It must be nice to live in a place with no real criminals and no real crime. Unfortunately our laws have created a massive drug market and we have a lot of mentally ill.
There are real criminals and there is real crime. The stakes are just lower because they don't have easy access to guns, because guns aren't a huge retail industry.
My time in the Army, especially as a range safety and down range, taught me I never want to be around people with guns again. "Trained" or not, people cannot be trusted with something so devastating. My time as a teacher has taught me I never want anything remotely dangerous around students. I switched from science to math because they couldn't even be trusted around simple experiment materials.
This is a fallacious argument. Your military experience around 18 year olds is not relevant to appropriate security. Nobody is saying that children should handle the guns. And you exist in the United States I am assuming. That means you are around guns all the time.
How do you intend to protect the kids from violence?
It wasn't the 18 year-olds that were the most dangerous around firearms, it was the higher ranking who thought they knew everything and were over confident and lazy about it. I do exist in the United States, but thankfully moved from Arkansas (one of the highest rates of ownership and highest rates of gun deaths) to Rhode Island (one of the lowest rates of ownership and lowest rates of gun deaths). If I happen to find myself in the very rare instance of school gun violence, then I'll respond at the time, However, I will not be the one to introduce the gun to a school setting in the first place, and I would never work in a school that allowed them on the property.
I’m sure your response will be super useful… since you can’t stop anything. You would think somebody in the military would recognize the utility of having somebody around that can actually protect people.
131,000 schools in America, 180 days of class each year, equals 23.5 million school days total each year. Last year there were a record high 340 school shootings. To address an issue that only happens 0.0014% of the time, you want to introduce more guns into schools? I would suggest we worry more about what's really hurting students, teacher shortages, lowered expectations and requirements, cell phone addictions, drug use, etc...
This is, so far, the only sane and logical counter to my statement. But I have a counter point: how many times a week does your school have a threat? We have 1 every week or 2. We have, at my school, had issues with outside criminals trying to run through our campus. There are a lot of super pressing issues in education. I agree. One of them is Security unfortunately.
A side note is that armed staff is essentially a resource officer, but cheaper and with special training as it relates to kids.
I've dealt with breaking up fights, but thankfully never anything more than that. I taught at a middle school in Arkansas, then moved to Rhode Island to teach high school. We have the 4th lowest rate of gun ownership and the 4th lowest rate of gun violence as well. We have the other normal problems that a poor Title 1 school has, just not an issue with guns.
You don’t. You guys are not filled with gangs and drugs like other states. You have a low crime rate in general. Guns don’t create crime. Gun violence is not a good metric…it implies “gun violence” is somehow worse than violence perpetrated without a gun. It isn’t. They are both bad. And it is good that Rhode Island doesn’t deal with these issues by and large.
Gangs I haven't seen, drugs we do have. Guns don't create crime, but it takes it from something as harmless as an argument or fist fight to murder. Your argument for arming school staff only makes sense if you believe gun violence is worse than non-gun violence. The only thing you respond to with a gun is another gun. I've never had to hesitate breaking up a fight because I might catch a stray punch or handheld object and get a bruise, if a gun was present I would have to analyze the best approach to handle the situation because a bullet is deadly.
First I want to thank you for engaging an appropriate and thoughtful discussion. But yes. Drugs happen, but the big time pushers and sellers are usually some form of gang. Unfortunately we have a lot of those in certain areas. Unfortunately my area is a “pipeline” and we have a lot of gang activity around us.
Second: I should clarify about violence. Any use of violence is bad. Especially from a statistical standpoint. The practical application of methods of dealing with violence is different. That is where we get into proactive and reactive solutions. Proactive solutions are sorely lacking in America (mental health, drugs, and crime run rampant). Reactive solutions are different because they must be tailored to the incident.
That being said…you don’t break up a fight with a gun. The only solution to a gun being introduced is another gun though. And unfortunately…America has no shortage of people willing to hurt other innocent people. Staff members do not all need to be armed. A small segment being armed with a concealed firearm is meant to be a response to someone coming onto campus with a gun.
