Florida sheriff has ‘game-changer’ plan to arm teachers and end gun-free school zones

[RocksInMyHead]

Well, we're seeing the negative effects of everyone in schools being defenseless against someone on a shooting rampage. I think we've seen enough of the negatives from that, and I think we can agree that the negatives of it are unacceptable.

In a vacuum, sure. If I had a black-and-white choice between "school shooters kill people" and "school shooters get killed before they can kill anyone," then I'd obviously take the second option. But nothing is that cut-and-dried. When proposing a solution to a problem, it's important to consider both the negative and positive impacts of your solution and weigh them against the impacts of the problem you're trying to solve. You've clearly put a lot of thought into the positives, but you have to balance those against the negatives. If your solution saves 100 people from school shooters but kills 150 via accidents, that's a net negative.

The argument to arm teachers is a knee-jerk emotional response to a terrible situation - much like the calls from some on the left to ban guns entirely. Both ideas feel great to their respective target audiences, but neither takes any consideration for the potential downsides.

 

[Allandavid]

Are you satisfied with the only response they're able to give at the current time--having to use their body as a shield to protect the students for a few seconds?

The only response...?? I might be misunderstanding you, but I see quite a lot of other alternatives suggested. The major ones being focused on restricting access to weapons in the first place...

 

[Aldebaran]

In a vacuum, sure. If I had a black-and-white choice between "school shooters kill people" and "school shooters get killed before they can kill anyone," then I'd obviously take the second option. But nothing is that cut-and-dried. When proposing a solution to a problem, it's important to consider both the negative and positive impacts of your solution and weigh them against the impacts of the problem you're trying to solve. You've clearly put a lot of thought into the positives, but you have to balance those against the negatives. If your solution saves 100 people from school shooters but kills 150 via accidents, that's a net negative.

The argument to arm teachers is a knee-jerk emotional response to a terrible situation - much like the calls from some on the left to ban guns entirely. Both ideas feel great to their respective target audiences, but neither takes any consideration for the potential downsides.

It's really not. After all, we're not talking about handing out guns to every teacher. A teacher is just a human bieng like everyone else, and many of them are gun owners who have obtained concealed carry permits or have attended self defense courses. Those are the ones who should be allowed to carry so that they can provide the protection to their students that they provide to themselves and their own family.

 

[Aldebaran]

The only response...?? I might be misunderstanding you, but I see quite a lot of other alternatives suggested. The major ones being focused on restricting access to weapons in the first place...

Right, make it harder for 320,000,000 Americans to have access to firearms due to what a very few people do. Penalizing the many for the acts of the few haven't led to anything good in the past.
What should be talked about now is what the penalty will be for Nicholas Cruz. He's the one who murdered 17 people. It wasn't me that did that, or my AR 15 that did it, and it wasn't any other gun owners or their guns that did it. The penalty should be placed on those who commit the crime rather than the rest of society.

 

[Ringo84]

Arm only the female teachers which is just my statistics-driven opinion. Most shooters gone crazy are males.

At least this way, you eliminate / greatly reduce the probability that an armed teacher will use the gun to his or her own students.

I'm not saying that female teachers could never go crazy and use the gun to harm the students but the probability is greatly reduced based on statistics.

Arming teachers has got to be one of the dumbest ideas I've heard in recent years, and that's saying something in the Trump era.

It wasn't too long ago that LaPierre, noted coward, didn't want guns in schools: National Rifle Association Convention, May 1 1999 | Video | C-SPAN.org
Ringo

 

[RocksInMyHead]

It's really not. After all, we're not talking about handing out guns to every teacher. A teacher is just a human bieng like everyone else, and many of them are gun owners who have obtained concealed carry permits or have attended self defense courses. Those are the ones who should be allowed to carry so that they can provide the protection to their students that they provide to themselves and their own family.

And what if there are no teachers at a school with the proper training? How do you determine who gets it? How do you distribute the teachers throughout the school to optimize protection? Are the students in classrooms without an armed teacher just out of luck, or do they evacuate to the "safe" classrooms, potentially exposing them to the shooter?

While this proposal is probably better from a safety perspective than indiscriminately arming all teachers, I don't see how it would be any better than hiring trained security guards.

Right, make it harder for 320,000,000 Americans to have access to firearms due to what a very few people do. Penalizing the many for the acts of the few haven't led to anything good in the past.

A few people make meth, and now it's hard to buy Sudafed. A few people died due to tampered Tylenol, and now it's hard to open a pill bottle.

Personally, I think it should be more difficult to own a gun. @ThatRobGuy has made a few posts about the system used in Czechoslovakia, and it makes a lot of sense to me. It may take a little bit longer to get your gun and it might cost a little more, but so long as you're a good, law-abiding, citizen, you can still get one.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I know this sort of thing would make many people cringe due to how it looks like we'd be "militarizing" the schools. But I remember after 9/11 when it seemed so strange to see police in riot gear walking around in airports and carrying AR 15s openly. It made it look as if we were a nation at war. But it seems that people have gotten used to it now. Same goes for seeing cops with AR 15s waking around Times Square and snipers on rooftops on New Year's Day. It might not be the ideal site, but it seems to be what it takes, and people are already used to it. Perhaps it's time for armed security in schools. That seems to be the place where the worst shootings are occurring.

That's normalization for you. You'd be surprised what people can rationalize.

 

[Aldebaran]

And what if there are no teachers at a school with the proper training? How do you determine who gets it? How do you distribute the teachers throughout the school to optimize protection? Are the students in classrooms without an armed teacher just out of luck, or do they evacuate to the "safe" classrooms, potentially exposing them to the shooter?

