Kid, school, and guns

How do you feel about this?

1 Like

He shouldn’t have brought 3/.22LR rounds to school having one fall out of his pocket.
The student talked WAY too much.
The officers on scene seemed calm, cool, collected.
The principal acted like this student WAS an active shooter and seemed more concerned about suspending him immediately than have his school getting back to class. This guy probably went on FB and told his friends the student WAS an active shooter and that his life was in danger.:roll_eyes:
No policies or laws pertaining to firearms on school property?
No GFZ signage?
Ohio correct?
Please feel free to correct me if I have the wrong laws linked, I’m no lawyer.


My dad taught ROTC in high school and had a 22LR range on campus. Bring back high school rifle teams.


You are absolutely correct, I believe a year or 2 ago, as I do live in Ohio, somehow a kid at the local school was caught with a machete in their car, and they got charged for it.

Only if you have a concealed handgun license and only a handgun is allowed in the vehicle.

1 Like

Only thing that made me upset was the kid understood that the responsibility of protecting yourself is on you, and only you can do that.

But he called the AR assault rifles, and said he wanted them banned and there’s no need for them, but claims he’s going to fight a school shooter who has 30+ rounds and fires a semiautomatic weapon, with a bolt action .22lr.

Kids smart, has the right idea, just executed poorly and with little to no thought.

As for the principal, I can tell the principal isn’t around guns like the majority of the population.

When I was at the gas station before I left when the toxic coworkers came in, they tried saying I look and sound like a mass shooter when I was talking about my experience at the USCCA Expo.

Another friend of mine was talking about guns with coworkers at his job and they looked at him and said “So you’re the mass shooter?” And he’s like no, I’m the one that is to take out the mass shooter.

I’ve seen ignorant comments on tik tok about how the kind of guy who has his gun in his car or the guy who takes his gun to work, is going to be a mass shooter, because mass shooters are into guns.

I hope the charges are dismissed against the boy, as he has a disability and his intentions were good.

1 Like

I feel he should have called his lawyer and not talked to police. The police were more concerned for their responsibility and he needed someone on his side to helped him with his.


Happened a few years ago. I was talking to an anti gunner and he said: if everyone has a gun how do you know who the shooter is? I said: is he pointing a gun at you and shooting?


They ask that stuff all the time, act like if we all sat down in a restaurant and a mass shooter got up and started shooting, that we’d shoot everyone next to us.

We need a proving ground of a similar scenario, put us all in a room with guns, at a restaurant, play the scenario and watch what happens.

Debunk them to the fullest! I would participate!

1 Like

A machete is an agricultural tool. Not a weapon. Though they could make very useful improvised weapons in a pinch.

However many LEOs will consider machetes, bats and tire irons, etc. to be weapons if you carry them in a way that looks like your intent is to use them as a weapon.

I do a lot of driving on back roads as well as camping and regularly use a machete for clearing brush from roads or making kindling for a campfire. Have never had to consider using one for a weapon but would if I had no other choice.


I think we’ve talked more than once on this forum about the danger of not knowing who the good guy is and who the bad guy is.

But my first response when I read this question was “If everyone has a gun, how many shots will an active shooter get?” But I don’t know if that question would make sense to an anti-gun person.

1 Like

I’m up for a proving ground and I’m willing to participate. Get people from this community to join in, partner us up tells us what we doing and where to go, we won’t know who’s the bad guy until it goes popping off.

‘My Kid Can’t Sleep’: Gun Violence Drives Denver to Return Armed Police to Schools - WSJ

Just saw this article today. It’s a paid sight, so the gist of it is this: Denver, CO schools removed police from their campuses in 2020, as part of a virtue signaling campaign following the death of George Floyd. Because, you know, police might hurt our black students, or something.

Since then, violence in the schools has been on the rise, and there have been several cases involving firearms, recently. Still, the school board voted to keep police away from campuses. Finally, the school safety superintendent acted on his own and invited police back, because they get called in every time there’s a real or hoax incident, anyway. The school board relented, but said they will reconsider the matter this summer.

Parents seem to be divided. The pro-security side (campus police officers, metal detectors, expulsions, etc.) is organized, but so is the no-police side. They’re actually arguing that kids are safer with no security in school than they are with police… because again, police are racists, or something.

Interesting story, something to keep an eye on.


I can actually agree with both sides on this one.

There are a lot of stories about how having school resource officers on site has turned a lot of school infractions that would have normally only resulted in a detention or at worse suspension into criminal offenses. I don’t think every childish action needs to result in a kid in handcuffs and a juvie record.