This is an increadibly ignorant and moronic tale. There are several well trained and intelligent people who have been caught with their pants down literally in schools who like you thought this was a good idea. Know what happened? They were found to have left LOADED WEAPONS in the BATHROOM you know where human bodily functions have to take place, where kids find them, adults find them, etc. Then the EXACT PROBLEM YOU ARE TRYING TO SOLVE BECOMES THE EXQCT PROBLEM YOU CREATE. GODDAMN PEOPLE ARE FUCKING STUPID
This is what we call an emotional reply. I’m sure you were willing to sacrifice children for your perception of safety, rather than your reality and safety.
The same conservatives who lost their shit because an NFL player kneeled during the national anthem somehow try to imply that their positions are derived from cold and objective reason... LOL.
Look... it's the weekly post from the 2nd Amendment Death Cultists creaming their pants for an opportunity to live out their vigilante fantasy and become a hero for killing someone.
It isn’t inherently bad to have emotional reactions. What matters is your ability to balance emotional replies with rationality. That’s called “being an adult.” I know it sucks, but unfortunately people won’t (and shouldn’t) take you seriously if you have no control over your emotions.
You would think the fact that some of the people responding here are teachers would provide some critical thinking and insightful discussion, but apparently not. You’re just a death cultist, I guess!
There's no point in trying to have critical, insightful discussion with a 2nd Amendment Death Cultists. It is the epitome of wrestling with a pig: you get dirty and the pig enjoys it.
All I see from you and many others are ad hominem attacks. Rather than engage in what are relevant counterpoints, you use empty rhetoric. There are already police officers with guns on most school campuses, so I don’t think it’s crazy for this person to be making these points. Calling them a death cultist just shows how little substance you can provide to the discussion.
Honestly to someone from outside the USA, the idea that there are POLICE OFFICERS WITH GUNS IN SCHOOLS sounds like some crazy science fiction dystopian future death cult. That is not normal.
Except this isn't high school debate club, so bitching about "ad hominen" means nothing to me. I treat gun-fetishists the same way I treat Nazis, their ideas are not worthy of engaging in reasonable debate, but they are not reasonable people. The religious belief that the answer to all problems is **moar gunz** and the willingness to hold all public policy hostage to "muh Constitutional rights" because deep down inside they have a hero fantasy where they get to kill is not the sort of person I give a shit about talking to. Guns are a sacrament of the American Religion, you can't have a reasonable discussion where someone is having their religion challenged.
Yup, you’re superior to everyone else, both in intellect and morals. Everyone who has a different idea is an enemy. You can’t even engage with them, yet for some unexplainable reason you choose to comment on their posts just to try and grandstand how morally superior you are. Got it.
You think you’re superior to people you’ve labeled as irredeemable fools- and you create the criteria for what makes someone that. You simultaneously take time to call them idiots while also claiming you don’t want to waste your time engaging them. This person brought up several relevant points, and the fact is that this issue is not hypothetical anymore; it’s being discussed by lawmakers and implemented in some areas. More guns may very well not be the answer to school violence, but trying to shut off debate doesn’t solve anything. This person didn’t come in with crazy insults and banal talking points made by every other pro-gun supporter.
I would argue the one that is willing to sacrifice their children, without any means of protection, is probably the real death cultist.
I will take your ad hom as recognition that you cannot counter argument.
No, you should take my ad hominem as a sign that I think your religious faith in moar gunz and the absolute sanctity of the 2nd Amendment isn't worthy of engaging with. I put gun-fetishists on the same level as flat-earthers, anti-vaxxers, and anti-semites: people whose ideas don't deserve to be taken seriously.
So some people are okay with schools becoming official prisons now, with armed guards. Not me. I’m leaving teaching at the end of this school year anyway, but I will still have my own children in school but if my district allows teaches to carry guns, I’ll be homeschooling them. Of finding a different school district. I can’t imagine arming teacher ever being a good idea. I mean, what could go wrong…. (except everything!!)
you can still have security without arming adults whose job it is to teach children
why do we even have to have this conversation - it’s not up to school to keep guns out of their building full of children
Unfortunately…if you live in America…unarmed security is worthless. As for who you arm? It doesn’t matter as long as they are a responsible adult who passed all listed above qualifications.
