Del. Robert G. Marshall is proposing a bill that would require some teachers or other school staff to carry concealed weapons in schools.
Marshall (R-Prince William) requested that the bill be drafted in response to the mass shooting last week at a Connecticut elementary school.
Gov. Robert F. McDonnell (R) said this week that there should be a discussion about whether school staff should be allowed to carry concealed weapons to protect children against intruders.
Marshall’s proposal goes beyond the governor’s comments, which were made in the course of a radio interview Tuesday. Marshall would not only allow staff with concealed handgun permits to carry them in schools, but require school districts to designate some staff members to do so. Those employees would have to be certified in gun safety and competence, Marshall said.
Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling (R) said through a staff member Wednesday that he does not favor requiring school employees to be armed.
“There are probably many things we could do to make our schools safer, including having more trained law enforcement personnel in our schools as resource officers, but the Lieutenant Governor does not believe that we should require other school personnel to be armed,” Ibbie Hedrick, deputy chief of staff for Bolling, said via e-mail.
Marshall’s idea had some takers, however.
“I would be very supportive of the idea that properly trained teachers could carry concealed firearms,” said Sen. Richard H. Black (R-Loudoun). “There’s no way you’d have 20 innocent children gunned down if you had teachers who could help to defend themselves.”
Philip Van Cleave, who heads the Virginia Citizens Defense League, said he would like to see the state eliminate the gun-free zones surrounding schools. As an interim step, he would support arming teachers and other staff.
There seems to be an overabundance of just pure stupidity in the Old Dominion. I believe that Bill Bolling is the only elected leader who has any sense at all. Obviously the others have no idea what they are even talking about.
Van Cleave is not an elected official, thank goodness. He has a not-so-hidden agenda. This may come as a shock to him but we don’t trust strangers with guns. We don’t want anyone except law enforcement near our kids in our schools with guns. Just because he thinks others are sane and safe doesn’t make it so.
The politicians are politicians. They want to come up with solutions that they know nothing about and haven’t thought through very well. They want their solutions to appeal to the public. Lots of sex appeal. Most importantly, they want their solutions to be CHEAP.
To mandate that school personnel MUST be armed is sort of a violation of the 2A in reverse. There are lots of reasons why teachers shouldn’t be required to provide armed security for their schools. In the first place, They aren’t trained. What would they have, a 2 afternoon in-service after school? Teachers are not trained, like law enforcement is, to react to the many different types of confrontations that they could encounter. That kind of training requires day to day, on-the-job training by skilled individuals. Would the teachers go to police academy? Could they moonlight as cops?
I wouldn’t necessarily want a teacher who volunteered to “pack heat” in the school with my kid. I have seen too many people over the years who just might not be the best fit with that assignment. Going to work every day knowing you might have to kill someone is no incentive to attract dedicated teachers. Cops have enough trouble with a kill. What would it do to a teacher? Most teachers are nurturers, not people who stamp out life.
If the public wants armed personnel in the schools then they will have to dig deep and pay for it. Teachers are not going to accept any more assignments. Enough is enough. Armed guards will not be cheap. Airport security isn’t cheap either. Neither are wars to rid the world of terrorists. These shooters are terrorists of a sort. Who knows if they have a political agenda or not. If they survive, they are too crazed to verbalize their agenda. However, with or without an agenda, they cause terror and I am most comfortable calling them terrorists whether they are in a theater, a mall, a school or out on the street.
It’s time for the public to stop grappling with bad ideas. Its time for the government and the public to start treating mass murder like it means business. The brainless politicians should know that an armed teacher against the firepower that entered that school building last Friday would simply not stand up. It is seriously doubtful if one person with a hand gun could have disarmed that kid. Politicians need to not create a false sense of security. The politicians need to stop running their mouths and saying feel good things. They need to come to grips with limiting the firepower, taking a hard look at mental illness and the services and money required to treat it, and realistic protection of schools.
The Virginia politicians I have heard on the subject simply don’t get it. This is just another example of CHEAP.
I assume they would publish firearms scores by teacher so we could pick the best shot? Sure eliminates the SOL debate.
I don’t see an issue with armed teachers as long as they volunteer into the system. We trust pilots to be armed. Why not trust teachers? After all if they wanted to harm their students nothing stops them from doing so right now.
Just sick and tired of hearing of teachers using their bodies to catch bullets meant for their students. We need to support our teachers and by supporting them I mean if they want to be armed – let them be.
