In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Options
Should teachers carry guns?
Gunners762
Member Posts: 530 ✭✭✭
They got my vote.
Comments
Rep. Frank Lasee, a Republican, said Wednesday that, while his idea may not be politically correct, it has worked effectively in other countries.
"To make our schools safe for our students to learn, all options should be on the table," he said. "Israel and Thailand have well-trained teachers carrying weapons and keeping their children safe from harm. It can work in Wisconsin."
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/15142930/
The RTKBA makes no distinction.
It actually might help dissuade some of the psychopaths from plotting the Columbine-like tragedies and from actually bringing weapons to school to act upon those plots.
However, I believe that if a teacher were to carry a handgun on school property, it MUST be concealed with a CCW. IMO, impressionable kids do not need the provocation or distraction that seeing an open-carry gun would no doubt create.
Hey Mr. Law maker, CRIMINALS DON'T OBEY LAWS.
It's their nature. DUHHHHHhhhhhh.........
Give the LAW ABIDING a chance to fight back.
Once those incidents occur then it will be good-bye legislation, and yet another black eye on the 2nd Amendment.
Granted, there is nothing that prohibits states from passing such legislation. However, if it was on the ballot in my state I would seriously question voting for it. I DO support having armed guards at schools, if they meet stringent background checks and obtain advanced tactical firearms training. But batty Mrs. Jones, head of the teachers' union, who is just a little too friendly with the 12 year old boys... I don't feel comfortable if she is packing around the kids. Of course, I wouldn't be comfortable with most teachers around my kids period. Good topic.
-Wolf
P.S. Why don't we instead return to the tradition of marksmanship training as part of the P.E. requirements in school? If one of these lunatics gets on-campus, maybe he can be greeted with a dozen budding marksmen with single-shot .22s aimed at him.
Poll: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15143417/
Or we can create another whole arm of the Homeland Security Dept. SSA, school security administration! More gov jobs to replace the ones going south of the border.
Liberals like more gov so this solution will work for them.[:0]
Honestly, I think this is going to backfire if passed. There are tons of teachers that are unqualified to teach you how to do laundry, let alone teach children anything. I have no doubt that one of these idiots will bring a gun into the classroom and cause some sort of accidental discharge, or God-forbid shoot one of the students. Or another scenario, a Lib teacher (which describes most of them) intentionally brings a gun on campus and fires off a few rounds into the ceiling to prove how "dangerous" it is to allow teachers to carry.
Once those incidents occur then it will be good-bye legislation, and yet another black eye on the 2nd Amendment.
Granted, there is nothing that prohibits states from passing such legislation. However, if it was on the ballot in my state I would seriously question voting for it. I DO support having armed guards at schools, if they meet stringent background checks and obtain advanced tactical firearms training. But batty Mrs. Jones, head of the teachers' union, who is just a little too friendly with the 12 year old boys... I don't feel comfortable if she is packing around the kids. Of course, I wouldn't be comfortable with most teachers around my kids period. Good topic.
-Wolf
P.S. Why don't we instead return to the tradition of marksmanship training as part of the P.E. requirements in school? If one of these lunatics gets on-campus, maybe he can be greeted with a dozen budding marksmen with single-shot .22s aimed at him.
WW-
Consider the following trends concerning your statements...
Honestly, I think this is going to backfire if passed. There are tons of teachers that are unqualified to teach you how to do laundry, let alone teach children anything."
Normally, I would agree, but consider that the teachers you've described are probably not the ones who will be applying for permits, now are they? The ones who will are the ones most likely to be good choices for carrying....
As far as I'm concerned, that should be mandatory for the Principal of any school, though. If they don't have a gun, they don't have a job...
"Or another scenario, a Lib teacher (which describes most of them) intentionally brings a gun on campus and fires off a few rounds into the ceiling to prove how "dangerous" it is to allow teachers to carry."
Well, if they are not allowed to possess a gun in school (no permit) and they bring one in, anyway, they are in violation of the law, and can kiss their jobs and freedom goodbye. if they do have a permit, and they do the same thing, they are in violation of the law and can kiss their jobs and freedom goodbye.
It really is a simple solution, and I am not going to suggest otherwise, because someone "might" get hurt. It seems to me, if it is going to happen, punish them after the fact HARSHLY!!! I'm not going to be proactive, because being proactive is how gun kontrol thrives.
"Once those incidents occur then it will be good-bye legislation, and yet another black eye on the 2nd Amendment."
