Inside a School Where Teachers Pack Heat

[BainsBane]

"If somebody walked in that door and opened fire," he said, "we would have a chance."

It wasn't quite cold enough to need a vest on a recent Texas morning, but Matt Dossey was wearing one anyway. Made of heavy canvas, the vest might have concealed a pistol. There was no way to tell. Perhaps that was the point.
Dossey is superintendent at Jonesboro Independent School District, which serves a tiny community in the rolling Texas scrubland north of Austin. In January, the district decided to arm a select group of staffers with concealed weapons. . .

In Monroe, Connecticut, just nine miles from Sandy Hook, residents supported a range of expensive measures. The town, which spreads out from a village green between two white-steepled churches, spent hundreds of thousands of dollars upgrading buildings and hiring school resource officers, town cops who are posted at schools. The move is largely in step with what happened statewide. Lawmakers passed sweeping legislation in April that included gun controls, such as expanded background checks and mandates for school security. The Legislature also funded millions of dollars in infrastructure grants and tightened state law covering guns in school so that only active or retired law enforcement officers can serve as armed guards.

"I don't believe a teacher would just kill a kid right there. I've walked up in front of a kid who had a gun. I know how it feels."
Texas, on the other hand, has not appropriated money to school security and is not creating mandates. Jonesboro is one of about 70 districts to arm staff since Sandy Hook. This year, the Legislature encouraged more to do the same, passing a bill that created a state-run training program that will allow districts to designate staff as "school marshals," an entirely new class of law enforcement (districts must pay the costs). . . .

But federal funding for several school safety programs has dropped steadily since receiving a boost in 2009. The COPS program, which pays for community police efforts including school resource officers, saw funding cut by more than 80 percent, to $178 million in fiscal year 2013, for example.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/12/schools-guns-armed-teachers-guards


Do you want teachers in your neighborhood schools carrying guns? Would it make you feel safer or more nervous to know your children went to a school with armed teachers?

[msongs]

1. gun owners just need to stop shooting kids. nt

[LanternWaste]

4. Or stop telling us how how responsible they are...

Or stop telling us how how responsible they are...


(Six of one, half a dozen of the other, and each as petulant as the other...)

[eqfan592]

17. The vast, VAST majority are.

Implication to the contrary is denial of reality and counter productive to any reasonable discourse on the subject.

[AgingAmerican]

100. When they...

...taunt parents of dead children to their face, they aren't.

When they celebrate the anniversary of Sandy Hook, calling it, "Guns save lives day" they aren't.

[Duckhunter935]

101. is that the vast majority

of the millions of gun owners or just few idiots. Please link to those comments.

[AgingAmerican]

107. Why don't the 'vast majority' of gun owners

...counter these 'few idiots'? Why are they silent to this kind of BS? Why don't they cry out in protest?

Please link to the organization(s) of the 'vast majority' of gun owners that counter these 'few idiots.'

[eqfan592]

104. Both of those may be in poor taste....

...but neither of them have a single thing to do with responsible gun ownership.

[AgingAmerican]

110. Poor taste?

The fact that 'responsible' gun owners never stand up to these people makes them look complicit.

[eqfan592]

111. Complicit in what?

You do understand that the only reason those people are standing up is because they honestly do believe that guns in fact save lives, and that had an armed teacher or LEO been present at sandy hook, the death toll may have been much less, right? They aren't doing it to be intentionally insensitive, even tho I'm almost certain the vast majority of the victims families would much prefer them to pick a different day.

But literally NONE of that has anything to do with responsible gun ownership. Nothing whatsoever. And since that is what we were discussing, basically you're doing little more than derailing the conversation.

[AgingAmerican]

116. So you do buy into it

nt

[eqfan592]

119. If by "buy into it" you mean I think we should have trained personnel at schools...

...that are armed and able to respond quickly to threats, then yes, I do "buy into it."

Even if we banned every single gun in the country and confiscated them all, shutting down private ownership completely, schools would still make an easy target for those looking to inflict as much pain on a community as possible. The worst case of an attack on a school in our nations history was not with a firearm, but with explosives, and there have been other instances of attacks, such as mass stabbings.

Ignoring these realities isn't helping anything, and in fact is doing further harm.