On the other hand having well trained armed responders on site is the only way to quickly end deadly threats to students. But not all LEOs are well trained for dealing with school attacks. They are also easily identifiable by would be attackers which could allow the attackers to avoid or take out the only on site defenders. This has happened in at least a couple cases.

I much prefer the idea of having well trained and properly equipped non LEO staff on site. Maybe in the really bad neighborhoods, or when actionable threats have been identified, there could also be properly trained LEOs stationed outside the schools. They could identify and stop outside threats as well as provide a more rapid response to inside threats when needed.

1 Like

Yeah, it seems like there ought to be a happy medium between having police officers dealing with every incident of students misbehaving, and leaving students terrified of regular acts of violence because the school board doesn’t like the optics of having a police officer in the school.

It doesn’t seem like it would be so difficult for the school corporation to sign a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the local PD to define when police will be on site, how many, and what their responsibilities are & aren’t. And it seems reasonable that the officers serving school duty require some special training so they know exactly what they should and shouldn’t do while in the school, to include ways they could build up trust with students and teachers. (It might be a prime opportunity to combat the “all cops are pigs” myth with students.)

But in typical South Park fashion, the adults of Denver would rather have dangerous schools than allow police to do their jobs.


What is an example of a well trained and equipped non LEO that could take the place of LEO in the school? What training, what equipment, what capabilities?

I may be out of the loop, but I didn’t think having SRO LEO meant every thing is handled by the LEO. The teachers faculty and staff don’t just go get Johnny is passing notes while I’m teaching can I get an officer to tell him to pay attention. Isn’t the jn between simply having teachers and faculty do what they do but when it’s not safe or effective for a teachers, that’s where you get a leo

I agree, but that seems to be the concern from the parents in the article. They know the school is unsafe, but seem to think that if a resource officer is assigned to the school, that he’ll simply cart away all the black kids to jail for walking on the wrong side of the hallway. From my viewpoint, it’s a clear over-reaction meant to virtue signal how woke they are. Again, though, I don’t see why a school corporation and a police department wouldn’t want a MOU to define what the officer will and won’t do inside a school. It would protect everyone involved.

1 Like

Regular school staff that have undergone solid training like with the FASTER Saves Lives program. The equipment could be a concealed pistol or a hidden locked up weapon they can quickly get to. Perhaps some body armor as well.

There have been a lot of stories of kids being carted off and arrested for simple infractions like two kids throwing a couple punches at each other. In schools with no SROs they used to be separated and given some detention or maybe suspension time if the fight was bad enough. In schools with SROs the SRO is usually called in and the kids in some schools automatically get arrested for assault. That may not happen in all schools with SROs but it is far more likely to happen when they are present. Yes two kids throwing punches is technically assault but do minor little spats between kids really need to be handled with cuffs and a ride to the police station?

1 Like

I’d personally vote for simply having an actual police officer in the school rather than giving teachers body armor and a gun. I see no need to try to combine the roles.

“Two kids throwing a couple punches at each other” could be used to describe a lot of situations. Are there maybe some videos of this being a “simple infraction” that shouldn’t result in an arrest? Because generally out there in the world, throwing punches at another person does result in arrest, I can see the side of “why do teenagers in schools get away with committing crimes and no real punishment what kind of precedent are we setting here”

I’ve seen videos from in a school that people against police action would say was a “couple kids throwing a couple punches” but at the same time could reasonably IMO be argued as imminent threat of serious bodily harm or death and constitute a vicious, violent assault and battery that if committed in the real world might get someone justifiably shot.

Just sayin’

Edit: As you can tell, I’m firmly on the side of “I don’t like excusing violence in schools” and “initiation of violent action having consequences is how the country should work”


When I went to school in Colorado (in the Stone Age, admittedly), there were no cops in schools anywhere, even in the mean streets of Denver. During the Fall hunting season, every pickup in the high school parking lot had a rifle in the rack in the back window. In my high school class of perhaps 1,000 or so, the number of dropouts could be counted on one hand, instead of today’s schools bragging about their high school graduation rate of 50-60% and blaming parents for the failures of schools that suck up beaucoups tax dollars.

Police, even the most dedicated “school resource officer” can’t arrest their way to schools that produce children with basic education.

What’s needed are for parents to vote with their feet and disenroll their children from dysfunctional public schools that need armed, uniformed body armor wearing guards and metal detectors to maintain order and fail to provide children with something as basic as a high-school diploma. Sure, that means bearing the expense of private schools or spending the time and money for home schooling, but what we have now in the way of public education obviously does not work.