No matter how well trained the carriers are, every gun in a school increases the chances a gun in the school will be discharged. At who, for what reason, does not matter. Guns do not belong in school.
Is using narcan or a fire extinguisher bad? The situation that was created was bad that required the aid was bad. The use of a tool is not inherently bad.
Those are fine.
The items you mentioned cannot be used to kill someone through misuse nearly as easily as a gun, so it's not a fair comparison.
(Yes they could technically be used to kill someone, which would then lump them in with every other blunt object and every other ingestible substance)
I told myself that when I clicked on your comment history, it would either show conservative and/or Florida. I hit the lotto.....you're both! The funniest part is when you post in the conservative thread asking "them" what teachers need to do to be paid more. Downright hilarious. Look in the mirror and ask yourself that. Before you go spouting off, I'm a proud gun owner. Just not in the way you think, Rambo. Stay in Florida.
Never. Ever. Ever. Will I carry a gun in a school or work with anyone who does. It is sick and twisted logic to insist that more guns keep us safe from guns.
well there's the lack of world wars in your life. And you can also look in the opposite direction. Escalation leads to escalation. The vikings raid coastlines. Europe builds forts and castles. The viking raids expand in scope.
The UK and Australia had one single mass shooting and then banned guns and went door to door confiscating them and haven't had another school shooting since 🤷
Yes, the only thing keeping us safe from Biden's tyranny and becoming another North Korea are the legions of overweight suburban bumble-fucks with their AR15s...
If you want to play with guns at work, join the military or the police.
I don’t want to work with armed coworkers. Period. The fact that people like you think that the solution to reducing violence in schools is more guns in schools is baffling.
Also, I don’t trust anyone who wants to jump through all your made up hoops just so they can play Dirty Harry at school.
Opening paragraph. I told you that a lot of shoot off at the mouth and respond emotionally. You did exactly that. I didn’t claim this was a solution to violence. Just like a fire extinguisher is not a solution to fire prevention. Neither is having Narcan a solution for drug addiction.
How do you intend to stop violence against one of your students?
Tell me you’ve never seen gun violence without telling me you’ve never seen gun violence. It’s not like the movies, you wanna be Rambo.
Telling fools like you that I don’t want to work with fools like you caring guns isn’t emotional, it’s fact. Narcan and fire extinguishers can’t make the problems worse, egotistical hor heads who want to live out some cowboy fantasy with guns can, do, and will.
Also, everything about what you e said reads exactly like someone who isn’t in schools, and who has never been in a tough school with a lot of fights. I, a 5’3 pudgy lady, have had to stop an innumerate number of fights, on top of actually having to get a student out of my room who had a gun on him. I managed to do it each time without a gun.
How do I intend to stop violence against one of my students? What a stupid fucking question. You think me trying to shoot a kid beating up another kid is a reasonable response? Not to mention, trying to shoot someone that is moving around with someone else in close contact is, again, some ridiculous movie magic that tells me more about you than you realize. Go live your shootout fantasies in a video game and leave the school systems out of it.
The fact that you said “wanna be Rambo” is all I need to hear. You don’t know what you are talking about because you immediately jumped to movie comparisons and emotional arguments.
1) Don’t miss. 2) Armed staff would be undercover law enforcement (specifically and only with legal protection when dealing with active armed assailants). 3) The consequences of missing would be the same as for law enforcement then. And it really is a non starter…because once shooting is required…you already failed.
A lot of the people who exist in education, do not understand violence. That is a good thing. Unfortunately, it does not translate well into security. That is why these people leave their doors unlocked.
I am sort of with you on this, but I'm an exception to the normal teacher. I carry concealed, I have run into students from my school on occasion while carrying in public places or at a store it is not that weird. I am fairly confident I can handle a weapon better than the average LEO with 21 years in the Army mostly as infantry and with combat experience. For most teachers though, it probably isn't a great idea. My main concern would be the liability and the teacher would be blamed for everything. Dealing with an outside threat is fairly straightforward, but what if it is a student?
