Totin' Teachers Bill Heads for a Vote

[300winmag]

I will be surprised if more than a several hundred public K-12 school employees, besides armed security employees, in the whole state will be carrying handguns a year from now because this bill is so restrictive.  The bill is even more restrictive than the public college employee carry law.

The employees will have to get permission from a school principal, school superintendent, and police chief.  That is basically a may issue or in most places no issue system right there.  There are other unnecessary restrictions even after all these hoops are jumped through and someone is approved and trained.

The bill is not a very pro gun bill.

The politicians could have just legalized K-12 schools and colleges, like Mississippi, for people with an enhanced carry permit but did not.

Edited April 24 by 300winmag

[Grayfox54]

21 minutes ago, 300winmag said:

The politicians could have just legalized K-12 schools and colleges, like Mississippi, for people with an enhanced carry permit but did not.

That would actually make more sense. That way nobody could know who may be armed and in the school at any given time. 

[Thearmededucator]

24 minutes ago, 300winmag said:

I will be surprised if more than a several hundred public K-12 school employees, besides armed security employees, in the whole state will be carrying handguns a year from now because this bill is so restrictive.  The bill is even more restrictive than the public college employee carry law.

The employees will have to get permission from a school principal, school superintendent, and police chief.  That is basically a may issue or in most places no issue system right there.  There are other unnecessary restrictions even after all these hoops are jumped through and someone is approved and trained.

The bill is not a very pro gun bill.

The politicians could have just legalized K-12 schools and colleges, like Mississippi, for people with an enhanced carry permit but did not.

No, it is not. And its likely to cost me a decent bit of money.

I have reached out to the school principal, school superintendent, local police chief, TN POST Commission,  Tennessee School Boards Association, and the local School Board already, and so far each has given me the runaround, saying that they are waiting for one of the other groups to make a decision. No one seems willing to take the ball and run with it.

[Alleycat72]

Does this mean the teachers that have been carrying all along have to stop?

Edited April 24 by Alleycat72

[Chucktshoes]

36 minutes ago, 300winmag said:

I will be surprised if more than a several hundred public K-12 school employees, besides armed security employees, in the whole state will be carrying handguns a year from now because this bill is so restrictive.  The bill is even more restrictive than the public college employee carry law.

The employees will have to get permission from a school principal, school superintendent, and police chief.  That is basically a may issue or in most places no issue system right there.  There are other unnecessary restrictions even after all these hoops are jumped through and someone is approved and trained.

The bill is not a very pro gun bill.

The politicians could have just legalized K-12 schools and colleges, like Mississippi, for people with an enhanced carry permit but did not.

This really feels like a very “feel good” bill that moves the needle very little to none at all. At most, hopefully most of the schools that say no won’t announce it publicly like Memphis did because that removes even the last bit of deterrence factor that there might, just maybe be some sort of armed resistance. 

[srszczer]

2 hours ago, Thearmededucator said:

Private schools had already been able to have any firearm policy they wish (The only thing TN likes better than guns is Private Property Rights), provided that armed individuals had a TN ECP.

For private property rights, TWRA enters the chat…

[MacGyver]

15 minutes ago, Chucktshoes said:

This really feels like a very “feel good” bill that moves the needle very little to none at all. At most, hopefully most of the schools that say no won’t announce it publicly like Memphis did because that removes even the last bit of deterrence factor that there might, just maybe be some sort of armed resistance. 

I'd be willing to bet that one year from today there will not be a single teacher in a public school in Tennessee that is carrying as a result of this bill.

Even if you're all in on this - this bill seems remarkably poorly designed.  

[Thearmededucator]

 

28 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

I'd be willing to bet that one year from today there will not be a single teacher in a public school in Tennessee that is carrying as a result of this bill.

Even if you're all in on this - this bill seems remarkably poorly designed.  

It really is. That said, I would greatly appreciate it if yall could start reaching out to your local school and police representatives to try and get some traction on it. One overlooked group that would likely have a lot of influence and speed in which this policy is impemented is the Tennessee School Boards Association, which helps set board policy in 132 of Tennessee's 141 school districts. Messages sent to communications@tsba.net that would encourage a speedy decision on implementing the policy would clear up a large bottle neck.