[AgingAmerican]

120. By buy into it I mean

...you make excuses for the disgusting behavior displayed by so called 'gun advocates' in the name of gun owners. Taunting the parents of dead children to their face and celebrating the anniversary of their childrens deaths by assault rifle as, 'guns save lives day'. You refuse to see it for what it is: intentionally repulsive.

How anybody could ever buy into this disgusting right wing 'guns = stupid' nonsense and still call themselves a Democrat is way beyond me.

[eqfan592]

123. Well, how anybody can shut down the reasoning center of their brain...

...in favor of an emotionally charged and vitriolic personal attack and still call themselves a progressive is beyond me. Yet I see it almost every day, so I'm used to it.

[AgingAmerican]

124. There is no reason to RW talking points

No reasoning necessary.

[Oscarmonster13]

2. fuck that

I would immediately pull my kids and start homeschooling...this is out of control. We are failing to look at the illness of our SOCIETY...what kind of desperation and mental instability we are failing to see, coupled with a culture of violence and murder with ample gun availablity...

[BainsBane]

3. It's national insanity

The rest of the world surely looks at us like we're completely out of control.

[napkinz]

5. "Finish the Job" and Expand the Brady Law to Online and Gun Show Sales Now

"It's been 20 years since the Brady Law was passed. But 40% of gun sales still don't require a background check. Tell Congress to stop helping bad guys get guns."


http://www.bradycampaign.org/?q=finish-the-job

Spread the word!

Thank you

[Duckhunter935]

6. I bought a gun online

Guess what, I had to complete a background check at an FFL per existing law. Any gun sold at a gunshow by a dealer (most venders) have too do a background check per existing law. Please be truthful and and say background checks within the same state for private sales.

[Blanket Statements]

7. It's funny how the myth of online sales with no background check

keeps going and going.

[BainsBane]

10. because it's not a myth

There is all kinds of evidence showing it occurs all the time, facts ignored by people more interested in promoting pro-gun propaganda than in actual evidence. Nothing the gun crow despises more than evidence, which is why they have enforced prohibitions on NIH and other federal funding into research on gun violence.

[Duckhunter935]

12. Please show us?

I am sure you have lots of facts to back that up, put them out there.

and if this is happening across state lines it is a federal offense

[Blanket Statements]

16. They don't want to acknowledge the sales

are illegal. It would destroy the whole narrative

[Duckhunter935]

14. I posted my real life experience

Yes, real as in I had to get a background check on an online purchase.

That is not a myth

[BainsBane]

28. Do you know what?

Last edited Mon Dec 16, 2013, 09:52 PM - Edit history (1)

I went to the bank today and there was no robbery. Therefore bank robberies are a myth.
That's my personal experience. As we all know, nothing in this world counts if it doesn't happen to us. Or Maybe I'm just the kind of person who refuses to consider that experiences aside from my own even exist?

[Packerowner740]

49. So duckhunter posted above that it is federal law that Internet and gunshow purchases

From FFL dealers MUST go thru a a dealer and have background checks done. A qwik google search shows that actual FFL must do checks but private sales do not. What percentage do you know are private and is that the 40% not checked?

[BainsBane]

68. Various percentages are given in the media

It doesn't matter which I quote because you will call it a lie. Not all sales are through FFL dealers, OBVIOUSLY, and that is how the gun lobby insist it remain. They put millions into defeating a background check bill to make sure it stays that way. They don't spend money on something that has no effect. I get this is like denying racism, sexism, or poverty. You all pretend something doesn't exist in order to claim a law isn't necessary, then work night and day to prevent passage of restrictions you already claim are in place.

No one believes you anymore. It's so obviously transparent.

I've had endless conversations with gungeon folk when I show them evidence of something and they refuse to acknowledge it. Discussion is pointless. We are on opposite sides of the political spectrum. We will not agree, and you will continue to insist the world is flat. That is your problem. What is my problem is that the pro-gun side backed by billions of dollars from the Domestic Death Industrial Complex. Murder is highly profitable, so clearly our lives mean nothing in this country in comparison to corporate profits. They will continue to falsify and distort because it earns them billions. I know the score. It's always the same.