I’m not opposed to having teachers (that volunteer) appointed as special conservators of the peace or to have trained armed security personnel doing so – also as special conservators.
Here’s an interesting article from a pro-LEO forum. http://www.policeone.com/active-shooter/articles/2058168-Lt-Col-Dave-Grossman-to-cops-The-enemy-is-denial/
I think it’s a good read.
We really do have to have a conversation on this topic. We need to get people to really understand that there are bad people out there that want to do evil and that the only way to deal with them if the enemy is at our gate is to meet force with force.
If you really wanted to support teachers you wouldnt always be drooling after their pensions.
I trust most teachers also. However, being a pilot isn’t like being a teacher. Pilots don’t have to interact with the public. Their job is to navigate the plane. Different skill set.
The boundaries on a plane are much more clearly defined. You don’t have parents, brothers and sisters and enighbors entering the co-pit. I cold go on for pages.
Why bother. People who don’t know the field and probably couldnt do it anyway are going to be the people making the decisions.
Marshall does not understand firearms. It takes hours and hours of training to become proficient with a firearm. It also takes good vision, fitness and health. Demanding that teachers meet these standards is totally unreasonable. He is proposing legislation based on raw emotion. This would be a bad law.
If we want to really support teachers, we should support their unions. As we saw last week, our teachers will take bullets for our children. Begrudging them retirement benefits is a horrible way to treat these heros.
@Starryflights
He is proposing legislation based on raw emotion. This would be a bad law.
You do see the irony in this statement, right? Probably not. Let me spell it out for you.
You write that amidst all this OTHER emotionally based calls for assorted “solutions.”
Good job in pointing out what’s going on without realizing it.
If we want to really support teachers, we should support their unions.
Really? THAT is what you get out of this?
Demanding that teachers meet these standards is totally unreasonable.
Why? Many already meet that requirement by having Concealed carry permits and are proficient. What level of skill are you considering? SWAT?
@Moon-howler
You do know that there are already schools that have armed teachers and they have no problems, right?
@Cargo. Yet. I don’t know where there are. Private schools can do whatever they want to do.
Is that supposed to be a strong argument for why everyone should do it?
I am going to agree with Starry again here…..this isn’t support of teachers. This is just bullshit and very insincere blather.
Don’t support teachers YOUR way. Support them THEIR way…which might mean supporting their right to be union members. It might mean trying not to cancel their pension. It just might mean respect. Teachers are the best authority on how to support them. So now the great crocodile tear support comes on….we want to arm you.
How about changing some of the laws that allow these toads to stay in school regardless of their behavior. The public could just decide one of these days they aren’t going to allow some of these nasty behaved people to stay in schools regardless of what the courts say. Change the laws. The courts interpret the laws. Make them unmistakably clear.
By the way… look what’s happened to the school security programs.
http://www.washingtonguardian.com/washingtons-school-security-failure
and Moon, here’s a guy, a cop, that thinks the way you do about the games and young people.
http://maypeacebewithyou.blogspot.com/2012/12/thoughts-on-violence.html
I guess STOP SPENDING had to start somewhere. There are only so many places one can cut back. I think it is wrong but…no one asked me. I think that one might spending we need to continue.
As for the cop…anyone who works with kids or listens to kids sees the reality of kids and video games. Cartoons can do the same thing.
Video games are just more interactive and allows the player more control over the “death” of others.
Here we sit, on the brink of higher taxes for everyone, protecting the rich while the poor and the elderly will be hit disproportionately, talking about why programs like school security got hit.
it might just take more taxes to run this country and its complexities.
@Cargosquid
Renewing the assault weapon ban can hardly be called an emotional response. It was law for 10 years. If we are going to demand that they be armed, I would hope they are as proficient as the average patrolman.
As for teacher unions, read this:
Published Online: December 18, 2012
For Teachers, Newtown Shootings Prompt Reflection, Outreach
“There’s been a lot of teacher bashing over the last couple of years—we’re not performing, we work short hours and days, we get paid too much,” said Mullen, who worked as a police inspector in New York City before becoming a teacher. “It’s unfortunate but sometimes it takes a tragedy like this to see what certain public servants are ready to do, ready to sacrifice. Prior to 9/11, there was a lot of criticism of the NYPD for a variety of issues. After 9/11, policemen and firemen were suddenly looked at as the heroes they were. I think something like that now could happen with teachers—they’ll be looked at how they really are. They are heroes. They are martyrs.”
http://www.edweek.org/tm/articles/2012/12/18/15newtown_educators.html?tkn=LLTFKHQJq7uh9UAzCsZ2kuxfuO4HREbUYOkc&cmp=clp-edweek
@Starryflights
Renewing any useless law is the epitome of emotional lawmaking.