Additionally, if anyone gets a positive reaction from any one of your local policy makers, please send me a PM so that I can follow up as well. 

[chances R]

I read TFA's breakdown of the bill.  I think very few teachers will spend their own dime and time to meet all of the qualifications.  There will also be some 'anti' pressure and responsibility concerns.  With that said, this bill also will change the private school requirements.  It will be a wait and see situation but it is not as most of us would want it, nor as bad as those who oppose it think it is.

[hipower]

13 hours ago, MacGyver said:

I'd be willing to bet that one year from today there will not be a single teacher in a public school in Tennessee that is carrying as a result of this bill.

Even if you're all in on this - this bill seems remarkably poorly designed.  

 

I think you are right, Mac. Such stipulations are pretty heavy for those in the teaching profession. JMO.

Not sure if accurate here...but this afternoon Brian Wilson on WTN referenced the requirements of the bill. During it, he said those teachers who might go thru the process would be required to wear a uniform similar to the LEO since they had to get certified from the Training Academy.

I believe this is wrong on his part, but not completely sure. I couldn't get thru to question him about the comment.

But I think that would be a self-defeating requirement if so. The point of this bill is to have reliable, trained people carrying. But not openly or in uniform I would hope. Such a thing would just make the person a first-priorty target and defeat the purpose of the measure.

Edited April 25 by hipower

[Thearmededucator]

5 hours ago, hipower said:

 

I think you are right, Mac. Such stipulations are pretty heavy for those in the teaching profession. JMO.

Not sure if accurate here...but this afternoon Brian Wilson on WTN referenced the requirements of the bill. During it, he said those teachers who might go thru the process would be required to wear a uniform similar to the LEO since they had to get certified from the Training Academy.

I believe this is wrong on his part, but not completely sure. I couldn't get thru to question him about the comment.

But I think that would be a self-defeating requirement if so. The point of this bill is to have reliable, trained people carrying. But not openly or in uniform I would hope. Such a thing would just make the person a first-priorty target and defeat the purpose of the measure.

Nothing in the text of the bill stipulates that, but there is also nothing that would prevent something like that being a local policy. 

Edited April 25 by Thearmededucator

[OldIronFan]

Two teachers in the family, two more close friends or neighbors that are teachers. 3 of the 4 hold TN carry permits and do carry when not at work or on school grounds. None of the 4 have any desire to carry in school.

2 of the 4 specifically said they would not carry even if this bill did not have the restrictions or stipulations about gaining permission. Neither had any desire to take on that responsibility and quite frankly that risk. One specifically said they had no desire to get sued by a parent if things went sideways in their school at some point.

The one without an existing permit is not anti gun but has never owned one and has zero interest in learning to shoot much less obtaining a permit. She is married to someone who does own, carry, shoot and hunt but she has no interest in knowing anything more about firearms. 

My conversation with the two family members indicated that they had yet to hear a fellow teacher express any interest in obtaining the required permissions. General consensus of the educators in their circle of peers thought it was a pretty stupid idea and useless bill. 

[MacGyver]

I know a bunch of teachers - most of whom would jump in front of a bullet without a single hesitation to protect their kids.  I don’t know a single one who wants to carry in their classroom.

Plenty of them are pro-gun and carry elsewhere in their lives.  They express a host of reservations - everything from that’s not the job they signed up for - to risks associated breaking up fights - to their name being made public and suddenly being all over social media and PTA text threads.

I don’t know of any that have really thought about it and come to the conclusion that it’s worth it.

Every last one of them said some version of, “they don’t trust us with books or curriculum - they’re not going to trust us with guns.”

[OldIronFan]

15 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

I know a bunch of teachers - most of whom would jump in front of a bullet without a single hesitation to protect their kids.  I don’t know a single one who wants to carry in their classroom.