[Blanket Statements]

69. Soooo the 40% claim isn't actually verifiable

[Packerowner740]

73. "It doesn't matter which I quote because you will call it a lie"

Why would you say that? I don't know you, you don't know me I'm just asking you a question because I saw both answers on google.

". You all pretend something doesn't exist in order to claim a law isn't necessary, then work night and day to prevent passage of restrictions you already claim are in place. "

Who is "you all"?
I have never claimed anything.


You keep saying in your post "you, you all, your" when I don't think I have ever replied to one of your posts and I think I have only posted in the gungeon once. I just asked you a question.

[cleanhippie]

114. That's a typical response to anyone who questions her dubious claims.

It's not you, it's her.

[Packerowner740]

125. Oh, ok thanks

[cleanhippie]

113. When you "quote" something that you fabricated from thin air, that's a "lie."

When you "quote" a statistic that you can't/won't link to, and insist that your fabrication is correct in spite if the fact your "quote" is shown to be false, you are in fact, telling a "lie."

But you know that already.

The best part of your post is this...

No one believes you anymore. It's so obviously transparent.

[Blanket Statements]

15. I'd love to see one link, just one to a website

Where a gun is sold and there is no background check before the buyer takes possession

Just one.

[BainsBane]

23. Okay

http://www.armslist.com/

And a study about it: http://www.thirdway.org/publications/719

[Blanket Statements]

30. That website doesn't sell a single gun.

[BainsBane]

89. It advertises guns for sale

by private owners who don't do background checks, proving the claim that it's not possible to buy guys online without a background check to be a complete lie. As you well know, the NRA would not spend millions defeating background check legislation if it made no difference.

[Blanket Statements]

91. Ummm nooo, the seller is still required

to abide by state and federal laws regarding the sale and transfer of the gun.
In VA, which allows for private sales with no background check, the seller is required to verify age and residency of the buyer and the sale must be in person.
Putting an ad on the internet isn't the same as selling a gun over the internet

[BainsBane]

92. Then why did the NRA spend millions to defeat background check legislation?

If no guns are sold without them?

[Blanket Statements]

95. Nobody said no guns were sold without them

And your claim was that they were sold over the internet without a background check.

[beevul]

127. A reaction to pushing gun control for the sake of gun control, perhaps.

The gun control movement pushed for the same things that have been on the gun control wish list for decades.

That's a fact.

Also, they decided to use a terrible tragedy which those things being pushed would not have prevented, or effected.

Also a fact.

Can you take those things into account, and honestly say you expected a different response?

[Duckhunter935]

43. an online newspaper classified ad

depending on the state legal to sell wthin the state without background check (private intrastate sale). If sold out of state, must be shipped to an FFL by the seller and buyer will need a background check to receive weapon.

Same as any newspaper.

Armslist does not sell guns, private sellers do.

[Duckhunter935]

48. did you read this from your site?

TERMS OF USE

I am 18 years of age or older.
I understand that ARMSLIST DOES NOT become involved in transactions between parties and does not certify, investigate, or in any way guarantee the legal capacity of any party to transact.
I am responsible for obeying all applicable enforcement mechanisms, including, but not limited to federal, state, municipal, and tribal statutes, rules, regulations, ordinances, and judicial decisions, including compliance with all applicable licensing requirements.
I will not use Armslist.com for any illegal purpose.
If I am at all unsure about firearm sales or transfers, I will contact the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosive at 1-800-ATF-GUNS and visit the ATF website at http://www.atf.gov.
I will help to ensure the overall openness and accessibility of the site to all users through a peer-review process. I understand that failure to adhere to proper internet protocol and etiquette may result in removal of my listings or more severe corrective action.
ARMSLIST may edit or remove information, including my listings, from the site without notice.
If I violate these terms, ARMSLIST may permanently remove me from the site or, depending on the nature and severity of the violation, avail itself of such remedies as are prescribed by law. Whilst ARMSLIST ABSOLUTELY BELIEVES AND CHAMPIONS "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms," ARMSLIST will comply with federal, state, municipal, and tribal law enforcement entities pursuant to the Constitution of the United States and Due Process of Law.
I take responsibility for my actions whilst using Armslist.com. I also take responsibility for any and all of my actions related to, or resulting from, my use of Armslist.com. Further, I am solely responsible for any and all consequences of such my actions.
I indemnify and hold harmless ARMSLIST and all of its owners, directors, officers, employees, and agents for any and all loss, harm, damage, costs, liability, and expense caused to them, whether intentionally or unintentionally, by my use of Armslist.com, including but not limited to direct or indirect results of violations of any and all applicable laws.
ARMSLIST may make changes to these terms at any time without notifying me. As a user, I am solely responsible for reading the most current version of the terms and conditions.
By clicking "I agree," I electronically represent ("sign&quot that I agree to the above terms and further certify that I have read, and completely agree, to be legally bound by the ARMSLIST Terms of Use

