double entry into the main corridors. a person needs to present a drivers license which would procure a background check before going thru the first checkpoint. and when entering the doorway, it has metal detectors and armed security personel. students need only go thru the metal detectors.

even that is extreme, but for now, it is a much more reasonable approach.

[jljr1944]

When a school shooting occurs the swat trained armed police who arrive 5 to 10 minutes to late are regarded as heroes. Why can't you have a trained person or persons in the school to confront the situation when it happens. Most court houses,federal buildings,and even the social security office here in Georgetown Texas have armed police on site during office hours. I believe that most children would feel safer if they knew there were people at their school who would be capable of protecting them. Children are not afraid of good guys with guns or they would be afraid of every policeman they saw.

[chetr1200c]

unfortunately, your are so very right jl. but arming the teachers, some of whom have never even picked up a gun is not the solution. even if some teachers are armed, it would still be a hit a miss for another iccident. it only takes secs to to shoot the innocent victims.
armed personel at the entries seems like the only answer for now.

[jljr1944]

unfortunately, your are so very right jl. but arming the teachers, some of whom have never even picked up a gun is not the solution. even if some teachers are armed, it would still be a hit a miss for another iccident. it only takes secs to to shoot the innocent victims.
armed personel at the entries seems like the only answer for now.

In my opinion the teachers would have to be trained over and above a normal gun carry class. No one in favor of this approach is in favor of arming untrained teachers. Spending money on bullet proof doors electronic cameras,etc is well and good but in my state there are many rural schools that do not have the resources to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on those types of preventive measures. There would be a minimal cost to training a certain number of teachers/administraters. There would probably be people/agencies that would provide this training at a discount or for free to teachers. Paying one armed guard at a school would cost far more in one year than it would cost to arm numerous teachers. Reasonable people can disagree on this proposal but I think it is something that some schools are going to be looking at.

[chetr1200c]

i can only speak for my daughter and a few of her close friends, who are also elementary teachers.
altough i am a card carrying nra member and a member of our local gun club.....they are all anti-gun advocates........my daughter even refuses to speak to me at times because of our different views.
i am sure there are other teachers who would not carry a gun also......

[jljr1944]

i can only speak for my daughter and a few of her close friends, who are also elementary teachers.
altough i am a card carrying nra member and a member of our local gun club.....they are all anti-gun advocates........my daughter even refuses to speak to me at times because of our different views.
i am sure there are other teachers who would not carry a gun also......

I am curious if they would quit their job if other teachers carried? I'm sure the thoughts on this matter are divided on many levels but every teacher in a school would not need to carry. I am sure there would be teachers willing to carry in almost any school. In Texas it is up to the local school district. I think what might happen in Texas is that some smaller rural schools might opt for teachers carrying while larger more affluent schools might use off duty police officers. I just think it is a proposal which needs to be discussed in civil open minded way. Anyway,looks like you and I are the only ones that want to give an opinion.

[Ramrod]

I think its an option worth looking at.
Not Ideal, but an option for the right person, school, area, etc.
Mark

[chetr1200c]

jl, i am sure they wouldn't quit. but it goes back to what i said earlier,, it would be a hit and miss as to which teachers do carry. and that in itself would be some sort of deterrent for perpetrators, but not ironclad. we have teachers who are members of the gun club and participate in every idpa class and shoot. those people of course would raise their hands to carry in a heartbeat. for all i know, they might even be carrying in class today.but, the school could not opt to dismiss those who wouldn't carry at a risk of class action discriminations.
the best solution that i can see is to leave the firearms to the professionals for now. whatever way the outcome decision is, things will never be the same. very sad day for the entire country.

[junebug]

here in calif. or .........maybe just our district??? we have, and have had CAMPUS COPS for years.
these are a local police officer that is stationed at EACH school. elem,middle and high schools....
i remember people gripein' about the added officers needed when it started,i was and still am GLAD they are there.

just thinkin here.......they do something i feel is very good ,now that i think about it.
the officer at each school parks their squad car in the front of entrance in the FIRE LANE .....
you don't really think about it, but....always a POLICE CAR IN SITE,you have to walk past it......


i have NO CLUE to the right answer.......

[jljr1944]

jl, i am sure they wouldn't quit. but it goes back to what i said earlier,, it would be a hit and miss as to which teachers do carry. and that in itself would be some sort of deterrent for perpetrators, but not ironclad. we have teachers who are members of the gun club and participate in every idpa class and shoot. those people of course would raise their hands to carry in a heartbeat. for all i know, they might even be carrying in class today.but, the school could not opt to dismiss those who wouldn't carry at a risk of class action discriminations.
the best solution that i can see is to leave the firearms to the professionals for now. whatever way the outcome decision is, things will never be the same. very sad day for the entire country.

chetr1200
I'm sorry I didn't make myself clear. I didn't think the schools would dismiss teachers who wouldn't carry. I was just curious if a teacher would quit because other teachers were carrying.

[coffeecup]

I suspect there are teachers who would quit if they knew one of their peers was carrying (or if the possibility existed that someone might be carrying); I've known teachers who were very uncomfortable at the occasional (or at some schools, constant) presence of armed police officers.

