I am an educator and America’s education system is doing these children no favors with the way they rolled all these new laws and standards. They will not be able to keep up with the rest of world and from worldwide tests didn’t even make the 50% cut for ELA, Math, and science…I believe the math and science they scored 69th in the world.
Teachers willing to risk their lives and go teach in bad areas should be afforded the right to protect themselves…an armed intruder on campus, “oh, wait, let me run across the street so I can get to my car cause I can’t park on district property, unlock my car, retrieve my secured lockbox, pray I remember the or have my key, grab my gun and run back onto campus to protect my students and fellow co-workers…that’s makes so much sense.
I am retired but still teach as an adjunct at a local college. There are police working occasionally on campus and we are constantly seeing videos on how to lock up and wait until shots are over. Really? My answer to the question is “of course” we should allow teachers to carry who have gone through training or in some way be able to assure everyone they know how to safely handle a gun! This is not the world we used to know. I would want the training part to stay as a school requirement as being under intense pressure isn’t the same as range shooting…
Until recently my answer would have been an unqualified “yes” but lately I have seen a lot of teacher videos making statements like “parents shouldn’t have anything to say about what we teach their children.” That attitude makes me question whether they would use the firearm “defensively” or “offensively.” If we can get by that issue, I would still say that LE isn’t ever going to be close enough to provide immediate defense and the teacher is. However, as we all know, handling a firearm safely and accurately is a perishable skill so the training would need to be repetitive like it is for LE.
If the teachers want to carry, can pass whatever testing the School requires, are permitted concealed carriers I have no problem with that. If we can’t trust teachers to be armed and protect our children, they shouldn’t be teachers to start with.
I think we owe it to our kids to have them protected. Thanks to the media over coverage, if someone wants to punish a lot of people by making them suffer they do it by killing innocent children. Google teachers in Israel images and see how many carry not just concealed carry but, heaven forbid, those nasty, good-for-nothing, assault rifles. Of course over here the teachers sometimes need a gun to protect them from students. However I wouldn’t want any of those liberal university professors with tenure carrying. It is bad enough they force students to read leftist material to pass their class. We don’t need them waving a gun in a student’s face who disagrees with them.
I said before in another post, teachers do not have to be expert shots, they do not have to be medically trained, but they should know their personal limitations.
I envision the armed teacher ensconced in the class room protecting those students from a killer in the school. If the killer enters or shoots into the class room, the teacher shoots.
I would not expect nor encourage any teacher to “clear” the school as that requires a lot of special training and should be done with at least 2 armed trained people.
If I were an armed teacher, I would not leave my class unprotected while I went looking for a killer somewhere in the school.
It is hard to know your personal limitations in an active shooter situation if you have not been in one or been properly trained and practiced for one. I can’t imagine a more chaotic and stressful situation.
Fortunately these situations are incredibly rare despite the news hype.
People making poor choices with a firearm in their homes are a little less rare and sometimes get them or their families killed. Making a poor choice with a firearm in a school could get my kid and other kids killed. I believe the standard needs to be higher on school grounds. The school has an obligation to keep our kids safe. Both by having a defense plan (preferably with an armed, on site response) and making sure the people putting that plan into action are well vetted and trained.
I agree that a teacher, armed or not should either barricade in place with their students or run away with them to a safer area. But armed staff that is properly armed, trained and not tied down by a group of students they are directly responsible for could attempt to stop the situation. This could save a lot of lives in the endless minutes it takes for police to respond.
Teachers should be given the option of being able to carry concealed on campus. They should go though background checks and all the safety procedures. There also needs to receive proper training for a school environment. proper training. It’s a whole diffrent world from shooting at paper targets and when someone is shooting back at you (active shooter training.)
I haven’t read all posts on this topic, so forgive me if I’m covering what’s been said. Crime Prevention Research Center (crimeresearch.org) with Dr. John Lott president, has researched this subject in depth. The data concludes: Gun Free Zones mass killings rate at 95%+, whereas following decades of schools with teachers and/or staff armed: 0% mass killings. There has been in the past one solitary event of an accidental firing and that was after kids were gone from school, no injuries. I believe I had heard of another incident, no injuries, of another in the past year or so. (I don’t have a resource on that one. Crime Research Center has record on the other.) I believe that says enough.
Yes! If you went through the posts I think you’d find and conclude that the general consensus is the higher the chance of a victim being armed, the lower the chances of there ever even being an assailant. By their nature, most mass shooters are timid and even cowardly. It’s really obvious in my opinion. The only reasons for gun restrictions are as a means to more restrictions until all law abiding citizens are limited to the point of weakness. Ripe for the controlling nature of tyrants to find its element and rule over all. have I gone to far?
I would expect anyone carrying a firearm in the midst of children be at least a good a shot as I am … after 51 years of shooting guns. I am not a marksman, nor do I expect teachers to be - but they must have years of shooting and firearm experience and not be newly minted CCWs, etc. So, well-trained, well-experienced gun-toting teachers - hell yes. Anyone else - go to the range and come talk to me after 10,000 rounds down range … and bring your spent targets.
All kinds of people carry firearms around children every day, everywhere. The point is the potential of someone being able to be armed. That possibility of someone being armed. Even if every teacher in any given school decided not to carry, the mere chance that they could be carrying is enough to persuade a potential shooter to be a non shooter. The evidence is out there. Gun free zones are only that for people who obey the law.
I would like to politely disagree with this statement.
I would suggest that anyone seek out as much quality training as they can, but, using that “required” word is an infringement of their RKBA.
We can see, in the news at a regular interval, when those with training have made grave mistakes. Even police officers, are still just civilians. They are humans. They make mistakes, in spite of their training.
It ultimately falls to individual accountability. If someone, with any level of training, makes a mistake, they are accountable for their own actions. They are accountable for every round that leaves their gun. That is the underlying intent of the 2nd Amendment. To take responsibility of our own safety.
have I gone to far?