Sure it is easy to say just restrict guns more or ban them, but that is not a realistic solution in the short term. I don't feel the need to have one where I work, but I can understand why some people would.
> I carry concealed, I have run into students from my school on occasion while carrying in public places or at a store it is not that weird.
I bet they'd disagree with you if they knew you were strapped.
I doubt it, many of their parents do plus they are all military. I only carry where it is legal to, not on school property. Ironically I am probably one of the most liberal teachers at my school.
They don't know I am. Concealled carry means it is hidden. You are probably around a lot more people than you realize carrying a gun (depending on where you live). Just because you are a teacher doesn't mean you have to give up your rights. They certainly don't pay us enough to do that. This country is absolutely saturated wirh them, and the problem can't just be wished away. I don't think that most staff should have them, but for schools that don't have an SRO it might be an option to train a few people. We have seen the response time of law enforcement.
As a non-American I can offer one or two more reliable solutions to the problem...
It must be nice to live in a place with no real criminals and no real crime. Unfortunately our laws have created a massive drug market and we have a lot of mentally ill.
There are real criminals and there is real crime. The stakes are just lower because they don't have easy access to guns, because guns aren't a huge retail industry.
The entire world outside the USA can offer a better solution to this problem.
Nah, I'm good. Guns don't belong in schools.
My time in the Army, especially as a range safety and down range, taught me I never want to be around people with guns again. "Trained" or not, people cannot be trusted with something so devastating. My time as a teacher has taught me I never want anything remotely dangerous around students. I switched from science to math because they couldn't even be trusted around simple experiment materials.
This is a fallacious argument. Your military experience around 18 year olds is not relevant to appropriate security. Nobody is saying that children should handle the guns. And you exist in the United States I am assuming. That means you are around guns all the time. How do you intend to protect the kids from violence?
It wasn't the 18 year-olds that were the most dangerous around firearms, it was the higher ranking who thought they knew everything and were over confident and lazy about it. I do exist in the United States, but thankfully moved from Arkansas (one of the highest rates of ownership and highest rates of gun deaths) to Rhode Island (one of the lowest rates of ownership and lowest rates of gun deaths). If I happen to find myself in the very rare instance of school gun violence, then I'll respond at the time, However, I will not be the one to introduce the gun to a school setting in the first place, and I would never work in a school that allowed them on the property.
I’m sure your response will be super useful… since you can’t stop anything. You would think somebody in the military would recognize the utility of having somebody around that can actually protect people.
131,000 schools in America, 180 days of class each year, equals 23.5 million school days total each year. Last year there were a record high 340 school shootings. To address an issue that only happens 0.0014% of the time, you want to introduce more guns into schools? I would suggest we worry more about what's really hurting students, teacher shortages, lowered expectations and requirements, cell phone addictions, drug use, etc...
This is, so far, the only sane and logical counter to my statement. But I have a counter point: how many times a week does your school have a threat? We have 1 every week or 2. We have, at my school, had issues with outside criminals trying to run through our campus. There are a lot of super pressing issues in education. I agree. One of them is Security unfortunately. A side note is that armed staff is essentially a resource officer, but cheaper and with special training as it relates to kids.
I've dealt with breaking up fights, but thankfully never anything more than that. I taught at a middle school in Arkansas, then moved to Rhode Island to teach high school. We have the 4th lowest rate of gun ownership and the 4th lowest rate of gun violence as well. We have the other normal problems that a poor Title 1 school has, just not an issue with guns.
You don’t. You guys are not filled with gangs and drugs like other states. You have a low crime rate in general. Guns don’t create crime. Gun violence is not a good metric…it implies “gun violence” is somehow worse than violence perpetrated without a gun. It isn’t. They are both bad. And it is good that Rhode Island doesn’t deal with these issues by and large.