I spent a fair amount of time in the schools in the course of studying for a teaching degree. I've been in an elementary school when an adult was screaming in the hallway and pounding on the walls, knowing that this person somehow got past both the guy at the front door and the people in the office. The littles were curious about what was going on, but the fear from the teachers was palpable. We all knew the emergency plans, and the average response time for the police. In the high schools the kids are more aware of what is going on, more aware of the potential risks, and an incident like that gets a great deal of attention from the students.

You use them as teachable moments with the kids, but it scares the bejeebers out of the teachers. I know some teachers who would opt to carry, but only if it were done in such a way that no one outside administration was aware of it--not the other teachers, and certainly not the students.

[jljr1944]

coffeecup
This is the part of human nature that I don't understand when it comes to teachers and their aversion to other teachers carrying guns. Maybe someone can explain it to me.
One of the first things or even first thing a teacher or administrater will do in a crisis like Newtown is call 911 which means police will be coming with guns. When the police get there they are most likely unfamiliar with the faculty or the layout of the school. They don't know the bad guys from the good guys. A competent trained teacher on the other hand would know the layout of the school and would know who the bad guy was sooner than a police officer. Even if you are against people carrying guns wouldn't it be better to have a competent armed person on campus that was familiar with the school and the staff? In every one of the school shootings in the last few years you invariably hear the same remarks from the police concerning the fact that they had to move with caution because they weren't familiar with the layout and could not be sure who was or wasn't a threat.

[treefarmer]

I am retired from a school district, 35 years in Maintenance. My observations of our teachers leads me to say that some are capable and some are not. I would rather have those capable and willing to defend the students armed than not. If a teacher is not comfortable with this then they should not be expected to participate. All that jijr1944 stated in his last post makes perfect sense to me. Never had to face a situation like that in Conn. but was involved in several bomb threats over the years and the experts wanted personel that knew the campus to accompany them and their dogs through the class rooms because we knew where we were, common sense. Same with an armed, capable teacher responding to a threat, they know the building and the people as was stated earlier. My 2 cents worth! Treefarmer

[coffeecup]

Especially in elementary schools, teachers all seem to have the view that they have a "nurturing" role in addition to, or as part of, their role as educators. And they do--part of working with kids is being able to do that, because that is something that kids need. "Nurturing" and "defending" are very different things in their minds.

I'm most specifically not saying that the vast majority of teachers wouldn't act to protect their students. If you read the reports of school shootings, you often see that teachers do just that, often going so far as to physically interpose themselves between the student and the danger. That requires a tremendous amount of courage, and I wouldn't want to suggest otherwise.

But there is a significant difference between taking what might be seen as a "passive" role like that, and an "active" role that might include moving to take action against a threat, or even neutralizing a threat. That isn't what they see teachers as doing, that isn't part of what they see "teaching" to be; they are unable to see that as being a different (but morally equivalent) aspect of "nurturing." That is something cops do, not teachers: most teachers don't understand that there are elements of the role of law enforcement that are very similar to how they see their own role as teachers.

It is a short step, requiring only the correct circumstances, to go from "being prepared to take an active role in defense" to "having taken an active role in defense." Most teachers don't want to be someone who might do that, because it implies that they might be someone who has done that. Many find it uncomfortable to be around people who have done that, or are prepared to do that, in a school/educational context.

To expect them to think about aspects like knowledge of the building layout or recognition of who should or should not be in the school is asking too much. They aren't trained to game things out that way; teacher education doesn't include that kind of thinking (and seems to even avoid the use of words like "strategy" and "tactics"). No one in a school wants to think about the necessity of thinking like that, because it makes the risk seem more real.

[jljr1944]

coffeecup
I have to disagree with your comment about nurturing and defending being two different things with teachers. More than one teacher has given her/his life defending their students in school shootings. Giving your life for your students would seem to me to be the ultimate defensive act. Especially if you are unarmed and facing a crazy person with a weapon. I believe there are teachers who are perfectly capable of providing armed defense and there are those teachers who wouldn't be capable. In fact I don't believe the capability of providing armed defens has anything to do with your occupation,political affiliation,or anything else. Some people would be capable and others would not.

[coffeecup]

coffeecup
I have to disagree with your comment about nurturing and defending being two different things with teachers. More than one teacher has given her/his life defending their students in school shootings. Giving your life for your students would seem to me to be the ultimate defensive act. Especially if you are unarmed and facing a crazy person with a weapon. I believe there are teachers who are perfectly capable of providing armed defense and there are those teachers who wouldn't be capable. In fact I don't believe the capability of providing armed defens has anything to do with your occupation,political affiliation,or anything else. Some people would be capable and others would not.

I was merely trying to answer the question you posed in the previous post, when you wrote:

This is the part of human nature that I don't understand when it comes to teachers and their aversion to other teachers carrying guns. Maybe someone can explain it to me.

In order to answer that question, it was necessary to discuss aspects of how teachers are taught to be teachers, to probe a bit into how they tend to think, and to consider how teachers view "defense." I never wrote that they wouldn't act to protect their students; in fact I specifically acknowledged that they often do.

