THIS actually makes me proud to be an American...!

[T.Lex]

His freakin dogs are named Ranger and Darby.

He must be a true Sean Connery fan, because that's a pretty obscure reference....

 

[Woobie]

He must be a true Sean Connery fan, because that's a pretty obscure reference....

Lol, that's funny.

 

[ChristianPatriot]

Each state should pay for this, I'd be all for it.

Not sure what schools you’re going to but I’ve worked in probably two dozen schools on the north side of Indy, and in every single one of them, all exterior doors were locked all the time. There was only one entrance and you had to be buzzed into that door by a person at the front desk.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

This part should be automatic these days. So simple. Even locking the glass doors would help in some cases at least, although locked glass doors didn't help at Sandy Hook. Steel security doors would be great, the schools that can afford them should install them.

Okay, you install steel security doors. Now what about all those big glass ground floor windows?

Each state should pay for this, I'd be all for it.

How much do you think it would cost to retrofit all 130,000 or so k-12 schools to steel security doors at each entrance? Then as I mentioned above, what about all the ground floor windows?

Not sure what schools you’re going to but I’ve worked in probably two dozen schools on the north side of Indy, and in every single one of them, all exterior doors were locked all the time. There was only one entrance and you had to be buzzed into that door by a person at the front desk.

All our local schools are like that. Well 2 entrances are in use beginning/end of the day, and one during the day.

For everyone asking how it would work for teachers/etc to be armed, where they would keep it, that the students couldn't know. How does it work in UT? Every public school employee, volunteer, visitor, etc with CHP can carry. The public schools can't prohibit them from doing so. Students, no primary/secondary student carry, college is okay. It's been that way for 7 years or so.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Not sure what schools you’re going to but I’ve worked in probably two dozen schools on the north side of Indy, and in every single one of them, all exterior doors were locked all the time. There was only one entrance and you had to be buzzed into that door by a person at the front desk.

That's good. Seems not all schools have the same standard.

I think that's what needs to happen... set a safety standard regarding locks, who can enter, doors, etc... and bring all schools up to that standard.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

+10

When I was in HS teachers carried. The school had riots, no one came in those doors...no one left. The miscreants knew who not to fool with.

I'd actually be interested to hear more details about that. Probably some lessons to be learned there. Maybe start a thread on it?

 

[AJMD429]

"I think there's a difference between arming the teachers and letting the teachers be armed.

It's silly to think you can arm all teachers and turn them into security guards.

Most teacher don't want anything to do with guns.

But in the other hand a teacher (and any adult staff) that can legally carry a gun outside of school (someone that carried and trained for years) should have a right to self defense inside the school.

But there has to be more to it than that. It needs to be top-****ing-secret if there's a teacher with a gun. Probably needs to be locked up tight in their desk somewhere. No teacher should say they have one, and no student should know they have one.

I'm sure some teachers carry guns already, or knives or other tools that might be against school rules or against the law."

[several quotes combined]

I have many patients who work for various school systems in Indiana, and some of them are military veterans, several are licensed for CCW already, and some of them > gasp < carry despite the rules saying they aren't supposed to.



The firearm definitely needs to be on the person verses in some desk someplace, but regarding training, I fail to see how anything would be worse than what we have presently. When the alarm goes off that says there is an active shooter situation, if ceiling panels opened up and dropped loaded handguns everywhere, even in a Grade School environment, I really don't see how it could be any worse. Yes, training is important, and I think it seems reasonable to have some basic level of firearms proficiency required if you're going to carry firearms in a school, but allowing the government to make it a bureaucratic nightmare is ridiculous, and is the same reason we have the problem we already have today. All we would have had to do is allow basic God-given Constitutional rights to apply and this would not even have become a problem in the first place.

 

[What's The Frequency]

My wife, who is a teacher, hates this idea. I agree. They are educators, not law enforcement. That would put a huge pressure on them. They already do so much for getting paid so little.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wtburnette]

Defense in depth. The reason for this is that no one thing will fix the problem. You start by making the red flag law nationwide and possibly other things that help prevent weapons getting into the hands of people who shouldn't have them. Yes, there's a possibility of rights being infringed to some degree, but more needs to be done than we do currently. Add to that keeping doors locked at all schools. No one should be able to get into a school unless they have a valid reason to be there. Finally, teachers and other staff/employees able to carry, if they so choose, preferably only after they have had some level of training. As mentioned, no one layer of defense will provide a fix, but each layer filters who can get into the school and what the response might be. There are probably plenty of other layers that can be added, but those are the ones I can think of. Another side benefit of teachers and staff who want to be armed being armed is that it would start to work against the carefully crafted message of the libs, MSM and Hollywood and possibly remove some of the stigma associated with being armed.