[BainsBane]

90. wow, is that like clicking that you are 18 to read porn?

It's to cover their asses. The linked study shows that guns can be purchased without a background check. Moreover, you know this to be true. The NRA and its lackeys work full time and spent millions to defeat expanded background check legislation. They would not have wasted their money if such checks were already comprehensive.

This bullshit is boring, transparent propaganda. Who knows, Maybe you actually believe it yourself, which would be sad. No one who isn't a gun zealot buys that crap, and I think even most of them know better, despite their protestations to the contrary.

[Blanket Statements]

93. The claim was that they were sold over the internet

placing an ad isn't the same as selling a gun

[Duckhunter935]

97. they will never understand

[Blanket Statements]

99. Nope.

[hack89]

18. You know that all online sales have to go through a gun dealer - it is Federal law. Nt

[Blanket Statements]

19. Shhhhh...you'll upset the unicorns

[petronius]

36. 'Online' sales across state lines require an FFL, or those where the seller

is an FFL would require a background check, right? But an 'online' sale in which two private parties, both residing in the same state (a state that allows private-party sales), made contact through the internet and arranged the sale would not require a check, I think.

Perhaps I'm mixed up, but I have the impression that BGCs are federally required when:

1. the transfer-er is an FFL,
2. the sale is across state lines, or
3. the state in which it occurs requires a check.

But it's not required otherwise, whether or not the parties met electronically...

[Blanket Statements]

40. Private party gun sales do not require background checks

However, if the sale doesn't comply with state law then both parties can be prosecuted

[Duckhunter935]

45. yes the do

if they are interstate. May also depending on state law, see California.

[Blanket Statements]

62. I'm in VA. Private party sales are exempt

They must be face to face
And only to state residents who are of legal age to own or possess the type of gun

[petronius]

46. Right - as long as the state allows private party sales, and the transaction is

otherwise legal, the 'online' aspect is irrelevant (it's not different than any other private sale).

So it's as incorrect to say "online sales require a BGC" as it is to say "online sales don't require a BGC." Some do and some don't, and it's the location and role of the parties themselves that make the determination. (If I understand correctly, which, as always, is debatable...)

[Blanket Statements]

56. Well if we're talking about a legal means to buy a gun

You'd have to comply with all state and federal laws.

[hack89]

50. Perhaps it is merely a semantic issue

I consider online sales to be where you go to a website, order and pay for a gun, which is then shipped to you.

Two guys negotiating a private sale via the internet is just a private sale. I do think that all private sales should require a background check.

[Duckhunter935]

55. Yep

and open up NICS to the public for private sales

[Hoyt]

70. You can go through an FFL right now. You should not be able to do a background

check on private sales for several reasons - you could get someone's SS # and see if they have done something that would prevent them from buying a gun (invasion of pricacy); you do not have same level of accountability as an FFL; you are not setup to ensure proper paperwork is maintained.

Go through an FFL is thr way to go.

[petronius]

63. You're right, "online sale" does seem to have a flexible definition which

leads to some confusion. Your definition is probably what most people think of by the term, but the study linked above was clearly using a broader meaning....

(And I agree with you about BGCs on all transfers.)

[wercal]

65. If I were to sell a gun, I'd pay and FFL holder

Its worth 30 bucks to wipe away my association with the serial number.

Frankly buying online without a check seems very unlikely to me.

If you want to know how untraceable guns get on the street:

Step 1 - Somebody makes a legal purchase.
Step 2 - Somebody else breaks into his house and steals the guns.

An aquaintance did several years of prison for this. Stealing guns - thats how the pipeline gets filled. Straw buyers and person to person sales...yes they exist, but they aren't a major factor.

