Teachers with Firearms in classrooms

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • lperagallo

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 10, 2014
    20
    3
    Westfield
    Just saw Aron Bright (Coach) on WTHR supporting the bill to allow teachers to carry in classrooms. Great Job Aron! Bill passed through committee on an 8-2 vote.
     

    lonehoosier

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    28   0   0
    May 3, 2011
    8,012
    63
    NWI
    I’m sorry but this bill makes no sense whatsoever as it stands now. Teachers are already allowed to carry if they get school board approval. Now they just added they have to get training on top of that. This bill is crap.
     

    lperagallo

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 10, 2014
    20
    3
    Westfield
    I’m sorry but this bill makes no sense whatsoever as it stands now. Teachers are already allowed to carry if they get school board approval. Now they just added they have to get training on top of that. This bill is crap.

    But now the bill would allow state funds to be paid for training. I would think you would want trained teachers with firearms to be properly trained. How many people do you know who own firearms and fail to get properly trained? How many actually practice, so god forbid there is an incident, they don't have to think how to use the firearm?
     

    lonehoosier

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    28   0   0
    May 3, 2011
    8,012
    63
    NWI
    But now the bill would allow state funds to be paid for training. I would think you would want trained teachers with firearms to be properly trained. How many people do you know who own firearms and fail to get properly trained? How many actually practice, so god forbid there is an incident, they don't have to think how to use the firearm?
    Sorry but I don’t think the taxpayers should be paying for this. If teachers or school employees want to seek training and the school board approves for it so be it but that law is already exists.
     

    awames76

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Feb 24, 2016
    381
    28
    kendallville
    i posted in the other thread. but if they would let me carry at work[school] id pay for it if they would not

    at my local school im a custodian, i have 2 brother in laws, sister in law that work in the same school. the 2 brother in laws and mother in law also drive bus at the same school. we have 10 of the 13 kids go to the schools k to 10, i would do everything i can to stop some one that was a danger. a few yrs ago the school started training a few unnamed teachers but the public and lawyers stooped it. i told the rso [current leo hired by the school] id be interested in carrying on 2nd [ i was on 2nd then now first] and he in the works but probably would not happen. i would love to be able to carry at work, at least i can have it in my truck legally now. if i could carry at work i would pay out of my pocket if thats what it took.
     

    JettaKnight

    Я з Україною
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Oct 13, 2010
    26,517
    113
    Fort Wayne
    Sorry but I don’t think the taxpayers should be paying for this. If teachers or school employees want to seek training and the school board approves for it so be it but that law is already exists.

    I'm with you.

    We hate when taxes are used to fund programs... unless it's a program we like.


    Kirk's right - firearm training should be tax deductible.


    Also, arming teachers should be done at the district level - the door is already open, so now we need to work on getting pro-2A board members and superintendents. What the GA can do is remove the prohibition of common folks carrying on school ground. We need to change the mindset that declaring schools a GFZ makes them safer - which is obviously a fallacy.
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    I’m sorry but this bill makes no sense whatsoever as it stands now. Teachers are already allowed to carry if they get school board approval. Now they just added they have to get training on top of that. This bill is crap.

    Wait, are you saying the bill is crap because teachers need to be trained in order to carry a firearm while working? If so, I couldn't disagree more. I would expect that any teacher, teaching my kid, would be certified in the safety and use of their firearm.
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    Sorry but I don’t think the taxpayers should be paying for this. If teachers or school employees want to seek training and the school board approves for it so be it but that law is already exists.

    Ok, I think you might have clarified. If a teacher wants to carry a firearm in school, they need to cover the expenses themselves? I'm ok with that, but no training, no carry in school.
     

    Leadeye

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Jan 19, 2009
    36,693
    113
    .
    I would imagine part of this is to provide some insulation against litigation, like a situation where a teacher missed the shooter and hit a student. I still think that arming somebody or somebodys inside the school is the best way to at least slow down the shooters. Speed in attacking the shooter, still looks like the best defense.
     

    JettaKnight

    Я з Україною
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Oct 13, 2010
    26,517
    113
    Fort Wayne
    Ok, I think you might have clarified. If a teacher wants to carry a firearm in school, they need to cover the expenses themselves? I'm ok with that, but no training, no carry in school.
    Devil's advocate: As the spouse of a teacher, they spend enough of their own money on classroom stuff already.
     

    lonehoosier

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    28   0   0
    May 3, 2011
    8,012
    63
    NWI
    The only thing that changes is now a training requirement. It’s the same law that we already have. A school board still has to approve you to carry. Now if the law said you take this training and you then can carry I would be all for it. We are not going to see a spike in teachers carrying because these school boards are not going to approve them to carry. School boards now can set there own standards and allow anyone to carry but it rarely happens. Why do you think that will change now?
     

    JettaKnight

    Я з Україною
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Oct 13, 2010
    26,517
    113
    Fort Wayne
    Why do you think that will change now?

    Just musing, but the law puts in a place a tone, if you will. In other words, the GA is saying, "Arming teachers is good, and we are ensuring there is a path to get them properly trained." The hope is that boards will look at this as something desirable, some path that's already laid out. From my experience, school boards hate to be trailblazers and will do everything possible to keep a low profile.

    This would, at the least, keep the ball rolling, and keep it in the public eye.
     

    lonehoosier

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    28   0   0
    May 3, 2011
    8,012
    63
    NWI
    Just musing, but the law puts in a place a tone, if you will. In other words, the GA is saying, "Arming teachers is good, and we are ensuring there is a path to get them properly trained." The hope is that boards will look at this as something desirable, some path that's already laid out. From my experience, school boards hate to be trailblazers and will do everything possible to keep a low profile.

    This would, at the least, keep the ball rolling, and keep it in the public eye.
    I truly hope you are right and I am wrong. Time will tell.
     
    Top Bottom