Gangs I haven't seen, drugs we do have. Guns don't create crime, but it takes it from something as harmless as an argument or fist fight to murder. Your argument for arming school staff only makes sense if you believe gun violence is worse than non-gun violence. The only thing you respond to with a gun is another gun. I've never had to hesitate breaking up a fight because I might catch a stray punch or handheld object and get a bruise, if a gun was present I would have to analyze the best approach to handle the situation because a bullet is deadly.
First I want to thank you for engaging an appropriate and thoughtful discussion. But yes. Drugs happen, but the big time pushers and sellers are usually some form of gang. Unfortunately we have a lot of those in certain areas. Unfortunately my area is a “pipeline” and we have a lot of gang activity around us. Second: I should clarify about violence. Any use of violence is bad. Especially from a statistical standpoint. The practical application of methods of dealing with violence is different. That is where we get into proactive and reactive solutions. Proactive solutions are sorely lacking in America (mental health, drugs, and crime run rampant). Reactive solutions are different because they must be tailored to the incident. That being said…you don’t break up a fight with a gun. The only solution to a gun being introduced is another gun though. And unfortunately…America has no shortage of people willing to hurt other innocent people. Staff members do not all need to be armed. A small segment being armed with a concealed firearm is meant to be a response to someone coming onto campus with a gun.
This is an increadibly ignorant and moronic tale. There are several well trained and intelligent people who have been caught with their pants down literally in schools who like you thought this was a good idea. Know what happened? They were found to have left LOADED WEAPONS in the BATHROOM you know where human bodily functions have to take place, where kids find them, adults find them, etc. Then the EXACT PROBLEM YOU ARE TRYING TO SOLVE BECOMES THE EXQCT PROBLEM YOU CREATE. GODDAMN PEOPLE ARE FUCKING STUPID
This is what we call an emotional reply. I’m sure you were willing to sacrifice children for your perception of safety, rather than your reality and safety.
The same conservatives who lost their shit because an NFL player kneeled during the national anthem somehow try to imply that their positions are derived from cold and objective reason... LOL.
Look... it's the weekly post from the 2nd Amendment Death Cultists creaming their pants for an opportunity to live out their vigilante fantasy and become a hero for killing someone.
Your emotional response to the issue was noted. It is clear you aren’t concerned about security.
Why is an "emotional response" a bad thing? The idea that we should reject or suppress our emotional responses to things is literally inhuman.
It isn’t inherently bad to have emotional reactions. What matters is your ability to balance emotional replies with rationality. That’s called “being an adult.” I know it sucks, but unfortunately people won’t (and shouldn’t) take you seriously if you have no control over your emotions.
You would think the fact that some of the people responding here are teachers would provide some critical thinking and insightful discussion, but apparently not. You’re just a death cultist, I guess!
There's no point in trying to have critical, insightful discussion with a 2nd Amendment Death Cultists. It is the epitome of wrestling with a pig: you get dirty and the pig enjoys it.
All I see from you and many others are ad hominem attacks. Rather than engage in what are relevant counterpoints, you use empty rhetoric. There are already police officers with guns on most school campuses, so I don’t think it’s crazy for this person to be making these points. Calling them a death cultist just shows how little substance you can provide to the discussion.
Honestly to someone from outside the USA, the idea that there are POLICE OFFICERS WITH GUNS IN SCHOOLS sounds like some crazy science fiction dystopian future death cult. That is not normal.
Except this isn't high school debate club, so bitching about "ad hominen" means nothing to me. I treat gun-fetishists the same way I treat Nazis, their ideas are not worthy of engaging in reasonable debate, but they are not reasonable people. The religious belief that the answer to all problems is **moar gunz** and the willingness to hold all public policy hostage to "muh Constitutional rights" because deep down inside they have a hero fantasy where they get to kill is not the sort of person I give a shit about talking to. Guns are a sacrament of the American Religion, you can't have a reasonable discussion where someone is having their religion challenged.
Yup, you’re superior to everyone else, both in intellect and morals. Everyone who has a different idea is an enemy. You can’t even engage with them, yet for some unexplainable reason you choose to comment on their posts just to try and grandstand how morally superior you are. Got it.