[Packerowner740]

53. Then why do we keep seeing that 40% don't?

[Duckhunter935]

64. Because

they include all private intrastate sales. they use an online newspaper ad.

A real online sale, buy a weapon from a store willl require a full background check after the weapon is sent to an FFL.


It is a scare tactic, just like a bayonet lug makes an assault weapon. Remove the lug, same weapon, same action, same rate of fire but all is good now.

[hack89]

71. Those are private sales - a completely separate issue

You can't go on the internet and buy guns just like buying books from Amazon.

[eqfan592]

22. Yes, the old "all kinds of evidence" that nobody ever seems to have seen...

...but they heard it from somebody who heard it from somebody.

[BainsBane]

24. look above

[Blanket Statements]

35. That website doesn't sell guns.

[seveneyes]

47. Got a link to "all kinds of evidence showing it occurs all the time"?

I just have not seen any evidence to support this assertion.

[firsttimer]

87. You are correct that an on line gun sale is completed frequently

But it's done on gun forums where both parties live in the same state and it's legal .


It's either done after in what's called a face to face or one party chooses to have the gun transferred
to an FFL then sold to the other party.

I'm for very, very strict gun control but I won't post misinformation on the subject .

Now if you are referring to illegal sales of firearms that too also happens often.
But those are criminals and should be dealt with severely

[tularetom]

72. I've bought several guns online with no background check - all pre 1898 firearms

and thus exempt from federal requirements - no Form 4473, no background check, no nothin.

I've also bought newer guns - check at an FFL was required.

So it isn't strictly correct to say that no firearm can be purchased online without a background check.

[firsttimer]

94. You can also buy a black powder from Cabelas shipped to your home but

we know that's not what the poster is referring too

[Duckhunter935]

98. You are correct

I stand corrected

[riderinthestorm]

8. No way. I would yank my kids if the teachers started carrying guns nt

[demmiblue]

26. Me too. I find this concept just so bizarre. n/t

[etherealtruth]

9. .... because teachers are not human beings ...?

Therefore not susceptible to bad judgement, rage, mental illness ... incapable of having accidents? Except, they are human and have all the frailties and foibles of all other humans.

More guns is never the answer ... no, I would not feel safer knowing that there were guns in my children's schools.

[oldhippie]

11. Neither are cops ...?

Cops shouldn't have guns?

[etherealtruth]

21. Cops are specifically trained and practiced (admittedly not well practiced)

As are the military.

Teachers have more than enough on their plates than to have to endure militaristic training ... which I do not approve of, even if they were so inclined. School is not prison ... and children should not be put in a situation where they are treated as if it were.

The problem is societal .... schools are generally very safe places. A child is more likely to be accidentally shot with a gun in the home vs. shot at school (do a Wolfram Alpha search) or start comparison here http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/813708

[eqfan592]

27. I agree that teachers shouldn't have to undergo militaristic training.

And given that militaristic training wouldn't even be close to necessary, that isn't really a problem.

If a teacher volunteers, I wouldn't be opposed to it.

[etherealtruth]

29. i have strong faith in the fact that you would not mind it

[eqfan592]

32. And I have strong faith in your inability to hold a rational discussion of the issue. nt

[etherealtruth]

34. I believe you feel that way

[Eleanors38]

41. Please read on line tonight's PBS News, and its story on school shootings. Thanks.

[etherealtruth]

52. I couldn't find that but I did find a link to NPR's story ...

... about the actual safety of children at school (in general extremely safe)

http://www.npr.org/2012/03/16/148758783/violence-in-schools-how-big-a-problem-is-it

[Eleanors38]

106. My goof! I meant PBS Newshour for tonight...

I can't link with this hand-held.

A very sobering assessment of the school shootings with a heavy mental health bent. A reporter from one of Bloomberg's outlets, and the Chair of Columbia U's psych department. The "relentless focus on certain weapons" was decried, as well as a "tendency to go back to the same solutions," and an admonition to separate out goals: school shootings vs. general violence rates being the two biggest (going to the subject of your link -- thanks). They advocated more attention to increasing b.g. check effectiveness.

If I or my friends in the Gungeon say these things, it's an NRA TalkingPoint™. Interesting, it's now coming from more established figures, and over PBS. The winds may finally be changing -- outside GD/ Castle Bansalot.

