Move to arm teachers picks up steam in TN

[Mark@Sea]

I don't see a need for any training beyond marksmanship.  I'm guessing here, but I'd say a majority of HCP holders are more interested in marksmanship than the average police officer.  If you want to make the marksmanship test harder than the current HCP or police quals, fine by me.

  This isn't a job, or an extra duty.  This is simply allowing those who want to lawfully carry.  They need to identify a threat (He has a gun/knife/hammer and is threatening me/a student/a teacher) and do what it takes to negate the threat.  Anybody who can't figure out this decision matrix shouldn't be allowed to teach children.  Heck, they shouldn't be allowed to drive.

  This decision matrix is no more complicated than the one any HCP holder has to use, so why bugger it up?  Keep it simple.  For situations that are not an immediate threat, call the police.  Don't try to turn teachers into cops; they don't need to be a police officer to recognize and react to a clear and present danger.

Edited January 6, 2013 by Mark@Sea

[Wingshooter]

A disarmed Tennessee school teacher...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQygPC-4_kI

That deserves a re-post. Awesome vid. That's the first time I've seen that particular one, and I enjoyed watching it. No reason Hickok or any other permit holder should be restricted from defending themselves or the kids. Edited January 6, 2013 by Batman

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I don't have a problem with a teacher who wants to carry. Like Mike said, it's getting rid of the gun free zone status

that will help the most. A teacher, PTA member or volunteer having the ability, would do much to fix that. Since cops

don't have that duty to protect any more, the mere presence would stop most, if not all of this problem. The theme

is the gun free zone, not necessarily a cop in every school.

[DaveTN]

I think we'll find that MOST teachers won't want that job. I think we'll find a lot of opposition from parents, and of course, every libtard on the planet.
 
The goal is to eliminate advertized gun free shooting galleries. Schools get shot up because they have no way to defend themselves. Just the threat of armed oppostion will repel a lot of these cowards.

I disagree. Most school shooters that come to mind have already made up their mind they are going to die. I don’t think they fear much.

If they know the school and the people inside they will have plans to take out any threat in the beginning. It would take someone with very good situational awareness and the skills to go heads up against an active shooter and survive to be of any use. Two shooters like Columbine would be tough for anyone, much less someone with no street or combat experience.

I agree that most teachers won’t want to carry. My liberal azz ex-wife is a school teacher and so was my daughter until she got fed up with it and became a Probation Officer. Most school teachers I know live in a utopia where people don’t murder kids. Unfortunately unless they see it firsthand it isn’t an issue that has to be dealt with, by the time they do; it’s too late.
 

I would have no objection to letting a teacher carry if they completed resource officer training. There seems to be very little opposition to resource officers. It's going to come down to funding.

Then some parents better get out and start raising some money for their kid’s schools. I think you might be able to get some trained professionals to donate time; but I wouldn’t want to open it up to volunteers for free security. That just won’t fly.

[Dolomite_supafly]

Never happen. You will have all kinds of nutcases volunteering. Parents will never go for it. I wouldn’t and I don’t have kids in school here, I would never stand for it where my grandkids are.
 

 

What about those that have a HCP and have passed a background? 

 

I would be more fearful of a random armed security guard that doesn't have a stake in the school (collecting a paycheck like someone said) vs an armed parent or grandparent. Not every parent or grandparent is a nut case just waiting for this chance. Adding police officers or security guards will cost a lot and who do you think will bear the brunt of that cost? The teachers or the students will because taxpayers will not agree to pay more taxes. Our teachers and students are already suffering from lack of budgets, they are the first to have their budgets cut and the last to see raises.

 

Or have teachers agree to carry and give them a 10% raise if they do. 10% of the teacher's already low salary is going to be a lot less than hiring dedicated officers or security guards.

 

The biggest problem, I fear, is getting liberal leaning teachers to agree to carry a firearm. And what happens when not a single teacher agrees to carry and the budget doesn't allow officers or guards? Look they other way, hope and pray it doesn't happen or use parents and grandparents that have passed a background. They are going to be just as qualified as an armed guard and cost a lot less, especially if they volunteer.

 

Dolomite

[Mark@Sea]

From what I've read, most of them suicide at the first sign of armed resistance.  The available data suggest you don't need a swat team.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

And all school shooters performed their acts in gun free zones. As a matter of fact, most shooters like this were in mostly

gun free zones, period. It looks like they would have possibly gone out in the woods and offed themselves, if not for an

easy audience. The problem was created by a government attempting to fix it by ignoring the root cause.

[mikegideon]

I disagree. Most school shooters that come to mind have already made up their mind they are going to die. I don’t think they fear much.

If they know the school and the people inside they will have plans to take out any threat in the beginning. It would take someone with very good situational awareness and the skills to go heads up against an active shooter and survive to be of any use. Two shooters like Columbine would be tough for anyone, much less someone with no street or combat experience.