Nope. I think that teachers are great. And public unions are crooks. One can be a public servant without being in a union that is known to protect incompetency and corruption.
@Starryflights
Forgot to add…
If you are talking about only shooting proficiency of the average patrolman… that is the least that I want. That’s why I want volunteers. They will practice more. Police quals are not always the best. I posted a sample of the VA quals elsewhere… Doesn’t look too hard.
@Moon-howler
Some Texas schools. Of course…..
I completely agree with you about the laws and keeping certain people in school or not.
Supporting their right to defend themselves and others, one of which might be my child, has no correlation with my opinions of public unions or pensions. If a union wants to give them pensions…or states do….fine. Make sure its funded. Since they never are and the state goes bankrupt on pensions that were underfunded, without enough input from the salary for it to reach its “proposed” goal.
Guns should never be in schools except for those in the hands of law enforcement and even then it should be very carefully considered. If we must insist on trying to plan for the unthinkable, let’s let the old outrageous imagination free for a minute. Teaching can be unbelievably high stress, so what if a teacher snaps and goes on a rampage? What if a student disarms a teacher and opens up on other students or the teacher? The accuracy rate of highly trained law enforcement and military personal is amazingly low in “hot” situations, so could a semi-trained (I assure you that is all the taxpayers–read that politicians–will pay for.) teacher really be effective or could the teacher accidentally shoot an innocent person? I am all for security measures in schools, but I do not think setting up such possibilities qualifies as increased security.
If you think none of this could happen, consider that only a few years ago none of us thought Columbine could happen. None of us thought that someone could line up little Amish children and shoot them. None of us thought Batman could inspire someone to mow down a movie audience, many of whom were probably carrying concealed. There have been many more such horrors. The list is long and dark. Please, please let’s think before we jump into any drastic measures.
Welcome Smudgepot. You made some very interesting points!
The qualities that make a good school administrator or teacher are not necessarily the qualities that make one proficient in an exchange of gunfire in a crowded public area. I would hate to see teachers and administrators saddled with responsibilities that go beyond teaching. It’s hard enough to find and encourage really gifted teachers these days.
For the life of me, I can’t understand why the first reaction of some people is to put more guns into the hands of amateurs. Bob Marshall can always be counted on for a certain amount of loony bin stuff (sometimes he has a good idea now and then also), but this really would be laughable in any sane society.
We’ve created a world full of exceedingly dangerous devices in the hands of millions. We lose tens of thousands of people each year to these weapons. We are stunned these days because we lost a score of little children and a half dozen of their caregivers. Since this is the horrific world we gratuitously created for ourselves of our own political free will, it strikes me that the only competent resource to deal with it is a trained police force. We should not flinch for a moment to devote the resources necessary to have competent professionals in place to protect our children at their schools. The idea of getting “volunteer” amateurs to do this is nuts.
WaPo:
Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling broke on Wednesday with his fellow Republican and close political ally, Gov. Robert F. McDonnell, by opposing the possibility of arming teachers, principals and other staff at schools. “The Lieutenant Governor believes that the job of a teacher is to teach and he does not support arming teachers,” Bolling’s deputy chief of staff, Ibbie Hedrick, said via e-mail. “If school security needs to be enhanced, it should be done by trained law enforcement personnel.”
Republican gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli II signaled Wednesday that he was open to letting trained teachers carry guns in schools, while Democratic rival Terry McAuliffe called for an armed officer at every elementary campus that wants one. Their comments followed a rampage through a Connecticut school, where a gunman killed 20 first-graders and six staff members before taking his own life.
Good for Bolling. Finally a voice of reason
There’s got to be a sensible middle ground. Some on the right want to turn the schools into Dodge City with everyone totin’ six-shooters. Some on the left see this as just another opportunity to put more power into the hands of unions. BS on both. Moon has offered some reasonable ideas such as reforming the laws to get dangerous kids out of the general school population. We’ve discussed mental health reform already.