[oldhippie]

33. I'm afraid that if you actually saw the amount of gun training .....

.... a recruit at a typical police academy receives, you would be appalled. I think people have great misperceptions as to the firearms training received by police.

[etherealtruth]

37. I have a little insight and I am appalled

Firearms are very serious and I don't think they receive enough training on actually using fire arms, nor are they given enough training (and support0 when they are actually called upon to use them (for most folk the taking of a human life is not easily reconciled .... even under terrible circumstances).

We see the police making poor choices of when and how to use their fire arms all the time ... i am not overly impressed with the militarization of the police, but there is a part of me that says they haven't received enough (and ongoing) training

[Glassunion]

76. Well they are fantastic at tazering and shooting service dogs.

Hope none of the kids have one. Other than that they should be fine.

[etherealtruth]

77. That's just it ...

they can't really be trusted with guns ... how would others react in stressful situations?

More importantly ... in general schools are safe places

[Glassunion]

78. It's a numbers game.

We feel safe arming the police, because overall the vast majority don't run around killing people and pets.

[eqfan592]

20. So wait, you're saying that by disallowing teachers from legally carrying...

...you are preventing one who is mentally disturbed from bringing one into the school and doing something horrible? Exactly how?

Gun free zones are an abject failure of epic proportions.

As a parent, I'm ALREADY entrusting the life and safety of my child to the teachers and officials at the school every day. If they wanted to go through the training, I wouldn't be opposed to them carrying.

[etherealtruth]

25. Yes, I know you are extremely devoted to guns

I don't think I have ever read a post of yours on anything else. I expect nothing more than a call for more guns. Yes, yes nothing more to see. No societal problem... yes, I know the riff

[eqfan592]

31. I've posted plenty on other topics.

Just so happens that the last few days guns have been the big subject of conversation.

So basically, you're admitting that you have no ability or interest in attempting to counter any point I made, and instead would rather just lash out at me personally for being vociferous about a particular topic.

[etherealtruth]

39. Do you honestly believe what I did was "lash out?"

I did not attack you personally ... I did not define you in disparaging terms. I actually made no judgements beyond predictability. You may have replied in kind. My responses related to guns are very predictable, my position very strongly held.

Your "points" aren't actually counter points, they are simply restatement of your beliefs ... there really is no point in trying to engage with you on this subject. If you do post on other subjects that is a really good thing. It would be nice to see your posts on poverty, human rights etc.

[eqfan592]

44. Then use the search function.

I've posted on both of those topics, as well as others. Hell, I've even posted in another thread about "woo" medicine that you were also engaged in.

I made a couple of points. One about the failure of the "gun free zone" program (the evidence of which is readily apparent) and the fact that militaristic training is not necessary for teachers as you so stated, for again obvious reasons.

If you want to try and validate your assertions in any way (for instance, providing evidence for WHY you think militaristic training is necessary) you are welcome to do so. It's how conversations happen.

Or you can just not. It's really no skin of my ass.

[etherealtruth]

60. It's not worth using the search function

I have only noticed you in "pro-gun" posts ... but, have no reason not to believe you and hope to engage on topics where there is a possibility of common ground.

If one is to be intellectually honest .... the divide between gun enthusiasts and those that hate them (guns/ not people holding an opposing viewpoint) is far to wide overcome. Belief in 'gun rights' or belief that gun proliferation is a symptom of a sick society, are deeply held beliefs.

We can each cite a wealth of information (and statistics) that bolster our beliefs ... neither will impact the other.

Just as I stated in my original response ... I fully expect you to believe that guns are a good part of a civil society, I would hope you can anticipate that my beliefs are polar opposite to yours.

[Major Nikon]

54. They are a failure because we just need more gun nuts to keep us safe from the gun nuts

Makes perfect sense.

Guns do not make people safer. They make people less safe.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/18/gun-ownership-gun-deaths-study
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/09/26/2680541/how-guns-at-home-can-make-women-less-safe/
http://www.examiner.com/article/possessing-a-gun-makes-you-less-safe-not-more-safe
http://www.iansa.org/system/files/Risks%20and%20Benefits%20of%20a%20Gun%20in%20the%20Home%202011.pdf

Introducing more guns into the equation has an inverse effect on safety.