I agree that most teachers won’t want to carry. My liberal azz ex-wife is a school teacher and so was my daughter until she got fed up with it and became a Probation Officer. Most school teachers I know live in a utopia where people don’t murder kids. Unfortunately unless they see it firsthand it isn’t an issue that has to be dealt with, by the time they do; it’s too late.
 Then some parents better get out and start raising some money for their kid’s schools. I think you might be able to get some trained professionals to donate time; but I wouldn’t want to open it up to volunteers for free security. That just won’t fly.

 

You make it sound like these nutballs have all kinds of training. That's the kinda thing we hear from liberals all the time. I KNOW you're not one of them :)

Edited January 6, 2013 by mikegideon

[mikegideon]

From what I've read, most of them suicide at the first sign of armed resistance.  The available data suggest you don't need a swat team.

 

No shit.

[Dolomite_supafly]

As far as having the skills and mental fortitude to shoot a bad guy I will say this. I would be willing to make a wager that the majority of those who used a gun in self defense did not have military, LE or any dedicated training. The vast majority are going to be just like any one of us, a person who has done the minimum to pass their HCP. I suspect that in most cases where someone did use a friearm to defend themselves they did not have a HCP or needed to have one. I know we hear about a homeowners using firearms to do this and most of them do not have a HCP. It does not take a HCP or specialized training to use a firearm to stop a threat, people do it without either every day.

 

I would also say that a high speed, low drag super highly skilled and trained person winding up in a defensive situation is extremely rare, like lottery winning rare. Think about it. It is already and exremely rare occurance to be in situation in which you must defend your life with a firearm. Then take into acccount how rare a person that has a substantial abount of tactical training is. The stars must align perfectly for the two to meet.

 

We, as HCP holders, are a very small minority when it comes to those who have used a frearm to defend themselves.

 

Dolomite

[Wingshooter]

When my youngest first started kindergaten, it surprised me just how easy anyone can walk into most schools from most any door. If you go to a restaurant, bank, hotel, government building, etc you usually have restricted access in some form. I know parents/guardians need full access to their kids at all times, but some simple no-nonsense changes would prevent most crazies from skipin' on in. Basically... Harden the access, allow those inside to be armed, and keep the BG guessing as to how many armed LEOs (or HCPs) are present.

This is nothing different than what most on here have been saying, but If the gubment wants to regulate something, I would support these measures specifically...

1) eliminate gun free zones (any HCP can carry)
2) provide additional training in firearms and self defense to teachers/staff that desire it
3) place steel fire doors on all exterior doors (except front)
4) lock those doors during school hours. Panic bars would let students out in case of fire, etc.
5) guard the front door with paid LEO (maybe undercover??)
6) only parents, legal guardians, or those with a need to enter the school can do so and at any time through the front door
7) install panic button at front door, in office and other strategic locations in school. If this audible alarm is sounded, teachers close and lock classroom doors with kids gathered inside. Prepare to defend themselves from the crazy out in the concrete hallway. This is where an armed teacher really pays off.
8) train the staff on situational awareness and proper responses
9) advertise through signage and media that additional undercover LEOs may be present (keep their numbers and identity confidential). Maybe they are there, maybe they aren't...?

Funding for the LEO, training and facility upgrades would be the kicker, but I bet O'Dufus-in-DC would spend more $$ just trying to fight the 2A. Additionally, I bet most parents would be willing to pitch in through the PTO if necessary.

Obviously even these steps would not guarantee 100% safety, but that does not exist anywhere anyway.

Common sense may never happen though because some of those in charge are not really interested in making schools safer. It is more about their agenda.

Just my take Edited January 6, 2013 by Batman

[mikegideon]

Unfortunately, it has to be a plan that the sheeple will accept as well. That's why you won't see any of these programs in the deep blue commie states. They would prefer to do what they do and just strip away rights. That is gonna happen in some places.

 

I agree, personally, that allowing permit holders to carry in schools starting today will help a lot more than it hurts. BUT... if it takes extra training to get the sheeple to STFU and accept an effective plan, then so be it.

[Moped]

Is it too much to ask that teachers that want to carry attend the same firearms training and have the same qualifications requirements as their city Police Officers have?

 

I think that is reasonable and gets rid of the concerns that teachers would be less qualified than Police Officers. They may not get the same street experience, but they would have the same training as a new cop.

 

 

And/or give them reserve officer status.

I think both are excellent ideas!!!

[Sam1]

Unfortunately, it has to be a plan that the sheeple will accept as well. 

 

That's why we need a good marketing firm to sell it! Any of us would say "trained teacher with a gun to protect our students?" sign me up! Somehow that needs to be manipulated in an easy to understand way that shows the non-gun people how they are getting some kind of free benefits out of it. Right now all they know is guns cause bad things to happen and no one is showing them why this isn't true.

[mikegideon]

That's why we need a good marketing firm to sell it! Any of us would say "trained teacher with a gun to protect our students?" sign me up! Somehow that needs to be manipulated in an easy to understand way that shows the non-gun people how they are getting some kind of free benefits out of it. Right now all they know is guns cause bad things to happen and no one is showing them why this isn't true.

 

Not sure marketing will help. Too many talking heads in the mix. I'm happy to just let this shake out.