 

[thelefthand]

It's a complicated subject. Most, if not all schools are locked these days, but when you have +1,000 people entering a building in a 20 min period, it's going to be a challenge to identify the one person that's not supposed to be there. Especially when it happens so rarely.

Armed guards is a pipe dream. Millions of dollars spent every year for nothing. Same goes for the idea of using retired military/law enforcement. There's a huge need for responsible adults to volunteer and make a difference in the lives of our young people. This just adds to that list, and in a rather unreasonable way.

Armed teachers is also iffy. To think that some of our schools aren't already full of guns is nonsense, so if a teacher wants to be equally armed that seems fair. However, training to defend yourself, and training to defend a group or structure are totally different things. In a "shall issue" state where the majority of the permit holders consider themselves to be sufficiently trained because they go to a firing range (that doesn't allow double taps, moving while shooting, shooting from cover, or drawing and shooting) once in a while (best case), the odds of such an armed person being able to stop a well armed threat is questionable. The odds of that same individual having an AD in the school, or having some street smart punk take their weapon and use it for their own purpose is rather likely. Wouldn't the left have a Hay day with that??? Still, the teacher has a right to defend themselves. Maybe the best bet is to offer free training (yes, swat level) to those who are willing. School corporation should supply ammo for training, and range memberships. Not sure this would work either but it would address the training issue.

Bottom line, all of these things are addressing the symptoms and not the cause. How sad is it that kids are killing each other and our focus is on how to effectively kill them first.

 

[wtburnette]

It's a complicated subject. Most, if not all schools are locked these days, but when you have +1,000 people entering a building in a 20 min period, it's going to be a challenge to identify the one person that's not supposed to be there. Especially when it happens so rarely.

Armed guards is a pipe dream. Millions of dollars spent every year for nothing. Same goes for the idea of using retired military/law enforcement. There's a huge need for responsible adults to volunteer and make a difference in the lives of our young people. This just adds to that list, and in a rather unreasonable way.

Armed teachers is also iffy. To think that some of our schools aren't already full of guns is nonsense, so if a teacher wants to be equally armed that seems fair. However, training to defend yourself, and training to defend a group or structure are totally different things. In a "shall issue" state where the majority of the permit holders consider themselves to be sufficiently trained because they go to a firing range (that doesn't allow double taps, moving while shooting, shooting from cover, or drawing and shooting) once in a while (best case), the odds of such an armed person being able to stop a well armed threat is questionable. The odds of that same individual having an AD in the school, or having some street smart punk take their weapon and use it for their own purpose is rather likely. Wouldn't the left have a Hay day with that??? Still, the teacher has a right to defend themselves. Maybe the best bet is to offer free training (yes, swat level) to those who are willing. School corporation should supply ammo for training, and range memberships. Not sure this would work either but it would address the training issue.

Bottom line, all of these things are addressing the symptoms and not the cause. How sad is it that kids are killing each other and our focus is on how to effectively kill them first.

Agreed that this is sad, but it's also a reality that can't be ignored. Absolutely we need to address the symptoms and the cause. Until we find that perfect solution, we need an interim fix. A lot of your reasoning for not having guns in schools is sound, but there are plenty of schools (in TX and in UT if not more places) where this is already common. If it can and has worked in some areas, it can work in more. Maybe not every school, but we need that layered defense type of scenario and one layer needs to be that there is a response that will quickly shut someone down if they make it into a school with a weapon. Whether that is an armed guard, armed teachers, or some other method, there has to be something. Preventative measures only won't work.

 

[thelefthand]

I agree. What we have now sucks the most. There are some teachers who want this right. Not because of some hero complex, but because they want a fighting chance for their students and for themselves, and they deserve at least that much. We just need to understand up front that it will backfire eventually, and be willing to deal with that knowing the good out weighs the bad.