Plenty of them are pro-gun and carry elsewhere in their lives.  They express a host of reservations - everything from that’s not the job they signed up for - to risks associated breaking up fights - to their name being made public and suddenly being all over social media and PTA text threads.

I don’t know of any that have really thought about it and come to the conclusion that it’s worth it.

Every last one of them said some version of, “they don’t trust us with books or curriculum - they’re not going to trust us with guns.”

Yup, that is nearly the exact feedback I got from my teaching family and friends. High risk, low reward. Like you said most would throw their own body between an attacker and a child but none see being armed as the right answer to stopping an active shooter or protecting kids in classrooms.  

[Thearmededucator]

2 hours ago, MacGyver said:

I know a bunch of teachers - most of whom would jump in front of a bullet without a single hesitation to protect their kids.  I don’t know a single one who wants to carry in their classroom.

Plenty of them are pro-gun and carry elsewhere in their lives.  They express a host of reservations - everything from that’s not the job they signed up for - to risks associated breaking up fights - to their name being made public and suddenly being all over social media and PTA text threads.

I don’t know of any that have really thought about it and come to the conclusion that it’s worth it.

Every last one of them said some version of, “they don’t trust us with books or curriculum - they’re not going to trust us with guns.”

There is a lot of that for sure, but I have at least 7 others in my building that I’ve spoken to about it that keep asking me when they can get approval. 

[Garufa]

2 hours ago, MacGyver said:

- to their name being made public and suddenly being all over social media and PTA text threads.

Not to mention being ostracized by their co-workers. 

Social media outing, doxxing, etc is bad enough in today’s unhinged digital society.  The names of the teachers who carry, even if they are allowed to, will get out.

[hipower]

On 4/25/2024 at 5:11 AM, Thearmededucator said:

Nothing in the text of the bill stipulates that, but there is also nothing that would prevent something like that being a local policy. 

Referencing my second-hand comment on uniforms for Armed Teachers...I am in agreement with you. I don't think it's a good idea. As far as the armed/carrying teacher, well I do like the idea.

BUT, all the comments made here so fa indicate thatmost educators seem to feel the threat/risk of open or concealed carry in a classrom is a bad idea. I can see several scenerios where something could go fubar in a split second. Especially with the kids in many of the school systems today.

So, like you say...probably not much chance of armed tearchers anytime soon.

I still believe the SRO concept is the best and most viable method of providing safer schools and protection from most all forms of "bad actors" in schools.

I really don't understand why so much emphasis is place o the armed teachers when this option is available.  Seems like a no-brainer to me. JMO

[pop pop]

The Governor said on the news, last evening, He intends to sign the bill. I was wrong because I thought he would not. Egg on my face! 

I too agree there will not be many teachers signing up. Training is rigorous and costly. May be a few, and if not many signs up, I believe they will tweak the law next year. I think the Legislature intends to give trained willing teachers an opportunity to carry. I hope some teachers will want too. 

The people wanted change and they are getting it. The state has already made funds available to every school district to harden security in their schools and now it is up to the schools to take advantage of enhanced security measures and implement them. IMO every school district should have a security expert in place to see to the needs in that district. 

Those in Nashville screaming and shouting in the State House gallery, the Covenant Moms, and those on the street demonstrating did not get their way.  I, for one, do not agree with them and believe Tennesseans have gotten political gains in what has transpired so far. The state has prepared a way, and funded it, to achieve success in enhancing security in schools, but the counties must step up and do it. When this law goes into place teachers will have an avenue to move forward with concealed carry in schools. How many will do it, that remains to be seen. 

CHANGE, Tennesens got some. You may not like it, but change is here. I for one think it is gain. Will shootings stop, I sure hope so, but, IMO, realistically I don't think so.    

[chances R]

Note over 500 schools DO NOT have a SRO. Many schools are in rural areas and have delayed response times not to mention staff shortage.  Response time is proportional to body count.  TN has had armed teacher provision for the past 8 yrs in private schools, and over 30 states have it already.  Point is, no student/ teacher mishaps have bee reported.  All the uproar in opposition is the typical anti theatrics.