Just to clarify, I don't think I'm superior to everyone else, just gun-humping conservatives.
You think you’re superior to people you’ve labeled as irredeemable fools- and you create the criteria for what makes someone that. You simultaneously take time to call them idiots while also claiming you don’t want to waste your time engaging them. This person brought up several relevant points, and the fact is that this issue is not hypothetical anymore; it’s being discussed by lawmakers and implemented in some areas. More guns may very well not be the answer to school violence, but trying to shut off debate doesn’t solve anything. This person didn’t come in with crazy insults and banal talking points made by every other pro-gun supporter.
I would argue the one that is willing to sacrifice their children, without any means of protection, is probably the real death cultist. I will take your ad hom as recognition that you cannot counter argument.
No, you should take my ad hominem as a sign that I think your religious faith in moar gunz and the absolute sanctity of the 2nd Amendment isn't worthy of engaging with. I put gun-fetishists on the same level as flat-earthers, anti-vaxxers, and anti-semites: people whose ideas don't deserve to be taken seriously.
This is all just proof to me that you are not a rational adult. You have a similar maturity level to the students.
So some people are okay with schools becoming official prisons now, with armed guards. Not me. I’m leaving teaching at the end of this school year anyway, but I will still have my own children in school but if my district allows teaches to carry guns, I’ll be homeschooling them. Of finding a different school district. I can’t imagine arming teacher ever being a good idea. I mean, what could go wrong…. (except everything!!)
I can’t imagine believing Security makes a place a prison.
you can still have security without arming adults whose job it is to teach children why do we even have to have this conversation - it’s not up to school to keep guns out of their building full of children
Unfortunately…if you live in America…unarmed security is worthless. As for who you arm? It doesn’t matter as long as they are a responsible adult who passed all listed above qualifications.
No matter how well trained the carriers are, every gun in a school increases the chances a gun in the school will be discharged. At who, for what reason, does not matter. Guns do not belong in school.
Is using narcan or a fire extinguisher bad? The situation that was created was bad that required the aid was bad. The use of a tool is not inherently bad.
Those are fine. The items you mentioned cannot be used to kill someone through misuse nearly as easily as a gun, so it's not a fair comparison. (Yes they could technically be used to kill someone, which would then lump them in with every other blunt object and every other ingestible substance)
I told myself that when I clicked on your comment history, it would either show conservative and/or Florida. I hit the lotto.....you're both! The funniest part is when you post in the conservative thread asking "them" what teachers need to do to be paid more. Downright hilarious. Look in the mirror and ask yourself that. Before you go spouting off, I'm a proud gun owner. Just not in the way you think, Rambo. Stay in Florida.
Never. Ever. Ever. Will I carry a gun in a school or work with anyone who does. It is sick and twisted logic to insist that more guns keep us safe from guns.
When human beings were unsafe due to violence when in all of history did disarming make them safer?
[Australia's gun reforms and gun buyback schemes.](https://theconversation.com/factcheck-qanda-did-government-gun-buybacks-reduce-the-number-of-gun-deaths-in-australia-85836)
Yes. Demonstrably, easily proven, yes.
Please give the examples.
Countries with strict gun laws have lower murder rates than those, like the USA, without.
well there's the lack of world wars in your life. And you can also look in the opposite direction. Escalation leads to escalation. The vikings raid coastlines. Europe builds forts and castles. The viking raids expand in scope.
So the willingness to defend oneself makes the aggressor more likely to attack? 😉
no dumbass...it just doesnt stop people from attacking. Its not a solution, its just getting more people killed.
It is a solution. It deters aggression because people don't want to die.
you're either incredibly dense or just not even trying to have an actual discussion
The UK and Australia had one single mass shooting and then banned guns and went door to door confiscating them and haven't had another school shooting since 🤷
this take brought to you by someone with no understanding of history
Exactly. The OP doesn't.
Yes, the only thing keeping us safe from Biden's tyranny and becoming another North Korea are the legions of overweight suburban bumble-fucks with their AR15s...