I wouldn't be too sure about all that. A teacher is supposed to be a mentor to the child. Do you honestly think a community is going to rally to ban guns because a teacher shot a kid, either on accident or on purpose, or will they tar and feather the teacher for doing that to a child??? They do not have the luxury of being miscreants, and as trusted officials, they *&^% up, they pay the price; not their tool.
"I DO support having armed guards at schools, if they meet stringent background checks and obtain advanced tactical firearms training."
I support that, too, but I would much rather have the teachers armed. While they're at it, they can supply every teacher with a paddle, too.
"But batty Mrs. Jones, head of the teachers' union, who is just a little too friendly with the 12 year old boys... I don't feel comfortable if she is packing around the kids."
So, you would prefer a bad guy could kill your child at school rather because some of the teachers, not necessarily the ones instructing your children??
Not me.
Now if we were to reinstitute punishment in the schools......it would be a great step in the right direction!
Yes, I honestly do. The same way that a community rallies to ban guns when a lunatic shoots a kid.
quote:They do not have the luxury of being miscreants, and as trusted officials, they *&^% up, they pay the price; not their tool.
In a perfect world, yes I agree. In reality, teachers *&^% up around the kids all of the time and often never pay any price. We recently saw in Florida that a young, hot looking female teacher can even have sex with a student and not get punished.
quote:I support that, too, but I would much rather have the teachers armed.
I wouldn't. I would rather have professionals deal with the security. The teachers should be concentrating on TEACHING for once. Not whether some hoodlum kid is trying to break into his/her desk to get a hold of their gun.
I think if the people of a city, county, or state choose to pass such a law as is being proposed in Wisconsin, then more power to them. I would just be very cautious if it was being proposed in MY community. If such legislation passed, you better believe that a week before school starts that I am going to find out if the teacher will be packing, and if so I will be DEMANDING for some range time with that teacher before the school year begins. If I don't like what I see then I will be yanking my kid out of that class, or possibly that school altogether.
This is basically a guns in the workplace issue. The ultimate bosses of the school are the parents. If they want to promote this in their school then that is great. If they don't want it, then that is fine too. I don't have any children at the moment, but based on my personal exposure to teachers while in school, and my exposure to fellow adults who are teachers, I can think of very few that I would trust packing a firearm around my child in my abscence. But you are also right, gunphreak, most of them would not want to carry a gun anyway.
-Wolf
Why should a school be any different than any other place you take children? You take them to the mall, parks, restaurants, etc. Trusting that the people there are NOT criminals, with the intent of harming your child. Most people leave their children with either day care providers, babysitters, or both. I know of some of these establishments that DO have firearms in the house.
No one is forcing teacher to arm themselves. (or at least, they should NOT be forcing them) Give each the opportunity to make their own decision, just like any other person, in any other profession. Should ALL company employees be denied the right to carry, just because you or your wife work there, and you CHOOSE --- NOT to carry?
If you live in a state that "allows" LAW ABIDING people to carry, you are trusting EVERY ONE of them, EVERY TIME you go out in public. You never know which person is carrying, and which isn't. Or if they are looney toons, and getting ready to blow the lot of you away. I know people that "I" would NOT trust with a gun. Should we take ALL guns from EVERYONE because of this?
As long as schools are "GUN FREE" zones, criminals will be drawn to them like magnets. Since most states that "allow" citizens to carry, require at least "some kind" of training, and proficiency testing. At least give the administration and/or teachers that are willing to take on the responsibility of carrying a firearm, a chance to fight back.
All the laws in the world, are not going to stop a CRIMINAL, with bad intent.
quote:I wouldn't be too sure about all that. A teacher is supposed to be a mentor to the child. Do you honestly think a community is going to rally to ban guns because a teacher shot a kid, either on accident or on purpose,
Yes, I honestly do. The same way that a community rallies to ban guns when a lunatic shoots a kid.
quote:They do not have the luxury of being miscreants, and as trusted officials, they *&^% up, they pay the price; not their tool.
In a perfect world, yes I agree. In reality, teachers *&^% up around the kids all of the time and often never pay any price. We recently saw in Florida that a young, hot looking female teacher can even have sex with a student and not get punished.
quote:I support that, too, but I would much rather have the teachers armed.
I wouldn't. I would rather have professionals deal with the security. The teachers should be concentrating on TEACHING for once. Not whether some hoodlum kid is trying to break into his/her desk to get a hold of their gun.
I think if the people of a city, county, or state choose to pass such a law as is being proposed in Wisconsin, then more power to them. I would just be very cautious if it was being proposed in MY community. If such legislation passed, you better believe that a week before school starts that I am going to find out if the teacher will be packing, and if so I will be DEMANDING for some range time with that teacher before the school year begins. If I don't like what I see then I will be yanking my kid out of that class, or possibly that school altogether.