Frankly, if I were at my kids’ school and saw anyone other than a uniformed police officer with a gun, I would hit the panic button. I think there is merit, however, in thoroughly training a limited number of school personnel who volunteer for such a program and pass periodic, in-depth psyche evaluations in the use of firearms that would be stored securely in case of emergencies.
A gun in every teacher’s purse or desk drawer? Now, what could possibly go wrong with that?
I don’t trust the vulunteer system.
I simply do not trust it, based on life experiences.
I haven’t heard anyone want to involve unions. They have no part in this either. The only thing teacher associations like VEA should have to do with it is to just say NO. No more jobs for teachers.
Don’t the Marshalls homeschool their children? If so, he isn’t going to have to face the danger or experience the possible liability that he would place other people’s children or their teachers in.
I thought they went to parochial school. I could be wrong though. I think they all All Saints and Seton.
@Moon-howler
Regarding unions, that was Starry’s idea above. I trust that he doesn’t consider being called someone on the left an insult, but rather just a statement of fact. That’s how I meant it.
So many horrible possible outcomes of arming teachers and so few possible good ones. The only armed person on school grounds should be trained law enforcement personnel. And every school should have one.
Schools also need a faster alert system with a unique alarm in the schools – the school where I taught for 30 years used the same “code” for an intruder as for a lock down when the drug dogs came so staff and students were conditioned to not take it seriously possibly wasting precious minutes. School staff (including bus drivers, secretaries, substitute teachers, etc) should be trained in the procedures. School buildings which come in all shapes and configurations may need structural changes to assure everyone entering the building gets vetted. Don’t want them to be a prison, but…!
Welcome back, Bella Rose. Absolutely on structural changes. In PWC we have many schools that were the old “dumbell model.” doh. Most of those have been closed in. Schools really are still very soft, structurally. Are any of the school still open classroom at the high school level or have they all been closed in?
@smudgepot
All of these are good questions. And I do think that we should harden the schools.
@Belle Rose
My wife had a wonderful idea.
You know those “life alert” pendants? Set up a system like that, in which the teachers wear them when teaching. They would have instant alert for any emergency.
Also..harden the schools…even slightly. If you want security, then build security, not security theater.
That really is a good idea if and only if it were used for real emergencies. If used for real life threatening emergencies (intruder, weather, terrorist) then that is a great idea.
Unfortunately, some principal would get the idea that it would be a good way to let teachers know, in addition to life-threatening situations it might be a good way to let teachers know they hadn’t turned in their attendance or….that there was a faculty meeting after school.
You laugh.
It would be far better than the intercom coming on saying, “teachers, go read your email.”\
Maybe having lots of people running around schools with guns wouldn’t really be such a good idea:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hmwTkvRPoo
(warning: video contains vulgar language)
Some of the people I have known would be like the Keystone cops and shoot each other.
@Herman Toad
That is a classic video that gun bloggers use to say…”Don’t do that.”
And the police that says, “I’m the only one in this room..” and then shoots himself in the leg…is an internet legend. He’s the one that started the gunnies as calling officious police, politicians, etc… as “only ones.”
Funny at first…terrifying to those that actually pay attention to guns.
Many of our well trained police officers would prefer that citizens not be armed. It makes their jobs a little harder. They don’t need our help. Thanks but no thanks.
@Cargosquid
Exactly. And, most of those idiots on the youtube video are volunteers……
@Herman Toad
Did you mean to be ironical with that video — it had the very famous clip of the DEA firearms instructor shooting himself in the leg with his own Glock after saying he’s the only person qualified to operate it.
There was also an amusing one (not in your link) of a female deputy who had a suspect proned out and a male deputy cuffing him. Unfortunatly she suffered a negligent discharge and almost put a round through the guys skull. Needless to say she holstered her weapon and the other deputy got him cuffed QUICK.
If anything else the video shows that the guns are tools. They aren’t good and they aren’t evil. They can be used and abused.
The issue with having a ‘code’ or ‘alert’ is that its a reactive control. Just like texting students on a college campus. Once you have a madman going from class to class (alerting does help) what matters is how fast you can get friendly guns on target. Those guns can be carried by LEOs, teachers or the janitor — but the end of an active shooter only comes when force is brought onto force.
As I posted in another thread. You can deny this simple truth all you want and more kids will die. You want to prevent (friendly) deaths? Put MORE guns in schools.
I disagree. Put NO guns in schools.