While this proposal is probably better from a safety perspective than indiscriminately arming all teachers, I don't see how it would be any better than hiring trained security guards.

Simply allow the teachers who are qualified and willing to be armed to do so. That goes for any other school staff as well.

A few people make meth, and now it's hard to buy Sudafed. A few people died due to tampered Tylenol, and now it's hard to open a pill bottle.

They've also "watered-down" Sudafed so that it has hardly any effect. I got it after they regulated it and it no longer works for me. Thanks, meth addicts! Oh wait, they aren't the ones who are punishing me for what they do.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Simply allow the teachers who are qualified and willing to be armed to do so. That goes for any other school staff as well.

And if no one is willing?

Again, how does this provide any better outcomes than hiring trained security guards?

 

[variant]

And if no one is willing?

Again, how does this provide any better outcomes than hiring trained security guards?

Schools aren't hardened targets, and arming some teachers won't cause them to be, nor will hiring some security guards.

Any school from any point in my entire life would be a nightmare to defend, so if you have random armed teachers there quite a few more people randomly moving around with guns when the police arrive.

 

[Aldebaran]

And if no one is willing?

Then go with armed guards, but it will cost the school more to have the same number.

Again, how does this provide any better outcomes than hiring trained security guards?

How many? One? Two? The number of armed guards a school would be willing to hire is no doubt far less than the number of teachers. Teachers are already there and being paid to teach. If they're allowed to be armed and are qualified to be, then they would have the ability to offer protection for no extra charge.

 

[variant]

How many? One? Two? The number of armed guards a school would be willing to hire is no doubt far less than the number of teachers. Teachers are already there and being paid to teach. If they're allowed to be armed and are qualified to be, then they would have the ability to offer protection for no extra charge.

Yes, the cheap haphazard defense of folks who both teach and are happy to engage in gunfights should the need arise.

 

[Aldebaran]

Yes, the cheap haphazard defense of folks who both teach and are happy to engage in gunfights should the need arise.

Well, I suppose we could just give them no other option when a gunman comes around other than to use their body as a shield. But I thought it would be best to give them a fighting chance instead.

 

[variant]

Well, I suppose we could just give them no other option when a gunman comes around other than to use their body as a shield. But I thought it would be best to give them a fighting chance instead.

You were talking about arming teachers instead of other alternatives because it's cheap.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Schools aren't hardened targets, and arming some teachers won't cause them to be, nor will hiring some security guards.

Any school from any point in my entire life would be a nightmare to defend, so if you have random armed teachers there quite a few more people randomly moving around with guns when the police arrive.

I agree. I'm not thrilled about the idea, but if people are going to insist on there being an armed presence in schools, I'd rather it be trained security guards than random armed teachers.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Then go with armed guards, but it will cost the school more to have the same number.

How many? One? Two? The number of armed guards a school would be willing to hire is no doubt far less than the number of teachers. Teachers are already there and being paid to teach. If they're allowed to be armed and are qualified to be, then they would have the ability to offer protection for no extra charge.

I feel like having to carry a gun on the job and being forced to pay for licensing, the weapon, and ammo should at the very least merit a pay increase. Not to mention the psychological pressure of potentially one day being forced to shoot one of your students. As a parallel, armed security guards make more money than unarmed guards, so there's clear precedent. There is no way this is not going to cost money.

 

[variant]

I feel like having to carry a gun on the job and being forced to pay for licensing, the weapon, and ammo should at the very least merit a pay increase. Not to mention the psychological pressure of potentially one day being forced to shoot one of your students. As a parallel, armed security guards make more money than unarmed guards, so there's clear precedent. There is no way this is not going to cost money.

There was an armed officer at the school at the time of the shooting. He decided not to go in.

School officer waited outside building for 4 minutes as killings happened: Sheriff

There's the additional problem that guards and teachers might not be willing to get into gun fights when they actually come up.

 

[LostMarbels]

Coming form an individual that lives in Florida, I think this is the neatest thing since sliced bread. I have a niece, and 2 nephews still in school, and one daughter in college. My daughter has worked with disabled children at YMCA since the 9th grade as a youth counselor, and latter received a job after graduating High School. She has her CCW. But she would have to run for her life all the way to her Jeep to get it in a situation.

I think a consideration that is not being addressed is we do not need to arm teachers, just allow them to utilise their own CCW. If they themselves want to carry in their school then they have to maintain a certain readiness and level of professionalism. Require them to become licensed to carry their own gun. Most gun enthusiasts that go and get their CCW shoot guns for fun. They go to the range, hunt and even enter competitions. Most private citizens that shoot as a sport have more trigger time than security guards. The only thing I feel that they may need to be regulated on is crisis mitigation, situational awareness, and trigger/gun discipline. If they can display their competence Im for it.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Then go with armed guards, but it will cost the school more to have the same number.

But doesn't having specially trained personnel worth the extra expense? Or can we only protect our children on the cheap?

How many? One? Two? The number of armed guards a school would be willing to hire is no doubt far less than the number of teachers. Teachers are already there and being paid to teach.

And not paid nearly enough, I might add.

If they're allowed to be armed and are qualified to be,

As qualified as Nikolas Cruz was to be armed?

then they would have the ability to offer protection for no extra charge.

So we are doing this on the cheap -- and we have someone to blame for the next massacre. "Why didn't you save our children?"

 

[Snappy1]

There was an armed officer at the school at the time of the shooting. He decided not to go in.

School officer waited outside building for 4 minutes as killings happened: Sheriff

There's the additional problem that guards and teachers might not be willing to get into gun fights when they actually come up.

That's awful.