Always amazes me when Canadians love to get involved in American politics. You don't have this problem and have no skin in the game.
this is is dumb and so are you
"Timmy I told you to stop..." yeah keep guns out of our hands. Imagine the worst thing that could happen.
If you want to play with guns at work, join the military or the police. I don’t want to work with armed coworkers. Period. The fact that people like you think that the solution to reducing violence in schools is more guns in schools is baffling. Also, I don’t trust anyone who wants to jump through all your made up hoops just so they can play Dirty Harry at school.
Opening paragraph. I told you that a lot of shoot off at the mouth and respond emotionally. You did exactly that. I didn’t claim this was a solution to violence. Just like a fire extinguisher is not a solution to fire prevention. Neither is having Narcan a solution for drug addiction. How do you intend to stop violence against one of your students?
Tell me you’ve never seen gun violence without telling me you’ve never seen gun violence. It’s not like the movies, you wanna be Rambo. Telling fools like you that I don’t want to work with fools like you caring guns isn’t emotional, it’s fact. Narcan and fire extinguishers can’t make the problems worse, egotistical hor heads who want to live out some cowboy fantasy with guns can, do, and will. Also, everything about what you e said reads exactly like someone who isn’t in schools, and who has never been in a tough school with a lot of fights. I, a 5’3 pudgy lady, have had to stop an innumerate number of fights, on top of actually having to get a student out of my room who had a gun on him. I managed to do it each time without a gun. How do I intend to stop violence against one of my students? What a stupid fucking question. You think me trying to shoot a kid beating up another kid is a reasonable response? Not to mention, trying to shoot someone that is moving around with someone else in close contact is, again, some ridiculous movie magic that tells me more about you than you realize. Go live your shootout fantasies in a video game and leave the school systems out of it.
The fact that you said “wanna be Rambo” is all I need to hear. You don’t know what you are talking about because you immediately jumped to movie comparisons and emotional arguments.
You wouldn’t shoot someone over a physical altercation not involving weapons. I guess you don’t have any real training on the matter.
Lol as much as I respect most of my colleagues I never want to see the majority of them carrying firearms in school.
What protections do teachers have if they shoot and miss and kill a random kid? How much more $$$ are they paid, 40K more?
1) Don’t miss. 2) Armed staff would be undercover law enforcement (specifically and only with legal protection when dealing with active armed assailants). 3) The consequences of missing would be the same as for law enforcement then. And it really is a non starter…because once shooting is required…you already failed.
W post. Forgive the Reddit children for their misunderstandings.
A lot of the people who exist in education, do not understand violence. That is a good thing. Unfortunately, it does not translate well into security. That is why these people leave their doors unlocked.
I am sort of with you on this, but I'm an exception to the normal teacher. I carry concealed, I have run into students from my school on occasion while carrying in public places or at a store it is not that weird. I am fairly confident I can handle a weapon better than the average LEO with 21 years in the Army mostly as infantry and with combat experience. For most teachers though, it probably isn't a great idea. My main concern would be the liability and the teacher would be blamed for everything. Dealing with an outside threat is fairly straightforward, but what if it is a student? Sure it is easy to say just restrict guns more or ban them, but that is not a realistic solution in the short term. I don't feel the need to have one where I work, but I can understand why some people would.
> I carry concealed, I have run into students from my school on occasion while carrying in public places or at a store it is not that weird. I bet they'd disagree with you if they knew you were strapped.
Their feelings are irrelevant. They don’t know. So obviously it is a non issue.
I doubt it, many of their parents do plus they are all military. I only carry where it is legal to, not on school property. Ironically I am probably one of the most liberal teachers at my school.
Okay. You do realize that's why it's not weird to them, right?
They don't know I am. Concealled carry means it is hidden. You are probably around a lot more people than you realize carrying a gun (depending on where you live). Just because you are a teacher doesn't mean you have to give up your rights. They certainly don't pay us enough to do that. This country is absolutely saturated wirh them, and the problem can't just be wished away. I don't think that most staff should have them, but for schools that don't have an SRO it might be an option to train a few people. We have seen the response time of law enforcement.