Not everyone is psychologically equipped to have a weapon, especially around kids. Very often, that person is the last one to know it. In a perfect world where all huamn beings are simply statistics and all guns are tools, perhaps you might have a point. However, there is a lot more to it.
What I find missing in your argument is any humility that suggests don’t think you are 100% correct.
Mind you. Not cop bashing.
But this is the video from above re the deputy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pv89_3rrW8Y
Here’s another one. Negligent discharge when trying to clear the chamber at a checkpoint.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycTwaROa1I0
NOTICE that the firearm is NOT SECURED after the discharge in the reach of prisoners.
@Cargosquid
I think VA req’s 70% prof from LEOs and guards but I haven’t been to the DCJS website in awhile. Funny story. I asked PWC for that % one time cause I was curious and their FOIA Officer told me to pound sand and said it was ‘restricted data’.
20 minutes later I emailed her and said, “Thank you but I got the information off of Google and the DCJS website. For your information it’s 70%. Have a great day.”
I guess you told her.
I certainly do not favor a law that MANDATES teachers/staff to be armed. I would however support legislation that allows teachers to be paid for training and time to carry concealed weapons if they so CHOOSE.
Given the number killed in mass shootings and the inherent right of self defense, I surmise that the Supreme Court would support the right of teachers/staff to carry guns in schools. I would not think that the right of localities to regulate firearms would justify an outright ban in schools, given the threat that has emerged in recent years.
Who gets to decide who gets to be armed? What tests do you want them to take? Do you want the principals to select them?
Remember now, this person needs to be teaching, maintaining discipline (which shouldn’t be too difficult at gun point) making lesson plans, taking attendance, being a nurse, a guidance director, etc. That seems like a full plate to me.
It seems to me if the public wants guards at schools and that is not unreasonable, then they will be willing to pony up. Kelly, do you understand that teachers are at maximum capacity? They can’t get any more jobs. At one point do you just tell them to stop teaching? That’s why you hire armed guards.
The only one that makes sense isn’t running
@Moon-howler
Many police officers, however, DO support gun ownership and carry.
Many do not. I wonder what the % is if they thought it wouldn’t be traced back to them? If I were a police officer I am not sure I would want the interference. I have never talked to one who really wanted armed public.
Gun ownership, but believe me only at ranges.
@Cargosquid
@Moon-howler
“I disagree. Put NO guns in schools.”
So, no cops? Or, cops ok but no cops with guns? There was a courthouse that did that. Boy did that piss off the cops when the GFZ rule applied to them as well. They didn’t like hearing that the Court’s bailiffs would provide for their safety.
“I guess you told her.”
I dislike unhelpful public servants. Especially if they deny a lawful request.
“Not everyone is psychologically equipped to have a weapon, especially around kids.”
You are right. So that’s why they should not be forced or mandated. Those that feel they are mature enough adults to handle it and the legal responsibility. Sure – why not?
I have clearly articulated my position on this issue. I am more than happy to have professional, well-trained uniformed officers in each school. What I am unwilling to have is some wanna be cop in there.
You are free to dislike unhelpful public servants all you want. You aren’t there to dictate orders to them nor do they actually work for you. They are school board employees. You have been more than candid about your superior feeling towards them. Hubris always gets people in the end.
There is no lawful request and I seriously doubt if Marshall’s bill will pass. Very few of his bills do because too many of them are extremist.
I actually don’t think that the individual gets to decide if he or she is mature enough. That’s part of the problem. I have seen some real fools think they were mature enough for a variety of things. They were not. Who gets to decide?
I have traveled to the various blogs and have seen some real he man remarks. Perhaps the dumbest was the dark screen. Lots of whining about liberals. ho ho ho. I am curious. How do parents determine who is a good candidate to hold the gun for the day? Do you just look at the teacher and decide? How about gender? Maybe just the boy teachers get to hold the gun. Or maybe the principal should decide. I can think of a few principals out there who would make good choices. I can think of about 5 who would be bound to screw it up.
Frankly, the only people I see who are trumpeting this one are the gun enthusiasts who perhaps have no real clue what is required of school personnel in the first place.
Meanwhile I hear the usual girlie whine over LIBERALS. It has nothing to do with liberals and everything to do with knowing a little about those who are now supposed to pick up even more slack.
“You are free to dislike unhelpful public servants all you want. You aren’t there to dictate orders to them nor do they actually work for you. They are school board employees.”