 

[Speedy121]

The deterrence factor is that no one knows exactly who is caring.

Why does this have anything to do with being American? You can find just as many Americans that think it's a bad idea. I ok with the idea, but I don't think the president's logic is sound. A person who is "proficient with firearms," isn't the same as a person who is "proficient in dealing with a threat." And the idea that a deranged person hellbent on going into a school and killing people, will somehow think logically and avoid places where some teachers are armed, is just nonsensical.

He may not know how to say it right but he means an undisclosed number of concealed carry persons. The people carrying does not have to only be teachers. For instance, everyone ignores the janitor, with the coveralls that some janitors wear, a veteran who happens to be a janitor tends to be in a prime position.
Just like plain clothes Leo's, who knows who is carrying, that is the deterrent Factor.

 

[wtburnette]

He may not know how to say it right but he means an undisclosed number of concealed carry persons. The people carrying does not have to only be teachers. For instance, everyone ignores the janitor, with the coveralls that some janitors wear, a veteran who happens to be a janitor tends to be in a prime position.
Just like plain clothes Leo's, who knows who is carrying, that is the deterrent Factor.

I had missed that post and I agree. Not admitting that one of the reasons schools are targeted is due to their being gun free zones is ignoring reality. BTW, nice post and welcome to INGO

 

[Timjoebillybob]

My wife, who is a teacher, hates this idea. I agree. They are educators, not law enforcement. That would put a huge pressure on them. They already do so much for getting paid so little.

I've talked with teachers who love the idea. I agree. When I carry I don't think of myself as law enforcement. I don't know if you carry or not, but if you do, do you think of yourself as an LEO when you carry (well if your not actually one that is)? I carry for the defense of my family and myself, and possibly others dependent on the circumstances. I've carried at work, I didn't think of myself as a LEO.

Armed teachers is also iffy. To think that some of our schools aren't already full of guns is nonsense, so if a teacher wants to be equally armed that seems fair. However, training to defend yourself, and training to defend a group or structure are totally different things. In a "shall issue" state where the majority of the permit holders consider themselves to be sufficiently trained because they go to a firing range (that doesn't allow double taps, moving while shooting, shooting from cover, or drawing and shooting) once in a while (best case), the odds of such an armed person being able to stop a well armed threat is questionable. The odds of that same individual having an AD in the school, or having some street smart punk take their weapon and use it for their own purpose is rather likely.

For the last 10 yrs or so, any public school employee with a CPL in UT, along with volunteers and guests are allowed to carry in public schools. They don't have to notify the school, and the school cannot prohibit it. How many ADs have you heard of, or of a street smart punk disarming them?

 

[What's The Frequency]

I've talked with teachers who love the idea. I agree. When I carry I don't think of myself as law enforcement. I don't know if you carry or not, but if you do, do you think of yourself as an LEO when you carry (well if your not actually one that is)? I carry for the defense of my family and myself, and possibly others dependent on the circumstances. I've carried at work, I didn't think of myself as a LEO.



For the last 10 yrs or so, any public school employee with a CPL in UT, along with volunteers and guests are allowed to carry in public schools. They don't have to notify the school, and the school cannot prohibit it. How many ADs have you heard of, or of a street smart punk disarming them?

I think they are two different situations. I have a carry permit but don’t usually carry. The burden isn’t on me to protect anyone either (I’m not law enforcement) if there is an active shooter situation. I feel by arming teachers the burden is on them to take care of a shooter. It also makes it more likely that shootings can occur by placing a loaded weapon in a room full of kids. Where does the teacher store it? Is it just thrown in their drawer? Is it locked up? If worn, what if they are overpowered by a large student?

I expected the politicians to do more because the burden of solving these issues won’t end with arming teachers. What else are they going to do?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dead Duck]

School staff should carry on their person. Period. Off carry is extremely irresponsible.

If teachers are worried about being "Overpowered" or "Burdened" by protecting their children that THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR, then absolutely, they shouldn't carry guns on campus. (or anywhere else)
Anybody who would rather cower under a desk with their students to wait their turn shouldn't be in the care of mine or anyone else's kids - in ANY capacity.... EVER.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

I think they are two different situations. I have a carry permit but don’t usually carry. The burden isn’t on me to protect anyone either (I’m not law enforcement) if there is an active shooter situation. I feel by arming teachers the burden is on them to take care of a shooter. It also makes it more likely that shootings can occur by placing a loaded weapon in a room full of kids. Where does the teacher store it? Is it just thrown in their drawer? Is it locked up? If worn, what if they are overpowered by a large student?

