But then there would have only been a few rounds fired.....So, deffinately some limp wristing!
Would teacher participants be "sworn" like other Police?
Why would they need to be? Police aren't the only people authorized by law to use deadly force to protect themselves or another person.
Would they be part of a national union of armed school teachers?
Why would they need to be? We don't need to "arm" school teachers, simply eliminate the prohibition on those who wish to carry.
Would they receive liability protection like Police?
The police get sued all the time. If you study mass shooting incidents you'll find the vast majority of the scumbags take their own lives the instant they are met with armed resistance. I'll take an armed teacher there in seconds over a police officer 2 minutes away any day of the week.
What qualification standard/s would they need to meet?
That could be determined by the schools. As you pointed out earlier though, why bother?
What kind of training would they receive and who would pay for it?
In Indiana there is no requirement for training to obtain a license to carry a handgun. While I believe training is essential, that is a matter which could be left up to the schools.
Would they be able to retire in a shorter period of time than other teachers, as is the case with Police and Fire members?
Please show me where I get to retire "early"? 32 years is required for a full pension here.
Very importantly, would an armed teacher be mistaken for an active shooter, and shot by Police?
Odds are that an armed teacher willing to take the fight to the bad guy would have the situation ended long before the first officer arrived. If shots aren't actively being fired the police response changes and rushing to the gunfire doesn't happen.
As to your point shooting arguments, I will wholeheartedly agree with you that the vast majority of anyone involved in a life or death use of firearms never sees their sights. What is relied upon and what allows people to be successful in spite of this is the use of "muscle memory". To obtain the necessary "muscle memory" one must repeat the same action over and over and over for hundreds or thousands of repetitions. To obtain that precise repetition, someone practicing needs sights which allow for correction of misalignment of the handgun while pulling the trigger. Can it be done without sights altogether? Maybe for some but it would become a horribly inefficient proposition.
Aside from another reason to blather on about point shooting I don't know what you're getting at. Arming teachers is folly apparently yet you offer no alternative solution other than taking the sights off of everyone's handguns.
If a teacher has a 5 percent chance of stopping a shooting, and a gun gave them a 10 percent chance, wouldn't that be better?
As for "who would pay for their training?", I've seen a lot of trainers offer free classes to educators.
And I've seen some INGOers step up and donate ammo and such to help.
As to your point shooting arguments, I will wholeheartedly agree with you that the vast majority of anyone involved in a life or death use of firearms never sees their sights. What is relied upon and what allows people to be successful in spite of this is the use of "muscle memory". To obtain the necessary "muscle memory" one must repeat the same action over and over and over for hundreds or thousands of repetitions. To obtain that precise repetition, someone practicing needs sights which allow for correction of misalignment of the handgun while pulling the trigger. Can it be done without sights altogether? Maybe for some but it would become a horribly inefficient proposition.
Ernest Langdon did some experimenting on just that proposition. He found he could he could make solid "A" hits at 25y (the furthest he tested) with no sights at all, but at a certain distance it actually became slower than using sights (I can't recall the exact yardage). Additionally, it all fell to poo when the target was moving, the shooter was moving, or both.
Point shooting works well at very close distances and static encounters. It works well if the bad guy will stand exactly like your "muscle memory" has trained for him to stand. It falls apart pretty quickly when people start moving and distances open up, when angles and cover enter play, etc.
We've had a few staff members ace the qual course with no sights on the gun. I've found that (in training) I'm pretty accurate during dynamic courses out to about 10 yards without using the sights much more than knowing they're there. Some would have us believe people can be trained to shoot like Taran Butler does from the hip without ever holding a pistol with sights on it, I call BS.
Wasn't it in Times Square where the officers hit ELEVEN standers-by trying to kill a dude suiciding by cop?