I was talking to a police officer and this information request had nothing to do with schools. It was made years ago. The officer used a FOIA exemption so she knew what she was doing in her response. But she was wrong.
“…I seriously doubt if Marshall’s bill will pass”
I agree.
“I actually don’t think that the individual gets to decide if he or she is mature enough.”
Sort of like abortion right? Women are too stupid to decide? Oh, wait. They can decide that. I get confused when people are too dumb to think for themselves…
” Who gets to decide?”
I think you’d like the Government to decide if you don’t trust your fellow citizens.
“Frankly, the only people I see who are trumpeting this one are the gun enthusiasts who perhaps have no real clue what is required of school personnel in the first place.”
My only clue is that I think that teachers want a relatively safe working environment and not to die (or at least have a fighting chance) in the rare situation that a mass shooting occurs. But maybe you’re right. Maybe I give teachers too much credit for independent thought.
Marin, who do you think would be deciding who got to carry the gun? Schools are govt. Principals are govt.
Seriously, you are comparing guns to abortion? So what part would the gun be? hmmmm…well that was easy. As I thought. As I thought.
How do we get from a deeply personnel decision to teachers carrying guns in school? Help me with that transition. I have never heard a person say that they were too immature to do something, have you?
Most teachers have thought…about 10 seconds…and rejected your plan, Marin. They don’t want another job. I believe they would want trained officers to be the gun holders. Arming untrained people for a task they don’t do on a day to day basis would cause more of a problem in the long run than it would fix.
I think you do give teachers and other school personnel too much credt. You expect them to be wonder people. You expect you can pile on additional work because you are too cheap to pay professional law enforcement to do the job.
Lets see, we have 90+ schools in PWC. How much would it cost to put a cop in each school? Right now they are only in high schools. The resource officers were pulled from middle schools a couple years ago, during the budget session.
It obviously wasn’t a high priority. Tea Party mentality.
First off, repeal the gun free zones they don’t work. For the most part we aren’t seeing maniacs storm into police stations and when they do there’s minimal carnage because the bad guy is taken out quickly. Gun free zones mean that good people are guaranteed to be unarmed while the bad guy gets free reign.
Look at the District of Columbia they lifted their ban on guns and last year experienced the lowest level of homicides in 50 years.
My understanding like Marin’s is that Marshall’s bill won’t require any teacher to be designated as the holder of the gun but will allow teachers who are conceal carry holders to bring their weapons with them into the school versus leaving them elsewhere.
I don’t know a whole lot about guns but it seems to me that simply banning assault weapons is rather pointless. I am sure a gun or a pair of guns can do a significant amount of damage in a short period of time. And remember when seconds count the police are just a few minutes away.
Nice sound bites. Unfortunately they don’t fit with the reality of school safety.
Ok, lets lift the gun free zone. That makes it perfectly ok for just anyone to have a gun on school property. It is their legal right. Now, how are you going to tell the good guys from the bad guys?
You can’t even challenge someone walking up to the front door with an AK-47. It is their legal right to carry it. See how fast they tell you about their 2A rights. Now if you want some yahoo with an AK-47 at your kids school, have at it. I don’t want them around my gkids.
The Marshall bill would mandate school officials to appoint school personnel to be armed.
If you want armed personnel at your children’s schools, it will cost a lot. Plan for property taxes to go up. I don’t mind mine going up to have trained police officers in the schools. I don’t expect existing personnel to take one more job on that they aren’t trained to do. That would be CHEAP of me.
Let’s not turn this into a Deer Xing situation. Obviously criminals aren’t going to not bring weapons because the sign tells them not to do it. Its all about law enforcement.
Several years ago some crazed jerk shot up a police station and killed an officer and wounded 2 more. Sully substation.
It isn’t usual but it does happen.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/08/AR2006050800968.html
I think you hit the nail on the head – a sign doesn’t do anything. For all of these laws, signs and feel good measures – they don’t provide any security at all. None.
That’s what gun control gets us. Nothing. Empty promises and more bodies. I just want to give adults in schools a fighting chance. I don’t see why that is so controversial.
Be willing to pay to pay for that fighting chance.
Teachers are not armed guards. Teachers aren’t trained in tactical maneuvers. Cops are. Teachers don’t need another job.
Lets say Joe Blow who teaches science is the guy with the gun. Now how silly is this…he is up in science lab on the third floor. The shooter is mowing down the cafeteria on the first floor.