I expected the politicians to do more because the burden of solving these issues won’t end with arming teachers. What else are they going to do?

I don't really see any difference, I had a job where I could carry, I didn't feel the burden was on me to protect anyone other than myself. Oh an in case you don't know police aren't required to protect you, generally speaking. If the teacher feels like carrying and having that "burden", why prohibit it? Nobody is talking about forcing them to carry.

As for where to carry, I prefer on body. If they would choose not to, I'd say a well mounted handgun safe.

Again UT has allowed it for at least 10 years, public schools can't prohibit or restrict it. How many instances of those things you mention can you find? How many school shootings with a teachers gun? How many teachers overpowered and their firearm taken?

Okay you expect the politicians to fix it, let's hear some of your ideas of what they could do.

I forgot to address this in my original reply to you. You mention the already low pay. What is their pay? Average starting salary in IN works out to be about $950 per week worked, plus pension, health insurance, etc. Average per week worked is about $1450.

School staff should carry on their person. Period. Off carry is extremely irresponsible.

If teachers are worried about being "Overpowered" or "Burdened" by protecting their children that THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR, then absolutely, they shouldn't carry guns on campus. (or anywhere else)
Anybody who would rather cower under a desk with their students to wait their turn shouldn't be in the care of mine or anyone else's kids - in ANY capacity.... EVER.

I could see a well mounted handgun safe being allowed. Not just left in a purse/briefcase/etc. But as I said I prefer on body carry myself.

I'll disagree with your second sentence a bit as well. Their responsibility is to teach, that is pretty much it. Yes they are to some degree responsible for the safety of the students but it's not their main responsibility. Not everyone is cut out to carry, I wouldn't prohibit them from teaching. Along with some who's religions prohibit violence against others.

 

[What's The Frequency]

I don't really see any difference, I had a job where I could carry, I didn't feel the burden was on me to protect anyone other than myself. Oh an in case you don't know police aren't required to protect you, generally speaking. If the teacher feels like carrying and having that "burden", why prohibit it? Nobody is talking about forcing them to carry.

As for where to carry, I prefer on body. If they would choose not to, I'd say a well mounted handgun safe.

Again UT has allowed it for at least 10 years, public schools can't prohibit or restrict it. How many instances of those things you mention can you find? How many school shootings with a teachers gun? How many teachers overpowered and their firearm taken?

Okay you expect the politicians to fix it, let's hear some of your ideas of what they could do.

I forgot to address this in my original reply to you. You mention the already low pay. What is their pay? Average starting salary in IN works out to be about $950 per week worked, plus pension, health insurance, etc. Average per week worked is about $1450.



I could see a well mounted handgun safe being allowed. Not just left in a purse/briefcase/etc. But as I said I prefer on body carry myself.

I'll disagree with your second sentence a bit as well. Their responsibility is to teach, that is pretty much it. Yes they are to some degree responsible for the safety of the students but it's not their main responsibility. Not everyone is cut out to carry, I wouldn't prohibit them from teaching. Along with some who's religions prohibit violence against others.

I’m fine with them allowing it, but Florida acted like it was the sole solution to the problem. It’s not. Whether it has happened or not, it would be foolish to assume just because Utah hasn’t had one that it won’t happen. Other states with teachers allowed to carry have had fatalities. I’m too lazy to see if the shootings happened where teachers were armed. It’s more about not having those situations in the first place. I like the mounted safe idea though.

As for ideas I like the biometric approach along with punishment for people not locking them up. Putting door blockers in schools seem like another solution but wouldn’t prevent a lunchroom shooting. I know a lot of people here would hate those ideas. It’s a tough situation.

Teacher salaries in Indiana average $50,000. In many rural districts it’s much lower. Teachers spend thousands of their own money because they don’t get support for supplies. High deductible plans dig into it even more. If you started teaching when education was getting gutted then your salary today after teaching 15+ years is just above where you would start out in many schools. I don’t envy teachers at all. It’s too bad many are leaving due to poor funding, low salaries, and negative public image. They used to be respected.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk