Some Reactions to School Shootings

Discussion in 'Legal and Activism' started by Doc3402, Dec 28, 2012.

  1. Doc3402

    Doc3402 New Member

    Two things before I get started

    Mods: Feel free to move this thread to a more appropriate location. I couldn't find one, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

    All: Some of the things in this story are a step in the right direction. Other things have me so royally... um... upset that I am ready to throw my coffee at the computer and give up on the internet. Some of the things stated in this story, and my reaction to them, can't be good for my health.

    Below please find a URL for a story from Fox News titled 200 Utah Teachers Take Free Firearms Training Class

    The class is sponsored by the Utah Shooting Sports Council, and in my mind it is officially a good thing. Knowing that so many educators are of a more liberal mindset, this exposure to the safety aspects of firearms use can only help.

    There are quotes in the story from a few teachers that favor having a firearm presence in schools. Some say that anyone that qualifies should be allowed to carry while another makes mention of unarmed teachers being sitting ducks.

    In other parts of the story there is mention of a 24 hour tactical firearms course for a few Ohio teachers, and Arizona is considering changing state law to allow "an educator in each school" to carry.

    Some of the more acceptable statements point out the fact that teachers can react more quickly than law enforcement in the even of a problem. I agree with this. They would be on scene as soon as the incident started.

    What I don't know is whether their response would be appropriate, and I base this on the level of training they are most likely going to get, and the level of practice time they are going to invest in their new duty. I would hope that the school boards allowing armed teachers would have some clear cut guidelines on responsibilities and require the teachers to drill, much like they do fire and severe weather drills. I would hate to see untrained teachers mowing each other down in a crossfire, or worse yet, killing the students they are trying to protect.

    Before anybody gets their knickers in a knot, I support having an armed presence in the schools. What I don't know is if arming teachers is the answer. If a teacher normally carries outside the school, has adequate training and can clearly demonstrate proficiency, allow it. Allow them to carry in addition to providing dedicated armed guards or LEOs to protect the school grounds, staff and students.

    This brings me to the point that has me absolutely livid.

    Economically feasible? What is your child's life worth? Give me a number. Tell me where you draw the line on how much you want to spend to keep your kids alive. How much money would it cost each individual to keep their town from mourning the loss of their children to a whack job like this one? When has your wallet become a more valuable asset than your loved ones?

    How about that "alter student life" part? Kids all over this country are now afraid to go to school. There is a run on bullet resistant backpacks. I would call that an alteration. I would rather have their life altered than ended.

    I'm done. Thank you for tolerating my rant. If you are as PO'd as I am, contact your local elected officials and let them know.
  2. danf_fl

    danf_fl Retired Supporter

    "There are already police officers in some of the nation's schools. Parents and educators, however, have questioned how safe the NRA proposal would keep kids, whether it would be economically feasible and how it would alter student life. "

    Don't the president's kids go to a school with armed guards?

  3. rjd3282

    rjd3282 New Member

    Whatever their response would be if they were armed it would be a damn sight better than crouching behind their desks doing nothing.
  4. WebleyFosbery38

    WebleyFosbery38 Active Member

    My reaction to it is the same as it always has been. God bless those that die, help those that survive and damn to hell the perpetrator of these heinous crimes against all of society. If god doesn't take them immediately, its only because he wants us to do it for him as proof that Man still has power over our own acts of good and evil.

    I'm never gonna regret for a moment that the coward shot himself, only that he didnt do it before he entered that school...
  5. CrazedJava

    CrazedJava New Member

    I love the irony of people who are routinely protected by armed bodyguards routinely tell the rest of us how guns make us unsafe and the mere presence of armed personnel in schools, whether teachers, security, or police, is an unacceptable risk.

    Logical fallacies and hypocrisy all around.
  6. Doc3402

    Doc3402 New Member

    Yes, they do, and many of the lawmaker's kids attend heavily guarded private schools. This is why they are reluctant to take the sensible path of putting armed resistance inside our schools. Their kids are safe. It's easier and cheaper for them to write some knee jerk legislation that isn't going to add one iota to our kid's safety.

    Schools, many movie theaters, courtrooms, federal buildings, and police stations are all gun free zones, yet you never hear of mass murders in courtrooms, federal buildings, and police stations. Why? An armed presence inside each of them. It's time to let your legislators know that our children deserve the same protection.
  7. Doc3402

    Doc3402 New Member

    True, to a point. Let one bullet from one teacher harm a kid and we would be right back where we are today. This is why I lean toward paid LEOs instead. What are they going to do, take guns away from the cops? It wouldn't be hard to disarm teachers in the event of an accident, but it would be very hard to disarm the police. Besides, there is nothing like a marked patrol car parked outside to add a deterrent factor to the equation.

    If it was up to me, chainlink, concertina wire, and choke point guard posts would become a part of every schools landscape. This #### has got to stop.
    My attitude has nothing to do with the fact that I now have a granddaughter. She wasn't even around for Columbine, and I felt the same way then. This has got to stop, and more laws won't do it.
  8. John_Deer

    John_Deer New Member

    There was a poll in the Boston Globe asking if people would pay more in taxes to put armed guards in schools. 51% said they would pay more taxes to protect their children.
  9. 4sig

    4sig Member

    He is totally against civilians having guns but his police admit it takes time to respond to a situation. And armed presence, either Leo's or qualified trained school staff would be there at the onset of an event to take action. At least 4 teachers tried to take on the Connecticut shooter and were killed. If any one of them were armed it could have been a different story. These were brave teachers defending someone else's kids and they died for it. Most civilians that shoot are at the range once a month or more. Most police I've spoken to are required to requalify once a year. If a school employee wants to carry, is qualified o carry, is specifically trained in defensive hand gun tactics by qualified tactical police and is highly accurate in marksmanship why not?
  10. BK3220

    BK3220 Active Member Lifetime Supporter

    It is also important to remember that armed teachers and LEO's have a very different task. LEO's are expected to go after the shooter, with teachers and other staff it would often be more like setting up a quick ambush for someone moving towards them.