Calling gun free zones an "abject failure of epic proportions" has no basis in reality. The idea that injecting more guns into an environment that already has an extremely low incidence rate of gun violence is moronic. Remember the NRA's great idea of having armed rent-a-cops in schools? That sure worked out brilliantly. Now imagine multiplying that fucked up notion exponentially along with arming people who are less trained than cops with guns.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/school-guard-suspended-gun-hallway-article-1.1282242

[oldhippie]

13. It would be Ok with me .....

I have no great fear of armed teachers. My son has been around armed people his whole life. He was born in the Army hospital at Fort Ord. He went to a primarily military school. Most of my best friends are cops. Guns don't scare us.

[Hoyt]

74. Yahoos with guns is the problem.

[cleanhippie]

115. Right, it's the yahoos that are the problem.

Glad we agree.

[Hoyt]

117. Yahoos + their gunz. We don't agree on gunz.

[cleanhippie]

118. What's a gunz?

[Eleanors38]

38. Thank god there was armed security at Arapahoe High.

80 seconds. The armed security man ON DUTY was closing in fast, the shooter knew it, and shot himself.

And if this good man wan't there?

[Cleita]

42. I would pull my kid out of any school where any one was packing a firearm even

a security guard. One of the things learned from this latest shooting is that they were able to stop this kid very quickly. He was armed for bear and a school full of bear, but what the Colorado authorities learned from Columbine was not to wait for SWAT but to go in immediately. Only one child was shot, unfortunately, as was the shooter. Maybe next time they will figure out how to single out shooters before they arrive with their deadly arsenals and two children might be alive and unhurt today. This really points to a need for schools to staff mental health professionals to identify kids with problems and treat them before they do something deadly. If this kid could have had someone, who was a therapist, to talk to when this issue with the teacher started, there could have been a whole different outcome.

[YOHABLO]

51. What about stepping up security in all public schools? What about supporting >>

increased funding for education, mental health, and departments of family services? This is a national sickness, that no country other than the U.S, seems to be inflicted with. What about very stringent gun ownership laws. Where are these kids getting access to these types of automatic weapons designed for killing human beings? (rhetorical of course)

[Duckhunter935]

58. I understand

it was a pump action shotgun, that is far from an automatic weapon and has been around for well over a hundred years.

[Decaffeinated]

57. Wouldn't bother me with an acceptable certification...

[Hoyt]

75. NRA certification, no doubt.

[Major Nikon]

81. Another brilliant NRA idea. Armed rent-a-cops in schools

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/school-guard-suspended-gun-hallway-article-1.1282242

Now imagine turning people with less training loose with guns in schools.

[Hoyt]

82. Yep. And many of the gun fanciers would like to see "gun safety" taught by NRA

certified propagandists in schools, whoops they call them instructors.

[Duckhunter935]

83. I would prefer the local law enforcement activity and

using state or local laws

[Decaffeinated]

84. Politics and policy aside... They are the current standard...

I think some things could be improved on but the basic program is where I would start...

[Hoyt]

86. That's what we need, some NRA gun promoters lying to our kids.

Next thing you know, you'll be wanting Massad Ayoob to present his course on how to shoot scary minorities, and what to say to police if you shoot an unarmed kid by mistake out of fear.

[Ranchemp.]

122. Do you actually listen to, and believe the nonsense you spout?

You are the gift that keeps on giving to the 2A rights movement.

[Duckhunter935]

59. Fine with me

just make sure we have training standards that are enforced.

[LeftyMom]

61. It would be really nice if discussions about guns on DU weren't dominated by a half dozen loons.

[Duckhunter935]

66. I agree

some around here just do not understand the facts

[LeftyMom]

67. *cough*

[oldhippie]

85. And I could easily name the half-dozen .....

... gun-grabbers (oops, I mean pro-gun control proponents) who show up on every such post.

But, of course, I won't, as that would be a call out, and we don't do that.

[ancianita]

79. No, I wouldn't want my school teachers carrying guns. No, I wouldn't feel my kids are safer there.

Just the home stats on gun ownership that show a kid is 43 times more likely to be killed when a gun's in the home -- not twice, three times, ten times or twenty times greater, but 43 TIMES greater -- show that danger is elevated by the presence of guns.