When it became apparent that we would have to take drastic measures about air safety, billions of dollars were poured into the industry. The same thing will have to happen with school safety. Nothing is free.
By the time the correct process is in place, additional training is offered to teachers, liability insurance is raised (for those intended accidental shootings), it would be a helluva lot more morally and fiscally responsible to just hire a SRO for every school!
It’s not as simple as firearms training – they’ll need TACTICAL training so they don’t take out others while firing. Or know when to shoot. The average trained shooter hits body mass 17% of the time. For all you holster sniffers …
Great points Lyssa! Making the idea of arming teachers even MORE ridiculous AND dangerous!!!!
@Elena
I’ll probably sound condescending… But really anyone with brains wouldn’t go that route. Then again, I just looked up the average IQ in the US. I’ll ask for forgiveness tonight.
What is it? The average IQ? It used to be 100.
Lyssa, where did you get that statistic of 17%? And since you are talking statistics…the average body count at mass shootings stopped by cops…14 those stopped by CCW already there….2.5.
You are overthinking this. When the shooter is in the room with the class, there is no “when to shoot?” question unless there is an innocent n the way. And that can be taught. Lawful gun owners learn this every day. Tactical means they go looking for the bad guy.
As for the scenario that the teacher with the gun is on the third floor….where would the SRO be?
At least THAT class would have a chance to be defended.
Now..here’s something really shocking. We are “closing the door after the horse has gone.” “We are fighting the last war.” Lets all step back.
How many schools are there in the nation? How many have had this happen? How many elementary schools? The question is…. is this something that is likely to happen again? Also apply the question to the type of school…ie. High or middle, or elementary. I say this because high school has students grown enough to do this….Columbine. Elementaries do not. It HAS to be an outside force.
So, after reviewing all the data and thinking calmly….what do we actually require vs what do we all want?
Lawful gun owners do not get practical tactical experience every day.
are you saying that you could go in, sign up to be a cop and never go to academy?
Lets take the discussion there.
Do you think they would just issue you a uniform and tell you what time to report for duty?
Furthermore….Lyssa, why are you being insulting? Have we “hoster sniffers” insulted you or have we responded fairly to your statement, no matter what we may think privately?
Oh how we moaned about the money spent chasing terrorists in the wrong country for the wrong reasons. We’ll be moaning about money spent on policing schools in a couple years because the next target could be a mini-golf course, a Fourth of July parade, or a Girl Scout conference. The fact that there may be a few police officers in the crowd doesn’t stop some nut because most of these nuts don’t expect to survive their rampage. It’s better to target the real culprit – assault weapons that belong in the military or with the police and not Joe or Jane Rambo.
What makes you think I was referring to you! There are plenty of wannabes out there. That’s all. I am attempting to process four people being shot while the NRA gives us their big thought. It reminds me of the Baptism scene in the Godfather.
@Moon-howler
One source says 98.
Cargo – years ago I took a defensive tactics class for women. The female cop said that – why it was important to learn defensive tactics. She said a woman has a better chance of preventing an assault with tactics than with a gun.
@Censored bybvbl
“the real culprit – assault weapons that belong in the military”
In your world, inanimate objects just get up and commit crimes?
Also…what is an “assault weapon?” How is this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15 any different than this: http://www.ruger.com/products/mini14RanchRifle/models.html
In fact, the top three on here: http://www.ruger.com/products/mini14/index.html are all the same rifle. At most, they might hold 5 rounds less than an AR in some configurations. NONE of these is an “assault weapon.”
People murder. Blame the killer.
I really am tired of that sound bite.
Mouse traps don’t catch mice either. People do. they set the mouse trap that is just a tool to snap shut and kill the mouse.
@Moon-howler
Let’s take the discussion there. Many cops shoot only for qualification. Many CCW’s shoot competitively. The civilians don’t need all the skills taught to a cop. They would need only the skills taught to a CCW. Armed “civilians” aren’t going to arrest anyone.
But.. I’m not wedded to the idea of arming teachers. How about giving them tasers?
In addition to what?
@Lyssa
You might want to update your training.
http://www.corneredcat.com/
But…your trainer said what she said. I’d love to see where she got the stat.
@Moon-howler
In addition to what? What do you mean? If not firearms, and we want teachers to be able to defend themselves at least a little bit… give them tasers instead.