But they are taught to view things like defense, and their possible role in that defense, in a different manner than someone with a different background and training, such as a law enforcement officer.

[philco]

Coffeecup wrote:

"It is a short step, requiring only the correct circumstances, to go from "being prepared to take an active role in defense" to "having taken an active role in defense." Most teachers don't want to be someone who might do that, because it implies that they might be someone who has done that. Many find it uncomfortable to be around people who have done that, or are prepared to do that, in a school/educational context."

Jim can you expand on this a bit more. I'm not entirely clear about what you're saying, or perhaps the thought process you are explaining above is just alien to my way of thinking. Are you telling us that most teachers would avoid a person who is prepared to deal with a violent threat ?

[TripleF]

Everybody should be armed.......only knumb knuts believe that no guns, or tighter laws will reduce crime.

Don't agree.....check out the "gun laws" in Kenesaw, GA where every head of household is expected to maintain a firearm with ammunition.

Very simple.......

[tjmurphy]

Take a minute and go through this:

http://www.ijreview.com/2012/12/26022-9 ... tatistics/

[jerryd6818]

In the United States, teachers are already expected to be parents, counselors, social examples and moral guides to the children in their charge. Although it sounds good out of context, I would ask you, is it really sound thinking to expect teachers to take on the extra burden of protector and (essentially) cop?

My knee jerk reaction was support for this solution to the problem but having read the opinions of others and having given it much thought, I have to agree with Jim. As a general rule teachers are not emotionally equipped to take on the roll of armed protector of the children in their charge. Maybe teachers who have been in the Armed Forces and have seen combat could do it but that has to be a super small community.

I believe we all would like to think we could not only be accountable but in a situation where violence is appropriate, we could do the right thing. There's a lot more involved than just pulling the trigger on another human being. Quite frankly I think we all would like to think we have "what it takes" but in all actuality, speaking just for myself since I've never been in that situation, I don't know if I do or not.

Just some thoughts this topic has forced me to think.

[chetr1200c]

when i was in school i was the top on the pile when it came to creating trouble. i even went as far as to hit a teacher or two. i was expelled a total of nine times in 11th grade.........and still passed. only because teachers also respected me for my in your face manner. when i wasnt going on the class trip one teacher went as far as to pay my way and coax me to tag along just to keep order within the troops,,, and let me tell you, i did, but thats another story.
anyway, i had my followers and we knew every nook and cranny of that school. we would even break in at night and steal things, we even did this in daytime when school was in session. we even took some of the teachers possesions and no one ever found out,,,,,,,till now,,,,
what i am saying, in my experience, it would be very easy for a student of my past record and daring to very easily find and procure said teachers gun. and students today are 50 times worse than i ever was..that is something that needs to be seriously thought about also.

[jljr1944]

Reading through the posts I get the impression that some people don't think teachers are emotionally equipped to act as armed defenders of their schools. Some probably aren't but that would be true of any profession lawyers,plumbers,etc. Some people would be capable and some would. I do know one thing without a doubt and I don't need a shooting situation to prove it. If I was in charge of a group of kids and those kids were threatened by a nut with a gun I would have no qualms about defending them.
The people who are in favor of arming teachers want the teachers to be well traind above what is required for a carry license. They also do not want any teacher to carry a weapon if they choose not to. One proposal I read about would have multiple teachers trained but different teachers would have a weapon on any particular day and only the principal would know which teachers were armed on that particular day.
To me it is very simple. A well trained armed individual at the school is better than calling 911 and waiting 5 to 10 minutes for a well trained individual to show up. The well trained individual at the school wouldn't necessarily have to be a teacher.

[Quick Steel]

If you hear that an armed loony has just entered your child's school, do you want to know there are some armed good guys always on the premises? [security, or police, competent civilians (ex military volunteers, the principal, the coach etc.) Or do you pray that dear Miss Pendergast the secretary will distract the loony until the police arrive?

Without armed good guys on the premises we have nothing but a building full of targets.

[FRJ]

Let me just say I don't think teachers should carry guns in the school to protect the children. Not either voluntary or by assignment.
Do you think the teachers union would allow that.
Or if I were a teacher and my supervisor knew I could handle a gun and asked or told me to carry for the defence of the school; how much more money (read: quite a lot) would I need for said assingment.............. it just gets rediculess..... that cant happen.

[quote="jljr1944"] If I was in charge of a group of kids and those kids were threatened by a nut with a gun I would have no qualms about defending them. quote]

I don't think any one wants to avoid defending kids. The problem arrises when one confronts that real dicey point in time when, yes, you are going to remove your hand gun from its descreat location and reveal it to the bad guy and point it at him/them and shoot him/them in the guts.
This action packed scene may have alarming disfunctional problems and casualties. You may not be able to show your weapon and you could get shot as a confronter. You could be so scared stiff you will lose all ability to control your self..... and get shot. You could easily miss the bad guy.... and get shot. "bring a gun to a gun fight", thats a cute phrase, but it packs a lot of baggage.
If it has to be done, and I guess it does, a hired, capable front man seems to be the best appoach, along with a difficult entrance.
I know there is a great deal of sadness around here and it