Sure people kill people. But the presence of guns makes people want to use them to kill people.
The presence of VOCABULARY makes people want to use words to talk to people.

[Packerowner740]

102. I'm just glad my kids are all over 18 and I don't have to worry quite as much anymore

[ancianita]

103. Mine, too, but I still worry about the public's kids. To me they should still be a worry for all

of us, since every generation is how we build and sustain this country. We get out of our schools what we put into them.

I'll never understand the mindless 'babysitting' function that schools serve for many parents in this country.

[sarisataka]

80. Fair questions

Do you want teachers in your neighborhood schools carrying guns? no

Would it make you feel safer or more nervous to know your children went to a school with armed teachers? it would depend on several factors

As we have seen in other areas, as demand for a need increases, funding for the need decreases. We want schools safer; there are some indications that armed individuals may have a positive effect if the event of a school shooting. Therefore armed personnel in a school should make it safer.

Unquestionably the more guns, or any other item, in a given area increases the possibility of an accident or misuse. Therefore armed personnel in a school should make less safe.

I could go all Vizzini for an hour, but in short there is no definitive answer.

I have mentioned in the past that I do some security consulting for schools. I always address the idea of firearms in a school and have yet to give a positive recommendation. I have several reasons-
First- the teachers are there to teach, not defend. In a worst case situation their attention must be focused on the children, not engaging an armed intruder.
Second- staff members are more likely to be able to engage a threat. The counter point is they have their jobs on a day to day basis and likely no training in firearm combat. Outside of amazing luck they would be at best ineffective and quite possibly could make the situation worse.
Lastly-cost is an issue for schools (I do some work pro bono) The money spent on a dedicated security guard could stretch much further in better securing the building, making it a less inviting target without making the school into a fortress.

I cannot say that I will never see a school where armed staff or faculty would be a possible solution. The article is about a school in an uncommon situation and it seems to work for them. For most schools there are other options that are effective and less controversial.

[rrneck]

88. I don't like the idea of armed teachers.

Not because of any real safety hazard or that an armed teacher will make a school any safer. I don't like the presence of a weapon in an academic environment. Harden the target, secure the perimeter, post a cop at the door, install metal detectors - whatever - but the person interacting with the child shouldn't be armed.

[seveneyes]

96. When seconds matter and lives are are stake

It's much better if armed help is not minutes away.

[firsttimer]

105. I would rather see tougher measures in how someone can access a school

"If somebody walked in that door and opened fire," he said, "we would have a chance."


But I can't argue with his statement if it factually correct.

[Vashta Nerada]

108. Yeah, what's going to stop a group of kids from tackling this jackass down and stealing his gun?

If I had kids, I would never send them to a school if I knew some teachers carried guns.

[firsttimer]

109. I would be willing to bet that most of those kids that go to that small school in

Texas already have firearms in their homes.

I don't think that is what seems to be a concern.
What it could be is having this school administrator open fire in a hallway full
of children running in all directions during an active shooter.

Think of how many times you read of police missing their intended target and hitting
a by stander or killing a person that posed no immediate threat.

[uponit7771]

112. His gun gives him supper human powers of stupidity.... so... he'll just deny they did it

[HappyMe]

121. I don't think this is a good idea.

In a high school, there's nothing to prevent a kid from overpowering a teacher and getting that gun.

I think that schools need to shore up who and how people get into the school. I don't see anything wrong with some cameras outside, intercom type system and people have to be buzzed in.

[Bigmack]

126. Stupid in so many ways....

1. Nothing is secure in a school.... nothing. No locks will keep kids out of desk drawers. Where is the teacher/administrator going to store the weapon? If he/she stores it, can he/she get to it fast enough to do anything.

2. Will the teacher/administrator be able to sort out the bad guy and get a clean shot... better be a head shot, too... with other kids running around and screaming? What about the background? How many innocent kids will he/she hit?

3. When the cops arrive, what's the first thing they'll open up on..? Anybody with a weapon in their hand. Buh-bye hero teacher.

I think the people who advocate this guns-in-the-schools thing have no idea of the problems involved. They've watched all the Die Hard movies and imagine they are documentaries.

Dumbest. Idea. EVER!