Interesting to note that individual districts will bow to local politics and opt out of teacher carry completely.

Edited April 26 by chances R

[Grayfox54]

I fear that this is nothing more than feel good legislation. Most local school districts will say no and in the end very few teachers will be armed. Too many hoops to jump through will discourage a lot of teachers from getting the required training. I prefer the idea of allowing enhanced permit holders to carry in schools as the bad guys will never know who is armed. 

[chances R]

14 minutes ago, Grayfox54 said:

I fear that this is nothing more than feel good legislation. Most local school districts will say no and in the end very few teachers will be armed. Too many hoops to jump through will discourage a lot of teachers from getting the required training. I prefer the idea of allowing enhanced permit holders to carry in schools as the bad guys will never know who is armed. 

I agree with your first assessment.  However ECP is no where near enough training to permit teacher/staff carry.  It is a start but not for stand alone training. 

[Thearmededucator]

9 hours ago, hipower said:

Referencing my second-hand comment on uniforms for Armed Teachers...I am in agreement with you. I don't think it's a good idea. As far as the armed/carrying teacher, well I do like the idea.

BUT, all the comments made here so fa indicate thatmost educators seem to feel the threat/risk of open or concealed carry in a classrom is a bad idea. I can see several scenerios where something could go fubar in a split second. Especially with the kids in many of the school systems today.

So, like you say...probably not much chance of armed tearchers anytime soon.

I still believe the SRO concept is the best and most viable method of providing safer schools and protection from most all forms of "bad actors" in schools.

I really don't understand why so much emphasis is place o the armed teachers when this option is available.  Seems like a no-brainer to me. JMO

SROs are doing God's work, and this is intended to augment them, not replace them.

The issue with SROs is a microcosm of the need for concealed carry in society at large. There are simply not enough of them to be everywhere. Statistically, the average active shooting injures or kills 1 person every 10 seconds for the duration of the attack, although the first minute is often many times higher than the last. Therefore, in order to limit casualties to less than 10, we need to stop an attacker in the first 30 seconds. My school is very lucky in the fact that we have 4 full time SROs. But our building is over 400,000 square feet and our property is over 50 acres. A 3 minute response time from SROs already on site would still average nearly 20 casualties. 

Think of armed staff as hard points or speed bumps to keep the Attacker engaged, allowing the SROs time to respond while simultaneously reducing casualties

[mikegideon]

27 minutes ago, Thearmededucator said:

SROs are doing God's work, and this is intended to augment them, not replace them.

The issue with SROs is a microcosm of the need for concealed carry in society at large. There are simply not enough of them to be everywhere. Statistically, the average active shooting injures or kills 1 person every 10 seconds for the duration of the attack, although the first minute is often many times higher than the last. Therefore, in order to limit casualties to less than 10, we need to stop an attacker in the first 30 seconds. My school is very lucky in the fact that we have 4 full time SROs. But our building is over 400,000 square feet and our property is over 50 acres. A 3 minute response time from SROs already on site would still average nearly 20 casualties. 

Think of armed staff as hard points or speed bumps to keep the Attacker engaged, allowing the SROs time to respond while simultaneously reducing casualties

Funny how folks are inclined to preserve one of the most flawed concepts on the planet, the gun free zone. I'm reasonably sure that you could take damn near anyone with a college degree, and teach them not to shoot any kids in under an hour.

The real point is, the highest level of law enforcement training won't let you carry a gun into a school. That kinda thinking is Adam Lanza's best friend.

A lot of kids go home to armed parents every day.

[-boatman-]

What I keep thinking about is why schools are already saying they are not going to allow armed teachers. Why advertise to someone wanting to shoot up a school that there will be no resistance. It looks like the smart thing to do is not make a statement either way and maybe the shooter may not do it not knowing what he is going to face inside.

[Grayfox54]

24 minutes ago, -boatman- said:

What I keep thinking about is why schools are already saying they are not going to allow armed teachers

Because they're liberal and anti-gun. So they must proudly announce it to the world.