This is basically a guns in the workplace issue. The ultimate bosses of the school are the parents. If they want to promote this in their school then that is great. If they don't want it, then that is fine too. I don't have any children at the moment, but based on my personal exposure to teachers while in school, and my exposure to fellow adults who are teachers, I can think of very few that I would trust packing a firearm around my child in my abscence. But you are also right, gunphreak, most of them would not want to carry a gun anyway.
-Wolf
"Yes, I honestly do. The same way that a community rallies to ban guns when a lunatic shoots a kid."
A lunatic is not a trusted official. Lately, the blame has been going to the teachers, and not instruments.
"In a perfect world, yes I agree. In reality, teachers *&^% up around the kids all of the time and often never pay any price. We recently saw in Florida that a young, hot looking female teacher can even have sex with a student and not get punished."
Not lately, they haven't been getting away with it. In my community alone, there have been well over a dozen teachers who were forced to step down from their teaching jobs and face criminal charges. I don't believe this for a minute.
"In a perfect world, yes I agree. In reality, teachers *&^% up around the kids all of the time and often never pay any price. We recently saw in Florida that a young, hot looking female teacher can even have sex with a student and not get punished."
Isolated incident, because a mass majority of them do get jail time and fines.
Besides, if a hot teacher was to proposition me while I was in school, you better believe I would be tapping it[:D]
"I wouldn't. I would rather have professionals deal with the security."
Would you still say that knowing that "professionals" have a failure rate concerning shooting an innocent person 3.5 times higher than us "non-professionals"?
Consider also that in every country that has done this; I'll use Israel for this example. They learned the lesson on what "gun-free zone" means to children. When you deal with the Palestinians, who know the best way to hit adult Israelis where it hurts them most is through their children, and having it demonstrated by mass shootings of schools and children, the teachers, as well as the parents equipped themselves with full-auto M16's, and that number fell, over night to zero. Not "was reduced by half" or some other high number. It was completely irradicated. Not a single terrorist since has done this after realizing the kids were under extremely armed escort, not by police, but by teachers and parents.
That is the full power of deterrence.
- Do you believe that your employer should have the right to prohibit firearms in your workplace, concealed or otherwise?
- What if you are a public employee?
- If the government requires your child to go to school without your supervision, should you have control over what activity occurs in that environment, including exposure to firearms?
- If you send your child to a daycare, pre-school, private school, or public school, should they be required to notify you that there may be access to firearms at their facility?
- What precautions (if any) should be required at these facilities to prevent children from getting access to firearms?
- If a child gets access to a teacher's firearm, is the teacher then liable for the actions of the child with that firearm?
- If teachers are allowed to carry firearms in schools, should they also be required to complete training, certification, a background check, etc.? Would these restrictions be considered an infrigement upon their rights?
- Should there be any restrictions on children themselves bringing guns to school?
I think there are a lot of good points here, and I won't pretend to have all the answers. So maybe instead I should be asking a few questions:
- Do you believe that your employer should have the right to prohibit firearms in your workplace, concealed or otherwise?
- What if you are a public employee?
- If the government requires your child to go to school without your supervision, should you have control over what activity occurs in that environment, including exposure to firearms?
- If you send your child to a daycare, pre-school, private school, or public school, should they be required to notify you that there may be access to firearms at their facility?
- What precautions (if any) should be required at these facilities to prevent children from getting access to firearms?
- If a child gets access to a teacher's firearm, is the teacher then liable for the actions of the child with that firearm?
- If teachers are allowed to carry firearms in schools, should they also be required to complete training, certification, a background check, etc.? Would these restrictions be considered an infrigement upon their rights?
- Should there be any restrictions on children themselves bringing guns to school?
I don't know if you were asking them to me, or general, but here is my take on it.
quote:- Do you believe that your employer should have the right to prohibit firearms in your workplace, concealed or otherwise?
Only if they are willing to take on the responsibility of your safety at work. If they prohibit firearms as a defensive measure and you end up killed in a kriminal protektion zone, the whole while, you would have carried, they better have some deep pockets....
quote:- What if you are a public employee?
Same deal, except that we know the gov't has deep pockets.
quote:- If the government requires your child to go to school without your supervision, should you have control over what activity occurs in that environment, including exposure to firearms?
The sole control of all schools should rest on the parents and teachers, and should not have a damned thing to do with the gov't.
quote:- If you send your child to a daycare, pre-school, private school, or public school, should they be required to notify you that there may be access to firearms at their facility?