[Mark@Sea]

You hake it sound like these nutballs have all kinds of training. That's the kinda thing we hear from liberals all the time. I KNOW you're not one of them :)

 

  At least Dave is consistent.  I find myself consistently disagreeing with him.

 

 

 

  Not sure why we are disagreeing over something that has been proven to work.  Start googling, see how many school shooters have been stopped by ordinary people - principles, teachers, other (college) students.  Compare results to incidents where no one was allowed to carry, except for possibly 'resource officers'.  Do the math. 

 

  The answer is staring everyone right in the face, and only the willfully blind will not see.  "Gun-Free Zones" are killing fields.  It doesn't take a specialist, it doesn't require law enforcement, you don't have to be a world-class IPSC competitor.  It requires two things - the right tool and a will to live.

 

  Keep in mind that every requirement or restriction beyond those two basics is a sop to someones' fear, and an impediment to survival.

Edited January 6, 2013 by Mark@Sea

[jb980]

Not sure why we are disagreeing over something that has been proven to work. Start googling, see how many school shooters have been stopped by ordinary people - principles, teachers, other (college) students. Compare results to incidents where no one was allowed to carry, except for possibly 'resource officers'. Do the math.

The answer is staring everyone right in the face, and only the willfully blind will not see. "Gun-Free Zones" are killing fields. It doesn't take a specialist, it doesn't require law enforcement, you don't have to be a world-class IPSC competitor. It requires two things - the right tool and a will to live.

Keep in mind that every requirement or restriction beyond those two basics is a sop to someones' fear, and an impediment to survival.

This is exactly it. Why require anyone to get more training before they can defend themselves. A hcp should suffice.

[Wingshooter]

I agree that eliminating the gun free zone is the absolute best approach. HCP holders would be enough to stop these kinds of threats IF there are any present at a particular location. Eliminate the gun free zone AND have an officer. Along with some common sense security practices to harden the target, etc Edited January 7, 2013 by Batman

[Will H]

We have decided to Home School.  The schools in Haywood County are horrible anyway, and the lack of security only adds to the problem.  Our daughter is 5, so it will not get real complicated for about 8 years.  That gives us some time to figure out what to do till then.

[Sam1]

This is exactly it. Why require anyone to get more training before they can defend themselves. A hcp should suffice.

 

Because that is a completely different scenario. In a self-defense situation I would guess that many happen with very few people around. In a school, there are going to literally be hundreds of people around. Those teachers need specific training and a lot of it... I have seen a few people with HCP's that shouldn't be allowed to own a paintball gun, an 8 hour course and shooting a stationary paper target doesn't help you one iota in a shooting situation.

 

I've been in a couple of them where there was a slim to no chance of fratricide and it was a mess every single time... It's hard to imagine what would be running through someone's mind that had a dozen children in the line of fire.

[Mark@Sea]

"Aim high"?

[Sam1]

Yeah, but how many teachers do you think are going to know to get down and fire with an upward angle if there are people in the background? On top of that, how many of those teachers would be able to perform the task with nothing more than some HCP "training"?

 

The HCP course is an awareness course, it is not a situational training course. I bet everyone that carried would love to go to additional courses, especially if they were free or near free. More training for these people would be mandatory in my book.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

You don't need a police state to stop this crap. You don't need super trained professionals to guard our children. You don't

need to add to the budgets of municipalities to solve this problem. Get rid of the gun free zone garbage. These types of

criminals know they are up against no resistance. A common thread of a lot of these types are mental instability, may be on

Prozac, Effexor or other types of medication for the illness, and are under a shrink's care. The UVA shooter was never reported

to have been on meds, but the psychologist, some time afterwards, admitted having packed up his paperwork on Cho. Psyche

doc was let go. Never reported by the MSM, but the gun crap sure was. Cho had a death wish. He just wanted to make a

statement, like is seemingly common with these criminals. He knew he would face little or no opposition. Of course, no one

knows for certain. The key witnesses are usually dead in these cases. I don't know if the Joker has talked or if he will talk. He

is one of a select few who might be able to shed some light, but I doubt it would make much difference.

 

This kid in Newtown, CT, had some serious mental problems. It was a gun free zone, for the children of course. We protect our

children so well, don't we? Media has blamed it on the mother, who is dead, and on the guns, which is bogus, like every other

liberal emotional argument. Look at crime in DC. It's one big gun free zone. Robo-cop doesn't have to make an appearance,

either.

 

There are two common themes in these types of crimes: mental illness, which the left opened the floodgates on, years ago,

and gun free zones. With our current babying of society, the mental illness won't get fixed, but the gun free zones can be

abolished to provide a defense against these twits with screwed up brains.

 

We should be fighting with all we have against every gun law that restricts our right to use them. Their common theme is that

they don't do anything but allow crime to persist. Liberals live in Utopian dreams. Quit letting them share their damned dreams

with us. They caused a lot of this problem.

[Sam1]

Calm down, it's just the internet!

[mikegideon]

Calm down, it's just the internet!

 

He's right, and just about as calm as he needs to be right now.