Only upon request of the parent.
quote:- What precautions (if any) should be required at these facilities to prevent children from getting access to firearms?
That the firearm always be in the custody of its owner, and NEVER laid out for any reason.
quote:- If a child gets access to a teacher's firearm, is the teacher then liable for the actions of the child with that firearm?
Yes. Absolutely. The gun should not have been unsecured, and they knew that.
quote:- If teachers are allowed to carry firearms in schools, should they also be required to complete training, certification, a background check, etc.? Would these restrictions be considered an infrigement upon their rights?
You already know what I'm going to say, here. Things should be as they are in Vermont.
quote:- Should there be any restrictions on children themselves bringing guns to school?
Not if they are 18 years old, and thus, able to own property and be able to stand responsible for their actions. Everyone else in not necessarily prohibited, but by law, cannot own property, and cannot be held responsible for their actions.
A side note: Firearms classes should be MANDATORY (subject to parental objections for those limpwristed pansy parents) once the child reaches 18 years old, and especially if they are males. They should be electives for substitution of physical education after 10th grade, when some of them are reaching 17 years of age.
This way, we would have less BS surrounding irresponsible use of firearms in adults.
18 year olds should also be immune to school rules concerning possession of tobacco products. Granted, they should not have the right to light up during class, but during lunch, if they want to take a trip out to smokers' corner or whatever and fire it up, there should not be a damned thing anyone can do about it.
I think there are a lot of good points here, and I won't pretend to have all the answers. So maybe instead I should be asking a few questions:
- Do you believe that your employer should have the right to prohibit firearms in your workplace, concealed or otherwise? prohibiting concealed firearms is a naive prohibition. The people who are not going to cause problems with their guns don't need to be prohibited and the people who are going to cause problems will just ignore the prohibition. So generally such a prohibition is worthless. Even the people who put such prohibitons in place don't really believe in them. If they did believe in them, they would include a prohibition on other deadly weapons also (knives, garrets, steel clubs, etc)
- What if you are a public employee? same as above in red
- If the government requires your child to go to school without your supervision, should you have control over what activity occurs in that environment, including exposure to firearms? if the firearm is concealed, there is no exposure unless that firearm is unholstered to save your child's life
- If you send your child to a daycare, pre-school, private school, or public school, should they be required to notify you that there may be access to firearms at their facility? probably
- What precautions (if any) should be required at these facilities to prevent children from getting access to firearms? all firearms left in holster worn by teaching staff. Just as with police wearing their firearms holstered
- If a child gets access to a teacher's firearm, is the teacher then liable for the actions of the child with that firearm? depends on how careless the teacher was
- If teachers are allowed to carry firearms in schools, should they also be required to complete training, certification, a background check, etc.? yes Would these restrictions be considered an infrigement upon their rights? no. because they would be carrying in connection with their job
- Should there be any restrictions on children themselves bringing guns to school? I'm thinking
I believe that the best deterrent to a crazed gunman is a lawful citizen on the scene with his/her own gun. Even the crazed killers who are planning on dying during their crime apparently want to finish their crime before dying. If they thought they could be shot dead the minute they enter the school displaying their gun and their evil intentions, and thereby fail their evil mission, many of those nut jobs would probably not even attempt their evil mission.
Ever notice how none of the nut jobs ever attack police stations or military barracks? It is because they do not want to go up in smoke before they complete their evil killing mission.
quote:Originally posted by WoundedWolf
I think there are a lot of good points here, and I won't pretend to have all the answers. So maybe instead I should be asking a few questions:
- Do you believe that your employer should have the right to prohibit firearms in your workplace, concealed or otherwise? prohibiting concealed firearms is a naive prohibition. The people who are not going to cause problems with their guns don't need to be prohibited and the people who are going to cause problems will just ignore the prohibition. So generally such a prohibition is worthless. Even the people who put such prohibitons in place don't really believe in them. If they did believe in them, they would include a prohibition on other deadly weapons also (knives, garrets, steel clubs, etc)
- What if you are a public employee? same as above in red
- If the government requires your child to go to school without your supervision, should you have control over what activity occurs in that environment, including exposure to firearms? if the firearm is concealed, there is no exposure unless that firearm is unholstered to save your child's life
- If you send your child to a daycare, pre-school, private school, or public school, should they be required to notify you that there may be access to firearms at their facility? probably
- What precautions (if any) should be required at these facilities to prevent children from getting access to firearms? all firearms left in holster worn by teaching staff. Just as with police wearing their firearms holstered
- If a child gets access to a teacher's firearm, is the teacher then liable for the actions of the child with that firearm? depends on how careless the teacher was
- If teachers are allowed to carry firearms in schools, should they also be required to complete training, certification, a background check, etc.? yes Would these restrictions be considered an infrigement upon their rights? no. because they would be carrying in connection with their job
- Should there be any restrictions on children themselves bringing guns to school? I'm thinking
I believe that the best deterrent to a crazed gunman is a lawful citizen on the scene with his/her own gun. Even the crazed killers who are planning on dying during their crime apparently want to finish their crime before dying. If they thought they could be shot dead the minute they enter the school displaying their gun and their evil intentions, and thereby fail their evil mission, many of those nut jobs would probably not even attempt their evil mission.
Ever notice how none of the nut jobs ever attack police stations or military barracks? It is because they do not want to go up in smoke before they complete their evil killing mission.
Hey fox-
On your "I'm thinking.." response, check out my response and see what you think....
Gunphreak: In regards to your post on the subject, I could go with 21 yearolds carrying their guns to school. Reason being that I don't want to make it easy for anyone who is crazy high on drugs to have ANY dangerous machinery. And frankly I have seen many 18 yearolds who, even though they are not on drugs, act as crazy as if they were.
Fox-
I understand your concerns, but age is just a number. I know 40 year olds with nothing but $#!t for brains, while I also know 16 year olds that are every bit ready for the responsibility of and firearm.
At 18 years old, a person should have their @$$ and head wired the right way, otherwise, no amount of intercession will make a difference.
The belief I have in this is to force responsibility on those who are adults, right now, or make them pay for their lack of vision, right now.
I am not in favor of a law that makes 18 year olds, especially males, able to be conscripted to military service to use firearms, including handguns, but can't drink a beer in a bar, or use a handgun under their own recognizance.
Make it 18 or 21, but not both.
If anyone enters our campus, say a shooter, we go into immediate lockdown. Like many large suburban schools, our campus is really spread out and includes two separate buildings. So, even though a shooter might be in one building, about 4 minutes away, the rest of us have to wait to be saved or shot. There ought to be a third option. Most of my colleagues are liberals, touchy feely Oprah/Dr. Phil types and wouldn't be interested in anything other than banning guns let alone carrying one. Some teachers would be qualified. Those who would not be would not be interested. It would have to be a secret as to who was authorized. Right now, my only weapon to save my kids, and I would, is a wooden stool to the teeth and a piston from a 1968 Plymouth 383 "on display" in my room. There has to be another choice other than saved or shot. In any event, my district would NEVER go for teachers having access to arms no matter how qualified we were...NEVER.
I'm a high school teacher but I am also a ringer because I was a police officer for ten years before this career. The problem:
If anyone enters our campus, say a shooter, we go into immediate lockdown. Like many large suburban schools, our campus is really spread out and includes two separate buildings. So, even though a shooter might be in one building, about 4 minutes away, the rest of us have to wait to be saved or shot. There ought to be a third option. Most of my colleagues are liberals, touchy feely Oprah/Dr. Phil types and wouldn't be interested in anything other than banning guns let alone carrying one. Some teachers would be qualified. Those who would not be would not be interested. It would have to be a secret as to who was authorized. Right now, my only weapon to save my kids, and I would, is a wooden stool to the teeth and a piston from a 1968 Plymouth 383 "on display" in my room. There has to be another choice other than saved or shot. In any event, my district would NEVER go for teachers having access to arms no matter how qualified we were...NEVER.
I course you are correct. Such mindless rejection of a simple tool (a gun) that could, maybe just could, save an ENTIRE ROOM FULL OF KIDS. I think this rejection shows how the liberals truly fear and loath the power of a gun in the hands of a mere civilian more than they hate a gun in the hands of a criminal.
And their attitude is not just their philosopy being taken to an extreme for the sake of keeping the kids safe from a mere civilian teacher carrying a gun. If the liberals truly want to show extreme zeal for protecting the kids, they would start demanding random drugs tests for teacher, a police background check each year, etc. just to make positively sure that all the people (teachers) who are teaching the kids have a good enough character to have that much control over the kids. But liberals would not even think of such strict control (I don't agee with it either, I am just trying to demonstrate the hypocrisy of anti-gun liberals)
Also, isn't it interesting that liberals are content to have a gun toting LEO function as a teacher (D.A.R.E. program, anti-drug, alcohol program, job fair, etc) in the class room, but violently reject a teacher functioning as a gun toting LEO for even the few minutes it would take a capable teacher to shoot any crazed killer that bursts into his/her classroom? This in spite of the fact that such a gun weilding teacher might save the lives of a classroom of innocent, defenseless students?